Former Diplomats See Security Council Seat in Reach For Canada

This week in the Embassy, Michelle Collins reports that some of Canada's former top diplomats believe that Canada's campaign for a UN Security Council Seat in 2011 will be successful. Former Ambassador to the UN, Paul Heinbecker compared the campaign to basketball calling Canada's chances are "kind of a jump shot in traffic, one that we can make but will have to get on the rebound" (Embassy).

A jump shot in traffic? Really? That doesn't sound all that optimistic for those of us that have been paying attention to the campaign. In basketball, a contested jump shot is one of the harder shots and Canada doesn't really strike me as the Kobe Bryant/Lebron James sharpshooter type. Now if Mr. Heinbecker had said that we were in the low-post with the ball but still contested, I would have felt, then, that it could be said that the seat is foreseeable in Canada's future. But there is no point to dwell on what could have been said.

According to the latest UN DPKO releases, Portugal contributes more to UN peackeeping missions than either Canada or Germany but the numbers are not impressive for any of them. In the ISAF force in Afghanistan, Portugal's contribution to the mission is miniscule when compared to the contingents provided by Canada and Germany. While this is a rather narrow comparison of the three candidate states' involvement in peace operations and multilateral efforts, I believe it is possible to draw a couple basic conclusions from this. First, Portugal's greater contribution to UN peackeeping missions is a misleading factor because the difference is minor and when compared to the greater contributions of Canada and Germany on another (UN sanctioned, but not led) mission, becomes practically negligible. It would be hard to deny that Canada and Germany both play larger roles in protecting peace and security in the international community.

But Security Council elections are not just about troop contributions, they are essentially a report card on a state's participation and cooperation with those around it. This means it becomes necessary to look at other indicators like foreign aid. According to OECD statistics, Portugal's foreign aid levels (0.27% of GNI) are below that of Canada (0.32%) and Germany (0.38%). Canada and its competitors cannot use foreign aid levels as a great boost in the campaign as all are well below the international target of 0.7%. So again, Canada remains relatively in league with Germany in terms of influence/participation globally and Portugal comes up yet again short.

These are just a couple of the basic tangible measures that can help to compare states during international elections such as the Security Council ones. Based on these factors so far, it would seem like Canada would be a shoo-in for a Council seat. If that were the case though, Canadian citizens wouldn't keep reading about Canada's long shot chance to win the seat.

There is little wrong with Canada's "substance." I say this with the caveat that I do realize that Canada does have its problems but the bigger picture is that Canada's substance is of such good quality in so many areas that it can afford a few blemishes without tarnishing the whole. This means that there must be something wrong with the "delivery" or, in other words, politics. Canada has made some politically risky decisions since its last term on the Council including a pro-Israel stance, resistance to climate change initiatives, and even more recently its decision to focus the majority of its bilateral aid away from Africa. Often, elections become popularity contests and are not fought on the substance. This is what is causing the fear of losing the election. Canada has the substance to win the election but the popularity is in question after a string of politically risky decisions.

Is it time to go back to school where we all first learned about popularity? Canada needs a quick shot of popularity... time to throw a party! Are the parents going out of town anytime soon?

- blenCOWe

Brazil Beginning to Act Like a Great Power

The BBC reports, today that Brazil will offer the International Monetary Fund $10 billion in order to improve the accessibility of credit to developing nations. This move represents what could be the beginning of Brazil's true emergence as a great power. Brazil has both a strong military and economy but cannot really be called an "active" power. Until now, it was probably fairer to say that Brazil was at best a regional power. A move like this, part of a greater commitment by BRIC nations, helps Brazil to push past that label and earn the attention it has been receiving lately as a growing power.

Beyond that, by committing such a large amount of money to the IMF, Brazil may be helping to restore legitimacy to an institution that has had a poor track record in South America. With a contribution like this, Brazil will have a lot more influence in the decisions of the IMF because of the institution's structure where the number of votes a state has is dependent on the amount of money it contributes - this contribution would place Brazil as a top 5 contributions and, consequently, influence. What this means for South America is that it can finally have one of its own fighting in its best interests and hopefully work to change the mistrust (and/or hatred) that is the result of detrimental IMF involvement in the past. Also, this must make developing nations worldwide optimistic now that one of their former colleagues is now an influential player in international politics and institutions.

This seems like a good first step for Brazil and may create a little more anticipation for the upcoming BRIC summit.

- blenCOWe

Poll Shows People Favour Aid For Development Not Trade

Last week I wrote about Canada's decision to realign its foreign aid priorities towards countries who have major trade interests with Canada. Personally, I believe that foreign aid should serve a greater purpose than strengthening Canada's trade relations with other nations. There is so much poverty, disease and conflict in the world that Canada's foreign aid could have a significant impact in alleviating.

Well apparently I am not the only personal to have this belief. A recent poll shows that the Canadian people also believe that Canada's foreign aid should serve a higher calling than to bolster trade relations.

Maybe if Canada's foreign aid levels were up near the international community's goal of 0.7% of GNI then maybe it would be okay to route some major aid to its trading partners but with current levels hovering around 0.3%, Canada is not forking up enough money to do this. Until the 0.7% standard is reached, aid should only be directed to addressing the major issues that currently plague the international community and Africa is definitely the place where the greatest impact and need can be found.

- blenCOWe