Canada–US Relations: Sovereignty or

Shared Institutions? David Carment

Visit to download the full and correct content document:
https://textbookfull.com/product/canada-us-relations-sovereignty-or-shared-institution
s-david-carment/
More products digital (pdf, epub, mobi) instant
download maybe you interests ...

A Common Table 80 Recipes and Stories from My Shared

Cultures First Edition Cynthia Chen Mcternan

https://textbookfull.com/product/a-common-table-80-recipes-and-
stories-from-my-shared-cultures-first-edition-cynthia-chen-
mcternan/

Diaspora as Cultures of Cooperation: Global and Local

Perspectives 1st Edition David Carment

https://textbookfull.com/product/diaspora-as-cultures-of-
cooperation-global-and-local-perspectives-1st-edition-david-
carment/

Perspectives on International Relations Power

Institutions and Ideas Henry R. Nau

https://textbookfull.com/product/perspectives-on-international-
relations-power-institutions-and-ideas-henry-r-nau/

Queer international relations : sovereignty, sexuality

and the will to knowledge 1st Edition Cynthia Weber

https://textbookfull.com/product/queer-international-relations-
sovereignty-sexuality-and-the-will-to-knowledge-1st-edition-
cynthia-weber/
In the News The Practice of Media Relations in Canada
William Wray Carney

https://textbookfull.com/product/in-the-news-the-practice-of-
media-relations-in-canada-william-wray-carney/

Democracy the State and the Market Irreconcilability or

Equilibration between Institutions 1st Edition Paolo
Savona

https://textbookfull.com/product/democracy-the-state-and-the-
market-irreconcilability-or-equilibration-between-
institutions-1st-edition-paolo-savona/

People Institutions Relations Slovakia and Hungary from

the 11th to the 18th Century L’Udovít Marci (Editor)

https://textbookfull.com/product/people-institutions-relations-
slovakia-and-hungary-from-the-11th-to-the-18th-century-ludovit-
marci-editor/

Cultural Meanings and Social Institutions Social

Organization Through Language David R. Heise

https://textbookfull.com/product/cultural-meanings-and-social-
institutions-social-organization-through-language-david-r-heise/

Bourgeois Equality How Ideas Not Capital or

Institutions Enriched the World 1st Edition Deirdre N.
Mccloskey

https://textbookfull.com/product/bourgeois-equality-how-ideas-
not-capital-or-institutions-enriched-the-world-1st-edition-
deirdre-n-mccloskey/
C A N A D A A N D I N T E R N AT I O N A L A F FA I R S

Canada–US Relations
Sovereignty or Shared Institutions?
Edited by David Carment and Christopher Sands

C A N A D A A M O N G N AT I O N S 2 0 1 8
Canada and International Affairs

Series Editors
David Carment
NPSIA
Carleton University
Ottawa, ON, Canada

Philippe Lagassé
NPSIA
Carleton University
Ottawa, ON, Canada

Meredith Lilly
NPSIA
Carleton University
Ottawa, ON, Canada
Palgrave’s Canada and International Affairs is a timely and rigorous
series for showcasing scholarship by Canadian scholars of international
affairs and foreign scholars who study Canada’s place in the world. The
series will be of interest to students and academics studying and teaching
Canadian foreign, security, development and economic policy. By focus-
ing on policy matters, the series will be of use to policy makers in the
public and private sectors who want access to rigorous, timely, informed
and independent analysis. As the anchor, Canada Among Nations is the
series’ most recognisable annual contribution. In addition, the series
showcases work by scholars from Canadian universities featuring struc-
tured analyses of Canadian foreign policy and international affairs. The
series also features work by international scholars and practitioners work-
ing in key thematic areas that provides an international context against
which Canada’s performance can be compared and understood.

More information about this series at

http://www.palgrave.com/gp/series/15905
 David Carment · Christopher Sands
Editors

Canada–US Relations
Sovereignty or Shared Institutions?
Editors
David Carment Christopher Sands
NPSIA Paul H. Nitze School of Advanced
Carleton University International Studies
Ottawa, ON, Canada Johns Hopkins University
Washington, DC, USA

ISSN 2523-7187 ISSN 2523-7195 (electronic)

Canada and International Affairs
ISBN 978-3-030-05035-1 ISBN 978-3-030-05036-8 (eBook)
https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-05036-8

Library of Congress Control Number: 2018962911

© The Editor(s) (if applicable) and The Author(s), under exclusive licence to Springer
Nature Switzerland AG 2019
This work is subject to copyright. All rights are solely and exclusively licensed by the
Publisher, whether the whole or part of the material is concerned, specifically the rights
of translation, reprinting, reuse of illustrations, recitation, broadcasting, reproduction
on microfilms or in any other physical way, and transmission or information storage and
retrieval, electronic adaptation, computer software, or by similar or dissimilar methodology
now known or hereafter developed.
The use of general descriptive names, registered names, trademarks, service marks, etc. in this
publication does not imply, even in the absence of a specific statement, that such names are
exempt from the relevant protective laws and regulations and therefore free for general use.
The publisher, the authors, and the editors are safe to assume that the advice and
information in this book are believed to be true and accurate at the date of publication.
Neither the publisher nor the authors or the editors give a warranty, express or implied,
with respect to the material contained herein or for any errors or omissions that may have
been made. The publisher remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published
maps and institutional affiliations.

Cover image: © blakisu/iStock/Getty Images Plus

Cover design by Tjaša Krivec

This Palgrave Macmillan imprint is published by the registered company Springer Nature
Switzerland AG
The registered company address is: Gewerbestrasse 11, 6330 Cham, Switzerland
 Series Preface

Palgrave’s Canada and International Affairs is a professional and prac-

tical series showcasing scholarship by Canadian scholars of international
affairs and foreign scholars who study Canada’s place in the world. The
purpose of the series is to examine international issues that affect Canada
and to provide Canadian perspectives on international affairs focused on
current trends, events, and themes of policy interest and relevance. The
series will interest students and academics dealing with Canadian foreign
policy, national defence, international security, overseas development,
and issues of trade and economics, among others. By focusing on pol-
icy problems, the series will be of use to policymakers and practitioners
in the public and private sectors who want access to timely, rigorous,
informed, and independent analysis on the leading issues of the day.
We encourage submissions from interested applicants studying, teach-
ing, or working on:

• Canadian foreign policy or Canadian politics

• Comparative foreign policy or public policy
• International affairs and/or public policy
• Policy management and/or public administration

v
vi    Series Preface

The Canada and International Affairs series is structured around

three types of publications:

1. As the anchor, Canada Among Nations is the series’ most rec-
ognisable annual contribution. Canada Among Nations is an
established volume produced by the Norman Paterson School of
International Affairs (NPSIA), Canada’s oldest, largest, and top-
ranked interdisciplinary graduate school of international affairs
and a full and founding member of the Association of Professional
Schools of International Affairs (ASPIA) centrally located in
Canada’s capital, Ottawa. Canada Among Nations has been in
place since 1984 and become part of the international affairs
studies landscape, in Canada and abroad, for 30+ years. Canada
Among Nations provides thematic reviews of key international pol-
icy issues affecting Canada and the world and has been used exten-
sively in university courses at both the graduate and undergraduate
levels. Looking ahead, its purpose is to provide a broad-spectrum
review of the year in passing and focus on the pressing issues and
agendas facing the country and its place in the world. We encour-
age edited volumes in the range of 50,000–100,000 words.
2. In addition, the series features work by international scholars and
practitioners working on key themes or policies. These compilations
will consist of comparative multi-country studies against which
Canada’s performance can be better understood in its proper con-
text, relative to other similar countries. Examples include subjects
like comparative evaluations of foreign aid programs of OECD
countries or defence spending by NATO member-states. These
studies follow the Pivot Series format. We encourage monographs
in the range of 25,000–50,000 words and edited volumes in the
range of 50,000–100,000 words.
3. Finally, the series showcases work by scholars from Canadian uni-
versities and research groups, featuring structured analyses of
Canadian foreign policy and international affairs. Manuscripts by
individual authors as well as thematically-oriented edited volumes,
produced by established professors, emerging scholars, and senior
doctoral students are welcome. We encourage monographs in the
range of 25,000–50,000 words.
 Series Preface    vii

The Canada and International Affairs series is a venue for policy-

relevant publications intended for Canadian scholars of international affairs,
foreign scholars who study Canada’s place in the world, and students stud-
ying Canadian foreign policies and decision-making, including but not lim-
ited to defence, security, development, and economic policy. By focusing
on policy problems, the series will be of use to policymakers and practition-
ers in the public and private sectors who want access to timely, rigorous,
informed, and independent analysis on the leading issues of the day. The
goal is to provide policymakers from within the Canadian government with
the benefit of this knowledge and expertise, as well as with opportunities to
publish themselves and contribute to this diverse body of scholarship.
The Canada and International Affairs series editors are:

• David Carment, Professor of International Affairs, NPSIA, Carleton

University
• Philippe Lagassé, Associate Professor and William and Jeanie Barton
Chair in International Affairs, NPSIA, Carleton University
• Meredith Lilly, Associate Professor and Simon Reisman Chair in
International Affairs, NPSIA, Carleton University

The Canada and International Affairs editorial advisory board mem-

bers are:

• Greg Anderson, Professor of Political Science, University of Alberta

• Mel Cappe, Professor of Public Policy, University of Toronto
• Sheryl Lightfoot, Professor of Political Science, Centre for Indigenous
Studies, University of British Columbia
• Justin Massie, Professor of Political Science, Université du Québec à
Montréal
• Bessma Momani, Centre for International Governance Innovation,
Balsillie School of International Affairs, University of Waterloo
• Debora Van Nijnatten, Professor of Political Science, Wilfrid
Laurier University

Please forward any submissions or requests for further information to

CanIntAff@carleton.ca.

Ottawa, Canada David Carment

Philippe Lagassé
Meredith Lilly
 Acknowledgements

The editors of this volume wish to acknowledge the contributions of

all the authors in this volume. We are also grateful to the editors of the
previous volume in Canada Among Nations series, Norman Hillmer
and Philippe Lagassé, for their advice and support. Norman gets special
thanks for making the trip to Washington to launch the 2017 volume,
Justin Trudeau and Canadian Foreign Policy, at a public event where he
was interviewed by CTV Washington Correspondent Richard Madan.
We want to publicly thank Uriel Marantz for his research assistance
and outstanding efforts to communicate with authors, to coordinate sub-
missions to an online shared drive, and to manage logistics for an authors
workshop held at the Johns Hopkins School of Advanced International
Studies in Washington, DC. in June 2018. Authors and editors alike
benefited from the chance to meet and discuss their early conceptions
and themes in Washington. Special thanks are due to Martin Loken,
Political Counsellor at the Embassy of Canada in Washington who spoke
to our workshop on contemporary challenges in bilateral relations, of
which he has first-hand experience, and to Paul Koring, veteran corre-
spondent for the Globe and Mail and now a contributor to iPolitics.ca
who provided a historical perspective on the current period in bilateral
relations and stimulated many further conversations among us all.
The consensus highlight of the Washington workshop was a briefing
and lively exchange on the NAFTA talks and other headline issues
with Ambassador David MacNaughton and senior staff at the Embassy
including Katherine Baird, Adam Barratt, Colin Bird, Ron Garson, and

ix
x    Acknowledgements

Hani Nasser. It was a candid, off-the-record exchange that few of us will

forget. The Washington workshop would not have been possible with-
out the generous support of the Center for Canadian Studies at Johns
Hopkins which, most importantly, was manifested by hours of hard work
and attention to detail by the Center’s Senior Academic Coordinator
Starr Lee and by current graduate student and research assistant in the
Center Edward Saull.
We are extremely grateful to the Canadian Embassy in Washington
for their support to the scholars who attended the workshop. Special
thanks go to Vincent Raiche, Ron Garson, Niall Cronin for their hard
work in seeing this project to fruition. We also are grateful to the Barton
Fund, the Dean’s Office at the Faculty of Public Affairs and the School
of International Affairs all at Carleton for their support to the Canada
Among Nations project.
This volume and indeed the continuation of Canada Among Nations
as the premier annual assessment of Canadian international relations is
a credit to our publisher, Palgrave Macmillan, and the editors are very
grateful for the support and encouragement of our editor Katelyn Zingg
and her colleague Anca Pusca. We know that the readers of this book,
from scholars and policymakers to our students past, present and future
will share our gratitude that so many people worked together to bring
this book together.
 Contents

1 Introduction 1
David Carment and Christopher Sands

Part I Debates

2 The United States and Canada: In Search of Partnership 17

Charles F. Doran

3 Where Is the Relationship Going? The View

from Canada 39
Richard Nimijean

4 “America First” and U.S.–Canadian Relations 61

Rodger A. Payne

Part II Principal Domains of the Relationship

5 Canada–US Security Cooperation: Interests,

Institutions, Identity and Ideas 87
Todd Hataley and Christian Leuprecht

xi
xii    Contents

6 Fairweather Friends? Canada–United States

Environmental Relations in the Days of Trump
and the Era of Climate Change 105
Peter J. Stoett

7 Finding Commonalities Amidst Increasing Differences

in Canadian and U.S. Immigration Policies 125
Tamara M. Woroby

8 Canada’s Global Trade Options—Is There a Plan B? 151

Laura Dawson

9 Cross-Border Energy Infrastructure: The Politics

of Intermesticity 163
Geoffrey Hale

10 Upsetting the Apple Cart? Implications of the NAFTA

Re-Negotiations for Canada–US Relations 193
Laura Macdonald

Part III Emerging Issues in the Relationship

11 Drug Policy and Canada–US Relations:

The Evidence and Its (Ir)relevance 217
Jean Daudelin and Philip Jones

12 Whither Canadian Climate Policy in the Trump Era? 239

Brendan Boyd and Barry Rabe

13 Corruption in North America: Canada

and the United States 261
Robert I. Rotberg

14 Conclusion 283
Christopher Sands and David Carment
 Notes on Contributors

Brendan Boyd is an Assistant Professor in political science and econom-

ics at MacEwan University in Edmonton, Alberta, Canada. He holds a
Ph.D. from the University of Victoria and completed post-doctoral studies
at the University of Calgary. Prior to his Ph.D. studies, Brendan worked
on climate change issues for the provincial government in Manitoba.
Brendan’s research interests include environmental policy, transgovern-
mental policy learning and public governance. His work has appeared in
Publius: The Journal of Federalism, Canadian Journal of Political Science
and Canadian Public Administration.
David Carment is Professor of International Affairs at Carleton
University and Editor of Canadian Foreign Policy Journal. He is series
editor of Palgrave’s Canada and International Affairs.
Jean Daudelin is Associate Professor at Carleton University’s Norman
Paterson School of International Affairs, where he teaches on conflict,
development and property rights. He has recently published Illegal
Markets, Violence and Inequality, with José Luiz Ratton (Palgrave
Macmillan, 2018) and “Not Killer Methods: A Few Things We Get
Wrong When Studying Violence in Latin America,” in Violence in Latin
America and the Caribbean, Tina Hilgers and Laura Macdonald, eds.
(Cambridge University Press, 2017).
Laura Dawson is Director of the Wilson Center’s Canada Institute.
Named one of Canada’s Top 100 foreign policy influencers by the Hill

xiii
xiv    Notes on Contributors

Times, Dawson is a speaker, writer, and thought leader on Canada–U.S.,

NAFTA, TPP, and international trade issues. Previously, she served
as senior advisor on economic affairs at the United States Embassy in
Ottawa and taught international trade and Canada–U.S. relations at
Carleton University. Dawson continues to serve as an advisor at Dawson
Strategic, which provides advice to business on cross-border trade,
market access and regulatory issues. She is a Fellow at the Macdonald-
Laurier Institute, and the Canadian Global Affairs Institute. Dawson
holds a Ph.D. in political science.
Charles F. Doran is the Andrew W. Mellon Professor of International
Relations at the Paul H. Nitze School of Advanced International
Studies (SAIS), Johns Hopkins University, Washington, DC. There
he has long served as both Director of the Global Theory and History
Program and Director of the Program of Canadian Studies. He recently
developed and is now also Director of SAIS’s innovative Program in
International Political Economy. Doran has written widely on trade mat-
ters, environmental protection, oil economics and politics, and security.
He has provided briefings and testimony on energy and environmen-
tal matters, trade policy, and international security before committees
of the U.S. Congress and of the Canadian Parliament, and in formats
involving the respective stakeholder communities. An entire issue of
the International Political Science Review was devoted to his work on
structural change and security in world politics. He is currently working
on a book that assesses world order in the twenty-first century. Doran
has received the Governor General’s International Award for Canadian
Studies, the highest scholarly award in the field. The American Political
Science Association bestowed on him its Lifetime Achievement Award
in Canadian Studies. For his contributions in international relations, the
International Studies Association granted him its Distinguished Scholar
Award (Foreign Policy).
Geoffrey Hale is Professor of Political Science at the University of
Lethbridge. He has written widely on Canada’s International and
Intergovernmental Policy Relations, Canada–U.S. Relations and North
American Integration, including but not limited to trade, energy, invest-
ment, border management, and capital markets policies. He is the
author of So Near and Yet So: The Public and Hidden Worlds of Canada–
U.S. Relations (2012), Uneasy Partnership: The Politics of Business and
 Notes on Contributors    xv

Government in Canada (2018), and co-editor of Borders and Bridges:

Canada’s Policy Relations in North America (with Monica Gattinger, 2010).
Dr. Todd Hataley (Ph.D., Queen’s) is Adjunct Associate Professor at
the Royal Military College of Canada and recently retired from the Royal
Canadian Mounted Police. In 2018, he held an Honorary International
Visiting Fellowship in the Centre of Crime Policy and Research at the
Flinders University of South Australia. He has authored over 30 schol-
arly publications, including a monograph entitled Security Complexes
and Perimeter Defense in North America: A Critical Assessment (New
York: Lynne Rienner Press, 2012). He is an expert on the management
of international boundaries, regional security, and transnational crime.
During his tenure as a federal police investigator he conducted investiga-
tions into smuggling of drugs, weapons and human beings, money laun-
dering, organized crime, national security, and extra-territorial torture.
Philip Jones is a Ph.D. Student at Carleton University’s Norman
Paterson School of International Affairs, specializing in the field of
International Conflict Management and Resolution. His current area
of research pertains to smuggling, violence, informal governance, and
borders. Philip holds a M.Sc. from the London School of Economics
(Comparative Politics) and a B.A. with First Class Honours from
St. Francis Xavier University (International Relations).
Christian Leuprecht (Ph.D., Queen’s) is Class of 1965 Professor in
Leadership, Department of Political Science, Royal Military College,
on leave as Matthew Flinders Fellow at Flinders University in South
Australia. He is a recipient of RMC’s Cowan Prize for Excellence
in Research and an elected member of the College of New Scholars
of the Royal Society of Canada. He is president of the International
Sociological Association’s Research Committee 01: Armed Forces and
Conflict Resolution, Munk Senior Fellow at the Macdonald-Laurier
Institute and cross-appointed to the Department of Political Studies and
the School of Policy Studies at Queen’s University where he is also a
fellow of the Institute of Intergovernmental Relations and the Queen’s
Centre for International and Defence Policy. An expert in security and
defense, political demography, and comparative federalism and mul-
tilevel governance, he has held visiting positions in North America,
Europe, and Australia, and is regularly called as an expert witness to tes-
tify before committees of Parliament. He coordinates the security theme
xvi    Notes on Contributors

for the Borders in Globalization Partnership Grant, funded by the Social

Sciences and Humanities Research Council of Canada: www.biglobaliza-
tion.org, www.christianleuprecht.com.
Laura Macdonald is a Professor in the Department of Political Science
and the Institute of Political Economy at Carleton University. She has
published numerous articles in journals and edited collections on such
issues as The Role of Nongovernmental Organizations in Development,
Global Civil Society, Citizenship Struggles in Latin America, Canadian
Development Assistance and the Political Impact of the North American
Free Trade Agreement (NAFTA). She has edited four books: The Politics
of Violence in Latin America and the Caribbean, Cambridge University
Press, 2017 (with Tina Hilgers); North American in Question: Regional
Integration in an Era of Economic Turbulence, University of Toronto
Press, 2012 (with Jeffrey Ayres); Contentious Politics in North America,
Palgrave Macmillan, 2009 (with Jeffrey Ayres); and Post-Neoliberalism
in the Americas: Beyond the Washington Consensus?, Palgrave Macmillan,
2009 (with Arne Ruckert). She is the co-author of Women, Democracy,
and Globalization in North America: A Comparative Study. Palgrave
Macmillan, 2006 (with Jane Bayes, Patricia Begne, Laura Gonzalez, Lois
Harder, and Mary Hawkesworth), and author of Supporting Civil Society:
The Political Impact of NGO Assistance to Central America, Basingstoke,
UK and New York City: Macmillan Press and St. Martin’s Press, 1997.
Her recent work looks at Canada’s role in Latin America and policies to
reduce crime and violence in Mexico City.
Richard Nimijean is Instructor III in the School of Indigenous
and Canadian Studies at Carleton University in Ottawa, Canada. His
research and publications focus on the politics of branding Canada and
the connections between the Canadian national identity and its projec-
tion globally, public policy, and domestic politics. He was a Fulbright
Distinguished Scholar-in-Residence at the Center for the Study of Canada
at the State University of New York College at Plattsburgh (April 2013),
has twice received a Professional Achievement Award from Carleton
University, and received an Erasmus+ Teaching Mobility Certificate,
Alexandra Ioan Cuza University of Iaşi (Romania) (April 2017).
Rodger A. Payne is Professor of Political Science at the University of
Louisville. In fall 2018, he was Fulbright Canada Research chair at the
Norman Paterson School of International Affairs at Carleton University
 Notes on Contributors    xvii

in Ottawa. Payne is the co-author of Democratizing Global Politics (SUNY

2004) and dozens of journal articles and book chapters. From 1994
to 2011, Payne was the Director of the Grawemeyer Award for Ideas
Improving World Order. Payne has previously taught at Northwestern
University and was a visiting research fellow at Harvard’s Belfer Center
for Science and International Affairs, Stanford’s Center for International
Security and Cooperation, and the Program on International Politics,
Economics and Security at the University of Chicago. He received a
Dissertation Fellowship from the International Peace and Security Studies
Program co-sponsored by the Social Science Research Council and
MacArthur Foundation and was a 1983 National Debate Tournament
championship team member from the University of Kansas.
Barry Rabe is the Harris Family Professor in the Gerald R. Ford School
of Public Policy at the University of Michigan. He is the director of
the Center for Local, State, and Urban Policy at the Ford School and
is also a nonresident senior fellow at the Brookings Institution. Barry is
the author of five books, including Can We Price Carbon? (MIT Press,
2018). He has received four major research awards from the American
Political Science Association, including the 2017 Martha Derthick Award
for the Best Book with Enduring Impact for his 2004 book Statehouse
and Greenhouse.
Robert I. Rotberg is Founding Director of the Harvard Kennedy
School’s Program on Intrastate Conflict, President Emeritus of the
World Peace Foundation, and Inaugural Fulbright Distinguished
Professor at the Paterson and Balsillie Schools of International Affairs.
Fulbright Distinguished Professor of International Relations, University
of Sao Paulo; Fellow of the American Academy of Arts and Sciences. His
most recent book is The Corruption Cure: How Citizens and Leaders Can
Combat Graft (Princeton, 2017). He also edited, with David Carment,
Canada’s Corruption: At Home and Abroad (Routledge, 2018).
Christopher Sands is Senior Research Professor and Director of the
Center for Canadian Studies at Johns Hopkins University’s Paul H.
Nitze School of Advanced International Studies in Washington, DC.
From 1995 until 2006 he directed research on Canadian affairs at the
Center for Strategic and International Studies (where he is currently a
nonresident senior associate) and from 2007 until 2016 he was a senior
fellow of the Hudson Institute where he directed the Hudson Initiative
xviii    Notes on Contributors

on North American Competitiveness. He is an associate member of

Chatham House (UK), a member of the research advisory board of the
Macdonald-Laurier Institute, and serves on the executive council of the
Canada–United States Law Institute and the Association for Canadian
Studies in the United States. Prior to his appointment to the Johns
Hopkins University faculty in 2014, Sands held the G. Robert Ross
Distinguished Visiting Professorship in Canada–United States Business
and Economics at Western Washington University (2012–2017) and was
an adjunct professor in the Schools of Public Affairs and International
Service at American University. He holds a B.A. in political science from
Macalester College, an M.A. in international economics and a Ph.D. in
international relations from Johns Hopkins University.
Dr. Peter J. Stoett (Ph.D., Queen’s) is Dean of the Faculty of Social
Science and Humanities at the University of Ontario Institute of
Technology. His main areas of expertise include international relations
and law, global environmental politics, Canadian foreign policy, and
human rights. He was the Director of the Loyola Sustainability Research
Centre at Concordia University in Montreal and has held visiting fellow-
ships at the University of Tasmania; the Woodrow Wilson International
Center for Scholars in Washington; the International Institute for
Social Studies in The Hague; the University of Reading, UK; and the
University for Peace in Costa Rica. Dr. Stoett also works with the United
Nations Environmental Programme in Nairobi, Kenya, and is an Expert
Commission Member of the International Union for the Conservation
of Nature.
Tamara M. Woroby is Senior Adjunct Professor of Canadian Studies at
the Johns Hopkins University School of Advanced International Studies
(SAIS) and Professor of Economics in the University of Maryland
System (Towson University—College of Business and Economics). She
holds a Ph.D. in economics from Queen’s University, and is the author
of academic publications and monographs on international economic
issues. Her recent publications examine the differences in Immigrant
Naturalization Rates, and include a commissioned study on Refugee
Resettlement Issues for the European Union as Well as Academic Works
on North American Migration, published by Brookings Press and
Oxford University Press. She has served as a consultant to the World
Bank, the International Fund for Agriculture and Development, the
Migration Policy Institute and the US Department of State.
 List of Figures

Fig. 5.1 The 4-I framework 89

Fig. 8.1 Canada merchandise exports to top 10 trading partners,
2017 (Source Industry Canada, Trade Data Online,
http://cms-sgj.cra-arc.gc.ca) 152
Fig. 9.1 U.S. annual natural gas trade (1975–2017)
(Source Mobilla [2018]) 166
Fig. 9.2 U.S. petroleum trade (1950–2017) (Source Breul [2018]) 168
Fig. 9.3 NERC’s regions (Source https://www.nerc.com/
AboutNERC/keyplayers/PublishingImages/
Regions24JUL18.jpg [October 19, 2018]) 172
Fig. 9.4 U.S. electricity trade with Canada (2000–2017)
(Source Kempkey. “The U.S. Is a Net Energy Importer
from Canada” [Washington, DC: U.S. Energy Information
Administration, May 23, 2018]) 182
Fig. 12.1 Canada and US emissions trends and projections (To see
the full data represented in the above figure, please
visit https://www3.epa.gov/climatechange/ghgemissions/
inventoryexplorer/index.html#allsectors/allgas/gas/all
and https://www.canada.ca/en/environment-climate-
change/services/environmental-indicators/
greenhouse-gas-emissions.html) 243

xix
 List of Tables

Table 5.1 Summary of the 4-I framework applied to four policy

dimensions 101
Table 7.1 Immigrant population by region of origin (percent
of total foreign-born) 130
Table 7.2 2016 Foreign-born population by state or province
(percent of total population) 143
Table 9.1 Energy sources for electricity generation: United States 166
Table 9.2 Canada’s energy trade by resource or product—2015 168
Table 9.3 Primary U.S.–Canadian petroleum import pipelines 170
Table 9.4 Electricity trade as percentage of generation,
by province: 2012–2016 174
Table 9.5 Sources of electricity consumption: New England
1990–2016 183
Table 9.6 Electricity consumption by energy source: New England
and New York, 2016 184
Table 11.1 Annual prevalence of use as a percentage of the population
aged 15–64 (2015) 223
Table 11.2 Drug overdose deaths in the United States (2017) 224
Table 11.3 Crimes per 100,000 population in Canada
and the United States 228
Table 11.4 Drug apprehensions on US borders FY 2017 230

xxi
 CHAPTER 1

Introduction

David Carment and Christopher Sands

With the results of the North American Free Trade Agreement (NAFTA)
re-negotiations only now being made public, pundits and academics are
asking what lies ahead for the Canada–US relationship. On September 30,
2018 it was revealed that NAFTA would undergo a name change to the
United States, Mexico, and Canada Agreement (USMCA) reflecting, per-
haps, a shift from free trade to managed trade in which the United States
would play a primary role. Some observers have argued that President
Donald Trump got the better of the deal and yet arranged it so all three
countries could declare victory (Ivison 2018). Indeed, the substance of the
agreement indicates that both Canada and Mexico made a number of sig-
nificant concessions to the United States. In the words of Larry Kudlow,
Trump’s economics adviser: “Canada gave very graciously” (Ivison 2018).
In reality, Trump used the power of tariffs to bring Canada and
Mexico in line. Very early on in the negotiations Trump made clear his

D. Carment (*)
NPSIA, Carleton University, Ottawa, ON, Canada
e-mail: david_carment@carleton.ca
C. Sands
Paul H. Nitze School of Advanced International Studies,
Johns Hopkins University, Washington, DC, USA
e-mail: csands@jhu.edu

© The Author(s) 2019 1

D. Carment and C. Sands (eds.), Canada–US Relations,
Canada and International Affairs,
https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-05036-8_1
2 D. CARMENT AND C. SANDS

intent to bring investment back to the United States and, in the end,
managed to do exactly that. Some may call that behavior bullying, while
others may interpret it as part of Donald Trump’s “America first” strat-
egy. Certainly, with respect to the now all important clause regarding
future Canadian trade negotiations with China, it would seem that the
United States has imposed on its North American partners a degree of
veto power that heretofore never existed. To wit: “entry by any party
into a free trade agreement with a non-market country shall allow the
other parties to terminate this agreement”. The “America first” strategy
holds.1
For Canada the alternative to accepting these terms was rather
bleak; namely no deal at all. That is why it was essential that Canadian
negotiators convince their American counterparts to retain NAFTA’s
all-important Chapter 19 dispute resolution mechanism. American
negotiators pushed Canada to have trade disputes resolved through US
courts, an alternative that would be tantamount to surrendering sover-
eignty to a foreign power. Beyond the increases in dairy imports from
the United States, an agreement to coordinate foreign exchange policy,
higher wages for auto workers, and caps on auto imports, not much was
changed in this agreement relative to the old NAFTA. Certainly, the deal
was not what Canada’s negotiators had hoped for. Canada had to fight
very hard to maintain the status quo in a very difficult three-way nego-
tiation. There was limited success, for example, in engaging the United
States on Canada’s progressive trade agenda, labor mobility and big
pharma. More importantly, Trump’s all-important tariffs on aluminum
and steel remain, a bargaining chip the United States holds in reserve for
future considerations.
With the frantic and often contentious trade negotiations concluded
it might be reasonable to ask if the relationship between the two coun-
tries will ever be the same. There are good reasons to be optimistic. To
understand why that is so we must consider the depth of the relation-
ship. When we think of the “deep state” we imagine a country run by
narrow and private interests outside the realms of accountability and
transparency; a state captured by unelected secretive powers whose
actions run parallel to and often in contradiction to the public good and

1 According to John Ivison (2018) the creation of a macroeconomic committee with rep-

resentatives from all three countries to consider exchange rate policy has implications for
the Bank of Canada’s independence which are not fully understood.
 1 INTRODUCTION 3

the policies of democratically elected leaders. Few if any would charac-

terize the Canada–US relationship as functioning like a “deep state”; the
two countries are not formally integrated into a common political entity
like the European Union (EU) and they both sustain distinct foreign,
defense, immigration, and security policies.
And yet in so many important ways, the Canada–US relationship is
marked by higher levels of institutionalization than is commonly under-
stood. That is because these institutions are not often examined together
as a whole but in isolation, as individual pieces of a larger process of
increasing interdependence, whether that interdependence exists at the
para-diplomacy level through provincial and state relations, through pri-
vate actor arrangements, or through federal government cooperation.
Shared or bilateral institutions serve an important function in the
conduct of Canada–US relations. Each reifies a political agreement to
cooperate made by a US president and a Canadian prime minister. As
US presidents, and the executive branch they lead, have become more
important in the system of United States governance, and as the United
States has become a global power with interests around the world, the US
chief executive has had to triage engagement in issues in order to focus
on urgent priorities. Institutions permit US presidents to “fix it and for-
get it.” When an issue in the bilateral relationship with Canada becomes
urgent; public service professionals then take over day-to-day manage-
ment of the file and can develop subject matter expertise and familiarity
with Canadian government policy and priorities that facilitate cooperation.
For Canadian prime ministers, the US presidential authority embodied
in these shared institutions provides a politically valuable imprimatur that
ensures the cooperation and engagement of US officials, whether political
appointees or career professionals in US agencies and departments.
Though the mandates of these institutions vary considerably across dif-
ferent policy domains and in terms of their formality, capacities, and capa-
bilities, the scope and pace of institutionalization between the United
States and Canada are profound. Some of these institutions have been
long-standing arrangements and are highly formalized such as the near
century-old International Joint Commission (IJC), North Atlantic Treaty
Organisation (NATO), and The North American Aerospace Defense
Command (NORAD), while others, more recent, focus on managing the
impacts and benefits of more closely integrated economies such as USMCA
and the North American Development Bank (NADBank) and the chal-
lenges of shared security threats such as the Arctic Council among others.
4 D. CARMENT AND C. SANDS

Several institutional arrangements have generated outcomes that

make the Canada–US relationship unique. For example, our energy mar-
ket remains distinct (and partially protected) from global energy trends
because of shared resource exploitation, cross-border investments,
and concerns regarding climate change and environmental degrada-
tion. At the same time, barriers to trade and investment have all been
but removed save for a few “ring-fenced” sectors such as health, agricul-
ture, telecoms, and airlines. In particular, intelligence sharing as it effects
defense and security policy, has become highly institutionalized especially
with respect to border security and the monitoring of individuals “of
interest.”
It is important to note that the United States and Canada have estab-
lished institutions with varying degrees of formal structure. NORAD and
the IJC, for example, are formalized by treaty. Bilateral cooperation in
border security management and regulatory practice is conducted under
the aegis of executive agreements. And, as Douglas North has observed,
there are “soft institutional” understandings emanating from formal
agreements like USMCA that assume decision-making by private citizens
and firms and can be consequential even when not spelled out: for exam-
ple, the structuration of continental supply chains is based on the infor-
mal understanding that continental production is a goal of USMCA even
though the term “supply chain” never appears in the text.
If there is cause for concern regarding the increasingly institutional-
ized relationship between the two countries, one need look no further
than the UK’s convoluted and poorly managed departure from EU
membership in which a principal fear among British voters was the lack
of accountability and transparency they believed was embedded in EU
membership. Simply put, Brexit voters believed decisions affecting the
future of UK citizens were being made by unelected technocrats.
Yet in contrast with European institutions, the shared institutions
designed by Canada and the United States are intended to remain
accountable to sovereign governments, and therefore are, to some
degree, democratically accountable. These shared institutions have,
thus far, escaped scrutiny over “democratic deficits” and illegitimacy.
They do, however, remain vulnerable to political reconsideration or
revision by subsequent US administrations and Canadian governments.
For example, the USMCA may well portend the future of such political
predilections given that it is susceptible to trilateral review in 16 years.
In contrast, the more obscure an area of policy, such as human health
 1 INTRODUCTION 5

standards for safe use of pesticides, the more stable institutionalized

cooperation becomes.
For political leaders in both countries, there is the dilemma of sup-
porting such institutions while adapting them based on their own
electoral mandates. The asymmetries of mutual significance and gov-
ernmental capability between the United States and Canada place more
political pressure on Ottawa to initiate change and to defend past insti-
tutions under normal circumstances. Yet the difficulty to securing US
engagement and willingness to address an issue bilaterally, and to cement
a response in an institution of some kind leads Canadian leaders to be
cautious and to employ the formalization of agreement in shared institu-
tions sparingly.
As the old adage goes, the only thing worse than being ignored by the
United States is to have the attention of the United States. What makes
this period in the Canada–US relationship remarkable is that it is the
United States that has called into question the central shared institution
in the bilateral relationship: NAFTA. US President Donald Trump was
not simply demanding changes to the institutionalized commitment to
liberalized trade out of a misunderstanding of the reasons and purposes
behind this shared institution. He went so far as to claim that NAFTA
institutionalized a relationship between the two economies that was
unfair to the United States. Stepping back from this institution, Trump is
advancing an agenda that reinforces national sovereignty, the alternative
pole in the historical management of the relationship.
Representing the smaller partner, Canadian governments have tradi-
tionally asserted Canadian sovereignty in order to resist shared institu-
tions with the United States. The right of Canada to choose, to decide
for itself, was claimed against orders from London during imperial times,
and is deeply ingrained in Canadian diplomacy. And Canadian sover-
eignty is expressed not only as the right of independent decision or
action. It is also a version of the American idea of popular sovereignty,
with public consent held out as the proper means of legitimizing deci-
sions to surrender sovereignty. Thus, Prime Minister Brian Mulroney
called an election in 1988 to “let the people decide” whether to enter
into the Canada–US Free Trade Agreement.
In 2016, Donald Trump campaigned on distrust of the elite consen-
sus that had existed in Washington, DC in support of trade liberalization
and military defense of the world order with modest contributions from
US allies. Trump’s election exposed significant differences between elite,
6 D. CARMENT AND C. SANDS

or establishment policy, views and those of many Americans. Trump

offered disillusioned Americans a better deal in a dangerous world and a
globalizing economy, promising to renegotiate the terms of trade agree-
ments and military alliances. Trump’s message was that US allies and
trading partners had taken advantage of US goodwill and generosity at
the cost of American jobs and the lives of American troops, and Trump
proposed to address this with international policies that leveraged US
political and economic power in ways that put “America first.” We can
call this the new nationalism if you like, but in many ways it is a reaction;
reasonable under the conditions of how democratically elected leaders
behave—that puts domestic interests ahead of shared interests. It is a
choice to place sovereignty ahead of shared institutions, or perhaps to
leverage sovereignty against extant shared institutions to remake them.
An obvious example is Donald Trump’s “Make America Great Again”
slogan with its claims to strengthening the American economy by acting
in a self-interested fashion.
Notwithstanding the Canada–Europe trade deal success story and the
fact that Canada has proven capable of striking deals with small econ-
omies in emerging markets such as Colombia and Honduras, working
with the Trump administration has proving to be a more daunting and
unanticipated challenges. While Canada is historically dependent on
trade with the United States and Europe, Canada’s multicultural pop-
ulation and its well-organized diaspora communities may well hold the
key to Canadian prosperity. If Canada’s changing demography portends
future policy choice, then surely there is merit in looking beyond North
America.
But the demand for change is fuelled by more than these demo-
graphic considerations. By mid-century it’s estimated that Asia, led by
China, along with Brazil and South Africa, will have a combined gross
national product larger than the G8. The brief moment with the United
States as the preeminent world power at the turn of the twentieth cen-
tury, is now a multipolar system, dominated by rising giants that dwarf
Canada militarily, economically, and politically.
To add uncertainty to the mix, Prime Minister Justin Trudeau’s ambi-
tious multilateral agenda has been put on hold as his Foreign Minister,
Chrystia Freeland, grappled with the American leader’s trade agenda.
Trump who prefers to negotiate bilaterally because it more clearly
exploits American leverage over weaker partners has proven to be both
disruptive and catalyzing; implicitly cajoling Trudeau and Freeland to
 1 INTRODUCTION 7

reluctantly and hesitantly, embrace change. If there is discomfort in that,

it comes largely from the stark choices Canadians must confront in react-
ing to Trump’s policies.
A case in point is the flooding of the St Lawrence Seaway in 2017,
which should have been jointly managed but was interpreted in vastly
different ways by representatives from both countries. The net result was
conflict between leaders on each side of the border, acting on electoral
interests with a more narrow mandate (e.g. property loss and commen-
surate compensation as seen from the American perspective) vs support
for Seaway management with a focus on the public good including envi-
ronmental protection (as interpreted by Canadian bureaucrats). In much
the same way we are now witnessing a battle between leaders whose
interests they say are democratic (protection of jobs) versus an institution
focused on economic growth (with clearly defined sectoral winners and
losers) namely USMCA.
A second concern, more so for the Liberal government than the
American administration, is the need to uphold global and regional insti-
tutional arrangements for fear that in their absence, Canada would be
subject to even greater levels of transactional negotiation and linkage
politics. In essence, institutions act as a buffer to ensure continuity and
heighten expectations for the purposes of creating a more stable and
predictable policy environment. Absent such institutions and it becomes
clear how the more influential and powerful can disrupt the global
agenda, shift the policy focus and undermine institutional credibility.
In many ways, the need to uphold international institutions is a
long-standing Canadian interest. But the dilemma for Canada is that by
strengthening and deepening the bilateral relationship Canada’s leaders
are trading multilateralism for bilateralism Historically, Canadian foreign
policy has balanced multilateralism (e.g., the British Empire, the United
Nations, and other fora) against the constricting embrace of bilateral
ties to the United States. Indeed Canada has often preferred to off-
set American influence through a multilateral agenda with its emphasis
on the establishment and enforcement of collective rules guiding state
behavior. It is through multilateralism and membership in various organ-
izations that Canada has typically addressed questions of peace and secu-
rity through the rule of law economic prosperity and competitiveness in
trade and investment, as well as national unity and Canadian sovereignty.
And yet, unlike countries such as Norway or Sweden, Canada is not
a natural multilateral player. It has had to work very hard to support a
8 D. CARMENT AND C. SANDS

multilateral agenda because of ever-increasing continentalist pulls. Today

that commitment to a global multilateral agenda that includes free trade
and global peace and security is cast in doubt. For example, when the
Trump administration agenda negated the TPP, a deal that would have
provided access to 40% of the global economy Canadian leaders were
at a loss on how to move on without the United States. Both TPP and
CETA were supposed to be the salvation that would rescue Canada from
dependence on US markets (Carment and Landry 2017).
But the criticism of both deals has been extensive. From the left, we
hear primarily of environmental and labor rights concerns, along with
worries over investor-state dispute settlement mechanisms creating undue
power for corporations to legally challenge a sovereign nation. From the
right (and some on the left), we hear of wage stagnation and the loss
of manufacturing and natural resource industry jobs. Both sides worry
about the detrimental effects of rising inequality, exacerbated by export-
ing low-skilled jobs overseas. At the same time, the US obsession with
security detracts from our own leaders’ capacity to achieve economic
growth through immigration, for example (Carment and Landry 2017).2
Finally, we come to the issue of whether the United States is with-
drawing from its multilateral role of primus inter pares, abandoning
the rules-based liberal international system it established post-WWII.
By becoming more inward-looking the United States may be drag-
ging Canada along with it. The pursuit of bilateral free trade arrange-
ments is but one example of a potential weakening in the World Trade
Organization (WTO) structure. Other examples include a perceived
deterioration of the UN system, including the International Monetary
Fund (IMF) and World Bank and the United Nations Security Council
(UNSC) undermined by constant abuse by regional and global powers.
These points regarding the evolutionary if not revolutionary state
of Canada–US relations are at the core of this year’s Canada Among
Nations. Contributors to this year’s edition were asked to assess the
current status of Canada–US policy cooperation and the implica-
tions for both Canadian and US sovereignty in light of policy develop-
ments. Authors were asked to identify if and how the Trump agenda
has affected the level and kind of coordination between the two states.

2 This section draws from “Claiming the 21st Century?” in Reflections of Canada:

Illuminating Our Biggest Possibilities and Challenges at 150 Years, edited by P. Tortell and
M. Young (Vancouver, BC: Peter Wall Institute for Advanced Studies—UBC Press, 2017).
 1 INTRODUCTION 9

Authors were also asked to engage in the time-honored debate regarding

Canada’s strategic direction. For example, what are the consequences for
Canada’s commitment to upholding norms of multilateralist cooperation
such as rule of law, institutional liberalism and a stable and a predictable
political and economic environment while pursuing deeper integration
with the United States? Finally, authors were asked to consider whether
the United States is actually undergoing the kind of strategic transforma-
tion Trump advocates.
The volume is in four sections. In the first section we asked three
experts to evaluate and debate the current state of affairs and present
their ideas on where the relationship is headed. Evaluating the Canada–
US relationship, Charles Doran argues that economic forces com-
pelled the leaders of the three NAFTA countries to finalize a free trade
agreement, for the simple reason that the alternative of finding new trad-
ing partners is seen as undesirable and less feasible. Doran is therefore
correct in his conclusions given the emergence of the USMCA. If cur-
rent US policy appears to runs counter to this assumption, it is as Doran
argues because US grand strategy has the additional task of confronting
China over its unfair trading practices. Indeed Doran argues that in the
long run, Canada will be caught up in America’s slipstream as the two
economic giants grapple with one another over access to markets, intel-
lectual property rights, and manufacturing.
Richard Nimijean provides an alternative explanation for understand-
ing the Canada–US relationship in his chapter “National Identity and the
Management of Canada–US Relations: The View from Canada.” Being
a smaller and less powerful partner means that the relationship is always
interpreted in terms of the potential loss of policy sovereignty. Since
9/11, these fears have deepened, argues Nimijean. American statements
that “security trumps trade” challenge Canada as a trading country,
dependent on staples, exports and an integrated cross-border manufac-
turing sector. According to Nimijean. appeals to sovereignty and national
identity, once used in the fight against free trade and closer ties with
the United States, are now used to promote closer ties with the United
States through the articulation of a progressive trade agenda that will
protect and promote so-called Canadian values.
In the third and last contribution to our “debates” section in this
volume, Rodger Payne presents his ideas on the “America First” ­policy
and its implications for US–Canadian relations. Payne argues that a
foreign policy of “America First” appears to pose a significant challenge
Another random document with
no related content on Scribd:
sjorden ze nog, tot Dirk, in zwaren knoop, ’t touw-end
om wagenkant vastrukte. Hijgend en blazend, paf van
smoorhitte, die als wiegelend vuur op hun kleeren
bleef zengen, en hun zonnebronzige zweetkoppen
rood-vlekkig, bevlamd van inspanning, onkenbaar
verwrong, stonden de kerels achter ’t krat van den
hoogen wagen, waar de wind nu geen vat meer op
had.—

Stom even keken ze voor zich uit.—Toen, met ’n

forschen ruk boorde Kees de steek vork diep in ’t hooi.

—’n Gos-meroakel daa-tie stoan ’tmet.… kaik.… wâ

lailek die skaif hangt!..

Dirk kroop op ’t voorkrat, klom op z’n bankje,

ingedoken [228]onder ’t berghooge goudhooi, z’n
schonken en kop òverhuivend. In beukerenden ruk en
pracht-spannenden spierzwel, de pooten pezig
gekromd, de flanken gestrekt, kop in snuiving
laaggebukt, hoefklakkerde ’t paard op den grintdijk
áán. In waggel kraak-hortte de wagen voort van den
dijk.

Kees en Ouë Gerrit hingen zich aan de binten van ’t

achterkrat, met armen vastgehaakt, half-sleurend
langs spanrand en touwkruis, om den berg te stuiten
in z’n snel-sullenden gang van schuinen dijk. Zoo
hobbelde de wagen voort, angstig scheef-hellend den
straatweg op, klaar, om bij ’n dommen zwenk neer te
smakken, breed-uit op gloei-blinkenden klinkerweg
van polder.—
 [Inhoud]

III.

In den middag stonden de hooiwagens weer leeg op

den dijk. De wind was uitgevlaagd, brieste nu koeler in
den zwijmenden polder, en zilver wolkspel, veerig
blank, doorpluimde in ontzaglijke zwierlijn, ’t
hemelruim. Achter, bij horizon, stapelden wolktronen,
paars en violet in dampig en vochtig goudlicht. Van
alle kanten uit, achter dammen, dijken en paden,
waggelden de hooiwagens weg, als ’n zwoegend
versleep van duinen.

Gelijk ’n blinkende witte baan, lag gloeizanderige

klinkerweg naakt te blakeren tusschen ’t groen. ’n
Adem van zeezoelte koelde soms over ’t land en in
mistig violet slankten de dorpstorentjes op paarse kim.
Wijde middagrust, zwijmelloomde en suizelde over
klaverveld en bouwgrond. Meer bijeengedromd in de
middaghitte groepten de droomrige trage koetjes in
vacht-pracht, en smijige huidplooiing. Wat
watermolentjes wiekerden, wìekerden, en bestoven
van luwe dampen, schitterden de slooten of effenden
met kroos, in dof prachtgroen, pasteltintig omstreeld
van innig licht.—

Om zeven uur nog stonden Dirk en Kees den laatsten

wagen op te laden, nu vlugger en rustiger werkend, in
den [229]koelenden luchtstroom en stillen aangloei van
zonnerood, tusschen den avondlijken val van ritslige
zuchten en polderstilte, eindloos.—
 Luidlooze groei van schaduwleven was over ’t land
getrokken. Gebroken kleurval dampte òp in wazig
zonnerood. Graasgeluid van koeien raspte zacht door
de weien en blaatgekerm klaagde éven over dijken
áán, als ver kindergeween.

In pastoralen zang verklonken van heel vèr, soms

even, menschenstemmen vaaglijk, en hoog van
hooiwagens, door den avondrooden polder. En
roerloos, de weien verklankten de werkersstemmen
als zang in den avondval.

Kweelig vogelgekwinkel, zacht als in den ochtend,

jubelde rond en lichte muschpiepjes stipten ongedurig
nog blanke dag-geruchtjes tusschen oneindige lucht
en vlakte.—In ’t westen zwierden blank-beschuimde
wolkjes, als ’n vlucht zilvermeeuwen en blanke tortels,
verdwaalde zwerm in zonnedaal.

Goud-geel en rood omvloeide ’t stedeke Wiereland in

zomeravondbrand, met z’n havenwoel, schepen,
kleurig lichtspel, purperglanzig achter verren
boomendrom en molen.

Huisjes, met oud-rood en hel vurig dak, walmden in

laten gloed, in wolkerig avondgoud, bij enkele hoeken,
in zacht-wondren brand de krotjes verguldend als
blinkende kluistertjes.—

’t Vlammenrood van zomeravond licht-baande in

vervige vegen door ’n warrel van kleine huisjes,
dwars-scheef, krom, verweerd en gebroken, toch van
verre saàmgekringd, met hun geelbeokerde geveltjes
en glans-raampjes, pracht-tooverig aangegloeid in ’t
 zonnerood. Aan één kant van polder naar Lemper,
rijden de hooischelven òp in wonder-stille, roode
tooverij van magisch vuur.—’t Hooi sfeerde rood-
omwiegeld in angstig-heiligen gloed. Violet kropen de
slagschaduwen als gedoofd vuur onder aan de
schelven, met de graszee in laatste doorzonning er
onder, vreemdgeel-groen nu, in zonnedaal. Rij aan rij,
de hooischelven wonderden dáár in de roode
zonnetooverij, en angstiger in doodskruip klom
schaduw-violet aan één zij òp, doofde ’t hooiblond, ’t
goudgegloei, ’t gras, in langzamen stijg. [230]

Boven ’t stedeke, ’n zicht ver, stond de hemel in hel-

rooien brand. Wolkenburchten met goudbegloeide
boogbruggen en rood gegloeide pijlers, dreven in
geel-okerige zee van licht. Vlammenpoorten boogden
hoog, waaronder uitholden paardestoeten en
ruitergestalten in rooden vlammenvlucht, toeterend op
helkoperen trompetten, ’t vuur uit de avond-hemelen
samen.

Ze renden, ze draafden áán, beschuimd, bestoven,

ombeefd van gloed, één draf van renners uit ’t
vlammenrijk van rooden avondbrand, naar de
burchten, over gouden bruggen, door kleurige poorten
en zilver-groene hallen. In roodgouden damp ijlden
hun rossen, met snuivende trilneuzen, door ruïne-
rijken van vonkend violet.

Vanen van vuur en gloed in nevelspel, wapperden uit,

onder brandende vlammenpoorten en telkens in
heviger lichttuimel stortten afgebrande roode balken
 en steenen met knetter en vonkspat, ’t paarsblauwe
ruim in, uitgedoofd doodstil vergrijzend.—

Zoo, ’t hemelspel dreef boven stedeke,

zomeravondbrand van polder, geluidlooze ren en
fonkelende klaroening van paarden en ruiters, uit ’t
vuur naar de burchten, door gloed en damp
voortstuwend in drom, en tòch stilstaand in aarzeling.
Eindelijk versteende de drom, apotheose-stoet
verbleekend in oranje naar paarse mist, de
paardkoppen alléén nog vurig besinteld, in oogstaar;
nog éven te zien de hijgende snuifneuzen, in
nerveuzen angst-tril. En boven hun koppen,
gloeisperen van vergrauwende renners, dwars
geheven naar ’t vlammenlicht, in starre houding, grijs-
vaag wègdoovend in nevel van paars.—

Onder den wolkenden aarzeldrom, ’t stedeke

avondgloorde in stiller rood, heilig van gloed. Dakjes-
wemel, in zonnezinking verteerde in glansrood; blauw
geluik, groene deurtjes en venstertjes vergloeiden
èven zacht lichtstervend. Ruitjes in rooden gloor
vervlamden brand, stillen heiligen brand, en helrood,
en purper en zilverleiïg gloeiden de daakjes, lijnden
vervloeiend in ’t wisselend hemelbrio bòven
havenboomen; [231]boomen die groeiden, reuzig tegen
’t late licht in. Wasem van tinten dampte al lager uit
òver ’t stedeke en bleekgoud verstierf de havenwoel in
eindelooze stilte, doorruischt van avondval.

De polder ving laatsten gloed, in blonden aarglans van

rogge. Halmen glimmerden en dauwig lichtwaas
dampte over het stervende, verstillende land.—
De hooischelven stonden uitgegloeid in paarse dofte
en ’t gras weifelde geel-teer onder een zwijmel van
hooilucht en bloemzoet.

Vesperklokjes luidden lichtelijk in eindlooze

teerderheid, als zilverende koorgalm van angelus-
stemmen. En héél ver af, aan den schemerenden
cirkelrand van polderkom, de dorpjes vereenzaamden,
verschuchterden in bleek grijs. ’t Vee, loom plassend
in nevelzee, verstipte in overgrauwende dampigheid,
al kleiner.

Wat hooiwagens vèr op dijk, schommelden, dof in

avondlijk mistpaarsen landdamp. Zoete geuren uit de
koelende aarde zwijmden òp, wiegelden rond.
Tjilpertjes, heel zacht, in dooréén jubelenden piep,
vlogen áán en wèg door ’t gras, doorstreepten ’t
avondland met zangetjes ijl, zilverend geneurie van
vedels en aëoliens.—

Al donkerder verzonk de polder, vereenzaamd in

nachteduister.—

Krekel-dreunzang melodiëerde overal en nergens,

afgebroken avondklanken. Windefluister ruischte rond,
vertelde wat in ontroerden suizel van nachtegloor, en
van ’t stedeke woeien áán zwakke geruchten, brekend
op de deining van polderrust, avondstilte op rhytmus
van eeuwigheid gedragen.

Avondgeruchten vaag en wezenloos verzwierven in ’t

duistere weide-rond, en al zachter fluister trilde over
donkerend aarde-groen.—Zachter verstierf ’t
 ruischgebed van riet in de plassen, de weeke
heimelijk-teere ritsel van aren en halmen.

En dichter op de aarde daalde de hemel, al lager,

lager, grijs-nevelig vervloeiend met ’t duisterend
weiegroen, paars-teer, doorsidderd van avondheilige
stilte. [232]

Ver rijk van godswijde stilte in mistig avondgerucht,

éven doorweend van koe-loei, heel vèr, uit donkere
wei aanklankend, omruischt weer van rietzang en
halmenfluister.—

En stil, ontzettend in stilte, aan de kim, ging opstand

van stomme silhouetten, schaduwen van werkers,
donkere nabeelden van zwoeg, duister versluip van
menschen, stemmeloos verdwijnend in ’t avondpaars
van den onmeetlijken poldernacht. [233]

[Inhoud]
 ZESDE HOOFDSTUK.

Ouë Gerrit liep rond in z’n tuin, achter ’t erf, kijkend

naar de boonen. Op een be-boomd hoekje stonden
Kees en Dirk in zondagsplunje te koekeloeren naar de
bessen en frambroze-struiken. Stijfjes in zwart kolbert,
gouden horlogeketting op zondags-vest, stapte Dirk
voort naast Kees, die met schunnig gelapte broek en
in groenig verkleurde pijjekker, meeliep.—Ouë Gerrit
strompelde behagelijk in zondagsche rustzaligheid
rond, bekeek z’n boeltje met genot. De aardbeien
waren nogal gegaan. Dirk had met ’m afgerekend,
schraperig uitgeteld, en de zuip, dacht ie zoo, was wel
minder bij ’m geworden. ’t Geld had Guurt muurvast,
beter dan hij zelf. Want allang had ie gemerkt dat Dirk,
de snauwende stille Dirk, met hèm liever afrekende,
dan met z’n zus, die mirakels op de centjes keek, als
vroeger d’r suffe moeder.

Woàr ’t tug nou met ’t waif noar toe mos?.. hoho!.. da

wist tie puur sellefers nie! Dà wier d’r al suffer en
suffer! Dà wist ie sellefers moar hallef. Wá’ da’ nou
sain sou.. eenmoal … andermoal!.… moar de
oarebaitjes gonge goed en de boone stonge
prèchtig.… Die boone! die moste sain vast ’t joar
goedmoàke. Die laileke dokter Troost, die bemoeial,
ho! ho! had sain sait.. veur wâ hep je nie aldegoar
oarebaaie?.. Moar da sou ie denke! die
kabbeloebeloap!.… àl je f’rdienste op één risiko sette!
Wie waa’s d’r soò daas?.… Aa’s de boone moar goed
gonge!… en de kerels d’r tuusbrochte wa’ ontvange
 wier.… Nou gòng d’r Piet de heùle weuk noar stad.…
Da’ gong veul beterder! die beskouwde d’r soms de
half meer aa’s Dirk! En aa’s d’r dan Nofember dokt
most worde.. erais kaike of dá’ [234]ie d’r kwam dî joar,
al had ie skuld en skuld en nog erais skuld. Al stong ie
d’r gloeiend lailek veur! Moar wà nou? most ie.. most
ie op haide.. seure?.. op haide? d’r was nou rùst.. rùst,
nou most ie kaike, kaike!

Dirk en Kees drentelden ’m voorbij. Ze vonden ’t

lekker de kerels, in den snikheeten Zondagochtend,
stil en rustzalig lui, op ’t land, zoo tusschen d’r eigen
gewas en opgeknapten boel te slenteren.—Te
koekeloeren naar de teelt; alles zien wat noodig was,
en toch geen hand uitsteken.—Zoo leek ’t puur genot
adem te halen, midden in de landgeuren en ’t
zonnegoud.

De aardbei was in z’n grootsten haal gedaan. Er bleef

nog wel elken ochtend en avond wat te manden, maar
nu weer gloeiden de bessen òp en de kruisbessen
zwollen goud, en de dauw-doffe frambozen met hun
heimweeïgen geur van rozenzoet, purperden overal
aan de struiken, tusschen ’t groen. Ze hadden ’n
mooien vruchtenhoek, waar zorgelijk rond gewied
was. Voor den kerkgang van Ouë Gerrit, wouên ze
met d’r drieën nog ’n straatje omslenteren. Dirk had al
wat gebromd. De Ouë gooide z’n vuile jekker uit, liet
zich door Guurt z’n spannend-plooiïge zwart-
lakensche jas brengen. Heerig, met groenig
fantaziehoedje op z’n zilveren krullen, in enge jas die
stramde onder z’n armen, en over borst, kwam ie ’t erf
af, stijfgebarend en harkerig loopend, alsof z’n tikker
 bij elken tred kòn scheuren. Ze rookten alle drie,
knepen kwijl-dotterige punten aan hun sigaren en de
groenige morsige gebarsten handen, vereelt en
doorpeesd in grauw valen tint van aardewroet,
klauwden stijfjes onder de zondagsmouwen uit. Drie
op ’t rijtje, pas aan pas, ging de slenter door
Droogeweg, achterhoekschen tuin-wijk van Wiereland.
—

Aan twee kanten, langs Droogeweg-laan, goud-fel

doorzond, groende tuinderij op duingrond, hobbelig en
hellend, hier en daar doorscheurd van woest-
zanderige, kale brokken.—Jubel-blauwend straalde de
hemel uit en ’t zilvergrijs van wilgen en beukengroen
langs de laankanten, trilde in feilen lichtstroom. Stil lag
de zondag-weg, ’t smalle rood-aarden pad
doorsprankeld van zomervuur en zonnevonken.—Aan
weerszij, diep naar [235]achter, de zonnige goudgroen
beflonkerde moestuinen en boomgaarden, tusschen
den greppeligen goud-zanderig doorscheurden
duingrond, laag-golvend en vloeiend-teer van lijn,
waar naakt gegroeide wortelkronkels van krom-
gevloekte wilgen klauwden, onder struik-woest gewas
uit. Langs de heele laan, zonnigden heet, de
tuindershoevetjes, klein en hel-roodvlammig bedakt,
tusschen diep-inloopende oprijpaadjes die
paarszandig gloeiden tegen goudzand van duindal. ’t
Lage duin vergleed daar prachtig in z’n golvend
vrouwelijk-fijne lijn-rondingen, svelt en teer,
waarboven wijd hemelblauw jubelde, zee-wijd, boven
groen, groen, àl groen, bessenrood en purper.—
 Al de oprijlaantjes vóór zongloeiende hoeven
kronkelden daar aan twee kanten, hoog begroeid met
wilden cier van struik en bloem, waarachter de blaker-
geveltjes in zondagsrust heiligden, fel gelukkig
lichtjubelend, toch peinzend, doodrustig in
zomerglorie.

Laat-Juli daverde snikhitte en zonnegoud op ’t dicht

bijéén gegroeide teeltgroen, laaide door boomen,
struikwild en bloemgroepjes, in kleurigen gloed. Achter
en tusschen ’t groen, ’t godlijke stralende jubelgroen,
overal, van boomen en gras, gewas en duinmos,
scholen de hoevetjes in een blank-gouden wasem,
omsterd van gele en roode bloemselen;
goudsbloemen en dampende violier, sneèuw-fel wit,
en al-gloeiend duizendschoon. Er jubelde rood en
hoog-paars in de oprijlaantjes, in hellen blaker van
zonnigheid. En ’t bebermde golfduin in teer-
vrouwelijke glooilijn, omdonsd van groene koestering,
trilde overstort van tooverig zomervuur. ’t Vonkte langs
de greppels, achter de huisjes, geel en goud, papaver-
vuur en hel-paars boekettig.—

Skabiosa’s en blanke zilveren winden, reine

sneeuwvaasjes, lichtten in ’t groen gestruik tusschen
gras en wilden bloembloei. Heel diep, de zilver-blanke,
de goud-blanke, de schitter-sneeuwige winde dan hier
dan daar, sneeuwden boven ’t prachtgroen, roerloos
rein als besneeuwde hostie-kelkjes.—

Stàp-stàp, langzaam kuierden de mannen langs de

tuinen, op ’t rood-zandige pad, zwijgend, ieder wèg in
eigen denk-dommel. [236]Kees, stil en mijmerend,
dacht aan Wimpie, huilde en smoorde woede-drift, dat
’t ventje niet bij ’m was. En Dirk, al heeter op de
meiden van Grint, was blij dat ie nog wat duiten had
achtergehouën voor de kermis in half Augustus, om ze
te trakteeren. Toch jeukten ’m de handen, als ie dacht
aan lammen neef Willem, die ’m daar altijd dwars zat
met de lekkere Geert.—

Ouë Gerrit dommelde voort, onrustig zich voelend,

naast z’n zoons. Hij was ’t nou eenmaal gewend,
Zondags vóór de kerk, alleen ’n slentertje te maken.
Dan was ’r nog altijd wel wat voor ’m te gannefen.
Kleinigheidjes wel, maar dat kon nou eenmaal zomers
niet anders, bij zooveel vertier en zooveel kijkgrage
oogen. En nou was ie weer gedwarsboomd door de
kijkende kerels, die hij niet had willen weigeren ’n
hoekje om te maken, en bij wie ’t toch wel uitloopen
zou op ’n borrel.

Nou kregelde ’t over alles in ’m. Eerst om z’n

lamlendig sukkelwijf, dat maar vrat en zoop en duiten
kostte en geen poot meer uitsteken kòn; dat daar als
’n lijk in huis verslonk op d’r stoel, in ’n hoekje bij den
stal. Hij begreep maar niet waarom dat wijf leven
bleef.… ’n Stelletje rommelbeenen en tangen zonder
vleesch, koffie zuipend, met d’r muffen smoel open en
en dicht, en kwijlen, niks dan kwijlen. En ’t besef van
geen minuut! of zou ze nou altoos vigeleeren op hèm?
Dan kregelde ’t in ’m dat ie bij den fotograaf tegenover
’t plaatsje van Bekkema waar ie de blommetjes
nakeek,—dat ie bij dien vent ’n stommen streek had
uitgehaald.—Daar dronk ie tegen elf, nou altijd ’n
lekker bakkie koffie. Nou had ie bij dien kerel, ’n heel
mooi, fonkelnieuw goudtientje in ’n doosje zien liggen,
zoo losjes maar, en dat had ie netjes gepiept! ’t Eerst
van z’n heele leven dat ie geld gannefte. ’t Had ook
zoo geglommen, zoo prachtig uitgeblonken, dat ie d’r
geen oog van af wist te houen. Nee, hij had gevoeld,
dadelijk, dat hij dat goudtientje moèst nemen, al kostte
’t wat ’t kostte. Drie dagen later, na ’t gannefen had ie
plots gemerkt, dat de fotograaf ’m niet meer zoo gul
toesprak, en geen afporterteersel van z’n kop meer
maakte. Hij had gezien, heel sluwigjes, uit alderlei
kleine trekjes en zegseltjes, dat [237]de man ’m
wantrouwde, nooit meer alleen liet in ’t atelier, òf àls ie
’t eens deed, altijd de deur van z’n donker kamertje
sloot. Dat maakte ’m bang, onrustig, al wou ie dien
angst voor zich zelf soms verstoppen. Hij tastte nou in
vage benauwing.… òf ie den vent argwaan had
gegeven, al begreep ie niet waarom de man hèm
durfde te verdenken; hèm met z’n grijzen kop, z’n
besten naam, z’n lange woon?—Maar d’r was nog
meer, nog méér, waarover ie kregelde. Hij had twee
regels bollen gestolen, uitgegraven uit den grond bij
Bukkus, vlak achter zijn tuin.…

’t Jonge, dá’ waa’s d’r ’n nachie weest! ho-ho! Moàr

hai had se tùg … heul selsoàme bolle! Veur da’ mòst,
most ie juistig hewwe!.. Eéne regel.… van ’n poar
honderd pop!.. hoho!.… Moar wâ had ie d’ran? In
kelder gonge se wègrotte.. ’t gouwestukkie lai ’r
prêchtig! prèchtig! t’met òp de lepeltjes! Moar die
bolle? was niks gedaan!.… Doar leeë sullie hoho! wâ
had t’ie d’ran? ’t Was eerst moar lekker, salig weest,
dâ tie soo’n raikdom in ’t kluissie had.. sukke dure
snukkers! somoar ganneft! En se terugkwakke, nee da
kon ie tug ook nie van s’n aige f’rkraige.

Wa’ hadde sullie ’n heerejesis-hooge herrie moakt op

de ploats! Nou waa’s ’t alleweer soo wait hain!.…
hoho! moar toen! De pelisie!.. as daas hep sai d’r rond
spookt! En klage! klage! dat Bukkus dêe, teuge sain …
Da was d’r puur genot-en-weust. Beurde nie veul, dâ
d’r soo moar stole wier! Moar nou was ’t lol weust
alewèl.—Toen gonge se sain toeskreeuwe dáá ’t
skrikkelik, gruwelik waa’s.. da’ se de vent-en-moste
hange.—En hai.. s’n bakkes in plooi, stroef s’n
aigenste test an ’t skudde en meevloeke.. daa ’t ’n-en-
skande waas.. O! barstte had ie kent van genot, van
salighait soo. En de fint sain an ’t spuge, s’n aige van
malkoar, skreeuwe van drift.. En hai bromme in s’n
aige.. da’ hai wist woar se leeë, leeë, juustemint op dâ
stonde, dâ de fint sain d’r om-en-huilde!… En heel
Wiereland waa’s d’r in opstand, ’n relletje, van viere en
vaife en nie genog. Da’ sou die t’met nooit-nie f’rgaite!
Hai de heule santekroam doar stilletjes legge.… soo
stilletjes.… die meroakel-dure bolle.… die [238]moar
niks saie.… en dan sóó de heule boel veur je aige
sien hainholle en rondsnorre en soeke en skreeuwe
en skreie aa’s skoape! En hai an ’t bekloage, da’ tie
s’n aige stem hoore gòng, dá’ tie effe skrok, f’rbluft
stong van s’n aige valsighaid, moar tug weer lachte
van genot, salig genot.… omdá’ hai se had.… vlàk bai
sain. Enne.. da’ tie soo in sain hande naime kòn, a’s
tie wou, haì, woar de heule ploas daas van waa’s.. en
niks niemand van te begraipe wist. ’t Was d’r ’n salig
genot weust!.… Moar t’jonge hai most tug oppasse.…
’t Waif van sain kon d’r wel figelaire.… van waige ’t
 een en aêr.… tjonge.… da’ gong so wait.… hoho!
ongelukke binne kwaje kanse?… eenmoal
andermoal … dâ kon d’r in kluit-en-loope.. Aa’s da’
waif d’r aige moar nie stommetje sai.… allainig om
sain te beuke.… Moar.… moar hep de dokter nie
fermail sait aa’s da’ se d’r netuurlike f’rstand veur
alletait kwait leek? Wel ja! huhu! da’ waa’s d’r t’met ’n
ellendig-goeie woarskufing! hee?

De twee dokters saie t’met allebai eenderlai! Dan most

ie s’n aige nie soo moar van stuur moake!.… hoho!
Moar aa’s tie goed keek, waa’s d’r dan nie wat an
Kees? an s’n kaike? Had die sàin nou nie in de goate?
Heere kristis wa had die.. veurige weuk,.… èlleke
nacht ’n angst uitstoan? Ieder keer docht ie soo
laifendig Kees veur s’n lampies te sien. En op dag sag
ie Kees moar alletait op sàin loere! En gain woord da’
de fint sai! gain stom woord! En aa’s tie dan, uit angst
om sain haindroaide.… soo om d’r ’n woordje uit te
kraige, waa’s tie norsch.… Moar d’r uit niks! Enne
Piet?.. Piet? Hep die sàin nie veul meer afsnauwt..
aa’s aers?.. Sou die?.. sou die wa’ snapt hewwe?..
Och! hai most d’r moar late woaie!.. d’r waa’s d’r moar
aldegoàr bangighait! De kerels wiste puur niks! niks!
gain snars!

Dirk en Kees waren op ’t pad blijven staan voor ’n

duinbrok, breed goud-zandig, half verglooiend achter
kronkelig vergroeide wilgen. ’n Blauwbekielde stond ’r
te zwoegen, in den snikheeten zonnebrand.— [239]

—Wa’ nou Beemster?.… de sabbat onthailige?..

hoonde Kees.
Beemster keek òp, schrok toen ie strooperstronie van
Kees zag. Maar nou op den dag wou ie geen angst
voor den vent toonen.

—Nou maa’n, wi’ jai ’t t’met doene? Ikke gun je vast ’t

kattebakkie!

—Dankkie, lachte Kees, da’ rooit noa niks?

Dirk stil, koeiig-traag, keek op de wriemelende

werkhanden van Beemster. Ouë Gerrit was blijven
staan, naast Kees. Nou voelde ie zich toch weer
lekker, dat hij, op Zôndag, geen aardappels te wieden
had.

—Binne ’t loate?

—Daa’s net, moar an die hoek hai je makkeboone.…

stoan mooi hee?.…

—’t Is main f’rdomme ’n kattebakkie! schreeuwde de

daggelder naar de kerels in de laan,—da’ gòan je
sondag!.. ik sien gain waif, gain kind.… Nou poer ikke
tog van sonsopgang! tut ’s nachts, veur main diefe-
loontje hee?.… Enne om d’r sellefers ’n happie te
kenne freete in de winter.… mô’k an oarepels rooie
veur àige bik.… Daa’s iedere sondag eenderlai, ’t
eenige uuretje da’ je oferhept veur àige werk. Gunter
stoan d’r Bolk en Hannes Skrepel en Piet Steinstroa..
en Gais! daa’s nooit rust!

—Daa’s net, riep diepstemmig klankvol Kees terug,

smart-ernstig getroffen door ’t ploeteren en den
zweetdruipenden gloeikop van Beemster.
 Werker hield éven op met wieden, sprong van den
grond, tusschen z’n regels uit, keek naar Kees. Zon
schroeide z’n kop, waarop ’t zweet nu met vette
droppels glom, als neergehageld op wangen en
slapen.

—Kaik, gunters, hier ’t hoekie òm, stoan d’r Gais van ’t

Binnepadje, de looper van „De Dageroad”, die poert
s’n aige ’n beroerete.… Die hep d’r nog vaif golde in
de waik! van s’n vrachtraie.. van ses s’oafus tut ellef..
twoalef hee?.. enne in ’t murgen ’n poar uur.… aa’s ’t
mot!.…

Nou hep die d’r op den dag ’n hokkesoakie! moar.…

se [240]plukke d’r sain! en betoale nie! Nou hep tie s’n
leste duitje inskote! Hai kèn d’r puur baidele!.… Van
die vaif golde van kooks.… van die ses pop veur
turrif.… van die twee pop veur hout.… soo.… van
moand tut moand hee?.… nou, in ’t lest.. dacht ie..
f’rek jai mi je snoeptoafel! Hep ie lappie grond
pacht!.… Nou plant-tie wa’ kool, oarepels.… en da
bewerkt ie.. an den sondag! en nou komp de kapeloan
en sait d’r da’.. da’ sabbatskender hiet!.. Wâ! sait ie!
Sorrige.. da je an de winter nie heuldegoar
doodhongert, saittie!… is dâ sonde?—Nou.… in de
waik ken die d’r gain poot ànsloan.. saittie net aa’s ik
nie!.… nou werkt ie tut s’oàfus! nou … ikke hep d’r ’n
suur brok brood.… moar hemmis.… hemmis nog ’n
handje erreger.…

Hij had zich weer tusschen z’n regels gebukt, en

opsliertend woelde z’n hand ’t onkruid uit. Achter ’m
stonden in bloei van lichtend paars, de vroege
 aardappels. Fijne bloemengeur dampte uit den
zandigen, van zonnegloei ingevreten hobbeligen
grond òp. ’t Lage loof groende donker, en zangerig ’t
bloesempaars jubelde onder ’t vuur-fel hemelblauw.

Verwaarloosd stond z’n boel! In de hevige

aardbeidrukte had ie ’r, ook Zondagochtend met geen
vin aan kunnen werken. Nu stikte de rommel van
onkruid en vuil. Ouë Gerrit loerde maar, wreef langs
z’n baard, zei niks, dóód voor ’t gemartel en ’t gepoer
van Beemster. Hij zag niet eens z’n heet-dampenden
natten zweetkop, die bronsrossig glom in zonzeng. Hij
voelde niet dat de vent onder ’t rooien de hitte uit den
grond opgroef naar z’n eigen strot. Hij loerde maar
naar de kerels, of d’r niks was aan den weg voor hèm,
om mee te gappen. Er zat al zoo lang hittejeuk in z’n
steelhanden. De zomerploeter hing ’m al lang de keel
uit. Hij snakte naar den herfst, naar de inplanting van
bollen, als alles zoo onbeschermd stond op ’t veld,
gereedschap en goed.

—En pest-harde grond daa’t hier is, klaagde de

Zondagochtend-zwoeger op ’t duinbrok weer, ingebukt
pratend onder ’t wieden,—je ken d’r hier poere mit ’n
houwail, dan rooit.… rooit nòg noa nies! [241]

—Da’ wee’k, dá’ wee’k.… lachte Dirk goeiig neerziend

op den werker, die daar geschroeid bleef zitten te
zuchten en hurken, in verlammenden kruip, ingekneld
tusschen de nauwe aardappelen-regels.—Kees
voelde iets branden in z’n keel, iets van meelij met
Beemster. Maar gauw dat gewoel wrokte wèg in
onbestemden haat en nijd tegen alles; dat zijn Wimpie
 daar neergeslagen lag, elken dag bleeker, zwakker,
beroerder. Ieder dag zong ’t kind meer, en ied’ren dag
vloekte, schold hij heviger tegen ’t wijf en de vuile
menschklont van z’n schoonmoeder. Hij deed z’n
werk, loom, onverschillig, al vonden de anderen ’t heel
raak.—Maar onder al z’n werkgedoe, zag ie Wimpie
op z’n bedje of in den krakenden kinderwagen, in ’t
zonnetje, zingende stervend, vergeeld, vergrauwd,
vermagerd. En altijd in gebedjes, met dat weeke
stemmetje, ook zaligend en biddend voor de ziel van
zijn vader. Telkens smoorde Kees huil van woede
omdat ie ’r niet meer wild doorheen durfde ranselen.
Want als ie dat gefemel en geprevel zag op de bleeke
lipjes, had ie lust ’t kereltje ’n mep te geven, dat ie ’r
stom verbluft van zou kijken.—Z’n lieve jochie, al maar
z’n geraamtehandjes doopend in ’t wijwater-bakkie.…
dat gekke kijken op die beeldjes van ’t heilige Hart.…
Z’n lieve jochie voor hèm bidden, voor zijn zaligheid.
Ze konden z’n bast voor zijn part als ’n dooie hond te
drijven leggen in ’n stinksloot, was ’t nog goed genoeg
voor hèm.—Om dol te worden als ’t wijf ’m treiterig
sarde en zei, dat Wimpie door zijn goddeloosheid zoo
ziek blèèf en nooit beter kòn worden. Op die
oogenblikken kon ie ’r met moordlust en bloeddronken
duizel ’n mes de ribben instooten, dat kreng!—Wat
later dan, door ’n marsch in de duinen gekalmeerd,
begreep ie dat het kereltje ’t niet helpen kon; niet wist
wat ’t deed. In al z’n rauwen haat, die als ’n razernij
over ’m heen rilde, voelde ie dat soms heel zuiver.
Maar met één, dat ’t ventje al beroerder, akeliger keek
uit z’n geel-zieke oogen.…
Hij hoorde de doffe mor-stem van den Zondagzwoeger
op ’t duin niet meer, die telkens, schokkerend naar
adem, voortsprak, getroost al ’n beetje dat ie z’n
wrangen jammer aan ’n [242]ander uitklagen kon. Dirk
schudde maar met z’n kop, half-luisterend en slaperig
dommelend op ’t blakerende plekje. Ouë Gerrit wou
d’r telkens van doorstappen.—

Brommerig en loom kuierden ze eindelijk verder.

Heerlijk, in zoete geuren wasemde ’t walstroo rond, en
zonnig-heet gloeide ’t rood-zandige belommerde pad,
in bosch-vochtig zomerdrenksel, vol zoeten
dennenreuk, warm en prikkelend van woudgrondgeur.
Stil, de oprijlaantjes van beblakerde hoeven,
droomden in godstilte van Zondagsland.—Achter grijs-
glanzige wilgen, popels en sneeuwzilverend ritsel van
wond’re wit-fluweelen abeelen, achter struiken en
grasbloemen, flonkerden de besseboompjes, grillig
bezond, in spiralende prachtglanzing, hel-rood; overal
koralen trosjes, jubelrood, glansbevend van goud-
helle zonning.—

Tusschen malsch groen van gewas, klauterden de

boompjes hurkig òp. Struik-laag in drommende
trossen, hingen de vurige besjes tot op d’aarde,
weelde-trossend in zonnerood en schaduwrood.
Overal, aan weerskanten van de laan, al verder, al
dieper, in wasemig lommerend zomergoud, blakerden
de tuinderijen met dien wondergrilligen tooi van
vruchtjes, met d’r helle glansrood, àchter den wilden
hoogen bloei van lila en witte koekoek, goud bestoven
geel van rolklaver, en de zoete cier van
duizendschoon; àchter wemel van paarse, zoet-