Canada can still be a force of global peace and prosperity if Trudeau changes his foreign policy

OTTAWA—Prime Minister Justin Trudeau should lose some sleep over the extrajudicial killing of a Canadian citizen, allegedly by the agents of India. And once he’s done that, Trudeau should hone up his understanding of the rapidly shifting sands of international intrigue and geopolitics. Countries like India, China, and others in the BRICS bloc are contesting the fundamentals of neoliberal hegemony. With six new members, the BRICS now dwarf Western alliances in clout and reach. Instead of getting a grip on the changing nature of global politics, leaders like Trudeau still view the Global South as a third-world abstraction to be used, not as a shrewd driver of its own domestic political interests and transnational agendas. Trudeau’s attendance at the Association of Southeast Asian Nations (ASEAN) and then the G20 in India are illustrative. At the ASEAN meeting, he opened a new export development office, promoted UN Sustainable Development Goals, and got Canada elevated as ASEAN’s strategic partner. But in India, rather than endorse global economic co-operation as per the G20 mandate, he recited NATO talking points, urging the G20 to unite “in calls for Russia to end its illegal war in Ukraine.” The G20 wasn't listening. Instead, it called for an end to “human suffering and negative impacts of the war in Ukraine.” Canada’s foreign policy under Trudeau has been situated in the middle ground of neoliberal orthodoxy. In Latin America, Trudeau joined the Lima Group to overthrow governments that didn’t meet neoliberal ideals. His Indo-Pacific policy is doing the same in southeast Asia. He has even toyed with drafting a policy for Africa. Trudeau’s alliances in this orthodoxy are with Britain and the United States, both with imperialist instincts. These instincts intensify the tit-for-tat nature of competitive politics. Before going to the G20, Trudeau announced that Canada’s public inquiry on foreign interference would include India. He should have expected that Indian Prime Minister Narendra Modi would not take that lightly. It hurts Modi’s domestic appeal in the run up to that country's elections slated for April 2024. So Modi struck back with his own pre-emptive accusations of interference by Canada. As if on cue, Khalistan separatists re-emerge with plans to break up India. On Sept. 10, the second day of the G20, they held a referendum in Surrey, B.C., of all places. Their timing was impeccable for it allowed Modi to turn the tables on Trudeau. It is Canada—not India—that is interfering in the affairs of another country, Modi announced to the G20. He received rave reviews in the Indian media for being tough on terrorism. Trudeau got nothing. Khalistan separatists had used similarly disruptive tactics during Trudeau’s 2018 visit to India. Back then, they didn’t hold referendums, they took selfies. Did CSIS not give Trudeau a heads up? They have known that Indian agents—like the newly expelled diplomat—are enmeshed with the separatists. CSIS briefings may not have helped. Trudeau, like his neoliberal counterparts elsewhere, is predisposed to favour ideology over political realism. Last February, Trudeau’s foreign minister, Mélanie Joly, was in India to pursue what she said at the time were Canada’s “objectives under our Indo-Pacific strategy.” She claimed that Canada and India had a “shared tradition of democracy and pluralism, a common commitment to a rules-based international order.” That was not naiveté. It was well-rehearsed messaging to achieve the ideological vision of a redefined southeast Asia. It got a Canadian citizen murdered. It is Trudeau’s good fortune that our elections are not contested on the successes of foreign policy. But they could be on its failures. Conservative Leader Pierre Poilievre is already exploiting Trudeau’s G20 slip-ups. Also on Sept. 10, Poilievre tweeted—to the delight of the Indian media—that Trudeau has been “repeatedly humiliated and trampled upon by the rest of the world.” Poilievre seemed happy that Modi humiliated Trudeau. That’s no surprise. Like other right-wing populists, they are coalesced by the thinking of the International Democratic Union on how to consolidate domestic power. But Poilievre ought to be careful with his tactics. He is not like Modi. As divisive and aggressive as he may be, Poilievre does not come close to the blood-sport politics that Modi has played his entire career. Just ask the Muslims or the Indigenous Peoples of India, and now the Sikhs of Canada. Canada's federal election is technically not until 2025. That is enough time for Trudeau to pull back on his Indo-Pacific policy; flush out all the foreign agents, from all the countries, friendly or otherwise; and, rebrand Canada as a force of peace and prosperity in the world. The ASEAN leg of his overseas tour is a very good template for what needs to get done. The alternative—as his media analysis team, and the grieving family of a murdered Canadian, have probably figured out by now—is not doing anyone any good. Bhagwant Sandhu is a retired director general from the federal government. Between 2002-21 he held senior roles in several departments, including Fisheries and Ocean Canada, Infrastructure Canada, Treasury Board Secretariat, and Public Works Canada. He has also held executive positions in the governments of Ontario and British Columbia. The Hill Times