Canada’s ambition to expand its global footprint through various international frameworks, such as the proposed Africa Framework, the Indo-Pacific Strategy, and the Middle East engagement strategy, reflects a desire to assert itself as a more influential player on the world stage. However, this drive for a broader international presence raises a critical question: What is the opportunity cost of these endeavors? As a North American middle power with finite resources, Canada must carefully consider whether its efforts are better directed towards reinforcing its strategic interests closer to home, particularly in the Arctic. By focusing on regions where it can have the most significant impact, Canada can ensure that its foreign policy remains both effective and sustainable.
To fully grasp the implications of these various international initiatives it is essential to recognize that Canada is fundamentally a North American middle power, primarily anchored in the North American Arctic, the North Atlantic, and the North Pacific. Although Canada has historically sought to exert influence through diplomacy and multilateral engagement on the global stage, its capacity to play a significant role in far-flung regions is limited. For instance, Africa, the Indo-Pacific, and the Middle East are all significantly removed from Canada’s primary spheres of interest. In these regions, Canada’s involvement has typically been limited to trade, humanitarian aid, development assistance, and peacekeeping missions—important endeavors, but not ones that position Canada as a major player.
Moreover, the economic and diplomatic constraints Canada faces in these distant regions highlight its limited ability to compete with major international actors such as China and the United States, or regional powers such as Japan or Australia in the Indo-Pacific, Türkiye in the Middle East and others with far greater investments, more deeply entrenched interests and deeper historical ties.
In contrast, Canada’s Arctic region presents a unique and pressing opportunity for meaningful engagement and influence. The Arctic’s growing geopolitical significance—due to its abundant natural resources, strategic location, and the impacts of climate change—makes it a focal point for international interest and competition. As ice melts, new shipping routes open, and resource extraction becomes more feasible, the Arctic is emerging as a critical area for geopolitical strategy.
Canada’s role in the Arctic is vital for asserting sovereignty and leadership as the region undergoes rapid changes. The Arctic’s environmental sensitivity and potential for economic development provide Canada with the opportunity to lead in areas such as climate change mitigation, sustainable resource management, and the protection of Indigenous rights. Unlike the vast and diverse continents like Africa or the complexities of the Indo-Pacific and Middle East, the Arctic offers a more manageable and directly relevant sphere for Canada to concentrate its efforts and resources.
Pursuing ambitious roles in multiple far-reaching regions—such as Africa, the Indo-Pacific, and the Middle East—comes with significant opportunity costs. By channeling substantial resources into these international frameworks, Canada risks neglecting its own region, where it has the potential to make a real and lasting impact. The Arctic presents numerous challenges and opportunities that are more closely aligned with Canada’s national interests and strengths.
Strategic Influence and Sovereignty: Strengthening Canada’s presence in the Arctic is essential for asserting sovereignty and ensuring regional stability. As other nations expand their influence in the Arctic, Canada must enhance its capabilities to safeguard its interests and contribute to international governance.
Environmental and Climate Leadership: The Arctic is experiencing some of the most severe effects of climate change. Canada has the opportunity to lead global efforts in climate adaptation and environmental protection, drawing on its unique expertise and experience.
Economic Development: The Arctic’s potential for resource extraction and new shipping routes offers significant economic opportunities. By focusing on sustainable development, Canada can capitalize on these opportunities while ensuring that economic activities do not harm the environment or Indigenous communities.
Indigenous Partnerships: The Arctic is home to numerous Indigenous communities with deep-rooted connections to the land. Canada has the chance to build strong, respectful partnerships with these communities, integrating their knowledge into decision-making processes.
Given these factors, Canada would benefit from reassessing its strategic priorities. The resources allocated to various international frameworks, including the Africa Framework, the Indo-Pacific Strategy, and Middle East engagements, might be more effectively utilized in the Arctic, where Canada’s actions can be both impactful and directly aligned with its core interests. By redirecting its focus and resources to the Arctic, Canada can make substantial contributions in areas where it holds both strategic and practical advantages. This shift would not only enhance Canada’s role as a responsible regional power but also ensure that its efforts yield meaningful benefits for its own region and people.
Moreover, Canada should refine its Indo-Pacific engagement to focus specifically on the North Pacific, a region directly relevant to both Arctic and North American security. This tailored approach would align Canada’s international efforts with its strategic priorities, ensuring that its engagements in the Indo-Pacific contribute to the defense of North America. Similarly, in the context of transatlantic relations, emphasizing the North Atlantic aligns with Canada’s interests in securing its maritime approaches and strengthening ties with NATO allies, particularly those with shared interests in the Arctic.
This strategic realignment could also significantly strengthen Canada’s relations with the United States. By prioritizing Arctic defense and security, Canada would demonstrate its commitment to North American defense, reducing the burden on the U.S. to unilaterally secure this critical region. This cooperative stance could foster a deeper bilateral partnership, showcasing Canada’s willingness to take on a more substantial share of regional security responsibilities. Such a move would likely be well-received by the U.S., as it aligns with their broader strategic interest in the Arctic and could free up American resources to focus on other global priorities.
Additionally, by enhancing its presence and contributions in the Arctic, Canada would reassure its NATO allies of its commitment to collective defense. This would allow other NATO members, particularly those on the alliance’s eastern flank, to concentrate their efforts and resources on countering threats from other directions, such as the challenges posed by Russia in Eastern Europe. Canada’s proactive approach in the Arctic could thus serve to strengthen NATO’s overall strategic posture, enhancing the alliance’s flexibility and capacity to respond to multiple threats across different theaters.
In conclusion, while Canada’s efforts to expand its global influence through initiatives like the Africa Framework, the Indo-Pacific Strategy, and Middle East engagement represent attempts to broaden its international presence, these ambitions may come at the expense of more critical needs and opportunities closer to home. The Arctic, with its unique challenges and opportunities, presents a more realistic and strategically sound focus for Canada. By prioritizing engagement in the Arctic, Canada can strengthen regional stability, promote environmental stewardship, and support sustainable economic development. This approach ensures that Canada’s efforts are not diluted across distant regions but are concentrated where they can make a significant difference. Ultimately, aligning Canada’s strategic priorities with its core regional interests will enable it to achieve meaningful and lasting outcomes on both the global stage and within its own borders.
The Western powers have failed to effectively manage the increasing threat of proliferation in the Middle East. While the international community is concerned with Iran’s nuclear program, Saudi Arabia has moved forward with developing its own nuclear program, and independent studies show that Israel has longed possessed dozens of nuclear warheads. The former is a member of the treaty on the Non-Proliferation of Nuclear Weapons (NPT), while the latter has refused to sign the international agreement.
On Middle East policy, the Biden campaign had staunchly criticized the Trump administration’s unilateral withdrawal from the Joint Comprehensive Plan of Action (JCPOA), more commonly known as the Iran Nuclear Deal and it has begun re-engaging Iran on the nuclear dossier since assuming office in January 2021. However, serious obstacles remain for responsible actors in expanding non-proliferation efforts toward a nuclear-free zone in the Middle East.
This panel will discuss how Western powers and multilateral institutions, such as the IAEA, can play a more effective role in managing non-proliferation efforts in the Middle East.
Panelists:
– Peggy Mason: Canada’s former Ambassador to the UN for Disarmament
– Mark Fitzpatrick: Associate Fellow & Former Executive Director, International Institute for Strategic Studies (IISS)
– Ali Vaez: Iran Project Director, International Crisis Group
– Negar Mortazavi: Journalist and Political Analyst, Host of Iran Podcast
– David Albright: Founder and President of the Institute for Science and International Security
Closing (5:45 PM – 6:00 PM ET)
What is the current economic landscape in the Middle East? While global foreign direct investment is expected to fall drastically in the post-COVID era, the World Bank reported a 5% contraction in the economic output of the Middle East and North African (MENA) countries in 2020 due to the pandemic. While oil prices are expected to rebound with normalization in demand, political instability, regional and geopolitical tensions, domestic corruption, and a volatile regulatory and legal environment all threaten economic recovery in the Middle East. What is the prospect for economic growth and development in the region post-pandemic, and how could MENA nations promote sustainable growth and regional trade moving forward?
At the same time, Middle Eastern diaspora communities have become financially successful and can help promote trade between North America and the region. In this respect, the diaspora can become vital intermediaries for advancing U.S. and Canada’s business interests abroad. Promoting business diplomacy can both benefit the MENA region and be an effective and positive way to advance engagement and achieve foreign policy goals of the North Atlantic.
This panel will investigate the trade and investment opportunities in the Middle East, discuss how facilitating economic engagement with the region can benefit Canadian and American national interests, and explore relevant policy prescriptions.
Panelists:
– Hon. Sergio Marchi: Canada’s Former Minister of International Trade
– Scott Jolliffe: Chairperson, Canada Arab Business Council
– Esfandyar Batmanghelidj: Founder and Publisher of Bourse & Bazaar
– Nizar Ghanem: Director of Research and Co-founder at Triangle
– Nicki Siamaki: Researcher at Control Risks
The Middle East continues to grapple with violence and instability, particularly in Yemen, Syria and Iraq. Fueled by government incompetence and foreign interventions, terrorist insurgencies have imposed severe humanitarian and economic costs on the region. Meanwhile, regional actors have engaged in an unprecedented pursuit of arms accumulation. Saudi Arabia and the United Arab Emirates have imported billions of both Western and Russian-made weapons and funded militant groups across the region, intending to contain their regional adversaries, particularly Iran. Tehran has also provided sophisticated weaponry to various militia groups across the region to strengthen its geopolitical position against Saudi Arabia, UAE, and Israel.
On the other hand, with international terrorist networks and intense regional rivalry in the Middle East, it is impractical to discuss peace and security without addressing terrorism and the arms race in the region. This panel will primarily discuss the implications of the ongoing arms race in the region and the role of Western powers and multilateral organizations in facilitating trust-building security arrangements among regional stakeholders to limit the proliferation of arms across the Middle East.
Panelists:
Luciano Zaccara: Assistant Professor, Qatar University
Dania Thafer: Executive Director, Gulf International Forum
Kayhan Barzegar: Professor and Chair of the Department of Political Science and International Relations at the Science and Research Branch of Azad University
Barbara Slavin: Director of Iran Initiative, Atlantic Council
Sanam Shantyaei: Senior Journalist at France24 & host of Middle East Matters
The emerging regional order in West Asia will have wide-ranging implications for global security. The Biden administration has begun re-engaging Iran on the nuclear dossier, an initiative staunchly opposed by Israel, while also taking a harder line on Saudi Arabia’s intervention in Yemen. Meanwhile, key regional actors, including Qatar, Iraq, and Oman, have engaged in backchannel efforts to bring Iran and Saudi Arabia to the negotiating table. From a broader geopolitical perspective, with the need to secure its energy imports, China is also expected to increase its footprint in the region and influence the mentioned challenges.
In this evolving landscape, Western powers will be compelled to redefine their strategic priorities and adjust their policies with the new realities in the region. In this panel, we will discuss how the West, including the United States and its allies, can utilize multilateral diplomacy with its adversaries to prevent military escalation in the region. Most importantly, the panel will discuss if a multilateral security dialogue in the Persian Gulf region, proposed by some regional actors, can help reduce tensions among regional foes and produce sustainable peace and development for the region.
Panelists:
– Abdullah Baabood: Academic Researcher and Former Director of the Centre for Gulf Studies, Qatar University
– Trita Parsi: Executive Vice-President, Quincy Institute for Responsible Statecraft
– Ebtesam Al-Ketbi: President, Emirates Policy Centre
– Jon Allen: Canada’s Former Ambassador to Israel
– Elizabeth Hagedorn: Washington correspondent for Al-Monitor
Military interventions, political and economic instabilities, and civil unrest in the Middle East have led to a global refugee crisis with an increasing wave of refugees and asylum seekers to Europe and Canada. Moreover, the COVID-19 pandemic has, in myriad ways, exacerbated and contributed to the ongoing security threats and destabilization of the region.
While these challenges pose serious risks to Canadian security, Ottawa will also have the opportunity to limit such risks and prevent a spillover effect vis-à-vis effective humanitarian initiatives in the region. In this panel, we will primarily investigate Canada’s Middle East Strategy’s degree of success in providing humanitarian aid to the region. Secondly, the panel will discuss what programs and initiatives Canada can introduce to further build on the renewed strategy. and more specifically, how Canada can utilize its policy instruments to more effectively deal with the increasing influx of refugees from the Middle East.
Panelists:
Erica Di Ruggiero: Director of Centre for Global Health, University of Toronto
Reyhana Patel: Head of Communications & Government Relations, Islamic Relief Canada
Amir Barmaki: Former Head of UN OCHA in Iran
Catherine Gribbin: Senior Legal Advisor for International and Humanitarian Law, Canadian Red Cross
In 2016, Canada launched an ambitious five-year “Middle East Engagement Strategy” (2016-2021), committing to investing CA$3.5 billion over five years to help establish the necessary conditions for security and stability, alleviate human suffering and enable stabilization programs in the region. In the latest development, during the meeting of the Global Coalition against ISIS, Minister of Foreign Affairs Marc Garneau announced more than $43.6 million in Peace and Stabilization Operations Program funding for 11 projects in Syria and Iraq.
With Canada’s Middle East Engagement Strategy expiring this year, it is time to examine and evaluate this massive investment in the Middle East region in the past five years. More importantly, the panel will discuss a principled and strategic roadmap for the future of Canada’s short-term and long-term engagement in the Middle East.
Panelists:
– Ferry de Kerckhove: Canada’s Former Ambassador to Egypt
– Dennis Horak: Canada’s Former Ambassador to Saudi Arabia
– Chris Kilford: Former Canadian Defence Attaché in Turkey, member of the national board of the Canadian International Council (CIC)
– David Dewitt: University Professor Emeritus, York University
While the United States continues to pull back from certain regional conflicts, reflected by the Biden administration’s decision to halt American backing for Saudi Arabia’s intervention in Yemen and the expected withdrawal from Afghanistan, US troops continue to be stationed across the region. Meanwhile, Russia and China have significantly maintained and even expanded their regional activities. On one hand, the Kremlin has maintained its military presence in Syria, and on the other hand, China has signed an unprecedented 25-year strategic agreement with Iran.
As the global power structure continues to shift, it is essential to analyze the future of the US regional presence under the Biden administration, explore the emerging global rivalry with Russia and China, and at last, investigate the implications of such competition for peace and security in the Middle East.
Panelists:
– Dmitri Trenin: Director of Carnegie Moscow Center
– Joost R. Hiltermann: Director of MENA Programme, International Crisis Group
– Roxane Farmanfarmaian: Affiliated Lecturer in International Relations of the Middle East and North Africa, University of Cambridge
– Andrew A. Michta: Dean of the College of International and Security Studies at Marshall Center
– Kelley Vlahos: Senior Advisor, Quincy Institute
The security architecture of the Middle East has undergone rapid transformations in an exceptionally short period. Notable developments include the United States gradual withdrawal from the region, rapprochement between Israel and some GCC states through the Abraham Accords and the rise of Chinese and Russian regional engagement.
With these new trends in the Middle East, it is timely to investigate the security implications of the Biden administration’s Middle East policy. In this respect, we will discuss the Biden team’s new approach vis-à-vis Iran, Yemen, Saudi Arabia, and Israel. The panel will also discuss the role of other major powers, including China and Russia in shaping this new security environment in the region, and how the Biden administration will respond to these powers’ increasing regional presence.
Panelists:
– Sanam Vakil: Deputy Director of MENA Programme at Chatham House
– Denise Natali: Acting Director, Institute for National Strategic Studies & Director of the Center for Strategic Research, National Defense University
– Hassan Ahmadian: Professor of the Middle East and North Africa Studies, University of Tehran
– Abdulaziz Sagar: Chairman, Gulf Research Center
– Andrew Parasiliti: President, Al-Monitor
