I was involved in the Kapoustin case back in 2005 to 2008. I've always been sensitive to this because I've been part of the globalization process, working on many cases globally over the years. To me, it's just an incremental development. Things are just getting more and more global, along the lines you just said, and by “global” I mean for all the reasons you just said.
All that means then—and I totally agree with the consular officials who have spoken—is that this explosion in all dimensions with respect to globalization has increased the frequency of the problem. However, I suggest that there's a deeper problem than this, which is the failure of many governments—not just the Canadian government—to stand up for their own abroad because of state-to-state relations. That emboldens corrupt governments. It seriously emboldens them.
I'm concerned that it is actually a kind of complicity. It's unintended complicity on the part of governments to fail to intervene on behalf of their nationals, but it's seen by a foreign government as being a sign of weakness that they can take advantage of. It's no coincidence that it takes forceful advocacy of the highest order from the highest level to change things in an entrenched case.