Poilievre, Trudeau choose partisan politicking over action on NSICOP report

OTTAWA—Canada is now knee-deep in partisan politics. The lines have been drawn, the swords unsheathed. Conservative Leader Pierre Poilievre is on the attack while Prime Minister Justin Trudeau tries to hold the line. It is pure political theatre. It could also destroy our country in the process. Partisanship is foremost a strategy to get votes. The contenders make appeals to our unfettered feelings. They emote deep fraternity with our emotions, our personal predicaments, our tragedies, and triumphs. They try to lure us into communion with their own ideology and political camp with promises of bountiful bliss if we join and vanquish the enemy. The great historian Ibn Khaldun documented all of this in his 1377 book, The Muqaddimah, considered by most scholars as the first treatment of politics and history as an academic subject. His theoretical frame is that nations rise and fall in part due to the cycles of internal division. In other words, the more united they are, the more resilience they have against existential threats. Khaldun’s pedagogics are taking place in Canada’s Parliament. From standard showboating and incessant sloganeering, the fight is on to win public support for one political party, and encourage anger towards all others. For many, the pull of political tribalism is hard to resist. But that does not mean we shouldn’t try, especially in matters of national security. Stunning revelations by the National Security and Intelligence Committee of Parliamentarians that sitting MPs have colluded with foreign governments is one such matter. NSICOP reports that “semi-witting or witting” parliamentarians gave secret information to foreign intelligence officials, accepted money from their proxies, and tried to influence Canadian policy on their behalf. The officials and proxies, the report notes, are from India. The intelligence watchdog’s report names others, too, but the accusations against India are the most damning. Paul R. Pillar, senior fellow at the Center for Security Studies at Georgetown University, has studied the interplay of partisanship and foreign meddling. His 2023 book, Beyond the Water’s Edge, reveals that sectarianism diminishes national interest. Factional politics, he concludes, give rise to disruptive and inconsistent policies, which can open parliamentarians up for exploitation and corruption. Division and disunity tend ultimately to weaken democracy. Prime Minister Justin Trudeau has politicized the foreign interference file, writes Bhagwan Sandhu. The Hill Times photograph by Andrew Meade Pillar concentrates on the hyper-partisan political culture in the United States, but we are not far behind. In global affairs, Trudeau has split the planet into those who serve his illusory “rules-based order,” and those who don’t. And at home, Poilievre had created deep chasms between those who share his dogma and those who don’t. Together they have made Canada very vulnerable. Last year security agencies shared proof that India dispatched its nationals to kill Canadians. Instead of compelling Trudeau to immediate legislative and judicial action to safeguard Canadian sovereignty, Poilievre went dead silent on India. He attacked China. With Indian diaspora votes at stake, perhaps partisan politicking gained higher precedence over national sovereignty. Or could the treasonous parliamentarians who allegedly worked for India belong to his Conservative Party? We don’t know. What we know is that the patterns repeat with Russia, Iran, Israel, and other countries. Political opportunism to cleave off diaspora votes is not only a domestic problem. It is also driving our foreign policy with the camps in Canada’s Parliament divided along party lines: China taken by the Conservatives, while the Liberal rhetoric beats up on Russia. The negative consequences are self-evident. Rather than act expeditiously on the advice of intelligence agencies, Trudeau plays partisan games, and has politicized the foreign interference file. Could the treasonous parliamentarians reportedly working for India belong to his Liberal Party? We don’t know that either. No one is naming names. What are they really afraid of? The Conservatives could be forgiven. Trudeau is not known to ever seek their input. Even if he did, chances are they wouldn’t participate. Poilievre refuses to get security clearance to see the unredacted version of the NSICOP report. All other party leaders have done it. Poilievre’s unease, in all likelihood, is that knowing the facts might force him to take constructive action. That’s a big problem: proposing solutions doesn’t jibe with his partisan playbook. Conservative Leader Pierre Poilievre has refused to get the security clearance needed to read the spy watchdog's full report. The Hill Times photograph by Andrew Meade Thus, the stalemate continues. Foreign powers are brazenly threatening our dominion. When all our political leaders should join as a vanguard against those threats, instead they hide behind talking points in order to score political points. Trudeau and Poilievre need to find common cause, and assure Canadians that the “witting” MPs or Senators are no longer making national policy. If the allegations against them are valid, they should be charged with treason. If the allegations are not credible, then those who have seen the NSICOP report need to say so and put our minds at ease. Green Party Leader Elizabeth May has seen the unredacted report and said she is relieved no sitting MPs have “shown disloyalty to Canada," but raised troubling allegations against a former MP whom she said should be investigated by the RCMP. Punting the entire file to Justice Marie-Josée Hogue’s inquiry into foreign interference is not good enough. It’s just another delay tactic. Khaldun observed in 1377 that political disunity in the face of threats like possible treason can destroy a nation. That insight may not mean much to those in the pursuit of power, but it means a lot to the rest of us. Bhagwant Sandhu is a retired director general from the federal public service. He has also held executive positions with the governments of Ontario and British Columbia. The Hill Times Correction: This article was updated on June 13, 2024. A previous version incorrectly said Ibn Khaldun observed political disunity more than 1,000 years ago. In fact, his book was written in 1377.