Prime Minister Mark Carney has committed Canada to spending the equivalent of five per cent of its GDP by 2035, two per cent of it by the end of the year.Geert Vanden Wijngaert/The Associated Press
Michael W. Manulak is an associate professor at Carleton University’s Norman Paterson School of International Affairs. Lloyd Axworthy is a former Canadian foreign minister. Allan Rock is a former Canadian justice minister, attorney-general and Canadian ambassador to the United Nations.
Prime Minister Mark Carney has committed Canada to reaching the North Atlantic Treaty Organization (NATO) target of 2 per cent of gross domestic product on defence spending by the end of this year. That is welcome news; the world has become a dangerous place.
Video: Carney says Canada will spend 5% of its GDP on defence by 2035
A strengthened Canadian Armed Forces (CAF) wouldn’t just enhance Canada’s security, it would reinforce the international order. The CAF will be better positioned to bolster collective security and participate in peace operations, which serves the national interest: Canada does better in a safer world.
The Prime Minister’s nuanced analysis of the global environment also deserves attention. Mr. Carney underscored “how precious and precarious are international law, sovereignty, territorial integrity, and human rights. Disregarding these principles would not only betray our values but also imperil our nation.”
But following through on this vision will require reinvestment in our diplomatic capacity. We must resist the temptation to limit Canada’s diplomacy and development efforts to paying for defence; after all, defence is only an instrument of foreign policy. Spending 2 per cent on defence is not a foreign policy. And at this week’s NATO summit, allies agreed to an even more ambitious target of 3.5 per cent of GDP, plus an additional 1.5 per cent for defence and security-related infrastructure. So our diplomatic and policy capacity must grow in proportion to our defence capabilities.
Escalating violence in Iran shines a glaring spotlight on the urgent need for effective diplomacy. Canada must have the capacity to develop a strategy, collaborate with partners, and take the steps necessary to de-escalate conflicts.
Unease spreads through Iranian-Canadian communities after U.S. strikes
But Canada has underinvested in its diplomacy for decades. Canada ranks 14th among G20 countries – and worst among the G7 – in the number of diplomatic posts it maintains. Our multilateral missions are small by G20 standards. Canada’s foreign service lags other governments in regional and thematic specialization.
There is also a pressing need to improve the policy capacity of Global Affairs Canada (GAC). While disciplined messaging is essential, recent governments have done much to hinder initiative and risk-taking. Process now dominates policy. “No” is too frequently the default response to new ideas. The department has too many senior executives relative to lower-level officers.
And foreign policy direction cannot come chiefly from the Prime Minister’s Office. Mr. Carney’s government needs to tackle the centralization of decision-making, which allows too many relationships to be neglected and too much to fall between the cracks.
GAC has also become increasingly insular. The department should rectify this, improving engagement with Canadians by enlarging its Open Insights Hub and urgently undertaking its planned foreign policy review. A review might also help to identify areas of foreign-policy focus, including climate change, human rights, artificial intelligence, nuclear non-proliferation and disarmament. It is also in Canada’s interest that the Arctic not degenerate into a great-power battleground. Arctic diplomacy must be at the forefront going forward, with Canada augmenting its ties with Arctic nations. A strengthened Arctic Council should be a priority.
Opinion: Canada has long branded itself as an Arctic power. It’s time to start acting like one
On substance, the government should place particular emphasis on rejuvenating multilateralism, particularly at the United Nations. As Mr. Carney acknowledged, Canada has a deep and abiding interest in preserving international law and a rules-based system. The UN is at the centre of this. In a world where, in the Prime Minister’s words, “a new imperialism threatens,” we must be strategic.
We need also to strengthen our global ties. In addition to our priority bilateral relationships, La Francophonie and the Commonwealth of Nations serve as useful vehicles – if they can be reformed – to position Canada as a well-connected diplomatic player on critical issues.
Canada should also ensure that its level of international assistance – which has hovered around 0.35 per cent of our gross national income – does not decline. Let’s be clear: such assistance is not and never was about charity. Supporting the development of other countries is about fostering the future markets and political conditions that Canada needs for it to thrive.
While diplomatic spending would not qualify under NATO targets, certain peace-building and civilian support functions should. The government can make a strong case that its Weapons Threat Reduction Program, which reduces the risks around weapons of mass destruction, should qualify. As NATO contemplates ever-higher defence spending targets, Canada can play a lead role in elevating the conversation on better measures of allied contributions to global security.
Contributing to a safer world, to be sure, means greater military capabilities. But it also means attracting others to our priorities – and investing accordingly in diplomacy and international assistance.