Mr Good Example

Before Stephen Harper came along, Canada's international reputation was positive, though maybe not quite as positive as Canadians liked to believe. Governments of both parties were quick to stretch the underfunded military gossamer thin in order to contribute to peacekeeping missions around the world, and the country could generally be counted on to pull its weight whenever there was a refugee crisis. Budgets always seemed to be tight, so Canada's deeds always fell short of its words, but at least we were generally on the side of the angels.

That all changed under Stephen Harper, whose contempt for most of his fellow Canadians was matched by his disdain for foreigners -- the man couldn't even bring himself to be friendly to the United States.  The only countries Harper seemed to have time for were Israel and Ukraine, in both cases as much for domestic political reasons as for any point of principle. The aid budget shrank even further and instead of peacekeeping, Harper sent the still-underfunded military into combat zones, deploying ancient fighter jets to the Baltic and, more recently, to Iraq to join the fight against ISIS. As The Economist scathingly put it just before the recent election, Canada under Harper was "Strong, proud and free-loading".

In his speech to his supporters on election night, Justin Trudeau made a point of speaking about this. Directing his remarks to foreign countries that missed the "old Canada", Trudeau announced "We're back!"  He will have a chance to prove it soon enough: in the next few weeks he will be travelling to the G20 summit in Turkey, to a Commonwealth meeting in Malta, and to the climate summit in Paris. This article from today's Toronto Star looks at how he might try to reposition the country on key issues.

The Syrian refugee crisis will be a key issue at the G20 meeting, not least because the host country, Turkey, has taken in more than 2 million refugees, as well as playing a growing military role. Trudeau has already pledged to end Canada's air campaign against ISIS.  This was probably not a welcome decision in Washington, London or Paris, but it is a recognizable return to the policies of his Liberal predecessors -- Jean Chretien famously upset George W Bush by refusing to join the invasion of Iraq.

Trudeau has also pledged to bring 25,000 refugees to Canada by year end, a hugely ambitious goal. Here is where we start to see the old, self-righteous Canada starting to rear its head again: according to the linked article, Trudeau has said he hopes that commitment stands as an example for other nations. Well, which nations would those be? He can't mean Turkey, obviously, or neighbouring Jordan and Lebanon, both buckling under the strain of the refugee influx. He can't mean Sweden, which with a population less than a third of Canada's has been seeing more than 25,000 refugee arrivals per month. He certainly can't mean Germany, the preferred destination of hundreds of thousands of refugess, or France, which has pledged to take far more than Trudeau is proposing.

I'm not trying to put Trudeau down here: any contribution to the crisis is better than none. However, in the overall context, what Trudeau is proposing is not much more than a pinprick.  It's more than a little pompous to set it up as some kind of example to others, many of whom are already doing much more.

Then there's the climate summit. Stephen Harper was famously cavalier about climate change, withdrawing from the Kyoto Protocol and muzzling the country's climate scientists, while enthusiastically boosting the oil sands industry. Trudeau has pledged to change all that, but once again there's a risk that the rhetoric will far outrun the action.

Trudeau's team has been heard to say that Canada will be taking a leadership role at the Paris summit,  but it's hard to imagine countries that have been focused on the issue for years allowing the prodigal son to take a seat at the head of the table. In truth, the main decision that Canada could have taken to look good at the conference, the cancellation of the Keystone XL pipeline, has already been taken in Washington. Recall, too, that Trudeau expressed his "disappointment" at President Obama's decision, though to be fair that statement may have been made for a domestic audience.

Truth to tell, and oil sands aside -- and I acknowledge that's a huge aside -- Canada's environmental record is not all bad. No developed country gets more of its electrical power from renewables, largely thanks to the abundant hydropower resources found from Niagara Falls to Churchill Falls to Quebec's awe-inspiring Baie James. Quebec must be the only major jurisdiction in the world in which electricity is the most economical form of home heating, and it's all produced from renewables. That said, however, this is a vast country, cold in winter and stifling in summer, that will always be a relatively heavy energy consumer. Trudeau will have to weigh his long-term commitment to the environment with the need to avoid short-term damage to the economy.

What it comes down to is that, in energy policy as well as the refugee crisis, Trudeau needs to avoid committing to more than he can safely deliver. Given the budget constraints he faces, there is a risk that Canada will quickly be seen as a country that speaks loudly but carries a small checkbook.  Trudeau's fellow world leaders may be glad to see the back of the lumpen Harper, but they won't want to be preached at by the new guy.