About Colin Robertson

A former Canadian diplomat, Colin Robertson is a Senior Strategic Advisor for  McKenna, Long and Aldridge LLP living in Ottawa, Canada and working with the Canadian Council of Chief Executives. He is Vice President and Senior Research Fellow at the Canadian Defence and Foreign Affairs Institute and a Distinguished Senior Fellow at the Norman Paterson School of International Affairs at Carleton University. He is vice chair of the board of Canada World Youth. He is a member of the board of the Conference of Defence Associations Institute and immediate past president of the National Capital Branch of the Canadian International Council. He is an Honorary Captain (Royal Canadian Navy) assigned to the Strategic Communications Directorate.

Colin can be reached by email at cr@colinrobertson.ca

Comments Off

Colin Robertson, April 5th 2006 | Posted in Uncategorized

Canada and the Americas

Americas strategy? It takes three to tango

colin robertson From Tuesday’s Globe and Mail Apr. 03, 2012

Our size and global placement give Canadians multiple perspectives as we compete in the international market. But these advantages too often distract us, at a time when we need to focus and follow-through.

History and early trading patterns make us an Atlantic nation. With half of all new Canadians coming from Asia, we now have a Pacific outlook that we embrace. Our climate is a constant reminder that we’re also a northern country, and the Harper government has made the Arctic a priority.

As we were reminded by Monday’s trilateral summit in Washington, we are also a nation of the Americas. Our propinquity to the United States has always been a challenge – initially around security, then through cultural seduction – as well as an economic opportunity promised by the world’s biggest market.

For most of our history, with the exception of the Commonwealth Caribbean relationships, we avoided our neighbours south of the Rio Grande. It was a Latin land of dictators and revolutions. Besides, since the Monroe Doctrine, the U.S. had staked its hegemony.

NAFTA gave us a serious relationship with Mexico but, as Monday’s summit illustrated, we continue to be a somewhat reluctant partner.

Taking advantage of our shared continent is a good idea, but it requires vision and boldness if we’re to realize the advantage of resources, market and labour. For now, trilateralism is on life support.

As we saw again Monday, these meetings are essentially “dual bilaterals” between Mexico and the U.S. and then, time permitting, between Canada and the U.S. We have to await the outcome of this year’s elections in Mexico and the U.S. before we can revive the North American idea.

Mexico deserves our support in combatting the drug menace as well as in developing its institutions. If we can wage war in Afghanistan and Libya, then surely we can lend a helping hand in our neighbourhood.

We also have increasing commercial interests. The World Bank says Mexico is the easiest place in Latin America to run a business and, by mid-century, Goldman Sachs reckons the country will be the world’s fifth-largest economy, bigger than that of Germany, Russia and Japan.

Meantime, we should be doing useful continental planning around our shared infrastructure – roads and rail, electrical grids and pipelines and at our gateways. And as soon as we fix our made-in-Canada refugee problem, let’s lift the visa for Mexicans.

With the exception of our ongoing commitment to Haiti, Canadian efforts toward the rest of the Americas have been characterized by quixotic spasms of tango-like embrace – joining the Organization of American States and committing to the now-moribund Free Trade Area of the Americas – followed by a long siesta.

The Harper government developed an Americas strategy with an emphasis on democratic governance, prosperity and security. We’ve made progress through a series of boutique trade agreements, but the grand strategy has been slow to take shape. As we approach this month’s Summit of the Americas, it’s ready for a “reset.”

It takes two to tango, and Latin American governments share responsibility for not taking advantage of Canadian interest and opportunities. During Stephen Harper’s visit to Brazil last year, he promised to be ambitious, saying that, for “too long a time we neglected relations. … Too much grass grows in the cracks on the road between out two great countries.”

Ambition is important. But so is perseverance.

Mr. Harper will need to devote more time and energy if we’re to demonstrate that there are more steps in our dance repertoire. The Canadian business community is engaged. Our mining companies are especially active, and our banks have long had a presence in the Caribbean that has since expanded, notably into Mexico.

Business can be a driving force for taking the relationship to the next level. Twenty years of freer trade has given Canadian companies experience and confidence that they can compete on the wider world stage. As we have learned in Asia, however, our commercial interests are advanced when ministers are there to show the flag.

For Canadians, the U.S. market and relationship will always remain No. 1, and we can take some comfort from Barack Obama’s promise on Monday to make the border “faster and cheaper to travel and trade.”

But the slow economic recovery increases the likelihood of renewed protectionism. Even when it’s not aimed at Canada, we are always at risk through collateral damage. It’s why, while we need always to keep our focus on the U.S., we should look to other markets in the Americas, starting with Mexico. And if we’re to keep the grass from growing back in the cracks, we need a good plan, perseverance and senior political level follow-through.

Comments Off

Colin Robertson, April 3rd 2012 | Tags: , , , , , , ,
Posted in op-ed

Leaders Announce Trade Measures

Leaders announce measure on trade
Scotty Greenwood of McKenna, Long Aldridge, and Colin Robertson a former Canadian diplomat in Washington discuss Canada’s complicated trade relationship with Paula Newton on CTV Powerplay.

Comments Off

Colin Robertson, April 2nd 2012 | Posted in TV Interviews

Trilateral Summit in Washington

From Ipolitics April 2, 2012:  The North American idea

by Colin Robertson,

When Barack Obama welcomes Stephen Harper and Felipe Calderon into the Oval Office on Monday, the leaders will smile and the cameras will click.

But will there be anything more to report than the usual bromides about the need for greater cooperation and collaboration at this latest iteration of the three amigos?

Probably not.

Sadly, the idea of closer economic integration creating an uber-North America — effectively a customs union between Canada, the U.S. and Mexico that would marry resources, labour and market — is on life-support.

For Stephen Harper, the first priority is on making the Canada-U.S. border more accessible, while enthusiastically embracing a ‘Trade R Us’ approach through the Trans-Pacific Partnership, a deal with the European Union and a smorgasbord of bilateral agreements. For Barack Obama, the priority is on creating jobs against what is shaping up as another polarizing election. For Felipe Calderon, the focus continues to be on battling the drug cartels. Calderon is in his last months as president and the July election will likely see the defeat of his party and the return of the long dominant establishment PRI.

Since NAFTA, the continental association has seldom gone beyond a pleasant conversation on aspirations, with a couple of notable exceptions including pandemic planning in the wake of H1N1 or, as it was initially known, the Mexican swine flu. Unfortunately, the substance of the ‘trilateral’ summits quickly descends first into the U.S. relationship with Mexico, because Mexican issues are top of mind for the American president, and then, time permitting, the U.S. relationship with Canada.

This dual bilateralism has left Canadian practitioners with the view that Canadian interests are better advanced dealing directly with the United States. They are mostly right although, as we’re learning yet again in the latest initiative to expedite border access, if getting the framework agreement is difficult, achieving measurable results is an even bigger hurdle. It requires consistent effort and continuing high-level instruction to shift a post 9-11 bureaucratic mindset that has still to understand that you can have both secure frontiers and economic integration.

NAFTA, the anchor for trilateralism, has never enjoyed the popular acclaim that it deserves.

Canada was initially a reluctant partner – we signed on for reasons similar to what is taking us into the Trans-Pacific Partnership – so as to avoid becoming a spoke in the American hub.

For the Americans, the decision was strategic: give Mexico a hand-up that would create jobs, a market and keep Mexican migrants at home. It worked, but only to a degree. Many of the maquiladoras that initially sprung up across the U.S. border have long since been dismantled and reassembled in China. Mexico’s northern states are now a war zone. In the USA, NAFTA has become a synonym for job loss and outsourcing.

It’s too bad because NAFTA did what was intended for all three partners. From 1994-2001, NAFTA trade tripled and foreign investment quintupled among the partners. Intra-regional trade accounted for 46 per cent of the three amigos international trade — up from 36 per cent in 1988.

Then came 9-11.

America reasserted its borders and a combination of the rise of China, slowing economies and the existential war with the cartels saw intra-regional trade slide back towards its pre-NAFTA levels.

At Waco in 2005, George W. Bush tried to revive the trilateral idea with the Security and Prosperity Partnership (SPP). But the SPP suffered from too many little objectives (over 400) without focus or political will. While the North American Competitiveness Council did good work, its pro-business orientation made it an anathema to the new Obama regime and the SPP process petered out.

It’s too bad because a key feature of globalization is the successful development of intra-regional trade – Europe showed the way and now Asia and Latin America are following suit. With labour, resources and the biggest market in the world, North America is well placed.

But it requires a willingness to look at the kind of bold ideas outlined in Robert Pastor’s vision of a continental future, The North American Idea (2011). A tireless champion of the North American idea, Pastor makes a solid argument for a customs union involving labor mobility and coordinated infrastructure, with a special focus on energy and transportation.

The energy dimension is further explored by the Peterson Institute’s Jeff Schott and Meera Frickling. In their useful NAFTAand Climate Change (2011), they recommend harmonized renewable energy standards, regional cap-and-trade regimes, and a coordinated mapping of carbon capture and storage sites.

The ideas are there. So is the potential for growth.

Canadians are well aware of the importance of the U.S. market, but we sometimes forget that Mexico is more than a cheap winter holiday. The World Bank and International Finance Corporation’s Doing Business 2011 report declared this NAFTA partner as the easiest place in Latin America to run a company. The International Monetary Fund says Mexico’s economic growth will eclipse that of the U.S. and Canada from now until 2015, and Goldman Sachs predicts that in 40 years Mexico will be the world’s fifth-largest economy — bigger than Russia, Japan or Germany.

Canadian companies, like Bombardier, RIM and Magna, already have a significant manufacturing presence in Mexico as part of their North American supply chain. Walk down any main street in Mexico City and you are likely to see the red and white signature of Scotiabank, now Mexico’s sixth largest retail bank.

We have opportunities in Mexico and a useful outcome of today’s meeting would be an announcement that we are lifting the visa requirement for Mexicans that was clumsily imposed in July 2009. Designed to assuage our refugee determination system, a made-in-Canada problem, it has since been corrected by legislation.

Alas, in current circumstances there is neither the political will nor popular support for the North American idea. This is why at today’s trilateral summit we should not expect much beyond a photo and aspirational declarations of good intentions.

But, after a two year hiatus, that it is even happening at all is cause for cheer. While we await more propitious circumstances, the North American idea remains alive.

Comments Off

Colin Robertson, April 2nd 2012 | Tags: , , , , , , ,
Posted in Newspaper

Canada and the Americas

Excerpted from Canadian Press New Canadian strategy for Americas expected Harper to attend Summit of Americas next month by Jennifer Ditchburn March 22, 2012

Prime Minister Stephen Harper is poised to unveil a reinvigoration of his government’s muddled Americas strategy when he meets with hemispheric leaders next month.

The Canadian Press has learned that cabinet discussed a renewal of the foreign-policy directive last week. Harper is expected to discuss details of how Canada will re-engage with Latin America and the Caribbean during the Summit of the Americas in Cartagena, Colombia, April 14-15.

The previous Americas strategy, first signalled in 2007, had three pillars: security, prosperity and democratic governance. But the Foreign Affairs Department’s own internal evaluation last year suggested the strategy was mostly talk and little action, citing a lack of resources and poor understanding of the policy….

Colin Robertson, a former diplomat and fellow at the Canadian Defence and Foreign Affairs Institute, said he’ll be looking for signs that Harper is truly invested in the Americas strategy and of genuine efforts at a time when the government is slashing budgets.

“There’s tough decisions ahead. Are they going to put the weight behind an Americas strategy that they’re putting behind say a Trans Pacific Partnership or freer trade with Japan?” said Robertson.

“Meanwhile, you’ve got ongoing relations with China, India and the Europeans. So, eventually you’ve got to make some choices and prioritize.”

Comments Off

Colin Robertson, March 22nd 2012 | Tags: , , , ,
Posted in Newspaper

Does Canada need a national security strategy?

As part of the Ipolitics coverage of the upcoming budget issues,  former G&M security correspondent Jeff Sallot, who now teaches at Carleton moderated a panel discussion with former Ambassador Ferry De Kerchove, and Carleton security scholar David Perry and CDFAI Vice President Colin Robertson on the subject: Doee Canada need a national security strategy? .  The podcast can be found on the ipolitics video website


Comments Off

Colin Robertson, March 13th 2012 | Tags: , , ,
Posted in TV Interviews

Three Cheers for the Commonwealth

Excerpted from ipolitics, March 12, 2012

oday is Commonwealth Day. At the Pearson Building, they will run up the Commonwealth flag, a golden globe set on a blue background. The flag originated from car pennants used at the 1973 Commonwealth Heads of Government meeting in Ottawa.

The 61 spears that form a “C” around the globe on the flag represent not its members but rather the
functional work of the institution – practical, people-oriented and aimed at giving people a hand-up through technical assistance.

It is the Commonwealth’s usually overlooked functional work that deserves our first cheer. Commonwealth-supported initiatives range from setting standards and sharing best practices on everything from life-saving to lawyering. While no longer enjoying preferential arrangements, the idea of giving developing nations preferred access, now a principle of the WTO, began with the imperial preferences.

Sports play a big part in encouraging fellowship. The Commonwealth Games were first hosted in Hamilton by Canada in 1930. Every four years they bring together Commonwealth athletes in what are purposely styled the ‘Friendly Games’.

The second cheer goes to Canada’s continuing contribution.

Born out of the old British Empire, the Commonwealth is arguably the oldest continuous intergovernmental association. That it evolved from Empire to Commonwealth owes much to the initiative of then prime minister Louis St. Laurent and Lester Pearson, then our minister for external affairs.

The challenge in 1948-9 was how to incorporate the new republic of India, the former ‘jewel in the Crown’, into a group that still pledged allegiance to that Crown. Working with Indian prime minister Nehru and others, St. Laurent and Pearson came up with the London Declaration whereby the Crown is recognized as “symbol of the free association of its independent member nations and as such the Head of the Commonwealth”.

The first Secretary General of the Commonweath was Arnold Smith, a distinguished Canadian diplomat and contemporary of Pearson. Appointed in 1965, his ten-year tenure put in place the core political values that culminated in the 1971 Singapore Declaration and the belief that “that our multi-national association can expand human understanding and understanding among nations, assist in the elimination of discrimination based on differences of race, colour or creed.”

Non-discrimination and respect for human rights are fundamental to the Commonwealth ideal. With strong leadership from Canadian prime minister John Diefenbaker, South Africa was shown the door over its apartheid practices in 1961 (then readmitted in 1994 with the end of apartheid).

In the intervening years, Nigeria and Pakistan were also suspended over human rights violations and Zimbabwe and Fiji are currently outside the Commonwealth for the same reason.

Prime Minister Harper has criticized human rights abuses in Sri Lanka and he has served notice that, without progress, he’ll boycott the next Commonwealth Heads of Government meeting (CHOGM), scheduled for Colombo, Sri Lanka in 2013.

The Harper approach is consistent with Canadian leadership since the inception of the modern Commonwealth.

Canadian Senator Hugh Segal is one of the ‘eminent persons’ who are currently leading the reform movement within the Commonwealth. Inspired by the core values of non-discrimination, the Eminent Persons Group presented 106 ‘urgent’ recommendations, at the Perth 2011 CHOGM. They reported that the Commonwealth was in a state of decay and in urgent need of ‘people’ oriented reforms, including a Charter reflecting human rights, democracy and the rule of law.

Leaders agreed to the need for “one clear, powerful statement” but there was no consensus on recommendations that, as well as the proposed Charter, included the repeal of anti-sodomy laws and the creation of a human rights commissioner.

Punted to study groups, Commonwealth foreign ministers will take another look at the reform plan this fall. It’s the kind of difficult file deserving the personal attention of John Baird, who is energetically advancing human rights.

The third ‘hurrah’ goes to the Head of the Commonwealth, Queen Elizabeth. We celebrate her diamond jubilee this year and her reign virtually tracks the evolution of the modern Commonwealth. Behind the CHOGM curtain, her counsel has been described as wise, pragmatic and progressive.

In this year’s annual message for Commonwealth Day, the Queen says we “celebrate an extraordinary cultural tapestry that reflects our many individual and collective identities… however different outward appearances may be, we share a great deal in common.”

The Queen’s message of tolerance and pluralism captures the original spirit of the Commonwealth. It is one to which Canadians, in particular, can relate. Importantly, it should inspire the Commonwealth leaders as they look to the future. The useful institution is not broken but it does need to be fixed.

Comments Off

Colin Robertson, March 12th 2012 | Tags: , , , , , ,
Posted in op-ed

Manage the Chinese relationship at a personal level

by Maureen Boyd and Colin Robertson excerpted from the Glboe and Mail, February 7, 2012.

On his second official trip to China, Prime Minister Stephen Harper will appreciate that managing the China relationship is as important for our time as managing German ambition was for the first half of the 20th century.

At some point in the 2020s, China is expected to have the largest economy in the world, generating twice as much trade as the United States. The World Bank reckons the Chinese “miracle” has pulled 400 million people from poverty. China leapfrogged over Britain, Germany and Japan to become the world’s second-largest economy. Playing host to the Olympics in 2008 was China’s demonstration that it had arrived. China is now the alternate economic centre to the United States.

The miracle is not without warts. Social unrest is an abiding preoccupation of the Chinese leadership. The fear, as Mao Zedong put it, is that “a single spark can start a prairie fire.” Domestic stability is fundamental. This has led to celebrated confrontations with dissidents and over access to information.

In contrast to when Mao systematically tried to destabilize neighbours and spread communism, leadership since Deng Xiaoping has demonstrated a willingness to play according to “Western” rules. There’s still work to be done, especially around intellectual property, cyber espionage and human rights. Yet, for the most part, China has behaved responsibly in the World Trade Organization, G20 and climate-change negotiations.

Canadians have a role to play in ensuring that the international system responds to the changing concert of powers and that China is accorded place, standing and respect in a new order built on peaceful, competitive dynamism.

Our geography, demography and resources give us cards to play. As Mr. Harper has learned, it’s never easy dealing with the Middle Kingdom and its sensitivities. By focusing on people-to-people connections, we build trust that will serve our commercial interests and advance our ability to play constructive internationalism, especially in the critical Sino-American relationship.

We start with a couple of advantages. First, our history. Still a staple in Chinese liturgy on Canada is the legacy of Norman Bethune and the remembrance that we defied convention by recognizing China in 1970. Second, our existing people-to-people ties. Since 2000, China has supplied almost one-fifth of our new immigrants; today, 1.4 million Canadians claim Chinese ancestry.

Our Chinese diaspora and its ties throughout Greater China give us a head start in developing a “smart” relationship. Let’s focus on tourism and education. Achieving “approved destination status” during Mr. Harper’s last visit resulted in a 25-per-cent increase in tourists. We should aim to increase this tenfold, but we need to improve our visa services and make Canadian hotels more friendly. For example, Chinese like their tea, so put a kettle beside the coffee maker. Where once we led in education, the Australians now set the pace. Vest our trade commissioners with responsibility for education marketing. Today’s student is tomorrow’s trader, investor or immigrant.

Commerce, covering everything from forestry to financial services, is our other objective. Manulife first started selling insurance in China more than a century ago. Canadian companies that invested time and effort are making money from sales of subway cars to potash to the malt for Chinese beer. China is on track to becoming the premier destination for our softwood lumber exports. Having alternate markets increases our leverage as a seller, yet another reason why we need a pipeline to the Pacific.

Trade flows two ways. Much of the cargo that will eventually be carried through our Northwest Passage will be stamped “made in China.” We should put out the welcome mat and sponsor China for membership in the Arctic Council as we prepare to assume its chairmanship.

The West, including Canada, has teeter-tottered between two conflicting approaches, one stemming from the missionary experience and the other from the realist school of interest and power. Alone, neither is a sound basis for policy-making. Dealing with China requires patience, perseverance and hard bargaining. The China question is the challenge for statecraft in this century; it starts with getting to know one another better.

Comments Off

Colin Robertson, February 7th 2012 | Tags: , , , , ,
Posted in Newspaper, Uncategorized

Harper visits China

CPAC anchor Peter van Dusen interviews Colin Robertson, vice-president of the Canadian Defence and Foreign Affairs Institute, and discusses the prime minister’s continuing visit to China.

Comments Off

Colin Robertson, February 7th 2012 | Tags: , , ,
Posted in TV Interviews

On why the primaries matter to Canada

Radio Canada International The Link ’s Marc Montgomery (Monday, January 9, 2012) speaks with former Canadian diplomat, Colin Robertson, on why Canada has a stake in the party’s candidate selection process as U.S. Republicans preparing to vote in the influential New Hampshire primary.

Comments Off

Colin Robertson, January 9th 2012 | Tags: , , ,
Posted in TV Interviews

Canada in the Americas

Excerpted from Americas Quarterly Winter 2012 Diplomacy: Canada’s New Policies Toward Latin America

In August, on his fourth official visit to Latin America, Prime Minister Stephen Harper set out to reboot Canada’s on-and-off-again relationship with the region. In the first stop on a four-country tour that took him to Brazil, Colombia, Costa Rica, and Honduras, Harper declared in São Paulo that “during too long a time we neglected relations[…]too much grass grows in the cracks on the road. It is time,” he added, “for increased ambition.”

Ambition is important. But so is perseverance.

Canadian efforts in the Americas are characterized by quixotic spasms of tango-like embrace: joining the Organization of American States (1990); negotiating the North American Free Trade Agreement (NAFTA, 1993–1994); and committing to the Free Trade Area of the Americas (1994)—all nearly 20 years ago. But this rush of engagement was followed by a long siesta until 2007, when the Harper government announced its Strategy of Engagement in the Americas, which emphasized democratic governance, prosperity and security. The plan is only now taking shape.

It does take two to tango, and Latin American governments share equal responsibility for failing to take advantage of Canadian interest and opportunities.

So what makes Harper’s newest effort different?

First, there is the economic malaise in the United States and the recognition that Canadians really do need options to the U.S. market. Agree or not with Standard & Poor’s’ reevaluation of American creditworthiness, there is no disagreement with its analysis that “the effectiveness, stability and predictability of American policymaking and political institutions have weakened.”

For Canadians, the U.S. market and the bilateral relationship will always remain primordial, but as the U.S. hunkers down and the administration focuses on a “jobs” agenda, there is a likelihood of renewed protectionism—which could affect the huge Canada–U.S. resource trade in everything from lumber to fish. Notwithstanding President Barack Obama’s promise to export his way out of the economic malaise, certain Democrats and Tea Party Republicans equate free trade with the outsourcing of jobs. And that may impede further efforts to broaden the opportunities for Canada under NAFTA.

While Canadian and U.S. negotiators are in discussions to ease border access for people and goods, these steps alone will not strengthen the Canadian market. Canada must look to new opportunities to hedge its bets.

That is being done slowly in Latin America. On August 15, a free-trade agreement (FTA) with Colombia—an economy equal to the state of Connecticut—went into effect, and new implementing legislation for the Canada–Panama Free Trade Agreement (similar in economic weight to Vermont) is being introduced in Parliament this fall. Canada also has FTAs with Costa Rica, Peru and Chile.

Beyond FTAs, Latin American countries are making it easier for Canada to invest and do business in the region. A decade-long dose of the Washington Consensus, whatever its faults, has rinsed away the previous attachment to the Prebisch-inspired statism that stigmatized earlier efforts at boosting investment and terms of trade.

Mexico is a prime example. The World Bank and International Finance Corporation’s Doing Business 2011 report declared this NAFTA partner as the easiest place in Latin America to run a company. The International Monetary Fund says Mexico’s economic growth will eclipse that of the U.S. and Canada from now until 2015, and Goldman Sachs predicts that in 40 years Mexico will be the world’s fifth-largest economy—bigger than Russia, Japan or Germany.

Third, Canadian business is prepared for risk, recognizing that the options are either grow or get absorbed. Twenty years of freer trade have given Canadian companies, especially the larger ones, the confidence that they can compete internationally and the experience of operations on the global stage.

CTV network anchor Andrea Mandel-Campbell notes in Why Mexicans Don’t Drink Molson that Canadian companies are historically timid about venturing into international markets, but Mexicans ride on Bombardier-constructed subways and Scotiabank is the sixth-largest retail bank in Mexico. Where once Canada’s business associations focused almost exclusively on the U.S., their membership is now encouraging them to look beyond its neighbor to the south.

Fourth, the renewed Canadian approach melds trade objectives with development aspirations. Attitudes toward aid are changing with the increasing recognition that a job is the best form of development assistance. A key feature of the rebooted relationship with Brazil is a CEO Forum, staffed by the Canadian Council of Chief Executives and the Brazilian National Confederation of Industry.

This business-to-business dimension promises real gains, especially if Brazilians and Canadians can agree on a set of practical objectives such as increasing direct flights and identifying business impediments that can be addressed by working with governments. CEO forums should be included in every FTA negotiation and built into the existing relationships with Mexico and Chile.

To sustain the opening with Brazil and to move the relationships with key partners like Mexico and Chile to the next level will require a series of focused blueprints. These will have to address critical questions such as how to attract more Latin American investment in Canada and what barriers—especially those specific to Latin America—can be addressed by Canadian initiatives. The Canadian business community is engaged and should be a driving force for taking the relationship to the next level.

In every case, there needs to be a systematic plan of engagement starting at the most senior political level.

For one, the prime minister needs to block at least one week a year for visits to the region. To provide the needed intellectual capital, Canadians also need to actively support the work of think tanks and improve existing synergies among organizations.

The demise for lack of funding in September of the Canadian Foundation for the Americas (FOCAL) research center, after 21 years of advancing Canadian interests, is a setback because it consistently provided useful intellectual heft and intelligent trend-spotting.

FOCAL had been largely dependent on Canadian government funding after it was created by an act of cabinet under Prime Minister Brian Mulroney (1984–1993). In its next iteration it should look more like the Inter-American Dialogue or Americas Society/Council of the Americas, with strong private-sector involvement and a focus on investment and trade as the best means of generating development and creating long-term relationships.

The current Canadian government is not the first to promise a new look at the region, but all too often action never followed rhetoric. If the Americas are truly a priority, and Harper’s promise to be “ambitious” is more than just repetition of the old rhetoric, the prime minister’s continued attention to the region will be necessary.

Unless the Canada–Latin America relationship is given a place of priority on the agenda and moves from aspiration to pragmatic results, the grass will grow back in the cracks.

Comments Off

Colin Robertson, January 8th 2012 | Tags: , , , ,
Posted in Major Research paper
« Older Posts