[Opinion] Can France convince Canada to choose a multipolar world?

We often get the impression that foreign diplomats accredited to Canada use cant language so as not to offend their hosts. This is true in general, but some do not hesitate to speak their minds with the obvious aim of influencing the political and economic elites. The Americans, for example, are here in a conquered country and regularly let it be known.

Among others, we are usually more discreet. The French ambassador, Michel Miraillet, was an exception. On April 4, before the Council for International Relations of Montreal (CORIM), he called for a stronger alliance between Paris and Ottawa in order to deal with the turbulence “in the dark room that the world has become”, according to his expression. . The ambassador painted a pessimistic portrait of the future of international relations while emphasizing that a new era was dawning even if we are still looking for its configuration.

However, he underlines the emergence of blocks. On the one hand, “the Sino-Russian pact will be strengthened and will support all authoritarian regimes”, on the other, “the alliance of democracies will stand if the United States wants to decide on the solidity of this relationship with regard to their own interests”, finally, between the two blocs, “countries will be tempted to play their own part” as we have seen with the large number of them who refuse to condemn Russian aggression in Ukraine.

And Canada in all this, where does it fit? The ambassador knows this better than anyone. In commercial matters as well as in defense matters, Canada is now settled in an almost exclusive relationship with the United States. Miraillet does not say so explicitly, but it is a risky position, he suggests, because there is a temptation among Americans to go it alone. They are determined to build a North American fortress and opt for protectionist measures as evidenced by the North American Free Trade Agreement signed five years ago and the Inflation Reduction Act of 2022 (Inflation Reduction Act, or IRA), with its massive investments in addressing climate change at home. And they are preparing for a confrontation with China that will eventually force their allies to choose a side. Or so they hope.

Faced with this situation, according to the ambassador, there is today “a strategic choice for Canada: to accept and reinforce the American logic of decoupling, hoping to obtain in exchange an increased integration of the American continent, or to move towards a more multipolar, in particular with Europe, which would imply however for our Canadian friends, I take the liberty of saying it a little bluntly, to (i) choose (do they have the will and the taste?) and (ii) to change their habits…” In my opinion, the terms of the problem are well stated. The answer seems unambiguous to me: Canadians and their elites have neither the will nor the taste to make this choice and change their habits. On at least two issues, it is quite obvious.

The relationship between Canada and China is deteriorating a little more every day. The question of Chinese interference in our democratic institutions has taken the turn of a veritable witch hunt maintained daily by hysterical English-language media and irresponsible opposition parties. Any Chinese student photocopying a document at university is immediately seen as a spy ready to sabotage the functioning of the country.

With China, Canada is getting dangerously close to American options and away from those of Europeans. In a daily interview The echoes, President Emmanuel Macron has drawn the line on relations with China and it is the opposite of that of the Americans. “We don’t want to go into a block-to-block logic,” he said. At a time when Europe is acquiring strategic autonomy, “the paradox would be that we would start following American policy by a kind of panic reflex. And panic reigns in Ottawa, where the Indo-Pacific strategy published in December seemed to open up a space for dialogue with China. This space closes very quickly.

Another dimension of the strategic partnership between the two countries advocated by the ambassador is the purchase of military equipment. However, the Canadian market has long been in the hands of American manufacturers. The American F35 combat aircraft was preferred to the French Rafale and the Swedish Gripen and everything indicates that the replacement of the old Canadian submarines will be by Anglo-Saxon models. The Americans showed how they could steal a submarine contract from Australia from France. The logic of continentalization is a steamroller and deep-rooted habits make Canadians instinctively know where the cursor of their relations should be between the United States and Europe.

Towards the end of his speech, the ambassador aspired to see France and Canada act together, which “implies stepping out of one’s comfort zone and, beyond the games of internal politics, to have a grand purpose”. , he said. It would still be necessary that in Ottawa, our provincialist political elites are sufficiently educated to understand what this means and implies. Twenty years ago Canadians and their elites gave up thinking about Canada’s place in the world. They have settled comfortably into a relationship of dependency with the Americans and no talk of diversifying commercial, military and diplomatic relations will change this situation.

To see in video


source site-39