Jean Chretien: Yesterday's Man Charts the Future

(2 of 2)

Another problem that may prove easier to solve in rhetoric than in practice is the Liberal stance toward the North American Free Trade Agreement, already endorsed by Canada, Mexico and the U.S. Chretien vowed to renegotiate the pact and struck a chord among many voters, who blame free trade for Canada's severe recession. He bonged no similar chimes in Washington. President Bill Clinton, who telephoned his congratulations to Chretien, declared that the Liberal victory would have "no impact at all" on NAFTA. The treaty will go before Congress on Nov. 17 and, if passed, is due to go into effect on Jan. 1.

In contrast with the mercurial Campbell, Chretien projected a calming image to voters, buttressed by his plain-folks persona. The 18th of 19 children born to a machinist and his wife in rural Shawinigan, Quebec, Chretien began campaigning for Liberal candidates in local pool halls at age 15. Undeterred by a mild facial paralysis that has plagued him since childhood and by his unfamiliarity with English, Chretien won a seat in Parliament in 1963. He quickly rose through a succession of increasingly important Cabinet jobs, including Finance and External Affairs.

Today Chretien is the first Liberal Prime Minister ever to win office without a majority of the seats from Quebec -- all the more surprising given his origins. That apparent rejection of the favorite son has much to do with Chretien's role as an enthusiastic spear carrier for federalism and his rejection of any special status for his native province. "I've seen these ((separatist)) tides come and go," Chretien told TIME. "I believe Canada will remain together." Bloc Quebecois leader Bouchard has given a cruel assessment of Chretien's technique for turning Quebec's scorn into a national advantage: "It is making himself sufficiently detestable in Quebec to be loved elsewhere."

Soon enough, that love will be tested. Once the glow of his victory wears off, Chretien will be under assault: from the Reformers for taxing and spending too much, from the separatists for elbowing aside Quebec's sovereignty, from the left wing of his own party for his fiscal moderation and, in all likelihood, for failing to take a combative stance toward the U.S. It seems there is no such thing as a comfortable majority in Canada. Kim Campbell, after all, had one too.