*sigh* Not even a middle power anymore. Canada now a bit player globally, survey finds
This has been coming for many years, probably since the late 1960s, but definitely since the early 1990s. The Liberals, who have been in power almost 30 of the past 40 years, have done very little to maintain the international influence the country once had, and it's now reached a point where it'll cost too much for voters to be willing to pay to restore that position. So there'll continue to be campaign promises about rebuilding the military and taking a more active foreign policy, but things will continue to slide without any real action, and Canada will slip farther into irrelevancy.
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
4 comments:
Could this paradoxically be seen as a good thing when it comes to initiatives like peacekeeping and foreign aid? Unstable, defensive regimes where such initiatives come into play are often leery of having international powers step in and "interfere", because they see those powers as having an obtrusive (or, in the usual jargon, "imperialistic") agenda, and they can be resistant to efforts to do anything by more powerful countries like the US. As a country that flies under the radar, perhaps Canada can excel quietly in areas that we do focus on, like peacekeeping, rather than perform ineffectually in things that we don't really have much effect on, like military offensives or economic sanctions.
It is a shame. As to Maple Sugar's comment, I don't think so. Remaining aloof may not provoke as many domestic disputes, but it leaves Canada without a seat at the bargaining table. The best example of this may be Wison's neutrality policy (even though we eventually got into WWI). When wars end, only the participants (on the winning side) have a say in dictating the peace.
I agree that Canada doesn't need a large-scale, offensive-capable military. As the article says, most of the respondants felt that there should be at minimum an "autonomous mobile brigade that could actually get into tough regions quickly and be there for a couple of months at a time." But the degradation has gotten to the point where we can't really even get involved in that type of peacekeeping anymore. As well, as East Timor, Afghanistan, and other cases showed, there's no capability to get any sort of sizable force to a hot-spot. And that of course is the real shame, because that's where Canada could have the most impact and influence, especially as a "non-imperial" nation. The military can still contribute, but only in small, specialized roles. Canada's no longer flying under the radar, we're not flying at all anymore, and until there's a real effort to properly rebuild the armed forces that's gonna hurt us in the long run, if not sooner.
Of course, an even bigger problem is that Canadians no longer care that their international influence is gone. They'll stay content in believing that Canada is still a leader in peacekeeping, and keep insisting that the government not spend any more money on the military. And nothing will change, campaign promises notwithstanding.
Let me add a little historical depth to this discussion. During the Cold War, Canada had two major NATO commitments. One was for a mechanized brigade in central Germany and the other for a mixed brigade to reinforce Norway. The brigade for Germany was stationed there, and so represented no problem. The brigade earmarked for Norway was another matter since it remained in Quebec. The Canadian government hadn't just promised the forces for Norway but that they'd also transport and maintain them as well. Despite repeated assurances from Canadian politicians that they could and would honor their promises, every exercise in the '70s and '80s showed that this was beyond their capabilities.
If Canada couldn't project and maintain a brigade with the resources expended during the Cold War, does anyone really believe they'll spend even more for humanitarian contingencies? Call me a cynic but I don't.
Post a Comment