So far, at least, Canada’s response on Ukraine crisis deserves high marks

Opinion

Hey there, time traveller!
This article was published 06/03/2022 (928 days ago), so information in it may no longer be current.

The Trudeau government, which has stumbled through other crises and bumbled some key foreign policy issues, has been remarkably sure-footed since Vladimir Putin sent Russian troops into Ukraine.

And on this International Women’s Day it’s worth pausing to note that Canada’s efforts on this front have been led by three female ministers — Chrystia Freeland as finance and deputy prime minister, Defence Minister Anita Anand and Foreign Minister Mélanie Joly.

That’s notable in itself. Prime Minister Justin Trudeau’s determination to put women in senior roles has clearly paid off. There have been some duds along the way (every cabinet has those, regardless of gender) but there have also been significant success stories.

The Freeland-Anand-Joly combo isn’t interesting, though, only because of their shared background.

They have been the faces and voices of Canada’s response, and this time the government has been ahead of the curve in responding to Putin’s aggression.

Canada has imposed strong sanctions against Russia, adding to them (including on Monday) as it became clear that Putin is determined to bring Ukraine to heel no matter how high the human cost. It banned imports of Russian oil and gas, imposed high tariffs on other imports, and pushed other countries to go further (by, for example, kicking Russia out of the SWIFT financial transaction system).

The government also sent rocket launchers and other lethal weapons to Ukrainian forces. And it has launched an ambitious program to help Ukrainians fleeing their homeland and ease their path to this country if that’s what they want.

It’s a refreshing contrast to the government’s unsure handling of what it deemed a “national emergency” during the anti-vax protests and blockades (which, seen beside Putin’s genuine threat to global peace, seem a lot less grave than they did only a couple of weeks ago).

What a positive contrast, too, to the government’s bumbling on other foreign files — such as Trudeau’s disastrous tour of India back in 2018 or its humiliation by China during the ordeal of the “two Michaels.”

Key to all this in the Ukrainian crisis is, of course, the role played by Freeland. As many have noted, her family and professional background were ideal preparation for this moment, and she has made the most of it.

Canada would have taken a special interest in Ukraine no matter who was the government’s No. 2, given this country’s large Ukrainian population. But no one doubts that Freeland has brought both expertise and passion to the issue. Trudeau looks all the better when she’s standing beside him (and even better when she’s taking the lead and he’s beside her.)

Certainly, events have lined up to make things easier for the government. The sheer outrageousness of the Russian invasion created an instant consensus for action. And the fact that no NATO country is prepared to challenge Putin and his nuclear arsenal directly means Canada doesn’t face a decision about sending troops in harm’s way.

At the same time, the cost of imposing sanctions is relatively low for Canada, given our paltry trade with Russia and the fact we don’t rely on its oil and gas. It’s easy for Canada to ban imports, but many European countries can’t just turn off the taps without leaving their own citizens to freeze in the dark.

Things are bound to get tougher. Depending on how events unfold in Ukraine, the domestic consensus for action may erode. Pressure to curtail Europe’s reliance on Russian oil and gas will embolden those calling for more Canadian exports.

And the government is already facing calls to end Canada’s “holiday from history” and make serious investments in our military. Freeland’s next budget will be key in that regard.

In the meantime, though, the trio of women leading Canada’s response to this crisis are off to a very good start.