The global security environment continues to deteriorate on an almost daily basis, and Canada, once again, is struggling to respond. Our leaders need to step up.
I would sincerely hope that our current government are thinking seriously about what a second Trump administration would mean for Canada. Years of hollowing out of senior foreign policy expertise at Global Affairs Canada in favour of administrative acumen means that we’re left with very few strong thinkers on FP issues. This was evident when Trump first came to power and the PMO and senior GAC officials couldn’t shake themselves from the fantasy that Trump was just another Republican who would respond to normal incentives. Trump 2.0 will be an autocrat actively hostile to Canada and I’m not confident that our leadership appreciates that or would have any idea how to deal with it.
A solid analysis by Vincent Rigby, with one exception.
The United States, regardless if Trump wins or not, from a national security standpoint, would be completely insane to allow Canada to fall into the hands of a power hostile to their own interests. That would quite literally be suicidal on their part.
The United States also would be insane to allow Canada to completely fall into the hands of a hostile world power due to our embarrassment of national resource riches, including mineral, forest, and (most importantly) fresh water resources.
The author is correct that Canadians are unbelievably smug and overwhelmingly complacent because of the reality of our US proximity and natural resource wealth, and it is our folly.
Canadians, despite their own baffling superiority complex, are also woefully ignorant of the rest of the world, and distressingly naive about real threats that exist as outlined in detail by Mr. Rigby.
This is why our largely urban electorate has been stupid enough to elect the fundamentally unserious clown politicians (from all parties).
Adults in this country better wake up soon, and stop voting in self-interested, immature, ignorant, and often deeply corrupt individuals to represent them.
We do have leadership in this country. We desperately need them to clean house of all the chaff (elected and beaureaucratic) that has built up in peacetime, before it's too late to do so.
Only then will we be able to focus bright minds on building up our national security and sound governance that Mr. Rigby correctly notes is currently nowhere to be seen.
CP, I agree but there is a big difference between allowing Canada to fall in foreign hands and standing back and watching Canada flail away and itself fighting off (barely) that foreign power. In that way, Canada exhausts itself and, perhaps, just perhaps, starts looking to it's southern neighbor for succor. In that way of looking at things, why should the US do anything right now other than monitor? In other words, allow Canada to expend and exhaust itself and then be a savior.
KS I agree with you - that's likely what's happening.
I am just unsure how long they'll let this charade of 'governance' continue.
Occasionally a US official will be quite candid about the clown show up here - the ineptitude, the mediocrity, the corruption. Only occasionally, though.
Of course, the US has its own major corruption issues.
What keeps me up at night is the prospect that the US does not have our back due to its own corruption and societal decline.
The spectacle of octogenarian retread leaders in both the presidency and congress is very troubling- if the US is declining the same way Great Britain did after the first world war, then all bets are off, and we'd all better start learning Mandarin or Hindi.
I agree with "how long," etc. The short answer is, as long as it is in their interests. The long answer adds, "unless they are otherwise occupied when they most need to pay attention to Canada." In other words, playing with matches, etc.
Yes, the US does have it's own corruption issues, principal among them is election funding (but certainly not exclusively). Canada has "kinda" dealt with the election funding issue (but not entirely; I am not certain how one could reasonably - reasonably - achieve entirety).
Ah, those octogenarians. You are entirely correct, say I, a septuagenarian. Please allow me a moment to offer a prescription, one that assumes that you live in the US (I know that you do not). Unless and until "you" are willing to run for public office the obscene and disgusting folk who currently occupy political office will continue in office. The fact is, that most of us are repelled from and by politics and say devoutly, "Not me!" Unless new blood steps up the old blood will continue. Depressing, isn't it. And all I can say is, "Not me!"
I'm a quinquagenarian, comfortably so at this point.
I've been asked several times to stand for office - local and beyond.
I say that as a fact, not out of any vanity.
I've always been vocal on local to societal issues - it's just my nature.
That's why I believe I've been asked to run. I speak out, with what I'd like to believe are thoughtful, considered opinions. That is likely vanity ;)
My answer is always the same when I'm asked to run...happy to provide advice & counsel to those seeking office (I'd even accept payment for that advice and counsel), but elected officials have to debase themselves to a degree I'm unwilling to do, so my answer will always be no to running.
I realize giving advice/counsel would conceivably put me in the same category as a Rod Love (Ralph Klein) or a Gerald Butts (PMJT), which is unsettling, to say the least.
I just could not put myself, my wife, and my family through the ringer of elected office. I expect many others of similar conviction feel the same as I do.
As you note, this is part of the problem, and why we are where we are.
Oh, first off, a well earned "Bravo" for quinquagenarian.
The truth is, yes, running for office does affect families. And, yes, it affects the particular individual. Unfortunately, that is the reality of our times and someone, SOMEONE, has to step up and do it.
The truth also is, no one has ever asked me to run - smart everyone - but, I feel that, in other circumstances I would have nonetheless put myself forward. Ah, other circumstances ... age and physical disability (I am functionally deaf). The fact is that if "we" don't do it, who will. Put differently, if I (and I am very personally using myself here) won't do it, how can I expect others to do so?
The fact is that I am too selfish - and old and disabled - to do so but, quite honestly, those are excuses.
I admired the late Rod Love and I despise (current tense) G. Butts. Why did I admire Rod Love when he was alive? Well, he recognized a (relatively minor) talent in Ralph and he nurtured it and allowed it to flourish. I would have neither recognized that talent nor would I have been sufficiently talented nor determined to push it. Pretty good for a waiter at The Keg. Oh, Ralph did some strange things but over all I did think he represented folks reasonably well.
But enough of the past (you will note that I have not commented on G. Butts); I apologize to your family but you do need to get further involved in the political side of things. I know not your political bent but the simple fact of your involvement as your quinquagenarian (still a delight) is essential.
If foreign actors subvert too many Canadian businesses and politicians, it's over for the USMCA. Our economy is already in the gutter, we can't afford that to happen. So it's either contribute to our alliance now or do exactly what we're told ten years on.
Don't worry, the US would just turn Canada into a quasi colony before it got too bad. Southern Alberta and perhaps Windsor and Surrey would welcome it.
A solid statement of the risks and stakes we face. But given the expertise and experience of the author, a bit more prescription or specifics on action needed, would make for more useful reading. Calling for leadership is something we are all doing all the time.
Useful specifics to fix nearly 9 yrs of Trudeau? Neatly laid out in a short substack? Where are Trudeau’s current advisors who must be (one would hope) at least as informed as this author? If the author is educating the Trudeau gov’t from substack then we’re as screwed as I think we are.
Canada couldn’t even handle a trucker convoy. Cops from other jurisdictions were flown in (probably commercially lol) to save Ottawa. Freeland & JT enacted the EMERGENCY ACT because omg Ottawans ‘felt threatened on sidewalks’ & the border at Windsor had trucks lined up. That’s all it takes to cripple our smug, virtue-preaching nation. And at the stupid inquiry that followed, every single political pundit fawned over how natural & articulate Trudeau was delivering THE explanation. (Insert eye-roll & throw up hands.) That is what this country is today.
In the mid 1990s I made the statement to a colleague the the internet would be the downfall of society as we know it. Here’s my next statement Canada will fall, immigrants will not fight for this country when the time comes instead Canada will be ripe for the picking because of our water, minerals and oil. If you do not control your boarders and protect your sovereignty future generations can blame the current citizens who voted for politicians based on celebrity not intelligence.
Sorry, this comment is a repeat of a comment I made on 'The Line: Dispatch from the Front Lines'. But Mr. Rigby asks what the strategy is and I wonder what the strategy would be if what occurred in Russia last night were to occur at the Pearson Airport in Toronto.
In Russia, a plane from Tel Aviv lands and is confronted by and angry crowd, mostly Muslim, who wanted to take jews off the plane. I suspect there will be more information later, but CNN verified the story. The crowd outside the airport held antisemitic signs that included slogans such as “We are against Jewish refugees,” and “There is no place for child-killers in Dagestan.”
Note, Dagestan is "Dagestan, officially the Republic of Dagestan, is a republic of Russia situated in the North Caucasus of Eastern Europe, along the Caspian Sea. - Wikipedia'
Under the circumstances, Canada should have a plan in place to protect Jewish refugees and Jewish Canadians. I’m guessing there isn’t one.
This is yet another symptom of having a bipolar country with two different solitudes, cultures and expectations. How the French and the English see the world are very different and Ottawa, that city with one foot in both, can't seem to commit to anything because of this quandary.
I'm not sure how much longer the current Canada can survive like this.
An excellent overview of the current government’s ostrich-like foreign policy. Of course it’s easy to rely on big brother to the south to make the baddies go away - Fort Drum in NY state has 15000 ACTIVE troops just a 2 hour drive from Ottawa ready to be called upon to deal with pesky misguided libertarian Canadians like freedom of speech loving truckers or First Nationals should the need arise. As someone pointed out in a previous comment things might be different under a 2025-2028 Trump administration which seems more likely every week. The obvious tempting alternative is to copy Mexico’s defense policy and bar the armed forces from engaging outside the country- Canada would then have a decent National Guard for natural emergencies, population control and palace guard duties. Canada could use its free trade negotiation skills to come up with a suitable fee to the US for its protection.
I have to agree that mentioning the Trucker Convoy in an a piece about global leadership and a lack of defence and security policy proved to be a flash point. Our internal federal system failed horribly in the case of the convoy but an absent Ontario government and OPP along with the Ottawa police were the problem. The federal government was forced to act by the ineptitude of other levels of government. Yes we need leadership, clear articulated policy statements on national defence, foreign policy, immigration policy and national security. The federal government doesn’t appear to be capable of pulling it all together despite all the resources at its disposal.
Excuse me sir but conflating the Freedom Convoy.....a noisy but necessary expression of anger at the arbitrary and punishing covid lockdown rules, with Chinese interference in Canada's electoral process is simply tone deaf and worse. It is definitely reflective of the Laurentian elitism that views Western Canadians as turnips that fell off the truck and it exposes your utter contempt for freedom of expression. There are more than enough Trudeau inspired scandals for you to reference. As for Canada's supposed role in the wider world, well, Trudeau spent 54 million dollars on the Arrive Can app which had an original estimated cost of 50 thousand.....that sort of corporate/govt backslapping goes by another word......fascism......lets stamp that out here before sending another billion to Ukraine.
I normally stay out of the comments, but I want to jump in here and say that I strongly reject this view. The point isn't whether the convoy and the other threats are morally/ethically equal. That's a dorm room debate I'll leave to others. The issue, and I 100 per cent agree with Rigby on this, is that the convoy was an unplanned test of Canadian emergency preparedness, and we failed it badly. And I'm going to make this point as often as it's necessary: I don't care if you liked the convoy, because the point isn't whether it was good or bad, it's that it totally overwhelmed a series of Canadian governments and revealed major failures in our incident response capabilities.
I think that the major frustration for many Canadians that take national and world issues seriously (and John’s reply to you speakes to my case) is that Canadian governments reveal not just major failures in their incident response capabilities, but major failures in practically everything they do. As the most basic example, the feds are concerned about prayers in our army. There is a solution to a problem that doesn’t exist. In my head, if the person across the road from me was going to kill me, I think prayer is a good thing.
With all due respect exactly how should Canada's emergency preparedness have dealt with a peaceful protest of government policy?......how did it deal with the thousands of pro Palestinian anti Israeli protesters that noisily shut down city centers across Canada?...not an arrest in sight........myself and millions of others watched our country's emergency response to the convoy as shock troops rode horses through crowds, slammed grandmothers up against vehicles, seized bankaccounts and threw folks in jail without bail.......that Mr. Gurney was a prime example of the disfunctional federal government responding to a message it doesn't want to hear.
Calmly, competently, with a clear understanding of the roles and responsibilities of the various overlapping agencies, which would ideally work together smoothly and efficiently toward achieving whatever goal was set out by the relevant authorities.
Well that may have been possible, even probable under the mature leadership of PM Harper and i suspect under the future leadership of the next PM not called Trudeau. Incompetence seems to be the rule of the day and expecting otherwise from this group is, well, you pick the adjective.
But Canadians seem unable to agree on even the most basic priorities--and are plagued by a decline in the quality and coherence of public discourse (most notably in Canada's disintegrating news media sector, but also in academia). Present company excepted, of course.
For what it's worth, I'm not sure that the Conservatives would manage things better. Like the Liberals, the Conservatives are too fixated on the "fun and games" of attack politics and "gotcha" games to offer up much that is strategic and long-term in nature.
I would sincerely hope that our current government are thinking seriously about what a second Trump administration would mean for Canada. Years of hollowing out of senior foreign policy expertise at Global Affairs Canada in favour of administrative acumen means that we’re left with very few strong thinkers on FP issues. This was evident when Trump first came to power and the PMO and senior GAC officials couldn’t shake themselves from the fantasy that Trump was just another Republican who would respond to normal incentives. Trump 2.0 will be an autocrat actively hostile to Canada and I’m not confident that our leadership appreciates that or would have any idea how to deal with it.
A solid analysis by Vincent Rigby, with one exception.
The United States, regardless if Trump wins or not, from a national security standpoint, would be completely insane to allow Canada to fall into the hands of a power hostile to their own interests. That would quite literally be suicidal on their part.
The United States also would be insane to allow Canada to completely fall into the hands of a hostile world power due to our embarrassment of national resource riches, including mineral, forest, and (most importantly) fresh water resources.
The author is correct that Canadians are unbelievably smug and overwhelmingly complacent because of the reality of our US proximity and natural resource wealth, and it is our folly.
Canadians, despite their own baffling superiority complex, are also woefully ignorant of the rest of the world, and distressingly naive about real threats that exist as outlined in detail by Mr. Rigby.
This is why our largely urban electorate has been stupid enough to elect the fundamentally unserious clown politicians (from all parties).
Adults in this country better wake up soon, and stop voting in self-interested, immature, ignorant, and often deeply corrupt individuals to represent them.
We do have leadership in this country. We desperately need them to clean house of all the chaff (elected and beaureaucratic) that has built up in peacetime, before it's too late to do so.
Only then will we be able to focus bright minds on building up our national security and sound governance that Mr. Rigby correctly notes is currently nowhere to be seen.
CP, I agree but there is a big difference between allowing Canada to fall in foreign hands and standing back and watching Canada flail away and itself fighting off (barely) that foreign power. In that way, Canada exhausts itself and, perhaps, just perhaps, starts looking to it's southern neighbor for succor. In that way of looking at things, why should the US do anything right now other than monitor? In other words, allow Canada to expend and exhaust itself and then be a savior.
KS I agree with you - that's likely what's happening.
I am just unsure how long they'll let this charade of 'governance' continue.
Occasionally a US official will be quite candid about the clown show up here - the ineptitude, the mediocrity, the corruption. Only occasionally, though.
Of course, the US has its own major corruption issues.
What keeps me up at night is the prospect that the US does not have our back due to its own corruption and societal decline.
The spectacle of octogenarian retread leaders in both the presidency and congress is very troubling- if the US is declining the same way Great Britain did after the first world war, then all bets are off, and we'd all better start learning Mandarin or Hindi.
CP, a couple of points.
I agree with "how long," etc. The short answer is, as long as it is in their interests. The long answer adds, "unless they are otherwise occupied when they most need to pay attention to Canada." In other words, playing with matches, etc.
Yes, the US does have it's own corruption issues, principal among them is election funding (but certainly not exclusively). Canada has "kinda" dealt with the election funding issue (but not entirely; I am not certain how one could reasonably - reasonably - achieve entirety).
Ah, those octogenarians. You are entirely correct, say I, a septuagenarian. Please allow me a moment to offer a prescription, one that assumes that you live in the US (I know that you do not). Unless and until "you" are willing to run for public office the obscene and disgusting folk who currently occupy political office will continue in office. The fact is, that most of us are repelled from and by politics and say devoutly, "Not me!" Unless new blood steps up the old blood will continue. Depressing, isn't it. And all I can say is, "Not me!"
Quite so.
I'm a quinquagenarian, comfortably so at this point.
I've been asked several times to stand for office - local and beyond.
I say that as a fact, not out of any vanity.
I've always been vocal on local to societal issues - it's just my nature.
That's why I believe I've been asked to run. I speak out, with what I'd like to believe are thoughtful, considered opinions. That is likely vanity ;)
My answer is always the same when I'm asked to run...happy to provide advice & counsel to those seeking office (I'd even accept payment for that advice and counsel), but elected officials have to debase themselves to a degree I'm unwilling to do, so my answer will always be no to running.
I realize giving advice/counsel would conceivably put me in the same category as a Rod Love (Ralph Klein) or a Gerald Butts (PMJT), which is unsettling, to say the least.
I just could not put myself, my wife, and my family through the ringer of elected office. I expect many others of similar conviction feel the same as I do.
As you note, this is part of the problem, and why we are where we are.
And yet, and yet, and yet.
Oh, first off, a well earned "Bravo" for quinquagenarian.
The truth is, yes, running for office does affect families. And, yes, it affects the particular individual. Unfortunately, that is the reality of our times and someone, SOMEONE, has to step up and do it.
The truth also is, no one has ever asked me to run - smart everyone - but, I feel that, in other circumstances I would have nonetheless put myself forward. Ah, other circumstances ... age and physical disability (I am functionally deaf). The fact is that if "we" don't do it, who will. Put differently, if I (and I am very personally using myself here) won't do it, how can I expect others to do so?
The fact is that I am too selfish - and old and disabled - to do so but, quite honestly, those are excuses.
I admired the late Rod Love and I despise (current tense) G. Butts. Why did I admire Rod Love when he was alive? Well, he recognized a (relatively minor) talent in Ralph and he nurtured it and allowed it to flourish. I would have neither recognized that talent nor would I have been sufficiently talented nor determined to push it. Pretty good for a waiter at The Keg. Oh, Ralph did some strange things but over all I did think he represented folks reasonably well.
But enough of the past (you will note that I have not commented on G. Butts); I apologize to your family but you do need to get further involved in the political side of things. I know not your political bent but the simple fact of your involvement as your quinquagenarian (still a delight) is essential.
If foreign actors subvert too many Canadian businesses and politicians, it's over for the USMCA. Our economy is already in the gutter, we can't afford that to happen. So it's either contribute to our alliance now or do exactly what we're told ten years on.
Don't worry, the US would just turn Canada into a quasi colony before it got too bad. Southern Alberta and perhaps Windsor and Surrey would welcome it.
A solid statement of the risks and stakes we face. But given the expertise and experience of the author, a bit more prescription or specifics on action needed, would make for more useful reading. Calling for leadership is something we are all doing all the time.
Useful specifics to fix nearly 9 yrs of Trudeau? Neatly laid out in a short substack? Where are Trudeau’s current advisors who must be (one would hope) at least as informed as this author? If the author is educating the Trudeau gov’t from substack then we’re as screwed as I think we are.
Canada couldn’t even handle a trucker convoy. Cops from other jurisdictions were flown in (probably commercially lol) to save Ottawa. Freeland & JT enacted the EMERGENCY ACT because omg Ottawans ‘felt threatened on sidewalks’ & the border at Windsor had trucks lined up. That’s all it takes to cripple our smug, virtue-preaching nation. And at the stupid inquiry that followed, every single political pundit fawned over how natural & articulate Trudeau was delivering THE explanation. (Insert eye-roll & throw up hands.) That is what this country is today.
In the mid 1990s I made the statement to a colleague the the internet would be the downfall of society as we know it. Here’s my next statement Canada will fall, immigrants will not fight for this country when the time comes instead Canada will be ripe for the picking because of our water, minerals and oil. If you do not control your boarders and protect your sovereignty future generations can blame the current citizens who voted for politicians based on celebrity not intelligence.
Some “boarders” cross borders illegally but many simply live in boarding houses…🤔
Sorry, this comment is a repeat of a comment I made on 'The Line: Dispatch from the Front Lines'. But Mr. Rigby asks what the strategy is and I wonder what the strategy would be if what occurred in Russia last night were to occur at the Pearson Airport in Toronto.
In Russia, a plane from Tel Aviv lands and is confronted by and angry crowd, mostly Muslim, who wanted to take jews off the plane. I suspect there will be more information later, but CNN verified the story. The crowd outside the airport held antisemitic signs that included slogans such as “We are against Jewish refugees,” and “There is no place for child-killers in Dagestan.”
Note, Dagestan is "Dagestan, officially the Republic of Dagestan, is a republic of Russia situated in the North Caucasus of Eastern Europe, along the Caspian Sea. - Wikipedia'
Under the circumstances, Canada should have a plan in place to protect Jewish refugees and Jewish Canadians. I’m guessing there isn’t one.
This is yet another symptom of having a bipolar country with two different solitudes, cultures and expectations. How the French and the English see the world are very different and Ottawa, that city with one foot in both, can't seem to commit to anything because of this quandary.
I'm not sure how much longer the current Canada can survive like this.
An excellent overview of the current government’s ostrich-like foreign policy. Of course it’s easy to rely on big brother to the south to make the baddies go away - Fort Drum in NY state has 15000 ACTIVE troops just a 2 hour drive from Ottawa ready to be called upon to deal with pesky misguided libertarian Canadians like freedom of speech loving truckers or First Nationals should the need arise. As someone pointed out in a previous comment things might be different under a 2025-2028 Trump administration which seems more likely every week. The obvious tempting alternative is to copy Mexico’s defense policy and bar the armed forces from engaging outside the country- Canada would then have a decent National Guard for natural emergencies, population control and palace guard duties. Canada could use its free trade negotiation skills to come up with a suitable fee to the US for its protection.
I have to agree that mentioning the Trucker Convoy in an a piece about global leadership and a lack of defence and security policy proved to be a flash point. Our internal federal system failed horribly in the case of the convoy but an absent Ontario government and OPP along with the Ottawa police were the problem. The federal government was forced to act by the ineptitude of other levels of government. Yes we need leadership, clear articulated policy statements on national defence, foreign policy, immigration policy and national security. The federal government doesn’t appear to be capable of pulling it all together despite all the resources at its disposal.
Excuse me sir but conflating the Freedom Convoy.....a noisy but necessary expression of anger at the arbitrary and punishing covid lockdown rules, with Chinese interference in Canada's electoral process is simply tone deaf and worse. It is definitely reflective of the Laurentian elitism that views Western Canadians as turnips that fell off the truck and it exposes your utter contempt for freedom of expression. There are more than enough Trudeau inspired scandals for you to reference. As for Canada's supposed role in the wider world, well, Trudeau spent 54 million dollars on the Arrive Can app which had an original estimated cost of 50 thousand.....that sort of corporate/govt backslapping goes by another word......fascism......lets stamp that out here before sending another billion to Ukraine.
I normally stay out of the comments, but I want to jump in here and say that I strongly reject this view. The point isn't whether the convoy and the other threats are morally/ethically equal. That's a dorm room debate I'll leave to others. The issue, and I 100 per cent agree with Rigby on this, is that the convoy was an unplanned test of Canadian emergency preparedness, and we failed it badly. And I'm going to make this point as often as it's necessary: I don't care if you liked the convoy, because the point isn't whether it was good or bad, it's that it totally overwhelmed a series of Canadian governments and revealed major failures in our incident response capabilities.
I think that the major frustration for many Canadians that take national and world issues seriously (and John’s reply to you speakes to my case) is that Canadian governments reveal not just major failures in their incident response capabilities, but major failures in practically everything they do. As the most basic example, the feds are concerned about prayers in our army. There is a solution to a problem that doesn’t exist. In my head, if the person across the road from me was going to kill me, I think prayer is a good thing.
With all due respect exactly how should Canada's emergency preparedness have dealt with a peaceful protest of government policy?......how did it deal with the thousands of pro Palestinian anti Israeli protesters that noisily shut down city centers across Canada?...not an arrest in sight........myself and millions of others watched our country's emergency response to the convoy as shock troops rode horses through crowds, slammed grandmothers up against vehicles, seized bankaccounts and threw folks in jail without bail.......that Mr. Gurney was a prime example of the disfunctional federal government responding to a message it doesn't want to hear.
Calmly, competently, with a clear understanding of the roles and responsibilities of the various overlapping agencies, which would ideally work together smoothly and efficiently toward achieving whatever goal was set out by the relevant authorities.
Well that may have been possible, even probable under the mature leadership of PM Harper and i suspect under the future leadership of the next PM not called Trudeau. Incompetence seems to be the rule of the day and expecting otherwise from this group is, well, you pick the adjective.
Yes, all true.
But Canadians seem unable to agree on even the most basic priorities--and are plagued by a decline in the quality and coherence of public discourse (most notably in Canada's disintegrating news media sector, but also in academia). Present company excepted, of course.
For what it's worth, I'm not sure that the Conservatives would manage things better. Like the Liberals, the Conservatives are too fixated on the "fun and games" of attack politics and "gotcha" games to offer up much that is strategic and long-term in nature.