Canada

Tuesday November 29, 2022

Trudeau government unveils long-awaited plan to confront an ‘increasingly disruptive’ China

Canada’s long-awaited Indo-Pacific strategy describes China as “an increasingly disruptive global power” on the world stage — a social and economic force that’s too big to ignore but is also increasingly focused on bending international rules to suit its own interests.

November 16, 2022

Using some surprisingly blunt language, the strategy says the Canadian government needs to be “clear-eyed” about China’s objectives in the Far East and elsewhere. It promises to spend almost half a billion dollars over five years on improving military and intelligence co-operation with allies in the region.

“China’s rise, enabled by the same international rules and norms that it now increasingly disregards, has had an enormous impact on the Indo-Pacific, and it has ambitions to become the leading power in the region,” says the 26-page document, which was provided to the media in advance of its formal release in Vancouver on Sunday.

“China is making large-scale investments to establish its economic influence, diplomatic impact, offensive military capabilities and advanced technologies. China is looking to shape the international order into a more permissive environment for interests and values that increasingly depart from ours.”

The strategy document also says that “China’s sheer size and influence makes co-operation necessary to address some of the world’s existential pressures, such as climate change and biodiversity loss, global health and nuclear proliferation.”

In that respect, Canada’s foreign policy blueprint mirrors the approaches taken by its closest allies, including the United States, which last February released its own vision for engagement in the region.

The new strategy document, however, appears to reflect the lessons of the bruising international clashes that have driven relations between Canada and China into the deep freeze: the arrest and extradition fight involving Chinese telecom executive Meng Wanzhou; China’s retaliatory detention of Canadians Michael Spavor and Michael Kovrig; and even the lecture Chinese President Xi Jinping recently delivered to Prime Minister Justin Trudeau — an event caught on camera. (CBC) 

 

Thursday November 24, 2022

Editorial Cartoon by Graeme MacKay, The Hamilton Spectator – Thursday November 24, 2022

How to talk about the World Cup without kicking it off

We are now two days into the most complicated World Cup in living memory. Held at the wrong time of year, in a country drenched in human rights abuses, as a result of widespread corruption, the tournament could very well be overwhelmed by controversy. At the same time, however, it’s the World Cup. Everyone loves the World Cup. So the question is this: exactly how excited are you allowed to be?

The answer is that it depends on who you’re talking to. As a good and normal human being, your role in life is to socially triangulate with those around you, and this means adjusting your excitement levels according to who you happen to be with. Below are the four types of people you will encounter between now and the World Cup final on December 18, and a quick guide on what to say to them.

Your socially conscious friend here knows all about Qatar’s terrible record when it comes to migrant worker deaths and LGBT rights, and the thick vein of corruption running through Fifa. Logically you should not be excited about the World Cup at all around this friend. That said, they are a bit of a buzzkill and you do need to teach them to lighten up.

Do say: “The entire planet should boycott the World Cup this year.”

Don’t say: “Have you seen the mascot, though? So cute!”

Do say: “This World Cup was the result of widespread bribery and corruption on an unprecedented scale.”

Don’t say: “Hey, have you seen my new car? The Qatari government bought it for me.”

Do say: “Fifa is no longer fit for purpose and should be disbanded.”

Don’t say: “But it is fun when someone scores a goal, though, isn’t it?”

Do say: “In a way, the World Cup has helped to amplify Qatar’s human rights abuses in a manner that wouldn’t have happened if they were denied the bid.”

Don’t say: “Hey, they should hold the next one in North Korea.”

Do say: “I am not going to watch a second of the World Cup.”

Don’t say: “Unless England get to the quarter-finals, obvs.” (Continued: The Times (of London)) 

 

Tuesday November 22, 2022

Editorial Cartoon by Graeme MacKay, The Hamilton Spectator – Tuesday November 22, 2022

Political insider breaks down Green Party of Canada co-leadership win, potential trouble ahead

Former party leader and B.C. MP Elizabeth May and newcomer Jonathan Pedneault became the new co-leaders of the Green Party of Canada (GPC) on Saturday.

October 14, 2015

After her win, May, who ran the party from 2006 to 2019, made the case for the co-leadership model but noted that members would have the final say. It will require a change to the party’s constitution.

Former interim leader Amita Kuttner had expressed some uncertainty about how a potential shift to the co-leader model would be implemented.

Sonia Théroux, a political organizer who was involved with one of the Green Party of Canada’s most successful campaigns in 2015, says while she’s not surprised by the outcome of the leadership election, there could be some challenges ahead. 

When asked if she was surprised the two won the leadership, Théroux said, “I was not surprised. I was quite certain that Elizabeth and Anna Keenan were the two front-runners, and with Elizabeth’s name recognition, I assumed she had the edge.”

October 13, 2022

As for challenges they’ll inherit as co-leaders, “besides the obvious infrastructure problems, they’ve had a massive loss of staff. I think there’s a lot of work to be done to regain trust, not only from the base, which in some senses might be more easily done than with the public. I think the public looks for political parties and leaders in general that feel like they have a handle on their internal matters, and as we’ve all seen for the last few years, that’s not the impression the party has given.”

“It’s not unusual for Greens, that’s for sure. I see it as an increasing concept in leadership. I think it’s actually a good concept for the most part, but it can also really easily be poorly done if it’s not really well thought out. They do need to democratically come to this decision as a party, and my understanding is that they’ve attempted that in the past, and it hasn’t passed, but I can see it being successful at their 2023 annual general meeting. It will require an adjustment of their constitution.”

July 16, 2021

“if you’re both tackling the same things, you end up with a lot of confusion often, which can really trickle down to staff and the people that you’re working with. I’d say that the major factor from my perspective in a party that needs to signal change is that Jonathan Pedneault was given a lot of platform, and my understanding when Elizabeth announced the co-leadership intention, she was quoted somewhere in the media saying they had already figured it out.”

Théroux believes challenges lie ahead: “Jonathan was going to focus on rebuilding the party, and she was going to be the spokesperson. That sounds like a recipe for it not working. You’ve got a party in disarray that is not completely unrelated to her 13 years in leadership. To have Jonathan go in and try to fix that while she’s given the platform, I think it’s the opposite of how they should approach it.”

“If the intention is really to signal a new voice, a new time, a new era, and to try to regain the trust of the public, it’s really hard to do that when you’ve got a record versus somebody who’s brand new and exciting, and that can really engage a subset of the population that currently isn’t paying attention to the Green Party.”

June 18, 2021

“Elizabeth had her time at the party. It really needs to signal change. I think that points to giving Pedneault more of a platform than Elizabeth May herself. He needs to be given the time and the resources he needs in order to feel like he’s got everything he needs to move forward.”

When asked if the Green Party be any better situated in the next federal election to elect more members of Parliament, Théroux said, “That really depends on what they choose to do. I do know a lot of folks that feel like Elizabeth May returning to the role signals moving backward versus moving forward. So that is a hump that they have to overcome.”

“And I think then it really comes down to, can they as leaders really generate enough attention and engagement that they build back a funding base because you cannot win elections without staff and without money. And if those two things aren’t repaired together with, critically, a culture change that needs to happen in that party, I don’t see their chances necessarily getting better without that hard work.” (CBC News) 

 

Wednesday November 16, 2022

Editorial Cartoon by Graeme MacKay, The Hamilton Spectator – Wednesday November 16, 2022

Has the Trudeau government finally got Beijing’s number?

An ancient Chinese proverb: To learn is to come face to face with one’s own ignorance.

December 5, 2017

Seven years ago, full of naive bravado, Prime Minister Justin Trudeau’s government embarked on a quest for tighter ties with the People’s Republic of China. It assumed it was signing up for all sorts of cost-free economic and political rewards. Instead, it got an expensive education.

Another Chinese proverb: Strict teachers produce outstanding students. The Trudeau government has spent the past seven years getting schooled by one of the world’s most unreasonable tutors, the Xi Jinping regime. The lessons are paying off.

On Wednesday, Foreign Affairs Minister Mélanie Joly gave a speech introducing her government’s new Indo-Pacific strategy. The full policy won’t be unveiled until next month, but the minister teased its key elements. The most important involves a new approach to China.

The government has evolved from dreaming of ever-closer economic integration with China, to trying to minimize conflict – the better to return to the quest for closer ties – to now, as a cum laude graduate of the Xi Jinping School of Experiential Education, recognizing that China, at least in its current form, is an adversary and a threat.

November 20, 2020

Ms. Joly says that Canada will of course continue to have extensive trade and economic ties with the world’s second-largest economy. Given how much of the world’s industrial capacity has moved there over the past two decades, there is no other option. But the government now recognizes that Beijing’s autocratic regime, its hostility to the rules-based international order, and its eagerness to impose its will on smaller states, is a challenge to Canada’s interests.

What’s more, Ms. Joly says that, to give Canada the heft to stand up to China, we have to bolster our traditional alliances with Washington and Europe, while creating new ones with countries such as Japan, South Korea and India.

It’s a long way from where the Trudeau government started.

In 2016, as we watched the Trudeau government “make like a pretzel while attempting to court the hard men of Beijing,” we asked whether “Canada [was] caving into China’s demands,” and whether the Trudeau government was “clueless as to the brutal nature of the regime it is dealing with.”

December 8, 2017

In 2017, as the government bid for a free-trade accord with China, and China started upping its demands, we wrote that Ottawa “did not appear to be sufficiently aware of the potential dangers and downsides.” And we asked, not for the first or last time: “Does the Trudeau government, and the Prime Minister in particular, appreciate who they are dealing with?”

A few months later, after Mr. Trudeau went to China seeking that free-trade deal but was snubbed by his hosts, we wrote that this failure would “come to be seen as less of an embarrassment, and more of a blessing.”

And that was before Canada arrested a Chinese executive on an American extradition warrant, and China retaliated by turning two Canadians into hostages. “The case of Meng Wanzhou has torpedoed the Trudeau government’s China policy,” we wrote in late 2018. “At the same time, it has also sunk China’s Canada policy. Call it a win-win.”

January 29, 2019

“It’s never pleasant to discover the gap between one’s wishes and objective reality, but it is the beginning of the path to wisdom. The Trudeau government is being forced to wise up about the nature of the People’s Republic of China.”

A year later, in December of 2019, with the Two Michaels still behind bars, we wrote that “Beijing has spent the last year giving Canada a special education in how it sees our not-at-all special relationship. We should be thankful for the lessons. The Trudeau government, and the entire political and business establishment, must study them carefully. It may allow this country to finally get over its China delusions.”

February 20, 2021

The Trudeau government has since made progress on getting over those delusions, and let us give thanks for that. But it’s still a few steps short of the end of its 12-step program.

This week brought news that, according to information obtained by Global News, the PM was given an intelligence report last January – that’s nearly a year ago – detailing extensive Chinese meddling in the 2019 Canadian election. There are also credible reports of Beijing meddling in the 2021 election, in particular targeting China-critical Conservatives. What has the Trudeau government done about that? So far, nothing. (The Globe & Mail) 

 

Friday November 11, 2022

Editorial Cartoon by Graeme MacKay, The Hamilton Spectator – Friday November 11, 2022

Greene’s call for ending U.S. aid to Ukraine isn’t about the money

December 20, 2016

Speeches presented at Donald Trump’s rallies are not renowned for their detailed presentations of carefully considered policy proposals. That’s not why people go to rallies in general, of course, much less this specific genre of rally. Attendees show up to show their support for Republican candidates — and to hear excoriations of the political left.

That’s the context in which we should consider the contribution by Rep. Marjorie Taylor Greene (R-Ga.) to a rally Thursday in Iowa: Her arguments about funding for the war in Ukraine were political rhetoric, not considered analysis. The question, instead, is what political aim she intended to advance.

Greene’s mention of Ukraine stemmed from a riff about the border. Greene accused Democrats and the news media of ignoring an alleged “crime spree” involving undocumented immigrants, including that there are “drugs flooding across our border, with fentanyl poisonings every single day.” One reason you’re hearing about fentanyl so much this year is that overdose deaths have increased, as the media have reported. Another reason is that Republicans are using the fear of fentanyl as a way to bash Democrats on border policies — although most fentanyl is smuggled in through existing border checkpoints, often by U.S. citizens.

June 18, 2022

Regardless, that was the setup for her comments about U.S. spending to help Ukraine.

“Democrats have ripped our border wide open,” she said in Iowa. “But the only border they care about is Ukraine, not America’s southern border. Under Republicans, not another penny will go to Ukraine. Our country comes first.”

See the logical jump there? From “Democrats care too much about Ukraine’s border” to “we shouldn’t spend on Ukraine at all.” It’s not clear how one follows from the other, but consistency on such things is not how Greene has built her political reputation.

June 15, 2021

While not the official position of the GOP, Greene’s “not another penny” line met with some applause. That’s not surprising, given that polling has shown increasing Republican skepticism about providing aid to Ukraine in its war against Russian invaders. As The Washington Post’s Aaron Blake noted Thursday, nearly half of Republicans now think the United States is doing too much in support of Ukraine.

But the United States is doing relatively little — particularly when considering the historical context of its effort to contain Russian aggression.

May 5, 2000

U.S. defense spending has increased dramatically since the end of the Cold War, the period in which U.S. opposition to Russian strength was most overt. That’s largely because of the increase in spending that followed the 9/11 attacks, including for the subsequent wars in Afghanistan and Iraq.

But it’s also because spending has increased broadly and because of inflation. Relative to total government spending, defense spending (here meaning Department of Defense outlays) has been fairly flat. (The Washington Post)