The author was political adviser to the Minister of International Trade in the Harper government from 2011 to 2015. He is now a consultant and lecturer at several universities on trade and international affairs.
Canada defines itself as a “middle” power in geopolitics. The country prides itself on having an influence that surpasses its economic, military or demographic weight. Part of it comes from its soldiers, who made the ultimate sacrifice at Vimy, Dieppe, Passchendaele, on a beach in Normandy and during the liberation of Belgium and the Netherlands.
Diplomatic successes have also allowed us to rise to the rank of great nations. Lester B. Pearson during the Suez Canal crisis or Brian Mulroney with his opposition to apartheid in South Africa. Canada, with its principled diplomacy, is seen around the world as a moral compass. However, the country is failing in its economic diplomacy as well as in its support for its partners.
Canada must assume its role on the world stage. It must do so by putting its energy and mining potential at the service of its economic diplomacy and in support of its allies. In doing so, it will have, as a bonus, a concrete impact on the planet’s GHG emissions and the prosperity of Canadians.
At Canada’s doorstep
Germany and South Korea visited us in August and September. It is not a coincidence. With Russia at war, the world needs an energy partner, whether for oil or liquefied natural gas (LNG). It also needs critical minerals without feeling reliant on China. The reality is that we cannot talk about sustainable development without talking about rare minerals. Canada has it, just as it has oil and LNG.
However, there is one major absentee. President Joe Biden preferred to travel to Saudi Arabia in June rather than turn to his northern partner to ask him to increase oil production. In fact, a simple signature on the Keystone pipeline would be enough for Canada to export more hydrocarbons. Our sad energy reality is that our infrastructures are mainly in the North-South axis, towards the United States, instead of targeting the Pacific and the Atlantic. The result is that we import energy, nonsense!
There is also talk of banning gasoline-powered cars from 2035, but letting China control the supply of critical minerals, allowing it to consolidate its dominance in Africa and Latin America. Canada could be a key link in the supply chain if only it gave itself the means to do so.
Let’s be serious, China has no qualms about operating mines in the least ecological way possible and letting the local political classes line their pockets without sharing the income with the population of the countries it dominates. same.
Let’s be frank, too. If we want to adequately finance our health system and our infrastructure, have an adequate social safety net and modern schools (and well ventilated!), we will have to find money somewhere. We can increase our taxes, which are already high, or create collective wealth by exploiting our natural resources.
The Trudeau government concluded that the ” business case to operate a port to export LNG to Europe was inconclusive. Justin Trudeau prefers to postpone the discussion indefinitely and talk about hydrogen in 2025 instead. But, for him, it’s like promising to plant two billion trees: it’s not very credible. Same observation for Dominique Anglade’s speech on hydrogen. Nothing short term is going to come out of this.
On Sunday, the German chancellor was in the United Arab Emirates to sign an agreement related to LNG. If Canada does not decide to move, the other countries will meet their energy needs elsewhere, in countries that do not have our environmental standards. This also applies to critical minerals. Canada must send a clear political message: we are an energy and mining superpower.
Use our resources!
The death of oil was announced too quickly, and Canada is losing prosperity every day. We sell our oil at a discount in the United States. Imagine if Mr. Trudeau managed to convince his friend President Biden to accept Keystone by using the simple argument that the world (and environmental) situation compels him to do so.
In the absence of a pipeline, oil is transported by train. It is neither greener nor safer. The Lac-Mégantic tragedy is a reminder of this. The fight for a West-East pipeline is lost, but not that for LNG. Canada sent soldiers to liberate Europe during both world wars. This time, Europe is asking for gas for its energy security. Is it so difficult to acquiesce to his request?
The time has come to adopt rules to benefit from this prosperity. Principled diplomacy requires economic diplomacy to follow suit. Soldiers are sent to Europe to reinforce NATO and train the Ukrainian army. Why not gas too?
In Canada and Quebec, we want more electric cars. It will therefore be necessary to fully exploit our mining potential, one not going without the other. It will also be necessary to resist the urge to denounce the proliferation of claims mines or to discuss a possible moratorium. Otherwise, China will continue to exploit this source in our place, which will certainly not reduce the planet’s GHGs. “Atmospheric pollution knows no borders,” the UN Secretary General recently declared. This is a message for Gabriel Nadeau-Dubois.
Political decisions are often difficult to make. On the subject of LNG and critical minerals, it is nevertheless easy to send a clear message to our allies. On missions abroad, ministers François-Philippe Champagne, at the federal level, and Pierre Fitzgibbon, in Quebec, learned to writhe like a pretzel in the face of Canada’s silence. M Trudeau must seize the opportunity to finally speak. Its role is not only ceremonial, even less in economic diplomacy. The observation also applies to François Legault.