Prime Minister Mark Carney on Friday said he has found “much alignment” with Chinese President Xi Jinping in their views on Greenland, which some experts say is a signal of a new pragmatism in Canadian foreign policy while facing what Carney called a “new world order.”
“I had discussions with President Xi about the situation in Greenland, about our sovereignty in the Arctic, about the sovereignty of the people of Greenland and the people of Denmark. And I found much alignment of views in that regard,” Carney told reporters after his meeting with Xi.
U.S. President Donald Trump’s persistent threats about annexing Greenland — which is the autonomous territory of NATO member Denmark — has seen Canada find common ground with China, a country that Carney last year described as the biggest threat to Canada’s security.
“Canada and China have the policy position of maintaining the status quo, vis-à-vis that of the United States,” said Lynette Ong, professor of political science and director of the China Governance Lab at the University of Toronto.
Canada finds itself in the position of being more closely aligned with Beijing than Washington when it comes to Greenland and the Arctic, Ong said.
“China, unlike President Trump, has not declared any intention of taking Greenland or changing the status quo in terms of Arctic security,” she added.
However, “shared language does not mean shared objectives,” said Kevin Budning, director of Scientific Research at the Conference of Defence Association Institute.
China is not an Arctic power but defines itself as a “near-Arctic state,” even though the shortest distance between China and the nearest point in the Arctic is roughly 1,500 km.
Beijing’s interests in the mineral wealth in Greenland and its strategic location would be undercut by U.S. control over the island, Budning said. This is why China is positioning itself for different goals than Canada’s.
“It’s portraying China as more of a cooperative and responsible stakeholder (compared to the U.S.) in the Arctic, when historically China would be seen as the disruptor when it comes to Arctic security,” he added.
In April last year, Carney was asked on the federal election campaign debate stage what he thought was the biggest security threat to Canada.
“China,” Carney replied.
Get breaking National news
For news impacting Canada and around the world, sign up for breaking news alerts delivered directly to you when they happen.
Conservative Leader Pierre Poilievre said the change in tone between then and now was stark.
“Prime Minister Carney must explain how he has gone from saying China was Canada’s ‘biggest security threat’ before the election to announcing a ‘strategic partnership’ with Beijing after the election,” Poilievre said in a statement Friday.
Canada’s outstanding issues with Beijing remain.
For one, Beijing was accused of attempting to interfere in the 2019 and 2021 Canadian federal elections and intimidating Canadian politicians.
Last year, then-foreign affairs minister Melanie Joly said China had executed four Canadians over drug charges.
While the wrinkles in the relationship haven’t gone away, Ong said Carney is separating them from a partnership on issues of trade.
“It’s quite clear that he’s isolating politics from economics. And yes, we might have political differences, but we still need to disentangle economic interests from political disagreement,” she added.
During his Beijing trip, Carney said Canada’s new strategic partnership with China “sets us up well for the new world order.”
“It’s a partnership that reflects the world as it is today, with an engagement that is realistic, respectful and interest-based,” Carney said at a news conference in Beijing Friday.
Between Trump’s trade war against Canada and his threats about making Canada the 51st state of the U.S., Canada is being forced to seek new partners, Ong said.
“Because of changed geopolitics, particularly what is going on in the United States, there are certain selective issues on which Canada’s position is now closer to China’s than that of the United States,” she said.
“China does trade coercion, but it’s not declaring a trade war against 100 countries,” she said.
The U.S. is also turning its back on the world at large, not just Canada, she said.
Last week, the U.S. decided to leave 66 international organizations focused on climate, labour, migration and other issues the Trump administration has categorized as catering to diversity and “woke” initiatives.
“The era of the U.S.-led order has already ended. I think that’s quite clear,” Ong said.
But what replaces it?
“I will not say this is a Chinese-led order. It is in transition. I think its pretty chaotic,” she said, adding that nations like Canada will find themselves aligning with one superpower or the other on specific issues, rather than being solidly in one bloc.
Canada will have to learn to navigate a world that is no longer unipolar with the U.S. on top, Budning said.
“This has awakened many Canadians to the idea that we can’t take that relationship with the United State for granted,” he said.
However, diversifying trade relationships should not mean Canada should swing too hard towards China, Ong cautioned.
“China is the beginning of our diversification strategy. It shouldn’t be the end,” she said. “It should include Indo-Pacific countries, as we have spelled out in our Indo-Pacific strategy, it should include Europe as well.”
Budning said a reliance on China will hurt Canada’s ability to push back against Chinese aggression at Taiwan, for example.
“But you need to play in the sandbox with some bullies sometimes,” he added.
“We set ourselves up to be completely dependent on the United States, and this is an opportunity for us to reset and diversify our strategic relationships and economies,” he said.
