GV Editor's Blog
A look inside the Village...
Global Citizenship and the Canadian Election
At an all-candidates meeting a couple weeks ago, I had
trouble crafting a pressing question to ask the panel during the
Q&A with the audience. This was troubling - I'm a naturally
curious person and an important part of my job is to be able to ask
intelligent questions. Still, I was stumped. Why?
Living abroad - missing numerous elections back home and enagaging with other interesting political systems - is partly to blame. But more importantly, I hadn't found an issue that resonated with my identity as a dual Canadian and global citizen.
Not long after the meeting, I received an email from a fellow ex-CIDA intern in Zambia with the subject 'IYIP Program to be Axed?' It linked to an article in Embassy Magazine that says, despite largely positive internal and external reviews, the International Youth Internship Program (IYIP) is in danger of losing its funding after March 2009. After DFAIT cut a similar program in 2006, the loss of CIDA's IYIP program would mean that young Canadian graduates looking for international professional advancement would be left out in the cold.
This piqued my interest. While it can be argued that such programs help Canadian CVs more than developing countries, it seems like good foreign policy to send young ambassadors - eager to learn about global issues but also to represent Canada - into the the world to mix with their international peers. At a time when we are closing embassies all over the world, these foot soldiers of soft diplomacy are even more important to maintain Canada's international relevance in places other than Afghanistan (where the real soldiers take care of that quite well).
Needless to say, I have found my election issue: Canada's global relevance, and how to increase it. Not just within North America, NATO or countries we liberated generations ago - we already matter there - but how we can use our full range of diplomatic tools to enact a robust foreign policy that reflects our aspiration of being a 'middle power.'
If I make it to another all-candidates meeting, I'll be prepared:
"With the recent cuts to Canada's diplomatic and professional representation around the world, how will you and your party use both 'hard' and 'soft' diplomacy to ensure Canada's relevance on the international stage?"
Living abroad - missing numerous elections back home and enagaging with other interesting political systems - is partly to blame. But more importantly, I hadn't found an issue that resonated with my identity as a dual Canadian and global citizen.
Not long after the meeting, I received an email from a fellow ex-CIDA intern in Zambia with the subject 'IYIP Program to be Axed?' It linked to an article in Embassy Magazine that says, despite largely positive internal and external reviews, the International Youth Internship Program (IYIP) is in danger of losing its funding after March 2009. After DFAIT cut a similar program in 2006, the loss of CIDA's IYIP program would mean that young Canadian graduates looking for international professional advancement would be left out in the cold.
This piqued my interest. While it can be argued that such programs help Canadian CVs more than developing countries, it seems like good foreign policy to send young ambassadors - eager to learn about global issues but also to represent Canada - into the the world to mix with their international peers. At a time when we are closing embassies all over the world, these foot soldiers of soft diplomacy are even more important to maintain Canada's international relevance in places other than Afghanistan (where the real soldiers take care of that quite well).
Needless to say, I have found my election issue: Canada's global relevance, and how to increase it. Not just within North America, NATO or countries we liberated generations ago - we already matter there - but how we can use our full range of diplomatic tools to enact a robust foreign policy that reflects our aspiration of being a 'middle power.'
If I make it to another all-candidates meeting, I'll be prepared:
"With the recent cuts to Canada's diplomatic and professional representation around the world, how will you and your party use both 'hard' and 'soft' diplomacy to ensure Canada's relevance on the international stage?"
3 Comments
Dave Li
You briefly touched on it here, but what about Afghanistan? That doesn't appeal to the Cosmopolitan Canadian in you?
Brandon Currie
It certainly does, it just seems that debate over Afghanistan during this election has been stagnant. With the two major parties in agreement and the others shouting from the sidelines, I don't think we've gotten past the 'should we stay or should we go' argument.
I'd like to know what our vision is for Kandahar and the wider country post-2011, why we haven't been able to convince other NATO members to contribute more personnel in combat roles and how we'll work with the next American president (both candidates propose a greater focus on Afghanistan) to coordinate our resources most effectively. There's also the nasty business of bringing the Taliban into the government and a landmark Afghan presidential election next year.
Perhaps with the global financial crisis dominating the election this year, Canadians are thinking more introspectively than usual. But it hasn't gone unnoticed.
Bob Jennings
I like this question, and GV's coverage of the federal election and what it means to our foreign policy. Not enough people have been asking that this election cycle.