April 2, 2013

FINEST HOUR 154, SPRING 2012

BY JOHN G. PLUMPTON

“CANADA IS THE LINCHPIN OF THE ENGLISH-SPEAKING WORLD. CANADA,WITH THOSE RELATIONS OF FRIENDLY AFFECTIONATE INTIMACY WITH THE UNITED STATES ON THE ONE HAND AND WITH HER UNSWERVING FIDELITY TO THE BRITISH COMMON- WEALTH AND THE MOTHERLAND ON THE OTHER, IS THE LINK WHICH…SPANNING THE OCEANS, BRINGS THE CONTINENTS INTO THEIR TRUE RELATION AND WILL PREVENT IN FUTURE GENERATIONS ANY GROWTH OF DIVISION BETWEEN THE PROUD AND HAPPY NATIONS OF EUROPE AND THE GREAT COUNTRIES WHICH HAVE COME INTO EXISTENCE IN THE NEW WORLD.” —Winston S. Churchill, Mansion House, 4 September 1941

==================

2024 International Churchill Conference

Join us for the 41st International Churchill Conference. London | October 2024

More

Some historians have designated Canadians the original anti-Americans. This tag was applied because English-speaking Canada was founded by United Empire Loyalists who chose to remain under the British monarchy and left, or were driven out of, the new republic. Nevertheless, despite some bumps along the way (the War of 1812, Fenian Raids), the relationship between the two nations has been a model for the entire world for over 200 years. 

Parallel to that has been the growth of a harmonious relationship between Great Britain and its former colonies, solidly confirmed as allies in the First World War. These alliances survived both a growing Canadian independence of mind and American isolationism until the development of what Churchill called the “Special Relationship” between the United Kingdom and the United States during the upheaval of the Second World War.

A master of memorable description, Churchill called Canada “the linchpin of the English-speaking World” to describe the Dominion’s role. Even though President Roosevelt had initiated a personal correspondence between himself and First Lord of the Admiralty Churchill, the relationship was never as meaningful to him as it was to Churchill. The role of Prime Minister Mackenzie King and his emissary, Hugh Keenleyside, in conveying messages to and from the two great leaders (described elsewhere in this issue) is an illuminating example of why Churchill considered the “linchpin” so important.

By the end of World War II there was no need of a linchpin—and not just because Roosevelt and Churchill had met directly many times. By then Roosevelt was wooing Stalin in a manner similar to Churchill’s courtship of the President, much to the Prime Minister’s chagrin. Roosevelt did not visit Britain during the war and his suspicions of British imperial goals never abated, although he did agree to make Germany the primary target, and the Atlantic the primary ocean of combat.

Roosevelt was succeeded by Harry Truman, a man from Missouri with no particular interest in a special relationship with anyone. Canada’s prime ministers were gradually pushed aside by both nations and their linchpin had become virtually meaningless by the time Churchill returned to power in October 1951.

One of Churchill’s first acts was to visit the U.S. to build a relationship with Truman. They had met at Potsdam and again en route to the “Iron Curtain” speech at Fulton, but the 1945 British election had sent Churchill home early from Potsdam. After Fulton, Truman had quickly distanced himself from the heat generated by Churchill’s criticisms of their Soviet wartime ally.

In 1951 Churchill’s reception in Washington was not as warm as his wartime visits. A secretary recorded that Truman was “rather abrupt with poor old Winston” and Secretary of State Dean Acheson recalled Churchill pleading for a bigger role in naval affairs, because “for centuries England held the seas against every tyrant so surely we can make room for Britain to play her historic role upon that western sea whose floor is white with the bones of Englishmen.”

Canada was not part of these deliberations, nor was Canada a participant in Prime Minister Churchill’s efforts to engage his wartime colleague, President Dwight Eisenhower, in a common front toward Russia in the 1950s. (The 2004 International Churchill Conference in Bermuda explored that effort.)

Throughout the succeeding decades such concepts as the “linchpin,” like the Anglo-American Special Relationship, grew increasingly irrelevant. Although Britain was a nuclear power, the stand-off between the United States and the Soviet Union dominated world attention and the British seemed to have influence only when they supported American goals. Events like the Suez Crisis, during which the U.S. sided with the Soviets in demanding withdrawal of an Anglo-French expedition to recover the nationalized Suez Canal, illustrated quite different national interests.

In the 1960s Canada’s relationship with her southern neighbour became somewhat strained. Prime Minister John Diefenbaker and President John F. Kennedy did not much like each other, and Prime Minister Lester Pearson angered President Lyndon Johnson by refusing to support American actions in Vietnam. At the time it was noted in all countries that President Johnson was one of the few world leaders who did not attend Sir Winston Churchill’s funeral.

Prime Minister Pierre Trudeau and President Richard Nixon had nothing in common, and Trudeau’s nationalist energy policy annoyed Americans. In order not to offend Quebec sovereignists Trudeau also kept his distance from Britain, other than to “bring home” Canada’s constitution.

Prime Minister Brian Mulroney was an enthusiastic junior partner in the reborn special relationship between Margaret Thatcher and Ronald Reagan, and he was even closer to the first President Bush. Canada’s Conservative Party has historically preferred Imperial Preference and ties to the “Mother Country” over any reciprocity arrangement with the United States, so Mulroney’s Conservative predecessors were probably “spinning in their graves” over his policies, particularly the North American Free Trade Agreement (NAFTA).

Many Canadians were surprised when the second President Bush, with British Prime Minister Tony Blair in the Congressional Gallery, called Britain “America’s best friend,” but it is likely that Prime Minster Jean Chrétien of Canada did not care. There was little support in Canada for any involvement in Iraq, although there was equally little dissent when Canada joined Britain, the United States and other NATO countries in Afghanistan.

Today it is doubtful if many citizens of the “Anglosphere” have much understanding of the history of the linchpin or the Special Relationship. The Churchill Centre explored the latter (there was little mention of the former) at its 2011 conference in London, but at least one speaker bluntly labelled the concept irrelevant. He pointed out that Barack Obama’s roots are in Hawaii and Indonesia and that when he thinks of “that western sea” he probably envsions the Pacific.

Britain’s attention is now directed towards Europe and the European Union. As they eye the precarious course of the euro, many Britons express happiness over their decades-old decision to keep their own currency. In Canada there is no present interest in a linchpin role, and Canadian eyes are increasingly focused on Asia. The politics of the Keystone XL oil pipeline in the United States resulted in a high-profile trade visit by Prime Minister Stephen Harper to China, and talks of a Sino-Canadian free trade treaty. At the same time China’s “president-in-waiting” was visiting Washington, despite Chinese-American competition for economic and cultural influence.

The linchpin, like the Special Relationship, still has its uses. On March 14th, the British Prime Minister was visiting Washington, and in London The Times ran a front-page story: “The New Special Relationship: This Time It’s Personal.” But behind this warm relationship, the trappings, and the wining and dining of the cultural and political glitterati lies a substantive truth expressed by the Prime Minister: “The special relationship survives because it is based on common interests and common values.”

It is also based on a noble history. Therein perhaps lies an important role of The Churchill Centre and Societies: to remind our citizens and future generations of the great panoply of the good done by this historic relationship and that together we can enjoy an even greater future.