Canada, Africa, and the imperative of global engagement

In a September Hill Times op-ed, Andrew Latham made a persuasive case that Canada needs to reject “the label of a middle power,” and “should double down on our regional priorities because that is where our influence, security, and economic potential truly lie.” Latham suggests Canada should “embrace its true identity as a North Pacific, Arctic, and North Atlantic power,” and re-tool its foreign and defence policy to prioritize those regions at the expense of a more global footprint. It’s a compelling argument, but based on a flawed conception of middle powers. The ineffective value-signalling foreign policy approach of the Trudeau government on nearly every file outside United States-Canada relations and the war in Ukraine should not be interpreted as a failure of middle power assumptions. Similarly, Canada should already be an Arctic power, but multiple governments have pursued a value-signalling approach to the North. Simply put: Canada is a long-lapsed middle power in a world that needs engaged middle powers to function better as power has become more diffused, and core institutions of international society are breaking down. Chris W. J. Roberts is a political science instructor at the University of Calgary, and president of AfriCan Access Consulting. Photograph courtesy of Chris W. J. Roberts The question Latham poses is whether Canada should jettison a global perspective and double down on the North Atlantic and North Pacific due to its “true identity.” That identity, if I’m reading Latham correctly, is not only rooted in geography, but also in terms of where Canada’s influence, security, and economic potential reside. But can Canada wield significant influence in the expanded North Atlantic alliance, or in a North Pacific dominated by China, Japan, South Korea, Russia, and the U.S.? Would an enhanced Canadian Armed Forces fuelled by two per cent of GDP change that? Canada is already the only G7 economy with comprehensive free trade agreements with the rest of the G7, the European Union, South Korea, and other important Pacific economies. Much of the heavy lifting Latham suggests for Canada in terms of key trading partners is already done. What is a middle power, anyway? Middle powers are those countries that: 1) have limited hard power to bend the world to their interests; 2) understand that their security and prosperity is dependent on a global rules-based order; and, importantly, 3) can contribute meaningfully to influencing that international order. Influence—especially for middle powers—is determined by a combination of values, capabilities, and consistency. Those capabilities are not solely determined by military power, but also financial, industrial, diplomatic, cultural, and other forms of assets, values, and expertise. As political scientist Joseph Nye points out, it is more efficient to attract others to your position than to compel or even persuade. However, consistency is the critical lynchpin of influence for non-great powers: consistency in values, in backing up rhetoric with effective action, in presence to develop trusted expertise in international organizations and regions, and in ongoing and clear support for the rules-based order. Hypocrisy is the solvent for values and consistency, quickly diluting influence. Hypocrisy derives from rhetoric without action, from selective interpretation or application of rules, and from doing things at home that are then criticized abroad—for example, investing in fossil fuels domestically but telling energy-insecure countries to keep their oil and gas in the ground. Africa is the future So, if a Canadian government were to throw out two years of public efforts to review Canada-Africa relations out the window, our global influence would take yet another hit. Canada needs to be an engaged middle power not only for its own benefit, but also in support of its allies, partners, and world order. This country needs to be relevant in various regional contexts, to have capabilities, expertise, relationships, and good ideas relevant to solving problems in a fraught environment. Following a cocooning approach to the three Norths—Arctic, Atlantic, and Pacific—will reduce Canadian security and prosperity by limiting our influence globally. The reason Global Affairs Canada, the House of Commons, the Senate, civil society, diasporas, scholars, and businesses have engaged with various policy review processes related to Africa is precisely because of Canada’s failings to respond effectively to the opportunities and challenges presented by this dynamic continent and its more than 50 countries. Africa is the future in three important dimensions. First, in terms of driving global economic growth once energy poverty is addressed, and its young, often tech-savvy, working-age population finds productive employment. Second, in terms of illustrating the weaknesses of core pillars of the international order that have difficulty promoting economic development or democratic accountability. And third, in terms of African conflict prevention and resolution as a major driver of refugees and internally displaced people. Canada maintains a unique western relationship with the African continent: a middle power G7 and NATO member with fast-growing African diaspora populations, long-standing Commonwealth and Francophonie connections, a member of the African Development Bank since 1982, a permanent observer to the African Union, nearly $40-billion in Canadian-listed mining and energy assets on the continent (double the entire Asia-Pacific region and more than Asia and Europe combined), and linkages with various African armed forces which have been on the forefront of counter-terrorism and peace operations for decades. No other G7 or NATO country shares this set of characteristics. Canada is more than capable of fulfilling a role as a truly global middle power, but it needs to reconceptualize this role beyond the North Atlantic and Indo-Pacific, and recommit resources to overcome nearly two decades of lost influence. Africa is the future: let’s see if Ottawa has embraced that insight. Chris W. J. Roberts is a political science instructor at the University of Calgary, and president of AfriCan Access Consulting. The Hill Times

Canada, Africa, and the imperative of global engagement

Canada is a lapsed middle power. That doesn’t mean it can ignore Africa.

Canada’s aging crisis and a call for reform in eldercare

As COP29 wraps up, will Canada finally stop funding fossils this fall?

Addressing the threat of antimicrobial resistance

The wisdom of Homer Simpson and Aaron Sorkin

Climate finance should target resilient food systems

Trump’s ‘America First’ plans may undermine global trade

Trudeau must act now to save Canada’s partnership with Africa

Joly’s Africa engagement strategy copies the American approach

Time for Canada to get over its middle-power myth

Consulting the diaspora key to unlocking strong partnerships in Africa

Pivoting north as a middle power in a multipolar Arctic

News

Get free news updates

Opinion

Submit a guest opinion article

resources

Advertise

subscribe

get help

Get free news updates

Submit a guest opinion article

Canada, Africa, and the imperative of global engagement

Canada is a lapsed middle power. That doesn’t mean it can ignore Africa.

Get The Foreign Policy Newsletter