The Trudeau government has made its case for why a country like Canada should win a seat on the United Nations Security Council. There hasn’t been any discussion of the drawbacks.
It fell to Norwegian Prime Minister Erna Solberg, also in Ethiopia to promote her country’s competing UNSC bid, to reflect on the pitfalls of sitting at the world’s biggest table.
“You have to take a stand on some policy decisions that, as a non-member, you don’t have to,” she told CBC News.
The Conservative Party leader, nicknamed “Iron Erna” in memory of Britain’s Margaret Thatcher, says she sees the seat at the world’s biggest table less as a prize, and more as a responsibility.
“I think it’s an obligation that you have. As supporters of multilateralism, as supporters of rule of law, you have to take the burden of the Security Council. Because it’s also a burden.”
Indeed, the matter before the Security Council this week is a perfect example of how membership has its burdens, as well as its benefits.
Outside a bubble inhabited by the administrations of U.S. President Donald Trump and Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu, the “deal of the century” peace plan drawn up by Trump’s son-in-law Jared Kushner has been widely received as an attempt to legitimize future Israeli annexations.
On Tuesday morning, Palestinian President Mahmoud Abbas was at the UN Security Council to denounce the plan, drawn up between the U.S. and Israel with no Palestinian involvement. Opposition to the Kushner plan is one of the few things that unites Palestinian factions — and of the 15 members of the UN Security Council, the only one that seems inclined to vote for it is the one that made it: the United States.
Prime Minister Justin Trudeau explains from Ethiopia Feb. 9 what he says is the value of Canada holding a seat on the UN Security Council. 0:51
This Tuesday, the council was scheduled to vote on a motion brought by Tunisia, condemning the document as a land grab and a violation of past UNSC resolutions.
Anxious to avoid a 14-1 vote that would require the U.S. to use its veto and leave its isolation evident, the U.S. manoeuvred to postpone the vote at the last minute, leaning heavily on Tunisia and co-sponsor Indonesia. But the issue will almost certainly be back in one form or another.
Looking at the current composition of the council, it’s not hard to see which country the Trump administration would choose as the easiest to lean on to take its side and save it the embarrassment of total isolation. That’s partly because Washington tends to assume that Canada is a natural ally that will fall into line, and partly because the Trudeau government is already more pro-Israel than most of the council.
Canada would then have to weigh the cost of irritating Washington against the cost of abandoning its principles on international law. If it’s not on the council, it wouldn’t have to make that choice.
Being on the council would make Canada a natural target for arm-twisting by a U.S. administration that doesn’t hesitate to use trade as a threat to coerce other nations over non-trade issues. Canada is much more susceptible to that kind of pressure than its European competitors.
It’s about fighting for the rule of law in international politics, it’s about fighting for multilateralism, it’s about taking care of the big issues of the future.– Norwegian Prime Minister Erna Solberg
The Trudeau government has adopted a fairly successful policy for handling the Trump administration: act friendly, lay low and try not to attract too much attention in the hope that it will one day all be over and normal programming will resume.
Being on the Security Council — even in one of the 10 non-permanent positions — is the opposite of that low-profile approach, given that all member states are obligated to comply with council decisions.
Representatives of Canada, Norway and Ireland stress the friendly nature of the contest between them, to be decided in June, and the fact their governments share the same priorities and perspectives.
“I don’t want to do a competition saying Canada’s bad at this and Norway’s good at that, because we are in fact partners on so many issues,” Solberg told CBC News.
That begs the question: does it really matter who wins?
Prime Minister Justin Trudeau discovers there are many hands to shake on Canada’s way to the United Nations Security Council. 1:32
If Canada’s rivals for the position were countries with an illiberal government, such as Italy under Matteo Salvini, or a government with denialist tendencies around climate change, such as Australia’s, then the outcome of the vote would matter more when it comes to things the Canadian government cares about.
After all, one of the main reasons for claiming the seat is to prevent it going to governments that don’t share your priorities, don’t support a rules-based international order, or, for example, want to stall action on climate change.
That is not the case with either Ireland or Norway. As small, democratic countries, they are every bit as committed to a world governed by rules as Canada.
Little space between countries
Indeed, it’s difficult to imagine many votes where the three countries wouldn’t come down on the same side. The Israeli-Palestinian issue is one of the few; Canada might be inclined to abstain on votes where Norway and particularly Ireland could be expected to vote against the U.S. and Israel.
Erna Solberg describes her country’s priorities in terms that could have come from the lips of Justin Trudeau or his foreign affairs minister, François-Philippe Champagne.
“It’s about fighting for the rule of law in international politics, it’s about fighting for multilateralism, it’s about taking care of the big issues of the future: oceans, climate, gender equality, making sure the sustainable development goals are functioning.”
In practice, allowing Norway or Ireland to WIN would achieve the main policy goals Canada has for the seat. The real loss would be the political blow to the Trudeau government, whose domestic rivals could be expected to use it to pillory the claim that “Canada is back.”
But from the point of view of having a member who will do the right thing (by the standards of the Trudeau government), things would be mostly the same.
And it might even save Canada some uncomfortable choices.
VANCOUVER – Contract negotiations resume today in Vancouver in a labour dispute that has paralyzed container cargo shipping at British Columbia’s ports since Monday.
The BC Maritime Employers Association and International Longshore and Warehouse Union Local 514 are scheduled to meet for the next three days in mediated talks to try to break a deadlock in negotiations.
The union, which represents more than 700 longshore supervisors at ports, including Vancouver, Prince Rupert and Nanaimo, has been without a contract since March last year.
The latest talks come after employers locked out workers in response to what it said was “strike activity” by union members.
The start of the lockout was then followed by several days of no engagement between the two parties, prompting federal Labour Minister Steven MacKinnon to speak with leaders on both sides, asking them to restart talks.
MacKinnon had said that the talks were “progressing at an insufficient pace, indicating a concerning absence of urgency from the parties involved” — a sentiment echoed by several business groups across Canada.
In a joint letter, more than 100 organizations, including the Canadian Chamber of Commerce, Business Council of Canada and associations representing industries from automotive and fertilizer to retail and mining, urged the government to do whatever it takes to end the work stoppage.
“While we acknowledge efforts to continue with mediation, parties have not been able to come to a negotiated agreement,” the letter says. “So, the federal government must take decisive action, using every tool at its disposal to resolve this dispute and limit the damage caused by this disruption.
“We simply cannot afford to once again put Canadian businesses at risk, which in turn puts Canadian livelihoods at risk.”
In the meantime, the union says it has filed a complaint to the Canada Industrial Relations Board against the employers, alleging the association threatened to pull existing conditions out of the last contract in direct contact with its members.
“The BCMEA is trying to undermine the union by attempting to turn members against its democratically elected leadership and bargaining committee — despite the fact that the BCMEA knows full well we received a 96 per cent mandate to take job action if needed,” union president Frank Morena said in a statement.
The employers have responded by calling the complaint “another meritless claim,” adding the final offer to the union that includes a 19.2 per cent wage increase over a four-year term remains on the table.
“The final offer has been on the table for over a week and represents a fair and balanced proposal for employees, and if accepted would end this dispute,” the employers’ statement says. “The offer does not require any concessions from the union.”
The union says the offer does not address the key issue of staffing requirement at the terminals as the port introduces more automation to cargo loading and unloading, which could potentially require fewer workers to operate than older systems.
The Port of Vancouver is the largest in Canada and has seen a number of labour disruptions, including two instances involving the rail and grain storage sectors earlier this year.
A 13-day strike by another group of workers at the port last year resulted in the disruption of a significant amount of shipping and trade.
This report by The Canadian Press was first published Nov. 9, 2024.
The Royal Canadian Legion says a new partnership with e-commerce giant Amazon is helping boost its veterans’ fund, and will hopefully expand its donor base in the digital world.
Since the Oct. 25 launch of its Amazon.ca storefront, the legion says it has received nearly 10,000 orders for poppies.
Online shoppers can order lapel poppies on Amazon in exchange for donations or buy items such as “We Remember” lawn signs, Remembrance Day pins and other accessories, with all proceeds going to the legion’s Poppy Trust Fund for Canadian veterans and their families.
Nujma Bond, the legion’s national spokesperson, said the organization sees this move as keeping up with modern purchasing habits.
“As the world around us evolves we have been looking at different ways to distribute poppies and to make it easier for people to access them,” she said in an interview.
“This is definitely a way to reach a wider number of Canadians of all ages. And certainly younger Canadians are much more active on the web, on social media in general, so we’re also engaging in that way.”
Al Plume, a member of a legion branch in Trenton, Ont., said the online store can also help with outreach to veterans who are far from home.
“For veterans that are overseas and are away, (or) can’t get to a store they can order them online, it’s Amazon.” Plume said.
Plume spent 35 years in the military with the Royal Engineers, and retired eight years ago. He said making sure veterans are looked after is his passion.
“I’ve seen the struggles that our veterans have had with Veterans Affairs … and that’s why I got involved, with making sure that the people get to them and help the veterans with their paperwork.”
But the message about the Amazon storefront didn’t appear to reach all of the legion’s locations, with volunteers at Branch 179 on Vancouver’s Commercial Drive saying they hadn’t heard about the online push.
Holly Paddon, the branch’s poppy campaign co-ordinator and bartender, said the Amazon partnership never came up in meetings with other legion volunteers and officials.
“I work at the legion, I work with the Vancouver poppy office and I go to the meetings for the Vancouver poppy campaign — which includes all the legions in Vancouver — and not once has this been mentioned,” she said.
Paddon said the initiative is a great idea, but she would like to have known more about it.
The legion also sells a larger collection of items at poppystore.ca.
This report by The Canadian Press was first published Nov. 9, 2024.