Next time when you phone Canadian Embassy in Port-au-Prince or Rangoon in Burma (Myanmar), it is very likely that you will hear a recording saying: ” Press 1 for Canada, Press 2 for Great Britain.”
This is the new and innovative arrangement that the two governments have made to share embassy space to cut down expenses. So far, these are the only two countries selected as prototype. Canadian Foreign Minster John Baird and the British Foreign Secretary William Hague made the announcement of the shared deal in Ottawa recently.
The announcement was followed by some criticism from those who felt that Canada’s foreign policy will be overshadowed by associating with U.K., considered to be more powerful than Canada. Others felt that Canada was degrading itself by associating with a former colonial power.
The announcement also specified that the two countries will share a facility, support staff and some consular services. It does not include sharing diplomatic staff. Canadian diplomats will still speak for Canada while British diplomats will speak for Britain.
It’s nice to have ambassadors in most countries but let’s not forget that there are huge costs involved in renting or buying a building. The role of an ambassador is mostly ceremonial, but the pomp and pageantry associated with the foreign service can cost a lot of money. After all, it’s the support staff, rather that the ambassador, who do all the work.
However, that hasn’t stopped critics who see the move as a blow to Canadian sovereignty. They suggest that people will confuse the arrangement with Canada’s new roommate. NDP leader Thomas Mulcair told the House of Commons how he saw the new shared deal: “Canada would now be represented by a desk at the British embassy instead of an independent Canadian diplomatic mission” and he outright accused the Conservatives of not standing up for Canada in the world.
“We have our own identity and the world knows exactly who we are. We need to grow up a bit and recognize that for ourselves, said Mr. Robertson, who was once president of the Professional Association of Foreign Service Officers.
What is being forgotten in this whole debate is that because of being a former colonial power, Britain and Canada share common heritage, history language and philosophies. Granted we have had differences in foreign policies when we look at the war in Iraq but such examples have been minimal
Canada is already getting notoriety for embarking innovative and aggressive measures in foreign policy. The Harper government’s decision to expel Iranian diplomats from Ottawa and close its embassy in Iran has not been well received at home and abroad. Canada’s foreign policy has been so pro-Israel that many wonder if Israel Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu is the new foreign minister of Canada.
Canadian government’s move to reduce costs should be applauded. Diplomatic presence in foreign countries can be expensive and any move by the government to reduce expenses should be welcome. Also, it would be ludicrous to expect Canada to open diplomatic posts in every country.
Canada and Britain should go ahead and find other countries where they can mutually agree to cut costs and still represent their nationals without compromising their national interests. Both countries should ignore armchair critics who are turning a simple cost sharing agreement into an argument for loss of national sovereignty. To many of us, it means Canada has adopted a smart diplomatic measure at a time when cutbacks are needed. Let’s hope that Canada and Britain become roommates in more countries.
