Mark Steyn says that Canada needs to be broken up.

At a superficial level, America’s northern neighbour is taking on the characteristics of its southern one (pre-Vincente Fox): a ramshackle ersatz democracy where the ruling party never gets dislodged and the churlish resentment of the Yanqui is in direct proportion to the country’s economic dependency on him. This would be manageable were Canada’s anti-Americanism strictly of the traditional variety – the banal CanCon mood music playing in the Dominion’s elevator to nowhere. I’m thinking of things like: “As the United States descends into fascism, the importance of Canada, North America’s only civil society, is greater than ever.”

That was the opening sentence of an article by The Toronto Star’s Christopher Hume. Mr. Hume doesn’t write about politics or global affairs. He’s the architecture correspondent. Even more poignantly, he was writing about the new plaza on the Canadian side of the Peace Bridge between our two great nations.

But the US can afford to be relaxed about Mr Hume. He talks the talk but he has no inclination to walk the walk. He’s some arts-page pantywaist, so he’s not going to be strapping on the old suicide-bomber belt and waddling over to Buffalo pizza parlours any time soon. It’s on the long continuum between poseur Yank-haters like Christopher Hume and hard-core jihadi like the Khadrs that the judgments get more difficult to call.

Once you start thinking about it in American national-security terms, maintaining the territorial integrity of Canada seems easily the worst option, and all the permutations of coast-to-coast crack-up infinitely preferable.

I suspect that there are quite a few people in the western provinces that might prefer to become independent, but statehood might also be more preferable to them than the status quo. And if they were to secede, can anyone seriously imagine Ottawa raising an army to do anything about it?

Yeah, I could see Ottawa raising an army to suppress revolt. I live in Alberta, would you want to get between the pigs and the trough?

Great analogy Steve! I don't think most Americans realize how much of Canada's GNP comes from the western provinces or the amount of natural gas exported to the U.S. which is produced in western Canada. I think 20 or 25% of U.S. demand.

I can't see Ottawa using the army to suppress a revolt - particularly since their gun registry has failed to disarm Canadians (per capita there are more guns in Canada than in the USA).

Sorry Rand, Alberta becoming the 51st state is a non-starter. However, nationhood is not out of the question; a poll conducted by the Calgary Sun in 2002 (before Jean Chretien decided to endorse the oil-industry-punishing Kyoto protocol) indicated that even then 49% of Calgarians would vote in favour of separation.

"I can't see Ottawa using the army to suppress a revolt"

They would have to fund one first. Someone in the Canadian Army told me that the Michigan Militia could take the Canadian Army in about a week.

Here, this link seems appropriate to this discussion:

http://www.unitednorthamerica.org/home.htm

They'd hire the French.

Although the French whine well when war for US interest looms... when it is a _French_ interest, it just happens. This is part of why Africa is so messed up.

Alberta represents only 10% of the Canadian popultaion, the CSA represented 33% of the antebellum US population. If the Canadian government were to fight a total war to keep Alberta in Confederation I do not believe secession could be successful. Is total war by a western nation possible in this day and age?

I recall reading a lengthy Foreign Affairs or Policy Review article on the interdependence of the cascadia region's states and provinces.

It suggested that something like this was radical possibility:
http://zapatopi.net/cascadia.html

re: Cascadia

Someone needs to cut back on the BC Bud consumption.

If Canada were to try and forcibly occupy Alberta, they wouldn't be able to hold jack shit with 45,000 troops (thats assuming all would muster and remember that more than half are support and not combat troops.) and that is assuming Jack were to help out by leaving town.

Alberta is 256 thousand square miles and a population of 2,280,000 people.

The Canadian Army at its current muster of ~45,000 troops couldn't hope to effectively control it if the population was seriously resisting. Not even close.

re: Cascadia

Sure it's a goofy idea. But I must confess I don't understand why.

Let's trade portions of New England for the western half of Canada.

I said total war, not just the mobilization of existing forces. No rational person would have thought the antebellum US Army would have been capable of keeping the South in the Union. And if you want to get into how many military would actually muster, I would posit that a better question is how much of the population of Alberta would support armed insurrection? I don't know how many of the Canadian forces from Alberta would remain loyal to Canada, but the fact is the Canadians would have more professional soldiers and could draw on more recruits, any heavy weaponry would have to be moved in from the United States. Without American support there can be no independance without the consent of Ottawa.

Mike: Your data is a little out of date. According to the census, there were 2,974,807 people in Alberta in 2001. I know that Calgary alone has been growing by 30000 people a year, so call our population a little over 3 million.

http://www.gov.ab.ca/home/Index.cfm?Page=2

One thing that goes unnoticed in this talk of using the army, is a little law called the Clarity Act.

http://www.canadianlawsite.com/clarity-act.htm

Basically, all it would take is more than 50% of Albertans to vote Yes on a clearly-worded seccession referendum, and the Canadian Federal Government would be "obligated to enter into negotiations that might lead to seccession".

Another thing to remember is that as part of Canada's ongoing attempts to bribe the Quebeckers into staying part of Canada (don't ask ME why) about 90% of the miltary is based in Quebec. If Alberta decided it had had enough and said "We're out of here," and Ottawa decided to send in the Marines, bet the Frenchies would decide their time had come and say "Not with OUR army."

A friend of mine has said that if he ever ran for President, his campaign slogan would be fifty-four forty or fight. (He and I both lived in Calgary for a while; it was wonderful.)