Western economic orthodoxy, including that of Canada, has to adapt. Whereas the neoliberal hegemony of the 80’s encouraged the west to discipline ‘peripheral’ nation-states’ unfavourable to western-economic interests evident in the role of structural adjustment policies (SAPs)[1] and willingness to sanction any ‘peripheral’ nation-state who dared to nationalise their own resources,[2] such an approach is antiquated, and frankly dangerously delusional.
Every member of ‘BRICS’ (Brazil, Russia, India, China and South Africa), although perhaps once susceptible to western neoliberal disciplinary measures no longer are.[3] Yet, Canadian foreign policy, has thus far, failed to acknowledge this. Our response to the violation of Canadian nation-state sovereignty from such BRICS members, evident in the ongoing investigations regarding Chinese election interference[4], the Indian-state led assassination of Hardeep Singh Nijar,[5] and I’d argue, the Russian invasion of Ukraine, as the west believes Ukraine to pertain to its hegemonic sphere of influence,[6] will inevitably, if have not already, result in bipartisan calls to sanction such states.
The prevailing assumption is that the imposition of sanctions on certain states effectively ostracises them from our economic spheres. However, a closer analysis reveals that such measures inadvertently compromise our potential to capitalise on their burgeoning economic ascendancy. This is not to say that at least in the case of China and India, if such threats to Canadian sovereignty are substantiated, which as of writing this document they appear to be, nothing should be done. Rather, this document only explicates that economic, and political, isolationism is unitarily successful for international actors with dominant economic positions, a status neither Canada nor the United States can confidently claim to hold in the evolving post-neo-liberal global economic paradigm.
Indeed, even the initial reluctance of the United States to overtly censure India amidst these allegations[7]underscores their cautious stance in avoiding the creation of additional formidable adversaries. This contrasts with Canada's apparent willingness to take a confrontational stance, possibly predicated on the belief that its alliance with the United States provides adequate protection against any geopolitical and economic repercussions stemming from such actions.
Certainly, while the West previously overlooked the BRICS ascent,[8] recent policies have shifted to overt opposition against them. Beyond sanctions, token gestures aiming to ostensibly distance Western nations from these emerging powers have culminated in a series of ill-conceived bipartisan policy missteps which include the Canadian liberal party's tribute to Waffen-SS Veteran Yaroslav Hunka in Parliament,[9] and the conservatives' push to publicly amplify inquiries into Chinese interference.[10] This pronounced moral posturing and overt virtue signalling against rising nations underscores a lingering perception of their subordinate status. Such an approach sets a precarious precedent, especially at a time when the global order is transitioning to a more multipolar structure.
Certainly, the Western approach to global affairs needs a comprehensive reevaluation to ensure its sustained relevance. Neither the United States nor Canada, by proxy, possess the dominant economic leverage once wielded to unitarily dictate global economic terms, nor should we. Still, in this evolving newly multipolar landscape, moving away from the neoliberal economic paradigm of the 80’s, it remains imperative for us to forge new, collaborative avenues to reaffirm our national sovereignty particularly with the BRICS. If we neglect this, we tacitly acknowledge a shifting tide: just as the West once used economic disciplinary mechanisms to set the rules for emerging nations via the guise of ‘good economic governance’, often to encroach on such nations’ sovereignty ourselves, it may now be our turn to adapt to guidelines set by those once deemed 'peripheral' states.
[1] Balassa, Bela. Structural Adjustment Policies in Developing Economies., 1981.
[2] So, Alvin Y. Social change and development: Modernization, dependency and world-system theories. No. 178. Sage, 1990.
[3] Stuenkel, Oliver. The BRICS and the future of global order. Lexington books, 2020.
[4] Oxford Analytica. "Canada's Trudeau remains under pressure over China." Emerald Expert Briefings oxan-es (2023).
[5] Pathi, Krutika, and David Cohen. "Who Was Hardeep Singh Nijjar, the Sikh Activist Whose Killing Has Divided Canada and India?" The Hill. September 20, 2023. https://thehill.com/policy/international/ap-who-was-hardeep-singh-nijjar-the-sikh-activist-whose-killing-has-divided-canada-and-india/.
[6] Economou, Athina, and Christos Kollias. "In NATO We Trust (?): The Russian Invasion of Ukraine and EU27 Citizens’ Trust in NATO." Peace Economics, Peace Science and Public Policy 0 (2023).
[7] French, Howard W. “Washington Is Losing Credibility over the Canada-India Spat.” *Foreign Policy*, 27 Sept. 2023, https://foreignpolicy.com/2023/09/27/canada-india-sikh-separatist-assassination-biden-us-response-modi-democracy/.
[8] Papa, M. (2014). BRICS’ pursuit of multipolarity: Response in the United States. Fudan Journal of the Humanities and Social Sciences, 7, 363-380.
[9] Nicholson, Kate. "Justin Trudeau Responds After Canadian Parliament Accidentally Honoured Ex-Nazi." HuffPost UK, 26 September 2023.
[10] “Poilievre Accuses Trudeau of Ignoring Election Interference by China.” CBC News, CBC/Radio Canada, 18 Feb. 2023, www.cbc.ca/news/politics/china-interference-concerning-analyst-1.6752577.
About the author: Elliot Goodell Ugalde is a graduate research and teaching assistant of Political Science at McMaster University, having prior done his undergraduate vocation at the University of Victoria. His research interests include international political economy, Marxist political economy and world systems economics. He has prior published for the International Journal of Law Ethics and Technology (IJLET), The University Of Victoria's On Politics review as well as the European Studies Review.
Comments