Speech signals break from U.S.
Canada must stand on own feet: Freeland
Chrystia Freeland signalled her government is set to forsake flower power in favour of hard power, in a major foreign policy speech in the House of Commons.
What will become clear Wednesday, with the release of the defence policy review, is whether the promised investment in the Canadian military will go ahead in the lifetime of this Parliament — or even this prime minister. The fear in the ranks is that a “long-term” plan will be so back-end loaded as to be meaningless.
The theme of the speech the Global Affairs minister delivered on Tuesday was that, at a time of American retrenchment, Canada is obliged to step up to preserve the multilateral global order that has benefited this country since the Second World War.
The Trudeau government has been careful to avoid antagonizing Donald Trump but Freeland, like German Chancellor Angela Merkel last week, indicated that the U.S. president should no longer be viewed as a reliable partner.
No amount of diplomatic double-speak could disguise the fact that this government is making an important deviation from the post-war foreign policy orthodoxy.
“To rely solely on the U.S. security umbrella would make us a client state — such a dependency would not be in Canada’s interests,” she said.
Freeland expressly dismissed Trump-like, “Canada First” isolationism, instead advocating the collective goal of “a better, safer, more just, more prosperous, sustainable world” based on territorial integrity, human rights, democracy, respect for the rule of law and free trade.
The speech was coated with the usual Canadian varnish of self-congratulation — the eternal boasting about Canada’s achievements.
“Seventy years ago, Canada played a pivotal role in forming the post-war international order. We are now called — by virtue of our unique experience, geography, diversity and values — to do this again,” she said.
But it was not all mistyeyed romanticism.
Freeland was clear that diplomacy and development sometimes needs to be backed by hard power.
“Force is, of course, always a last resort. But the principled use of force, together with our allies and governed by international law, is part of our history and must be part of our future.”
That capacity requires “substantial investment,” she said, although she deferred the details to the defence review announcement that Defence Minister Harjit Sajjan will deliver on Wednesday.
Yet, Freeland’s speech has created weighty expectations. She outlined the problems facing the world in Ukraine, where “the sanctity of borders is under siege” by Russian expansionism; in Iraq and Syria, where “violent extremism challenges our very way of life”; and in North Korea.
“Our ability to act against such threats alone is limited — it requires co-operation with like-minded countries,” Freeland said.
She went out of her way to express appreciation for America’s post-war contribution. “The U.S. has truly been the indispensable nation.”
But it was clear that the new mood in the U.S. does not make it a “like-minded country.”
She noted that many U.S. voters want to “shrug off the burden of world leadership,” which requires countries like Canada “to set our own clear and sovereign course.”
That means the renewal, “indeed the strengthening” of the post-war multilateral order.
She said her government is seeking a UN Security Council seat because “Canada’s voice needs to be heard at that level.”
Fine words. But NATO is one of the institutions named by Freeland as a “cornerstone” of the multilateral agenda.
Canada spends less than half of two per cent of its GDP on defence, putting it in the bottom third of NATO contributors.
Most of those countries have responded to Russian adventurism by increasing their military spending, yet the Liberals won an election with a commitment to “maintain current defence spending” and have since hacked into the budget for big-ticket equipment in successive budgets. Whenever the subject is raised, the government tries to shift the conversation to “outputs,” rather than cash contributions — the last refuge of the parsimonious.
Freeland promised her government “will make the necessary investments” to place the Canadian Armed Forces “on a new footing,” with equipment, training, resources and “consistent, predictable” financing.
We will soon find out if that commitment is genuine or whether it is merely the creative use of decimal points and dates.
THE PRINCIPLED USE OF FORCE ... IS PART OF OUR HISTORY AND MUST BE PART OF OUR FUTURE.