Ban Ki-Moon speech throws light on Canada-UN relationship New contributions have been few and far between, but the public doesn't seem to mind. By Avinash Gavai Published May 19, 2010

View story Email Comments To the Editor

In many ways, the highlight of UN Secretary-General Ban Ki-Moon's visit to Ottawa last week was a speech he delivered at the Château Laurier in advance of his meetings with Prime Minister Stephen Harper and other officials.

Right off the top, Mr. Ban described Canada as a "long-standing supporter and partner of the United Nations," and then praised the many contributions the country has made to the world body over the years.

"I think of your UN peacekeepers today, who are adding new chapters, serving in different missions from Africa to the Middle East and most recently in Haiti," he told the audience. "I think of Canada as a champion of the Responsibility to Protect, of promoting and protecting human beings."

He went on to talk about the work being done in Afghanistan, then focused on several Canadian diplomatic initiatives, including the Ottawa Treaty banning the production and use of landmines, as well as the recent Jerusalem Old City Initiative, unveiled by three former Canadian diplomats in Washington on May 5.

However, as laudable as that list may appear at first blush, a closer look reveals some major gaps.

The latest figures released by the UN show Canada ranking 58^th in terms of military and police personnel deployed on peacekeeping duties abroad. Canada has also largely backed off the Responsibility to Protect doctrine, which reached its zenith under previous Liberal governments.

In addition, the Jerusalem initiative is completely arm's-length from the government, while the landmine treaty is already 11 years-old.

Even in terms of aid, Canadian development aid will be frozen starting this year, and as a percentage of gross national income will fall from 0.3 this year to 0.26 in the next couple of years. The internationally accepted target is 0.7 per cent.

And Mr. Ban himself called on Canada to honour its Kyoto commitments, which have been largely abandoned for years.

All this to ask: What has Canada contributed to the UN lately, and has it been as strong a supporter as Mr. Ban indicated in his speech?

Many Canadian UN experts are not optimistic on the present government making a concerted effort to constructively engage with the 192-member body.

"We've rolled back our participation substantially in the UN," said former UN ambassador Paul Heinbecker, "and the government, generally speaking, has not taken much interest in the UN and uses it primarily to explain its military role in Afghanistan. It hasn't done much beyond that."

Mr. Heinbecker compared the current government's view of the UN to that of the Bush administration, which distrusted the world body and largely saw it as an obstacle.

"There are neo-cons in the Conservative party who don't like the UN for whatever reason," he said. "The impression you get is that these individuals sit on judgment at the UN, but don't seem to feel any responsibility towards it."

Others also believe that while the level of hostility of Canada's position may not mirror the antagonism displayed by the previous US administration, the UN has ceased to be a priority issue under the Harper government.

Louise Fréchette, a former UN deputy secretary-general, agreed that the furthest extent of active involvement under the present government is invoking the UN mandate under which Canadian troops operate in Afghanistan. However, she also attributed the move to step away from the UN as an attempt to put its mark on Canadian foreign policy.

"The [Conservative government's] foreign policy priorities—few in number and sketchily defined—seemed to respond to both genuine ideological differences with the Liberal Party, and an intense desire to appear to be different," she writes in a recently released Canadian foreign policy anthology called Canada Among Nations 2009-2010.

Citing the arrival of the more multilaterally-minded Obama administration as a catalyst to mend international policy, she notes focus areas that have been ignored and require immediate recalibration include climate change, nuclear non-proliferation and disarmament, conflict resolution and peacekeeping, agricultural development, and UN governance.

"When we come across as a 'one-note' foreign policy country—Afghanistan, Afghanistan, Afghanistan—we signal our disengagement from the broader agenda of problems plaguing our planet," she writes.

Kathryn White, the executive director of UNA-Canada, however, takes a far more optimistic view about the possibility of Canada-UN rapprochement than her peers in academia and public policy.

"There have been hopeful signs of commitment," she said. "We have the secretary-general of the UN here, signalling that in advance of the G8 and G20, this PM and his Cabinet realize the important and the expectations that Canadians have for our foreign and developments policies being implemented from and through the United Nations."

Public withdrawal?

Ms. White additionally noted that Canadians have been historically supportive of the UN as an institution, and that continues to the present day.

"Our own polling and international polling shows that Canadians are very supportive of our role in the UN, and in many ways, they may actually believe that we are more engaged with the UN than we actually are," she said.

Yet a UNA-Canada research paper that came out in 2007 discovered a trend among Canadians towards a sense of disillusionment.

A series of Foreign Affairs department polls over 2002-2005 asked Canadians if they were positive, neutral or negative about the overall effectiveness of the organization. There was a split result, with the largest group professing neutrality on the matter.

The document states, "Of the rest, however, more had negative than positive views. Moreover, negativity has increased higher in recent years."

Other academics, such as Thomas Keating, a political science professor at the University of Calgary, shares the view that public support for the UN has shown a marked decrease in recent time and this has compounded the level of official neglect by the government.

"I think it [public opinion] is probably less favourable than it was 15 years ago, because I think it has slipped a bit from the policy agenda, and therefore has slipped out of the public's mind, he said.

Mr. Keating believes that the present government has taken advantage of the fact that there is a certain level of Canadian ignorance about the lack of Canadian engagement in world affairs, which they still believe to be high.

"I think there is a bit of support [for the UN], but it's not at the visible forefront, and it's not likely to act as a significant force to advance that agenda. So the government can get by without worrying too much about public outcries to these issues."

agavai@embassymag.ca