Poilievre owes it to voters to provide some clarity on his intentions for defending the country’s interests
Marco Rubio, the former rising Republican hope whose future now seems to be behind him, was wheeled out on Sunday to defend Donald Trump on CNN’s State of the Union show.
At a campaign rally on Saturday night, Trump said that he would “encourage” the Russians to “do whatever the hell they want” to NATO countries that did not pay for their own defence to his satisfaction.
Enjoy the latest local, national and international news.
Enjoy the latest local, national and international news.
Create an account or sign in to continue with your reading experience.
Don't have an account? Create Account
Rubio appealed for calm. Trump shouldn’t be interpreted literally. “He doesn’t talk like a traditional politician,” Rubio said.
Trump wouldn’t actually invite the Russians to invade Europe. The intention was simply to squeeze America’s allies to pay more for their own defence, say Trump’s supporters.
But the deterrence that has kept the peace in Europe since NATO was formed in 1949 only works when all sides believe the commitment to collective security is ironclad.
That belief will melt like snow on a river if Trump is elected.
Now, America’s allies and adversaries all have to plan for the eventuality that a Trump administration might abandon the alliance.
Parties with ambitions to form government must also wrestle with the implications. Canada’s Conservative party has said very little about its defence and security policies, preferring to focus on domestic issues.
But Canadian voters should be told in advance of an election what a government led by Pierre Poilievre would do if the United States pulled out of NATO.
This newsletter tackles hot topics with boldness, verve and wit. (Subscriber-exclusive edition on Fridays)
By signing up you consent to receive the above newsletter from Postmedia Network Inc.
A welcome email is on its way. If you don't see it, please check your junk folder.
The next issue of Platformed will soon be in your inbox.
We encountered an issue signing you up. Please try again
They should know if Poilievre plans to commit to the two per cent of GDP spending target that Canada signed on to in Wales in 2014.
The answers to those questions are not clear. I asked Poilievre’s office if a Conservative government remains committed to NATO in all eventualities (for example, if America pulls out).
Sebastian Skamski, Poilievre’s communications director, said Justin Trudeau has left Canada to depend on Joe Biden or Donald Trump to keep the country secure.
“Common sense Conservatives support our NATO alliance and believe Canada should once again be a strong partner,” he said. “We will restore our economy and our military to … restore Canada as a reliable partner to our NATO allies.”
On the two-per-cent question, Poilievre’s defence and foreign affairs critics (James Bezan and Michael Chong) issued a statement before last year’s NATO summit in Vilnius that said the party supports “the commitments Canada has made to NATO and we must make an effort to meet them.”
However, they did not explicitly state they would live up to the two-per-cent promise and nor did Poilievre during his successful Conservative leadership campaign, when he was the only candidate who refused to make that commitment.
Could a Poilievre-led Conservative government follow Trump out of NATO, if the Republican lived up to his comment to European Commission president, Ursula von der Leyen, that “NATO is dead … we will leave”?
Sources in the party say that scenario is extremely unlikely.
To do so would be a radical departure from the founding principles of the Conservative party, which has long advocated support for strong national defence, law and order, and Canada’s history and traditions.
Senior Conservative MPs say that people should not misinterpret the lack of security statements, policy positions and opposition motions as a lack of commitment. Rather, they say, it is because of the leader’s focus on the carbon tax, housing issues, crime, and balancing the budget, which Poilievre thinks will win him the election.
But we have already seen the potential for blowback when that narrow fixation blurs peripheral vision, in the case of the Ukraine free-trade deal. The reference to carbon taxes saw the Conservatives oppose the updated agreement and allow the Liberals to portray them as being on the same side as Putin. Poilievre was obliged to issue a press release calling for additional military aid to Ukraine to clarify that he was not in the same camp as those Republicans who want to block more aid to Kyiv.
In the case of NATO, sources suggest that Poilievre is not skeptical about the idea of collective security; rather, he is committed to balancing the books. A promise to spend two per cent could cost up to an extra $18 billion a year, according to the Parliamentary Budget Office, which estimated Canada is on track to spend $51 billion a year — or 1.59 per cent of GDP — on defence by 2026–27.
“Poilievre has said: ‘OK, but what am I not spending money on?’” said one person with knowledge of internal discussions.
Defence spending is the largest discretionary item in the federal government’s budget, which helps explain why it has been underfunded for so long.
Another reservation Poilievre expressed during the leadership contest is the ability of the Canadian Forces to absorb large increases in its budget. “If you up the budget in one year, you’ll have a bunch of bureaucrats in the department trying to shovel the cash out of the door without getting proper results,” he said, not without justification.
But arguments against a plan to get to two per cent do not stack up against the twin threats to Canada’s national interests.
The first is Russia. These are serious times and Canada needs to show some urgency in modernizing its military.
The second is Trump’s threat to abandon NATO. The only insurance policy Canada can take out against that potentially devastating action is to get on a path to two per cent.
The consequences extend beyond NATO. The U.S.-Mexico-Canada trade agreement struck during Trump’s first term in office included clause 34.6, which gives all parties the right to withdraw from the agreement with six months’ notice.
As a senior Conservative noted, that is a sword of Damocles hanging over Canada that could be used by any U.S. president, but especially by Trump, who has a track record of using tariffs as weapons. “The number one foreign policy priority for the U.S. is not enhanced trade and investment, it is defence and security and has been for decades,” he said. “If we are not addressing their No. 1 interest through a commitment that shows a clear path to two per cent, we are putting at risk our own interests.”
There is no guarantee that two per cent would satisfy Trump — at the NATO leaders’ meeting in Brussels in 2018 he demanded that allied nations should be spending four per cent, a level that only Poland would meet this year.
Justin Trudeau has already shown his hand, telling allies that Canada will never reach two per cent, according to leaked Pentagon documents. With the NDP demanding the introduction of a national pharmacare program as the price of its support in Parliament, the Liberals are unlikely to find an extra $18 billion to spend on a file that wins few votes.
That leaves the field to the Conservatives.
Poilievre owes it to voters to provide some clarity on his intentions for defending the country’s interests. Ideally that should be a clear path to spending two per cent of GDP on defence in the short-term, and three per cent in the mid-to-longer timeframe.
National Post
Postmedia is committed to maintaining a lively but civil forum for discussion and encourage all readers to share their views on our articles. Comments may take up to an hour for moderation before appearing on the site. We ask you to keep your comments relevant and respectful. We have enabled email notifications—you will now receive an email if you receive a reply to your comment, there is an update to a comment thread you follow or if a user you follow comments. Visit our Community Guidelines for more information and details on how to adjust your email settings.
Get ready to meet the ultimate fashion-meets-function handbag collection.
The effects of stress on our skin — and how to mitigate those effects — are an increasing focus of skin-care companies.
We tried it and so far, we’re impressed
The top seven wireless earbuds right now
Stream the game on Sunday, Feb. 11, 2024
login
who are we?
contact us
qosheapp
Toi Staff
Gideon Levy
Belen Fernandez
Andrew Mitrovica
Mort Laitner
Nikkei Editorial
Rami G Khouri
Ali Fathollah-Nejad
visit website
