Commentary
We are an odd nation. We aspire to be many things, to be included in multilateral fora, to be noticed. We want to be seen as important, as “not Americans.” Maybe that is partly a consequence of having the United States next door and feelings of inadequacy/fear. As Prime Minister Trudeau—Pierre, not the current version—once put it: “Living next to you is in some ways like sleeping with an elephant. No matter how friendly and even-tempered is the beast … one is affected by every twitch and grunt.”
So we try—hard. We are active in the U.N. and are a member of the G7 (despite the fact that we were an afterthought in all honesty when the G5 expanded to its current structure). We see ourselves as different—a country that matters and punches above its weight.
But do we? We certainly did at one point, during World War II for example when our armed forces played a huge role in the victory over Nazi Germany and its allies. Alas, those days have gone. We do not even meet the NATO goal of 2 percent spending on defence, and our much-vaunted role in U.N. peacekeeping is a mere shadow of itself (we currently rank 66th and are in a tie with The Gambia).
The same goes for intelligence. Despite our inclusion in the so-called “Five Eyes” club (the other members are Australia, New Zealand, UK, and U.S.) we do not invest nearly enough resources (human and financial) in our spy agencies and, which is worse, we don’t pay attention to what they have discovered. This lack of commitment has been front and centre of late over the discovery of significant People’s Republic of China interference in our country.
True to form, the Trudeau government not only misrepresented what it knew about this threat to our sovereignty (is there any more serious challenge than a foreign nation’s attempt to influence our elections?) but has reacted in a very strange way. Rather than acknowledge that agencies like the Canadian Security Intelligence Service have been doing their jobs by providing timely intelligence on these issues and thanking them for their efforts, the current government has been in denial over the problem and chosen to blame CSIS for not doing enough.
Furthermore, in the face of this blatant interference in our democratic process, the powers that be have decided to create yet another body (a “foreign influence transparency agency”—is that the best name these mandarins could come up with?) to do what in effect CSIS has been doing for more than three decades. And, given the track record of multiple governments in pretending there is nothing to see here and hence no need to act, why should Canadians have any confidence that this new bunch will be any more successful in getting the government’s attention?
This is yet another bad decision by a series of officials and is consistent with innumerable mistakes on this issue (note that CSIS has had a mandate to investigate foreign interference under section 2b) of its act since 1984!). What the Trudeau government should have done, in my humble opinion, is the following:
1. Acknowledge that the appropriate intelligence was in fact provided and ignored;
2. Vow to fix how intelligence is passed up the chain so that in future politicians and senior mandarins cannot say they had been kept in the dark;
3. Ensure that CSIS is adequately staffed to fulfill its mandate.
The chance of any of this coming to pass is next to nil. We have yet to hear what former governor general David Johnston will say on whether an inquiry is required to see what was missed on this file (do we really need another inquiry?). Whatever happens, it is unfortunate that the government is again making the wrong moves. And the PRC (and perhaps others) will continue to have virtually free rein to pursue their own interests in Canada to the detriment of all.
It is past time to fix this mess. Let CSIS et al. do their jobs and listen to what they have to say. Incorporate intelligence into decision-making in a more robust way. Stop pretending that all is well. Canadians deserve better.
Views expressed in this article are the opinions of the author and do not necessarily reflect the views of The Epoch Times.
