Tag Archives: India

Roundup: Ending a filibuster and starting the Iran debate

Posted on by
Reply

Two big things are up today in the House of Commons. First is a programming motion that would end the filibuster on Bill C-9, which is the hate crime bill that the Conservatives have been stalling on because the government agreed with the Bloc to remove the religious exemption to hate crimes. This has caused all sorts of howls, particularly from certain members of the Conservative backbench who are experienced propagandists, who claim that this is going to criminalise religious worship and that prosecutors will be combing the Bible to come after Christians, as though police have the time and resources to do that (as police are the ones responsible for laying hate crime charges—and are frequently the ones who don’t, even when merited). It’s stupid, it’s misleading, it’s dishonest, and the government has had enough, so they’re going to put their foot down and they will have the votes to pass this motion.

Yes, C-9 is a bill that is mostly just empty symbolism, and while civil liberties groups have their concerns that it could be used to criminalise legitimate protests, I would say that the bigger issue—the hate crimes that this is supposed to address—remain in the same position of waiting on police action or inaction. You can pass all the hate crime legislation you want, but if police don’t bother to investigate or lay charges (because most police do have a certain ideological bias), then it’s all for naught.

The other thing that will be coming up today will be a debate on the conflict in Iran, which will take place during the evening. The Government House Leader signalled this before needing to wait on the opposition parties to move anything in the Chamber, for all the good this is going to do. I’m sure the world is waiting with baited breath for MPs to read twenty-minute speeches into the records about how this violates international law (NDP, Bloc), that it’s great that the Supreme Leader was killed and how the Iran regime needs to be destroyed—completely ignoring that the Americans have no plan and will only make things worse (Conservatives), or just praising Mark Carney’s “leadership” and “pragmatism” (Liberals).

Ukraine Dispatch

A Russian missile struck an apartment building in Kharkiv early Saturday, killing ten people. President Zelenskyy says that Ukraine is discussing joint arms production with the Netherlands for interceptor drones.

Continue reading →

Roundup: An increasingly incoherent position on Iran

Posted on by
1

From Sydney, Australia, prime minister Mark Carney finally held a press conference, nearly six days into the tour. There, he was forced to somewhat walk back his position on what is happening in Iran, and while he may think he’s trying to nuance the situation, he instead sounds increasingly incoherent. He says that he supports the attack “with regret,” but that support isn’t a blank cheque, and there was a failure of international law. But remember, his Davos speech was about how international law was built on hypocrisy, and we’re dealing with the world as it is, but now we’re calling on rapid de-escalation and a ceasefire, and for diplomacy and international law to prevail, the same international law that you said is pretty much over? Huh? He also had to somewhat walk back the assertions that India is no longer engaging in foreign interference and repression…but he also wouldn’t say that they are, because again, incoherence, with a side of an amoral focus on dollar signs.

This Carney statement is puzzling. If, as he says, we must accept "the world as it is" – including the purported failure of previous diplomatic efforts and of the international order – then why call for a diplomatic solution, de-escalation, and respect for international law?

— Roland Paris (@rolandparis.bsky.social) 2026-03-03T22:58:19.535Z

Meanwhile, the situation in Iran remains hard to gauge, because there is no plan, and frankly, where people call for negotiations, it’s unclear with whom they are supposed to negotiate with, and when Trump calls on Iranian the military to surrender its weapons, there is nobody for them to surrender them to. There is an interesting piece on Radio Atlantic where Iranian writer Arash Azizi and Anne Applebaum discuss the fact that there isn’t a coherent opposition within Iran who can reasonably be expected to turn power over to. And then Trump is also suggesting that he may leave someone from the existing regime in charge, which then changes nothing and possibly makes things worse if it’s a hardliner determined to consolidate power and punish civilians for disloyalty, of whatever.

Meanwhile, from his London sojourn, Pierre Poilievre is trying to bring back CANZUK as a concept, which I always quite qwhite telling when conservatives sing its praises. But his ideas for CANZUK are also making a bunch of promises he can’t keep, because things like credentials recognition are provincial jurisdiction and good luck with that, while promising East Coast LNG is something that is never, ever going to happen. He also gave a Margaret Thatcher lecture where he praised capitalism, and called environmentalism a grift, and so on, because he’s very smart like that.

To file under promises Poilievre can't keep:-Credentials recognition is provincial jurisdiction. It's hard enough getting recognition across provincial borders and he wants to extend it to CANZUK?-East Coast LNG is never, ever going to happen because there is no market case.

— Dale Smith (@journodale.bsky.social) 2026-03-03T16:10:49.461Z

From the extraordinary intellect that brought you “the Nazis were lefties because it says socialist in the party name,” I bring you…

— Chris Turner (@theturner.bsky.social) 2026-03-04T01:20:40.650Z

— Effin' Birds (@effinbirds.com) 2026-03-03T15:08:04.120Z

Ukraine Dispatch

Continue reading →

Roundup: We are one (murderous) family

Posted on by
Reply

From New Delhi, Mark Carney had his big meeting with Narendra Modi, and they announced their plans on a comprehensive trade agreement by the end of the year, along with a number of other trade plans, including a uranium agreement. Carney even said that “We are one family” with Modi, erm, except Modi’s government has very likely murdered Canadians on Canadian soil, which is a pretty strange definition of “family.” But then Carney refused to take media questions, cancelled a planned press conference, citing the need to get into the air to avoid the flight crew’s scheduling regulations, and apparently decided that he couldn’t scrum on the plane either, meaning that all of those media outlets who shelled out thousands of dollars to be there are being given nothing for the time and trouble. This is turning into a habit for Carney, as is the fact that at least one of his meetings was found out by social media and wasn’t on his itinerary.

Pretty much.

— Dale Smith (@journodale.bsky.social) 2026-03-02T15:19:39.900Z

Meanwhile, Anita Anand had to pick up the media slack, but even then, she refused to say whether she believes the attack on Iran violated international law, and only will say that Canada is not militarily involved, though she also says she wants to see a “diplomatic solution.” Other members of the government has also been backtracking on the assertion that India stopped engaging in foreign interference and repression, including secretary of state for combatting crime, Ruby Sahota, which makes it look an awful lot like that senior official was set up to try and deflect questions on the interference ahead of the trip (which backfired spectacularly because we could all tell that it was bullshit).

Meanwhile, while in London, Pierre Poilievre expounded on his idea of a critical mineral stockpile available to allies with tariff-free trade agreements (but again, I fail to see how this will change Trump’s mind). He is also getting all hot and bothered by the impact that the Iran conflict is having on the oil market, but it’s making him say dumb things about Canada trying to step in and displace that Middle Eastern oil and gas. It’s never going to happen, and none of what he’s saying is true, but nobody’s going to challenge him on it (other than Andrew Leach).

https://twitter.com/andrew_leach/status/2028513969766560215

— Effin' Birds (@effinbirds.com) 2026-03-02T23:08:01.907Z

Ukraine Dispatch

Ukraine’s military continues to make gains reclaiming territory in Zaporizhzhia region, while a naval drone attack his the Russian oil terminal at Sheskharis, suspending operations. President Zelenskyy says that Russia won’t be able to fulfil its short-term goals in the invasion.

Continue reading →

Roundup: Davos speech vs Iran support

Posted on by

In the early hours of Saturday morning, the Americans and Israelis stuck Iran under dubious pretences—later confirming that nuclear talks were merely a ruse, and that Trump and Netanyahu had been planning this for weeks—and managed to effectively decapitate the country’s leadership, including killing Ayatollah Khomeini. Within hours, prime minister Mark Carney sent out a statement from his trip in Mumbai, where he effectively supported the actions, but also did not promise any Canadian support, military or otherwise. Nevertheless, everyone went on a big round of hand-wringing about how this statement jived with his big Davos speech.

My statement on Iran-related hostilities in the Middle East:

— Mark Carney (@mark-carney.bsky.social) 2026-02-28T12:31:32.929Z

It's not small-dick energy.It's smallest dick energy.

— Dale Smith (@journodale.bsky.social) 2026-02-28T19:10:15.695Z

Of course, the thing about the Davos speech is that it was a bit of a Rorschach test, depending on one’s priors. Sure, Carney talked about sovereignty and territorial integrity, but he also made it clear that the existing system of international law was a mirage, so he was kind of saying that it didn’t matter? In either case, I don’t think we should expect anything other than “pragmatism” without much in the way of principle, because that is the tone Carney has been setting for a while now, which could eventually work to our detriment.

People keep saying that this goes against the Davis speech. It does not. Carney said the rules based international order was always hypocritical, is now dead, and we live in a time of rupture. I disagree with support but this is not against what he said. The sign is gone. GONE GONE.

— Stephanie Carvin (@stephaniecarvin.bsky.social) 2026-02-28T14:54:02.726Z

In Davos, Carney argued that only countries w/ strong economies could afford “principled” foreign policies. Carney’s pro-US, pro-illegal war statement is that idea in action.The thing is, this view is both self-serving and wrong. Wrong because there is always a cost to standing up for principles.

— Blayne Haggart (@bhaggart.bsky.social) 2026-02-28T14:14:37.709Z

But if you always subordinate principles (i.e., non-economic interests like international law) to economic growth, you’ll never stand for anything. ESPECIALLY Canada, since the best we can hope for is only sending HALF of our exports to the US. They will ALWAYS have leverage over us.

— Blayne Haggart (@bhaggart.bsky.social) 2026-02-28T14:14:37.711Z

In reaction, Bob Rae wonders what happens after the military operation ends, which has long been the question for those who want to attack Iran. Anne Applebaum lays out the fact that Trump has no plans for what to do next with Iran, and has already dismantled programmes which might have helped, which is a huge danger of creating something worse. Justin Ling wonders why Carney chose the route he did of cheering on such a dangerous gambit.

— Effin' Birds (@effinbirds.com) 2026-02-28T22:10:01.821Z

Ukraine Dispatch

Zelenskyy’s chief of staff says that Russia has accepted the proposal for post-war security guarantees (which…means not much).

Continue reading →

Roundup: Poilievre’s big foreign trip

Posted on by

As Pierre Poilievre heads to London and Berlin for his first actual foreign trips as opposition leader, his office released his itinerary, which includes attending a CANZUK reception in London after meeting with parliamentarians and business leaders, and then delivering a keynotes speech in Berlin, along with meeting with officials and business leaders and touring an LNG facility.

And there’s the rub. This is going to turn into another tedious exercise of Poilievre doing a little song and dance about “Look! Europe wants our oil and gas!” when really, European leaders, after much badgering and hectoring, actually said something like “Sure, we’d like it if it was available and the right price,” neither of which is going to happen. We’ve seen this before. Certain political show hosts in our country like to engage in this very same badgering and hectoring whenever they interview a visiting European leader in order to say “Look! There’s a business case! Trudeau was wrong!” But they ignored the caveats and the economics.

The reason why LNG to Europe is never going to happen include:

  1. There is no local supply of natural gas on the east coast, so most of the feed stock would be imported from the US, raising prices locally, and if you think a cross-country pipeline is feasible, that will also increase prices in the east coast;
  2. It would take years to build an export facility, and it would take years to convert the one existing import terminal (which serves not only the local market, but also feeds into the northeastern US market);
  3. Even if these facilities existed, there has been no interest by European buyers in signing a long-term contract, which is one of the reasons why proposals for east coast LNG terminals never got off the ground. Also remember that these facilities essentially need to operate for a good thirty or forty years to make their money’s worth, and Europe is already rapidly decarbonizing.

Of course, Poilievre will ignore all of that, and declare that Europe wants our LNG, and we’ll go through this whole exercise yet again. It’s so tiresome that nobody actually wants to listen to reality on this subject.

— Effin' Birds (@effinbirds.com) 2026-02-27T23:56:01.183Z

Ukraine Dispatch

Russia says a temporary ceasefire has been reached around the Zaporizhzhia nuclear plant in order to ensure repairs. Ukraine is setting up a joint venture with allies to produce more air defence ammunition.

https://twitter.com/KyivIndependent/status/2027352819905249375

Continue reading →

Roundup: Damage control over India’s foreign interference

Posted on by

Consider it an own-goal, as the government spent the day doing damage control over the statement by that unnamed senior official who declared that India was no longer engaged in foreign interference or transnational repression. Out of the gate first was Liberal backbench MP Sukh Dhaliwal, who condemned that official and questioned his suitability for the role.

This seems…unlikely, especially in light of reporting a few days ago that another Sikh activist had been warned of a credible threat to life. Either the government is naively believing India, or it is misleading Canadians with this statement. globalnews.ca/news/1170676…

— Jess Davis (@jessmarindavis.bsky.social) 2026-02-26T11:27:33.313Z

As the day progressed, more ministers needed to get involved. Gary Anandasangaree had to come out and say that no, they remain concerned about security issues, while Anita Anand went on TV to very carefully parse what that official said, and insist that they have an ongoing dialogue with the Indian government and that they are working toward dealing with these issues, and tried to very carefully walk the line of doing the whole “Everything’s fine!” line that Carney seems to be demanding as he departed for the trip, and trying to also let the Sikh community know that their concerns are being heard, but not really succeeding at that because their spokespeople were also on the political shows to talk about how they’re feeling like they’re being gaslit.

Honestly, this whole thing feels like another case of ineptitude at the highest levels of Carney’s government. He’s so quick to try and tout these trade deals and “strategic partnerships” that he both ignores real optics questions, and dismisses the concerns about things like, oh, human rights, or international obligations, or anything like that, and keeps bringing it back to his whole CEO shtick, which is frankly not a good look for a government. Things like rights and international law matters, and if Carney is going to keep sweeping this under the rug in order to get his hands on the dollars on offer, it shows those “Value(s)” he wrote a book about to be pretty hollow.

— Effin' Birds (@effinbirds.com) 2026-02-26T22:27:01.610Z

Ukraine Dispatch

Russia launched 420 drones and 39 missiles in the early hours of Thursday morning, injuring at least 26 people. It also appears that Russia has employed nuclear-capable cruise missiles as part of their recent attacks.

Continue reading →

Roundup: Stopping because we asked nicely?

Posted on by

Prime minister Mark Carney departs for India today on the first leg of his major trade trip, and as pretty much as he’s out the door, senior officials giving a background briefing to reporters says that they believe that India is no longer engaging in transnational repression, otherwise they wouldn’t be on the trip. That…defies credulity. And the logic of not going on the trip if they were engaged in the repression doesn’t hold given that Carney was just in China two weeks ago, and lo, they haven’t stopped their own efforts around interference or repression.

Foreign interference from India, including transnational repression, has been going on in Canada since the 1980s. It did not stop last week. You can agree that stabilization of relations is important with India is important, while not believing this BS. www.thestar.com/politics/fed…

— Stephanie Carvin (@stephaniecarvin.bsky.social) 2026-02-25T23:42:11.723Z

“I really don’t think we’d be taking this trip if we thought these kinds of activities were continuing,” a senior government official said. lol ok so by that logic I guess that means China no longer interferes in our democracy either since the govt took a trip there

— Supriya Dwivedi (@supriya.bsky.social) 2026-02-26T00:35:08.800Z

We just had a whole-ass judicial inquiry that found that India was the number two country, following China, engaging in foreign interference and transnational repression in this country. It’s been happening since the 1980s, and we’re supposed to believe that they just folded up shop and went home because we asked nicely? Really? Just this week, more Sikh activists in Vancouver were warned by police that they and their families are being targeted. Are we supposed to believe that this is just a figment of their imaginations?

The worst part of this is that it’s just insulting to everyone’s intelligence. It’s transparently untrue, and it’s done to shut up the reporters who keep asking about the state of the relationship. There were so many better ways he could have answered this, including talking about how they have made progress with dialogue with Indian officials, or that they have police cooperation, or anything, but just saying “they stopped,” because apparently we asked nicely, is not going to cut it, and Carney is misjudging the public on this one yet again.

Ukraine Dispatch

There were overnight attacks on Kyiv and Kharkiv. Ukraine’s defence minister says they plan to have 4000 kilometres of road protected by anti-drone netting by the end of the year. It is estimated that some 1700 Africans are fighting for Russia, mostly having been tricked into doing so.

Continue reading →

Roundup: Conflating failed with fraudulent

Posted on by

The Conservatives went ahead with their Supply Day motion of scapegoating asylum claimants for the strain on the healthcare system, and so many of their claims are based on falsehoods. The claim that a failed claimant is “bogus” of “fraudulent” is not true, and plenty of claimants rejected by the IRB win their appeal in Federal Court. The numbers of actually fraudulent claims are very small, and even rejected claimants may be rejected on technical grounds. Trying to conflate everyone as “bogus” or “fraudulent” is more of the MAGA mindset that they’re trying to tap into, because this is who the party has become. It’s too bad the government is too invested in their own attempts to scapegoat newcomers for problems that the premiers mostly created and refuse to fix, because they should be absolutely savaging the Conservatives on this, and they can’t—and won’t.

— Effin' Birds (@effinbirds.com) 2026-02-24T22:22:02.270Z

Ukraine Anniversary

Yesterday was the fourth anniversary of Russia’s full-scale invasion of Ukraine, which was supposed to be a “three-day war.” There were a number of speeches and a moment of silence in the House of Commons to mark the occasion, so it didn’t go unnoticed. Prime minister Mark Carney announced that Canada will extend Operation Unifier to keep training Ukrainian troops for another three years, as well as donating another 400 armoured vehicles, and extending more sanctions. (Not announced were any resources or a competent federal policing agency to enforce those sanctions).

Four years have passed since Russia's full scale invasion of Ukraine. Russia was supposed to win in three days. Instead, Ukraine reinvented modern warfare, built a drone industry, and can destroy a thousand Russian soldiers in a day. Ukraine can win.

— Anne Applebaum (@anneapplebaum.bsky.social) 2026-02-24T09:58:52.954Z

Prime minister Carney's statement on the 4th anniversary of the full-scale invasion of Ukraine.

— Dale Smith (@journodale.bsky.social) 2026-02-24T15:30:17.057Z

Conservative statement on the 4th anniversary of the full-scale invasion of Ukraine.

— Dale Smith (@journodale.bsky.social) 2026-02-24T15:26:12.386Z

NDP statement on the 4th anniversary of the full-scale invasion of Ukraine.

— Dale Smith (@journodale.bsky.social) 2026-02-24T15:26:12.387Z

https://twitter.com/SenGagne/status/2026324346189283440

Ukraine Dispatch

European leaders were in Kyiv to show support on the anniversary of the start of the war. Here is a look at how the attacks on energy infrastructure is dragging down Ukraine’s economy, and here is a look at how drone warfare has changed the nature of the conflict over the past four years.

https://twitter.com/FedorovMykhailo/status/2026404778884932075

Continue reading →

Roundup: The tariffs are dead, long live the tariffs

Posted on by

Yesterday, the US Supreme Court struck down Trump’s IEEPA tariffs in a 6-3 decision, because tariffs are taxes and taxes need to come from Congress. These were the so-called “reciprocal” tariffs, the fentanyl tariffs, and the “Liberation Day” tariffs, but not the Section 232 sectoral tariffs on things like steel and aluminium and autos. This means that the effect on Canada is very minimal because for those IEEPA tariffs, we had the New NAFTA exemptions on something like 85 percent of tariffed goods. (Five Things to know about this ruling here, and the list of remaining tariffs on Canada here).

Almost immediately, Trump implemented new global ten percent tariffs under a different set of powers, meaning that this whole process gets to start over again with a new legal challenge, but these powers have a 150-day expiry date, so how does that even work? Meanwhile, companies who paid those IEEPA tariffs can apparently apply for refunds, but I have a suspicion they will never see that money, because Trump will drag it out, his courts are corrupt, and well, the money will have disappeared into some Trump lackey’s accounts, because the graft is real.

https://bsky.app/profile/jrobson.bsky.social/post/3mfdo7xcbw227

https://bsky.app/profile/jrobson.bsky.social/post/3mfdovg5ius27

What problem is Trump's new global 10% tariff meant to solve?If it's about leverage, ask: How much leverage do you get from a tariff that disappears in 150 days?If it's onshoring: Who builds new factories based on tariff that disappear before the factory is built?It's a tax. That's all it is.

— Justin Wolfers (@justinwolfers.bsky.social) 2026-02-20T20:00:44.062Z

Meanwhile, this has largely served as vindication for the fact that we didn’t rush to get a deal with Trump over tariffs, because there was no deal to be had, and because those tariffs were illegal. Why come up with a deal over something that’s illegal and immoral? Why do what Keir Starmer did when capitulation just emboldens a bully?

Statement from Dominic LeBlanc:

— Dale Smith (@journodale.bsky.social) 2026-02-20T16:06:42.548Z

— Effin' Birds (@effinbirds.com) 2026-02-20T23:56:01.759Z

Ukraine Dispatch

As the war enters into its fifth year, here is a look at some of the displaced civilians from the war who has lost everything. Europe’s five biggest defence powers are launching a project to develop and build low-cost air defences that can be put into production within a year.

Continue reading →

Roundup: Conspicuous silence from Poilievre

Posted on by

In the wake of prime minister Mark Carney’s big Davos speech, it has been noticed that there is a conspicuous silence coming from Pierre Poilievre, aside from the fact that he was tweeting misleading things about grocery prices, because his strategy is to keep hammering away at cost-of-living issues while the world is on fire. Apparently, his office was circulating a statement before the speech about how a trip to Davos was an “unneeded indulgence” that wasn’t going to resolve any tariffs, because of course, he doesn’t travel. That hasn’t stopped his various proxies from floating their own attack lines, either insisting that it’s nothing but an empty speech (not entirely untrue), or being utterly dismissive and saying that he needs to be back at the table with the Americans to resolve the tariff issues, as though there is a deal to be had with Trump and his mercurial whims where agreements aren’t worth the paper they’re written on. It’s clear there isn’t, and that is becoming an ever-more irrelevant attack line with each passing day.

Meanwhile, here is a look at some of the global reaction to the speech, but one of the comments that stands out is from Michael Kovrig, who has a warning about how some of Carney’s language is being used, particularly in the way he invokes Havel, and how it sets up a false equivalency between the American-dominated rules-based order with totalitarian communism, and why that could have repercussions.

In pundit reaction, Kevin Carmichael is impressed with Carney’s Davos speech, and finds the biggest lesson in it to be the reminder from Havel that we are not powerless. Seva Gunitsky parses the references to Thucydides and Havel in the speech, and how they apply to the American empire. Althia Raj weighs some of the positives and negatives of Carney’s Davos speech. Philippe Lagassé has questions about the government’s defence and intelligence priorities in the wake of Carney’s speech, because they are greatly affected. And Paul Wells strips the speech of its applause lines and contemplates the core of it, and what some of the inevitable critiques will be.

Ukraine Dispatch

Nearly 60 percent of Kyiv remains without power after attacks on its energy grid, making it their hardest winter yet. An executive of the state grid operator died while supervising repairs at a power facility, but they won’t say how. Ukraine’s new defence minister is planning a sweeping, data-drive overhaul of the military.

Continue reading →