Canadian Foreign Minister Mélanie Joly’s official visit to Beijing last month demonstrates both a failure to take Chinese interference in Canadian democracy seriously and an apparent determination to undermine the United States and other NATO allies in their posturing towards China.
On the first issue, two recent inquiries into foreign interference have clearly documented China’s extensive interference in Canada’s democracy: the National Security and Intelligence Committee of Parliamentarians Special Report (NSICOP) and the Federal Election Interference Commission, known as the Hogue Commission after the Justice who leads it.
China has funneled money into Canadian political campaigns through proxies; has targeted and harassed the family members of elected officials; and weaponized the Chinese-Canadian diaspora through intimidation and threats. China has succeeded in getting China-friendly candidates elected to a variety of different positions, ranging from mayors to provincial officials to the national government. China has facilitated treason among Canada’s political class.
I could go on – there is no shortage of examples. Chinese interference in Canadian democracy is very real and it is now well documented.
Despite these reports, Joly’s visit indicates Canada’s resolve to restore relations with China, even at the expense of further alienating NATO allies. The recent NATO summit had not even started yet when Canada started taking it from all sides of the Alliance for its failure to present a plan to reach 2 percent of GDP military spending, the floor that is required to be a member of NATO. House Speaker Mike Johnson, addressing a Hudson Institute audience, called out Canada’s lack of defense spending saying, “talk about riding on America’s coattails” adding that it was “shameful.”
The derision of Canada’s military spending debacle continued in both public and private. Finally, after days of taking it on the cheek, Canadian Prime Minister Justin Trudeau announced on the final day of the summit that Canada would reach the 2 percent GDP spending threshold, but not until 2032.
Crucially, the NATO Summit concluded with a statement signed by all 32 member states calling China a “decisive enabler” of Russia’s Ukraine war. The strongly worded communique called on China to cease “all material and political support to Russia’s war effort.”
The communique also stated that NATO countries have seen “sustained malicious cyber and hybrid activities, including disinformation” stemming from China and that member states would fight against Chinese “tactics and efforts to divide the Alliance.”
With this resolve in mind, it came as a shock that only one week after the summit, Canada sent Foreign Affairs Minister Melanie Joly on an unannounced visit to Beijing for the purposes of “pragmatic dialogue.”
Why, when China is having its way with Canadian democracy, is it rewarded with a high-level visit that sends a directly oppositional message to the already miffed NATO allies?
The sad answer is Canada’s foreign Minister, Melanie Joly, is in over her head. She has written something called a “doctrine of pragmatic diplomacy”. This doctrine outlines that engagement is better than sidelining. She states that pragmatic diplomacy is about “keeping allies close, while also being open to different perspectives as we encourage others to take a chance on peace.”
To put it simply, Canada will have meetings for the sake of meetings.
She adds that Canada is not naive at what engagement will accomplish but that a refusal to engage will “create additional incentives for those whose actions we strongly oppose to join together.”
But what of those who already had joined together, such as Russia and China?
For what it’s worth, Minister Joly said she told Beijing that PRC interference in Canada’s democracy would “not be tolerated” (though, arguably, it has been). The Chinese read-out of the meeting focused on how Beijing would not allow any “criticism” of its human rights record.
China clearly does not respect Canada – if anything it has been emboldened by its success at political interference. Joly’s visit, and in particular the timing of it, gave Beijing propaganda fodder to undermine the NATO alliance. The meeting accomplished nothing, no substantive discussion was had and no decisions or changes to the relationship ensued.
For Americans, already angered by Canada’s weak response to Chinese interference and lack of commitment to the NATO alliance, it was nothing short of perplexing.
Jamie Tronnes is the executive director of the Center for North American Prosperity and Security (CNAPS.org)
