DFAIT logo partnership The logo for the by design elab, an independent research development and production think tank specializing in online forums for policy development, incubated in 1997 at the McLuhan Program at the University of Toronto
Printer friendly version of: http://www.foreign-policy-dialogue.ca/index.php/en/answers/index.php?ac=pqi&qid=3826

View Answers

Question 3: The 1995 Policy Review and Since

Canada is a member of many international organizations, including the G8, NATO, the Commonwealth, La Francophonie, the Asia-Pacific Economic Cooperation forum (APEC), the Organization of American States (OAS) and the Arctic Council. Should our participation in any of these be strengthened, or adjusted?

 

 


 
« previous   |   View answers for question 3   |  Next »    
Contributor:CCIC
Date: 2003-05-01 21:12:07
Answer:
CCIC favours a fair trade and multilateral approach to Canada’s work within the international system. Canada’s contribution to international organizations needs to be both consistent, in terms of policy, and independent. The values and interests that should be fundamental to Canadian foreign policy are identified in the response to question 1, and should be reflected in the actions Canada takes within all international organizations.

Canada, as a Northern country with a large economy, a history of peace-building and active participation at the United Nations, is in a strong position to promote greater inclusion of Southern country and civil society concerns in international fora.

The Government of Canada is to be commended on its support for multilateralism, its decision last year to support the Kyoto accord and its recent attempts to work through the United Nations to resolve the Iraq crisis, rather than supporting unilateral action by any one country. However, it is also true that in recent years, particularly since the signing of the Canada-U.S. free trade agreement and subsequent trade challenges under NAFTA’s Chapter 11, the integrity of Canadian foreign and domestic policy has at times been compromised by an apparent reluctance to outline a clear and consistently independent (i.e. “made in Canada”) position. Among the concerns that emerged from a September 2002 forum, held at the request of the Minister of Foreign Affairs, on Canada-Europe relations (hosted by the Canadian Centre for Foreign Policy Development) was "that Canada should not be in a position of merely adopting policies made in Washington."

With respect to multilateral institutions, the Government of Canada should seek cooperation with other states on global issues of human rights, disarmament, peace-building, poverty, human security, labour, intellectual property and the environment. However, the federal government should ensure that trade bodies such as the World Trade Organization (WTO) do not enjoy de facto jurisdiction over these issues at the expense of other multilateral mechanisms: the International Labour Organization (ILO), Multilateral Environmental Agreements (MEAs), and the UN respectively. At the same time, Canada should promote trade rules that work in favour of poverty eradication.

Since joining the OAS in 1990, Canada has repeatedly stated its interest in promoting and protecting human rights in the hemisphere. Unfortunately, however, this stated interest has not translated into concrete action: Canada has not signed on to several of the Inter-American Human Rights instruments, most notably the American Convention on Human Rights and the San Salvador Protocol. Until it does so, Canada will remain effectively mute on human rights issues in the Americas. The Government of Canada has the potential to play an important role in the promotion of human rights in the Americas and should support this commitment by signing on to these important Inter-American Human Rights instruments.

Canada’s leadership at the international level, in particular at the G8 in terms of raising the issue of African development, is welcome and should be continued. The Government of Canada’s renewed emphasis on aid effectiveness as well as the announcement that half of the recent aid increases will be devoted to Africa are applauded by the international development NGO community. These are important policy initiatives that can address poverty, inequality and injustice in Africa and contribute to new partnerships with African governments and citizens.

However, Canada’s approach to discussions at G8 preparatory meetings and summits, should not have the effect of shutting out the concerns of developing countries and civil society. For example, G8 leaders, including Canada, welcomed NEPAD’s (New Partnership for Africa’s Development) “focus on investment-driven economic growth and economic governance as the engine for poverty reduction.” (G8 Action Plan, page 1). However, NEPAD failed to address debt, the re-building of regional and national markets and the productive capacity of Africa's national economies. The plan had little, or no, sign-on by African legislatures and parliaments, let alone African civil society organizations, before it was discussed among the G8 countries in Genoa and Kananaskis.

While there are some positive initiatives in the Canada Fund for Africa and in CIDA’s renewed commitment to Africa, such as substantially increased support for basic education in its recent Africa aid allocations, a significant portion of the fund is devoted to an export-oriented growth strategy for Africa. This strategy has not succeeded in bringing benefits to Africa’s majority poor populations in the past.

G8 and other economic fora initiatives intended to address poverty reduction need to be developed with greater input from both recipient countries and civil society groups. Canada should review all such initiatives to ensure that this input is included.

With the prospect of half of new aid resources being devoted to Africa in the coming years and the need for an overarching development framework to guide the allocation of these resources, Canadian civil society organizations working with counterparts in Africa can provide unique perspectives for synergistic foreign policy initiatives in support of sustained African poverty reduction.



Recommendations in response to Question 3


1. Cooperate with other states on global issues of human rights, poverty eradication, common security, labour, democracy and the environment.

2. Ensure that trade bodies such as the WTO do not enjoy de facto jurisdiction over issues such as security, labour, intellectual property and the environment at the expense of other multilateral mechanisms: the ILO, MEAs, and the UN respectively.

3. Fulfil the commitment to promoting human rights in the Americas by signing on to the Inter-American human rights instruments, including the American Convention on Human Rights and the San Salvador Protocol.

4. Develop G8 and other economic fora initiatives intended to address poverty eradication needs with greater input from both recipient countries and civil society groups. Review all such initiatives to ensure that this input is included.
« previous   |   View answers for question 3   |  Next »    
Visit us online at: http://www.foreign-policy-dialogue.ca