A diplomacy without a compass | The Press

(Ottawa) Just as NATO, the United States, France, Germany and the United Kingdom were weighing the best options to deter Russia from invading Ukraine, ministers in the Trudeau government decided to show their solidarity with the Ukrainian people on social networks.

International Development Minister Harjit Sajjan, Public Security Minister Marco Mendicino, and International Trade Minister Mary Ng, among others, posted photos of them on Twitter holding up a poster that reads: “#STANDWITHUKRAINE”.

The maneuver was ridiculed. “Holding a sign is not foreign policy,” said Stephanie Carvin, a former federal government national security analyst and now associate professor at Carleton University’s Norman Paterson School of International Affairs. .

The staging was also denounced by Gerry Butts, a former close associate of Prime Minister Justin Trudeau. “This is not the best moment of my former colleagues. This is a serious matter,” he commented on his Twitter account, republishing the comments of an American expert, Ian Bremmer, criticizing Minister Sajjan’s pose.

Faced with growing threats from Russia, which has massed more than 100,000 troops on the Ukrainian border, the United States has put 8,500 troops on alert and sent ammunition and weapons to Ukraine. NATO, for its part, has decided to place troops on standby and has sent ships and fighter planes to strengthen its defenses in Eastern Europe.

After spending three days weighing its options, the Trudeau government finally announced last week that it was extending the UNIFIER mission of 200 Canadian soldiers in Ukraine for another three years to continue training Ukrainian troops, that another 60 Canadian soldiers will join this mission over the next few days and that it will send non-lethal equipment such as bulletproof vests and optical equipment. Canada also promises to share intelligence with Kyiv while increasing support in the fight against cyberattacks. A loan of 120 million dollars has been granted to the Ukrainian government, but this money cannot be used to buy military equipment.

Justin Trudeau thus rejected Kiev’s request to send him weapons, an aid also demanded by the Congress of Ukrainian Canadians. He defended the Canadian contribution, saying it was “significant”. “We will be there to support Ukraine in need,” he said.

But the Prime Minister’s remarks did not convince the skeptics. His government’s procrastination on the Ukrainian issue is another chapter in a story that repeats itself when it comes to foreign policy.

The Trudeau government is groping and navigating without a real compass when it comes to defining Canada’s role in the world. Canada’s image among its most loyal allies suffers painfully, according to experts and former diplomats.

Diplomats posted abroad do not mince their words. “I call the current approach dilettantism fueled by complacency. It’s a big lack of seriousness, which gives a performance that is not up to the current challenges, including the sloshing of our main ally which is turning more and more towards the internal crisis. We are completely unprepared for the global imbalance that is emerging between the collapse of the post-American order, the rise of China, and the destabilization caused by Russian revanchism, not to mention the rise of fascism elsewhere. , in particular in Europe”, bluntly asserts a diplomat posted abroad, who requested anonymity to avoid reprisals from his employer.

“Our current government’s response is to rely more on its illusory ‟soft power”, an approach focused almost exclusively on image and communications rather than on the concrete. We persist in lecturing everyone by boasting about our Canadian values ad nauseam and by falling back on the diplomacy of the press release, without getting involved in the field, with a few exceptions, by mobilizing the three Ds [diplomatie, défense, développement] in a sustained and consistent manner. Result: Canada finds itself increasingly marginalized on major issues affecting international security,” added the diplomat.

Revolving Door at Foreign Affairs

However, at the Department of Foreign Affairs, many maintained the hope that a turn of the tide would be given after the difficult years of cuts and contortions under the Harper government. “Canada is back”, had also launched Justin Trudeau to the rest of the planet, in the hours following his electoral victory at the expense of the Conservatives of Stephen Harper in 2015.

But this declaration remained without a future. Especially since the Prime Minister has entrusted Foreign Affairs to five different ministers in six years in power. This turnover at the head of Canadian diplomacy means that priorities change according to the personality of the minister. The same staff turnover had also marked the department during the Stephen Harper years. According to many, the last foreign minister who really left his mark was Lloyd Axworthy during the reign of Jean Chrétien. He spearheaded the last major Canadian initiative, the conclusion of the International Convention on the Banning of Anti-Personnel Mines.

It should come as no surprise, then, that Canada suffered two setbacks at the United Nations in 10 years when it tried to obtain a non-permanent seat on the Security Council.

“Mr. Trudeau does not give the impression that foreign policy is among his priorities. Too bad, because as soon as he came to power, he had raised expectations around the world. He missed a great opportunity to take advantage of it to really put Canada ‟back” [‟Canada is back !”]. He does not have among his team the equivalent of strong personalities, with the exception of Chrystia Freeland, who can serve as a spearhead for the affirmation of a more active and recognized Canadian presence on the world stage,” said supported a former diplomat who represented Canada in Africa and who also prefers to remain anonymous.

We also deplore the Prime Minister’s bad habit of appointing deputy ministers of foreign affairs who have never served in an embassy abroad. “That the vast majority of the highest ranking officers in the Pearson building have never set foot in an embassy is a pure aberration”, underlines an internal source.

For former diplomat Ferry de Kerckhove, it is time for Canadian diplomacy to find its compass. And the best way to do that is to produce a white paper on Canada’s foreign policy. The last in-depth review was in 2005. It’s been 17 years.

“It is by its foreign policy that a country best reveals itself to the world,” wrote former Prime Minister Paul Martin, in a long introduction to the White Paper announcing Canada’s new foreign policy, concocted after a review of 18 month. Bearing the title Pride and Influence: Our Role in the World, this White Paper clearly set out Canada’s fundamental priorities.

“The world is changing rapidly and radically, and the resulting changes mean a lot to Canada. […] Our security, our prosperity, and our quality of life are all at risk of being affected by the influences and effects of global transformations and the challenges that accompany them,” added Paul Martin.

For many diplomats and experts, these words are more relevant than ever today.