Since the election of the new federal government in Canada in October 2015, many experts tried to predict the new political course of the Liberal government.
On the economic front, it was clear that Justin Trudeau and his team viewed budget deficits as the only way to kick-start the economy and generate jobs. However, no one expected that the “modest” deficit promised during the election would turn into an almost 30 billion dollars deficit this year and over 100 billion dollars during the next 4 years of governance. On the social front, the new Prime Minister was praised for introducing a gender-equal Cabinet with 15 male and 15 female Ministers.
However, Trudeau’s foreign affairs roadmap was harder to predict. The Liberals had made numerous promises of a general nature during the election, without really outlining any of the details of the new course in foreign policy.
For the first time the public heard about a “re-engagement” policy with Russia from the Foreign Affairs Minister Stephane Dion was during Question Period in Parliament in late January 2016. The justification for reopening the dialog with Russia was that even during the worst period of the Cold War Canada was speaking to Soviet Russia, so why not speak now? One of the arguments put forth is that Canada needs to negotiate the future of the Arctic with a number of countries, including Russia.
When the Minister realized that the “re-engagement” policy was not being well received neither by the Ukrainian community, nor by the Official Opposition, which, when in power, had fought fearlessly on the international stage against Putin, the minister changed his tactics. In response to criticism, the Minister decided to visit Ukraine to express his support and seek approval from Ukraine’s government. To date, Ukraine’s top officials have provided Dion with what he was looking for.
Whether the new Canadian government will be willing to stand up to Russia, remains unclear, at least for now. There is no doubt, however, that the previous Conservative Government was at the forefront of helping Ukraine in response to the Revolution of Dignity on the Maidan and then throughout the war in eastern Ukraine. Canada was the first G7 country to send an official government delegation to visit Ukraine in 2014 after the ousting of Yanukovych at a time when the smell of burning tires and the blood of innocent protesters was still evident on the streets of Kyiv.
Today, the new government in Ottawa continues to convince the public that by restoring dialog with Russia, Canada will somehow be able to help Ukraine more effectively. During his recent visit to Canada, Ukraine’s First Deputy Speaker Andrii Parubii made it clear in his interview with Canada’s leading newspaper, that resuming ties with Russia is a very dangerous move. “Putin understands only the language of force in international relations,” the deputy Speaker said. “The diplomacy of the Western countries – he perceives as a sign of weakness … you will lose time and you will be back where you started from.” It should be noted that the Minister of Foreign Affairs did not meet with Parubii during his visit to Ottawa due to scheduling conflicts. However, Ukraine’s Deputy-Speaker had a chance to briefly meet with Prime Minister Trudeau during which time Parubii expressed hope that Canada will continue to be Ukraine’s leading champion on the international arena. So far, Canada’s condemnation of Putin’s aggression is symbolic, with little new progress.
A few weeks after Parubii’s visit to Canada, Bill Browder, the famous American-born financier who currently leads an International Justice Campaign for Sergei Magnitsky, testified in the House of Commons along with Zhanna Nemtsova, daughter of late Russian opposition leader Boris Nemtsov, and pro-democracy activist Vladimir Kara-Murza. For some time now, Browder has been advocating for the adoption of the Magnitsky law in Europe and North America. A number of parliamentarians from various parties lobbied for several years for a Canadian version of the Magnitsky law, which would sanction individuals in any country for violating human rights. While supporting the adoption of the legislation during the election campaign, today the Liberals no longer seem eager to pass the law after getting elected. Instead, they have called for a process “to review” the American version of the legislation.
According to Bill Browder, “there’s a camp within the government that wants to, they use the word ‘re-engage.’ When taken very literally by most people, that means appease Russia. I fear that the appeasement camp may stall our initiative.”
Minister Dion introduced his foreign affairs doctrine in a lengthy speech at the University of Ottawa. The “responsible conviction” approach outlined by the Foreign Affairs Minister is strikingly similar to Obama’s foreign-policy approach. Internationalism and realism are the two pillars of this old-new approach. The current war in Ukraine was briefly mentioned in Dion’s speech in the context of explaining the rationale for re-engaging with Putin’s Russia. “Canada must stop being essentially the only one practicing an empty-chair policy with Russia, because by doing so, we are only punishing ourselves,” said the foreign minister.
While the Ukrainian media largely reported on the doctrine in a positive light, there are not too many reasons for Ukraine to feel good about it. Yes, Dion suggested introducing new sanctions against Russia if needed, but this wasn’t the main message of his speech. While the fact that the Liberals apparently ditched the old “honest broker” ideal for Canada’s role in the world is good news, it is unclear if the “responsible conviction” approach will be any better. It is deeply troubling, that, while in opposition, the Liberals unanimously supported the temporary recall of Canada’s Ambassador to Moscow and supported a Conservative motion to condemn Putin’s military adventurism, yet now they advocate for a re-engagement solution, claiming that dialog is a more appropriate form of fighting evil.
If Minister Dion thinks that he can simply convince Putin to adhere to the Minsk Agreement or return Crimea, he simply doesn’t know Putin. On the contrary, the West is rewarding Putin by inviting him to international meetings and trying to sign binding documents with him. German Chancellor Otto von Bismarck once warned that any agreement signed with Russia is not worth the paper it was written on.
Another fact that supports this claim is the immediate welcoming of Canada’s new foreign policy approach by the Russian Embassy in Ottawa. The Press Secretary at the Russian Embassy praised the move, saying, “(the) Liberal government intention, as outlined by Minister Dion, to end Canada’s self-isolation from Russia and to get bilateral relations back on track is a timely and welcomed development. We believe that engagement better serves the interests of both countries, be it anti-terror cooperation, new business opportunities or joint work in the Arctic.” This endorsement clearly shows that re-engagement is precisely what Putin wants from the international community; he wants to get back to business-as-usual. There is no doubt that Putin misses being invited to world-class pow-wows, where he was treated as an equal by other world leaders – a privilege taken away from him after he violated international law by launching a military campaign in eastern Ukraine and illegally annexing part of Ukraine’s territory, despite being a signatory to the Budapest Memorandum.
It is time for Ukrainian diplomats, whether in Canada or other countries, to advocate strongly for the national interests of their country and not pander to local politics. Thanks to Putin’s propaganda machine, which has redirected the attention of the world media to the Middle East, the Russo-Ukraine war is no longer in the international headlines. Ukraine cannot afford to play footsie with its allies. It is time to make it clear to the international community that today’s Ukraine is defending Europe, and by extension, Western civilization, from Putin’s increasingly belligerent Russia. An unstable European Union, weak NATO, and non-decisive America are what Putin needs in order to succeed in Ukraine and eventually other Eastern European states. Let’s not reward his disregard for the world order, by further empowering his neo-imperial aspirations.
Anton Sestritsyn holds a Degree in Public Affairs and Policy Management from Carleton University and has a strong interest in Eastern European politics and human rights issues. He currently serves as Executive Director of an international NGO
