Saudi Arabia expels Canadian ambassador for urging release of activists

[garb811]

There has already been one polite reminder about the rules in this thread, consider this the final warning.

Next time anyone gets remotely personal, in any way, with comments towards members of this site or political figures, this thread is getting locked and the appropriate warning(s) handed out.

Enough is enough.  Discuss the issue like adults or find another website where that kind of thing is tolerated.

- milnet.ca Staff

 

[beirnini]

[quote author=George Wallace]As the Toronto Sun headline says: "Diplomacy and progress are built by growing fragile relationships between nations, not by morally superior hectoring."

There are much better ways of diplomacy than to act like a spoiled child.
[quote author=Remius]That is exactly how Saudi Arabia is acting.  Overreaction and taking a hissy fit over what amount to nothing.  The only snowflakes right now is them.
[/quote][/quote]
There's no winning with some. Morally superior hectoring about NATO contributions by President Trump? Well that's just fine now, isn't it: Disrupting institutions with some oh-so-smart Grand Strategy or whatever. But our PM does much the same only instead it's over just silly, inconsequential stuff like due process and secular rule of law and he's a "spoiled child".

Screw the KSA with a rusty shovel.

 

[Oldgateboatdriver]

Actually, it's more like the then mayor of Montreal (Coderre, ex-Federal Liberal minister) unilaterally and without consulting anyone came out against it after viewing a few crackpots crashing the National Energy Board hearings. Around Montreal, the views were split, at about 50/50 for or against the pipeline, but overall, in the whole province, the surveys I have seen were 60% in favour of the pipeline to 40 % against. So outside of Montreal,there was good support.

The provincial Liberal party, currently forming the government, quickly sided with the mayor of Montreal only because their strong base is located in the Montreal area.

Interestingly enough, the best argument in favour of the pipeline that got some traction outside of Montreal was that such pipeline would immensely reduce the number of rail tanker-cars transiting through their area (they remembered Lac Megantic). The mayor of Montreal - or most Montrealers, seem unaware that in excess of 100,000 such tanker cars of crude/oil transit through Montreal every year as it is, and this traffic is actually increasing. Most of it would be replaced by the pipeline. I know that the more quoted surveys allegedly show only about 35% overall support in Quebec, but those surveys - though largely quoted - were not found to be scientifically proper.

Moreover, the mayor of Montreal excuse for taking his position was, put mildly, bull. It was the danger to Montreal's water supply. The pipeline does not cross the St-Lauwrence anywhere upstream of Montreal's water supply's basin (Lake St-Louis, a lake on and part of the the River) It first crosses the Ottawa river a little west of the ON-QC border (this, if anything happens, would hold the actual oil West of the Carillon dam, with any overspill then being discharged into the River well east of Montreal, after going through the Deux-Montagnes lake - Milles-Iles and Des Prairies rivers.) Then, it recrosses the Saint-Lawrence near Quebec City.

 

[Altair]

Actually, it's more like the then mayor of Montreal (Coderre, ex-Federal Liberal minister) unilaterally and without consulting anyone came out against it after viewing a few crackpots crashing the National Energy Board hearings. Around Montreal, the views were split, at about 50/50 for or against the pipeline, but overall, in the whole province, the surveys I have seen were 60% in favour of the pipeline to 40 % against. So outside of Montreal,there was good support.

The provincial Liberal party, currently forming the government, quickly sided with the mayor of Montreal only because their strong base is located in the Montreal area.

Interestingly enough, the best argument in favour of the pipeline that got some traction outside of Montreal was that such pipeline would immensely reduce the number of rail tanker-cars transiting through their area (they remembered Lac Megantic). The mayor of Montreal - or most Montrealers, seem unaware that in excess of 100,000 such tanker cars of crude/oil transit through Montreal every year as it is, and this traffic is actually increasing. Most of it would be replaced by the pipeline. I know that the more quoted surveys allegedly show only about 35% overall support in Quebec, but those surveys - though largely quoted - were not found to be scientifically proper.

Moreover, the mayor of Montreal excuse for taking his position was, put mildly, bull. It was the danger to Montreal's water supply. The pipeline does not cross the St-Lauwrence anywhere upstream of Montreal's water supply's basin (Lake St-Louis, a lake on and part of the the River) It first crosses the Ottawa river a little west of the ON-QC border (this, if anything happens, would hold the actual oil West of the Carillon dam, with any overspill then being discharged into the River well east of Montreal, after going through the Deux-Montagnes lake - Milles-Iles and Des Prairies rivers.) Then, it recrosses the Saint-Lawrence near Quebec City.

I wonder what the CAQ position on the pipeline is.

I believe they strategically kept their head down during that period, but they are strong in the regions outside Montreal.

 

[Brad Sallows]

We can be certain some Canadians will suffer economically.  Whenever there is economic turmoil, at the margin there are job losses.  Job losses lead to family stress, etc.  Some people pay more than just a temporary economic price.

There will always be risks of spillover from diplomatic tiffs, but they can be minimized by expressing controversial ideas diplomatically.

Steve Pincus, in a book about the Glorious Revolution ("1688"), in part proposes a thesis that revolutions don't often happen while regimes are firmly in control; rather, revolutions happen when reforms are attempted.  The door being opened, competing views on reform enter discussion.  Sometimes the competing views overtake the regime and its reforms.

That suggests to me that if KSA is pursuing some reform, it is risky to inject additional stresses.  KSA with limited reform should be incrementally better than KSA status quo.  Loss of control - revolution - could lead to a much more illiberal KSA.  The apparent overreaction might be evidence that the reformers' position is not impregnable.  So: Canada - and others - butt out, lest things turn out worse.

 

[a_majoor]

Whatever one may think about Saudi Arabia, the United States or Togoland, the real issue here is what our government did/is doing/will do to provoke/handle/mitigate or exploit the issue.

Canada's representatives and their staffs obviously failed to look at the conditions currently in place in the KSA, or the reactions of the Kingdom to similar activities. They also failed to consider response or contingency plans, failed to do any meaningful preparations beforehand (i.e. Energy East), and of course gave no consideration to Canada's actual ability to project hard or soft power. Indeed, the current Crown Prince obviously believes we are such a soft target he is willing to roll over us by pulling out investments, students and diplomatic exchange to make his point to the rest of the West: it is hardly going to hurt himself or the KSA to punish Canada, and (much like the trade and tariff wars) few other nations will come to our aid, if any.

In Realpolitik, nations have permanent interests, not permanent friends or allies. I can't really see how the actions of the current government have advanced our permanent interests. Even the comment upthread about the difference between Canada and the United States "twitter diplomacy" fails to take into account the Americans are using Twitter as battlespace preparation to advance their interests, and of course the Americans actually have the ability to follow through, with hard or soft power.

Voters would be wise to start really looking at how the government's actions are going to affect Canada in the medium and long terms. 2019 isn't that far away.

 

[Altair]

We can be certain some Canadians will suffer economically.  Whenever there is economic turmoil, at the margin there are job losses.  Job losses lead to family stress, etc.  Some people pay more than just a temporary economic price.

I'm sure some might lose their jobs. But really, we do .02 percent of our trade with Saudi Arabia. Canada should be fine.

There will always be risks of spillover from diplomatic tiffs, but they can be minimized by expressing controversial ideas diplomatically.

Since when is saying don't go after human rights activists a controversial idea? And lets be clear here, Saudi Arabia is picking its fights. Other countries have said pretty much the same thing and Saudi Arabia didn't go off the deep end. Canada is a easy target for the same reasons that Canada shouldn't care too much about this. Very little in terms of trade between Canada and Saudi Arabia and not much to lose.

Steve Pincus, in a book about the Glorious Revolution ("1688"), in part proposes a thesis that revolutions don't often happen while regimes are firmly in control; rather, revolutions happen when reforms are attempted.  The door being opened, competing views on reform enter discussion.  Sometimes the competing views overtake the regime and its reforms.

That suggests to me that if KSA is pursuing some reform, it is risky to inject additional stresses.  KSA with limited reform should be incrementally better than KSA status quo.  Loss of control - revolution - could lead to a much more illiberal KSA.  The apparent overreaction might be evidence that the reformers' position is not impregnable.  So: Canada - and others - butt out, lest things turn out worse.

I'm getting the sense that this over the top reaction over a tweet is for domestic consumption, but at the end of the day, it's not Canada's job to help prop up the Saudi government, especially one that engages in the things that Saudi Arabia does. If they are doing horrible things today, the fact that they may topple if they reform too quickly really isn't our concern. The fact that they are doing horrible things now should be.

 

[Altair]

Whatever one may think about Saudi Arabia, the United States or Togoland, the real issue here is what our government did/is doing/will do to provoke/handle/mitigate or exploit the issue.

I see no reason for Canada to censor itself for the likes of Saudi Arabia. When Saudi Arabia does something against basic human values, I see no problem with calling them out on it, because at the end of the day, what are they going to do? They aren't China. China could hurt Canada. Saudi Arabia is a mosquito bite.

Canada's representatives and their staffs obviously failed to look at the conditions currently in place in the KSA, or the reactions of the Kingdom to similar activities.

Or, like German and Sweden, decided it's better to stand up for what is right than to suck up to a murderous theocracy/dictatorship/monarchy.

They also failed to consider response or contingency plans, failed to do any meaningful preparations beforehand (i.e. Energy East)

I don't think one needs to go as far as to push through energy east before posting a tweet

, and of course gave no consideration to Canada's actual ability to project hard or soft power.

On the flip side, Saudi Arabia is in the same boat. What can they do to Canada that will actually achieve anything? For all their bluster, Canada, if anything has looked on in bemusement, like a adult would look at a child throwing a fit on the ground

  Indeed, the current Crown Prince obviously believes we are such a soft target he is willing to roll over us by pulling out investments, students and diplomatic exchange to make his point to the rest of the West: it is hardly going to hurt himself or the KSA to punish Canada, and (much like the trade and tariff wars) few other nations will come to our aid, if any.

Our aid? Why do we needs aid again? Is Saudi Arabia throwing our economy into a recession or something? I think you may be overstating the actual effects of everything Saudi Arabia is doing. As for not hurting themselves, well, when you sell off all Canadian assets at below market value just to get rid of it no matter the cost, when you go to buy wheat and barley at a higher price out of spite, you are not doing yourselves any favors

In Realpolitik, nations have permanent interests, not permanent friends or allies. I can't really see how the actions of the current government have advanced our permanent interests. Even the comment upthread about the difference between Canada and the United States "twitter diplomacy" fails to take into account the Americans are using Twitter as battlespace preparation to advance their interests, and of course the Americans actually have the ability to follow through, with hard or soft power.

Any step to severing ties from that pit of poison is an advancement in our permanent interests if you ask me.

Voters would be wise to start really looking at how the government's actions are going to affect Canada in the medium and long terms. 2019 isn't that far away.

They should.

Look at the conservatives. They had the perfect response to this. It may not have been the best move, but they aren't blaming this on the current government. Same as with the American, they don't want to be seen on the wrong side of this, siding against the PM and with the President of the USA and in this case, MbS.

I must say, I do like the CPC new attitude on things. Far more measured than before. They come across as more responsible and reasonable when they aren't attacking everything the current government is doing



*mod edit - removed duplicate post*

 

[Brad Sallows]

>If they are doing horrible things today, the fact that they may topple if they reform too quickly really isn't our concern.

We can't predict how bad a future might be.  The last Shah of Iran was a reformer who also did horrible things; he lost control of the reform/revolution agenda, and his toppling led to a fair few messes.

Hardliners in KSA openly wedded to its home-grown international terrorists, with KSA as another state sponsor of terrorism in the region - how bad could that be?

 

[Altair]

>If they are doing horrible things today, the fact that they may topple if they reform too quickly really isn't our concern.

We can't predict how bad a future might be.  The last Shah of Iran was a reformer who also did horrible things; he lost control of the reform/revolution agenda, and his toppling led to a fair few messes.

Hardliners in KSA openly wedded to its home-grown international terrorists, with KSA as another state sponsor of terrorism in the region - how bad could that be?

The tweet in question was simply opposing the arrests and imprisonment of human rights activists in Saudi Arabia, not exactly asking them to embrace full democracy overnight.

Saudi Arabia has to deal with US oil production cutting into its market share, Iranian oil entering the market, oil prices still lower than the 100 dollar mark, lower future demand for oil as the world moves to more renewables, a war in yemen, austerity budgets that cut of social supports for people, a young population of which half are aged under 30, growing security concerns with extremists(good for them), a tweet from Canada should be the very very least of their concerns, and in no way should threaten to topple their government replacing them with something even more vile than the status quo.

It's a tweet. If tweets had this power, the USA would have started over a dozen revolutions by now.

 

[Colin Parkinson]

Brad is very much on the mark, the Arab Spring weighs heavily on the minds of ME/Arab leaders. Syria was also trying to ease reform as well as deal with economic turmoil due to prolonged drought when the revolt broke out. Even Libya was trying to improve as well. Not as fast as we consider acceptable, but most people don't realize that there is significant structure preceding a healthy democracy. We started with the Magna Carta as one of the first building blocks of a democratic system and we are still tweaking it. That is really how long it can take.

I think that as long as a country is moving in the right direction, then you work with them.

 

[Altair]

Brad is very much on the mark, the Arab Spring weighs heavily on the minds of ME/Arab leaders. Syria was also trying to ease reform as well as deal with economic turmoil due to prolonged drought when the revolt broke out. Even Libya was trying to improve as well. Not as fast as we consider acceptable, but most people don't realize that there is significant structure preceding a healthy democracy. We started with the Magna Carta as one of the first building blocks of a democratic system and we are still tweaking it. That is really how long it can take.

I think that as long as a country is moving in the right direction, then you work with them.

"Canada is gravely concerned about additional arrests of civil society and women's rights activists in #SaudiArabia, including Samar Badawi. We urge the Saudi authorities to immediately release them and all other peaceful #humanrights activists"


I wouldn't call this tweet not working with the Saudis. It's a tweet asking them to release peaceful human rights activists.

 

[Czech_pivo]

If Canada really wants to pour gas onto this fire, it could easily offer PR to all of the medical students et al who are here after they successfully complete their studies, as well as picking up the costs associated with it.  Take away some of their best and brightest and see where that gets them.
As well, their Oil Minister has stated that this tiff will not alter/stop oil shipments to the East Coast at all.
Lastly, we don't need anyone 'coming to our aid' in this tiff.

 

[Altair]

If Canada really wants to pour gas onto this fire, it could easily offer PR to all of the medical students et al who are here after they successfully complete their studies, as well as picking up the costs associated with it.  Take away some of their best and brightest and see where that gets them.

I imagine a lot of these students have family back home who wont be treated all that kindly if they do decide to stay in Canada.

As well, their Oil Minister has stated that this tiff will not alter/stop oil shipments to the East Coast at all.
Lastly, we don't need anyone 'coming to our aid' in this tiff.

With their minister coming out and saying oil shipments wont be effected by this, it just shows that this is all bluster and posturing. Giving up market share, even just 100 000 barrels of it, is off the table, which shows just how weak their position is.

 

[PPCLI Guy]

Hardliners in KSA openly wedded to its home-grown international terrorists, with KSA as another state sponsor of terrorism in the region - how bad could that be?

Less the "openly" part, that is essentially the situation now.

 

[Brad Sallows]

>It's a tweet. If tweets had this power, the USA would have started over a dozen revolutions by now.

I'm not sure from where you drew the inference that tweets risked causing revolution.

What I wrote earlier: "The apparent overreaction might be evidence that the reformers' position is not impregnable."

The overstated reaction to the tweet indicates something.  The fact that substantive measures - like an oil embargo - were not undertaken suggests the reaction is a demonstration to people other than Canada.  A reason for doing that is to shore up an insecure or unstable position.  Again, my point: avoid stirring the pot for now.

 

[Colin Parkinson]

"Canada is gravely concerned about additional arrests of civil society and women's rights activists in #SaudiArabia, including Samar Badawi. We urge the Saudi authorities to immediately release them and all other peaceful #humanrights activists"


I wouldn't call this tweet not working with the Saudis. It's a tweet asking them to release peaceful human rights activists.

One also has to be culturally sensitive as well. I have zero love for the Saudi's, but I also know that even the tepid moves being made will piss off the hardliners in the country, things could easily go south on them and a civil war there is going to have major impacts and every player in the book involved. You might even see Russia and the US on the same side. 

 

[Good2Golf]

This from Al Jazeera, no less.

Putting the spat between Saudi Arabia and Canada in context
The unexpected diplomatic feud between Canada and Saudi Arabia exposes the fragility of the latter's reform agenda.
https://www.aljazeera.com/indepth/opinion/putting-spat-saudi-arabia-canada-context-180807091325074.html

"Canada is gravely concerned about additional arrests of civil society and women's rights activists in #SaudiArabia, including Samar Badawi. We urge the Saudi authorities to immediately release them and all other peaceful #humanrights activists."

As tweets go, this expression of concern from Canada's Foreign Affairs Minister Chrystia Freeland at the arrest of women activists in Saudi Arabia didn't seem particularly offensive.

It is the sort of thing that Western governments do from time to time when their consciences are mildly pricked by the actions of authoritarian regimes. The response of those regimes is usually to ignore the criticism, and life, trade deals and human rights abuses carry on until the next time democratic consciences are somewhat troubled. It has become a bit of a game, a diplomatic set piece with little consequence for either side.

...

Compared with his other foreign fiascos, the attack on Canada is a mild, risible faux pas. But it is one that reinforces a growing consensus that Mohammed bin Salman is increasingly out of his depth, struggling at home to impose his grandiose transformation of the Saudi economy, Vision 2030, and on the international stage tripping over his feet and beginning to look the fool.

True to form, the Canadians are playing a polite, patient game while resolutely holding their ground. As a spokeswoman for the foreign minister put it:

"Canada will always stand up for the protection of human rights, including women's rights, and freedom of expression around the world. Our government will never hesitate to promote these values and believes that this dialogue is critical to international diplomacy."

So will Canada manage this diplomatic and economic war with Saudi Arabia?  Well, Canadians are, after all, becoming adept at handling tyrannical bullying, dire economic threats and reality TV bluster from a source much closer to home. So my hunch is that the answer is yes.

 

[Jed]

All the whoferaw just illustrates that Canada definitely does not have the A team in for governmental foreign affairs presently. Time to refresh the lineup.

 

[Good2Golf]

All the whoferaw just illustrates that Canada definitely does not have the A team in for governmental foreign affairs presently. Time to refresh the lineup.

With whom, then?