PM discovers hard limits of soft power in China
In the end, China wasn’t moved.
Not by Justin Trudeau’s charisma. Nor his press clippings. And certainly not by the prospect of a “progressive” trade deal with Canada.
Instead of launching free trade talks this week, as was expected, Trudeau left China with a meek commitment to “exploratory talks to continue on a framework for a Canada-China free trade agreement,” a result that fills a tweet and not much else.
Trudeau has spent much of the past two years making kissy faces at China. He even made John McCallum, one of his veteran cabinet ministers, his man in Beijing. All for naught.
“Canada is committed to moving forward on progressive trade deals that involve things like chapters on gender, on the environment, on labour,” Trudeau explained to reporters. “China is very aware that this is a precedent as they move forward with their first trade deal with a G7 country, and there’s a desire to make sure we get it right.”
Got that, China? You’ll need to play by Canada’s rules if you want a little G7 action. And China’s response? Stony silence.
China just isn’t in the market for “progressive” trade deals. They already enjoy enormous trade surpluses with G7 countries. “Free” trade with China isn’t about being “progressive,” it’s about doing what China wants.
But what would it take for Canada to get the deal it needs? Sadly, nothing Canada has to sell. We don’t have that kind of leverage, even if we offered the oilsands to China on a silver platter. I think Trudeau recognizes this as fact, but wanted to give it a try for domestic purposes.
It’s not the trade failure with China that rankles; that’s a good thing, on balance. But when placed next to our argy-bargy in Vietnam over the terms of the Trans Pacific Partnership, and the ongoing NAFTA rodeo with an increasingly erratic Donald Trump, our free-trading perch feels precarious. And failure on all three fronts would hoof us squarely in the GDP. The government needs a result.
Despite the grand proclamations that Canada is “back,” Trudeau’s celebrity and well-intentioned words haven’t moved the dial on global trade. Or the fight against ISIS. Or Russia. Or the environment, really.
No Canadian leader has ever truly commanded the world stage. We’re not equipped for the task, even when our leader rockets out of central casting to tick the boxes of desperate liberals around the world.
Canada’s influence in the world is a function of that of our neighbour to the south. If the United States isn’t pulling in the same direction, all our fancy talk about free trade, freedom, democracy, human rights and the rule of law are wasted breath.
And right now the U.S. is led by a narcissist who hates trade, digs authoritarians, hammers the free press and retweets hate groups, and whose lawyers are arguing he is above the law.
This doesn’t mean things such as a feminist foreign policy or a progressive trade agenda aren’t worth doing. But we must acknowledge the hard limits of our soft power.
So when Trudeau goes to China to talk about progressive trade, the real audience is at home. He might not be able to change things in the current climate, but he wants voters to know his heart is in the right place, because his re-election will come before any helpful change in U.S. leadership.
But Trudeau shouldn’t limit himself to foreign rhetoric. Why not tackle our inter-provincial barriers to trade? Why not invest more in the military? Why not get our books in order?
These things are within Justin Trudeau’s power to fix, and would do more to strengthen our hand abroad than play-acting with people who have no interest in Canada’s values. — Andrew MacDougall is a London, England-based communications consultant and ex-director of communications to former prime minister Stephen Harper.