McLeod Group Blog

Canada and International Democracy Assistance

Canada and International Democracy Assistance

McLeod Group blog by Stéphanie Bacher, October 2, 2019

On numerous occasions, both in Canada and abroad, Canada’s Minister of Foreign Affairs, Chrystia Freeland, expressed Canada’s concern over the rise of populism and authoritarianism around the world. For instance, in August 2018, she said: “The truth is that authoritarianism is on the march – and it is time for liberal democracy to fight back. To do that, we need to raise our game.”  

Despite this lofty rhetoric, the Liberal government has not raised its game to position Canada as a leader in international democracy assistance. Although the current international environment requires a strong response from Canada, the government has not put forward any action plan, nor has it provided the necessary human and financial resources to respond to the rise of authoritarianism, populism and of extreme right in many parts of the world.

A poor record in democracy promotion

In June 2019, the House of Commons Standing Committee on Foreign Affairs and International Development released a report entitled “Renewing Canada’s Role in International Aid to the Development of Democracy”. This report explains that democracy promotion has not constituted a priority for the Government of Canada in the past decade and makes a series of recommendations to help Canada regain its leadership in this area.

Canada does not currently have any institution whose mandate is to coordinate and support Canada’s international democracy assistance. The Office of Democratic Governance, which was created in 2006 within the former Canadian International Development Agency (CIDA), seems to have been dissolved. Rights & Democracy, an independent institution created by Parliament in 1988 to support human rights and promote democracy around the world, was abolished in 2012 by the Harper government, among other things because of its work on Palestinian rights and on access to abortion for women.

Even though the Trudeau government has focused on human rights defenders and women’s participation, it has failed to distinguish itself from the previous government in substantive ways. Canada has led a resolution on the power of inclusion and the benefits of diversity at the Organization of American States, provided financial support to promote the political participation of women in Pakistan and announced $10 million annually to promote and protect democracy. 

However, funding has declined in absolute terms and as a percentage of international assistance over the past decade. Global Affairs Canada allocated only 4% of its development assistance budget to democratic development projects in the 2017-2018 fiscal year, for a total of $169.5 million. In comparison, CIDA invested $341 million in governance and democratic development projects in 2004-2005.

Canada needs an action plan on international democracy assistance

If Canada wants to establish itself as a world leader in international democracy assistance, the next government will have to develop a coherent approach and policy that would outline its priorities. Such plan should include the following elements:

1. International democracy assistance programs and projects developed in accordance with the local context. For decades, Western countries engaged with recipient countries in a very paternalistic way, trying to impose “democracy promotion” programs aimed at replicating the liberal democracy model. The effectiveness of democracy assistance in the long term depends largely on establishing a permanent dialogue with local actors in order to understand their needs and implement projects adapted to their reality.

2. The inclusion of key areas and countries of focus. In order to ensure continuity and greater effectiveness, this list of priority areas and countries should not change every year or two or whenever a new government comes to power. Canada should also choose its areas and countries of focus based on its special relationships and historical links with some countries and in order to complement other donors’ actions.

3. Evidence-based decision-making should be at the core of its action plan. To this end, Canada must ensure that its actions are the result of substantive consultations with academicians and practitioners, both in Canada and in the concerned countries. It could also offer support to university exchange programs to build its expertise on democracy assistance.

4. Allocate substantial funding, otherwise the action plan will be nothing but an empty shell. Funding must also be predictable so that organizations can develop their projects accordingly.

So far, during the current election campaign, federal political parties have barely spoken about their vision of Canada’s role in the world and even less about international democracy assistance. However, as Minister of Foreign Affairs Freeland highlighted in her speech, the state of democracy in the world is fragile, even where it was believed to be consolidated. Without a clear action plan and adequate funding, Canada will be a mere spectator while populism and authoritarianism continue to gain ground.