Foreign Affairs Committee on March 28th, 2023

[The Chair, Liberal, Ali Ehsassi]

Welcome to meeting 56 of the Standing Committee on Foreign Affairs and International Development.

Today's meeting is taking place in a hybrid format, pursuant to the House order of June 23, 2022. Members are attending in person in the room, as well as remotely through Zoom.

I would like to make a few comments for the benefit of members.

Please wait until I recognize you by name before speaking. For those participating by video conference, click on the microphone icon to activate your mike. Please mute yourselves when you are not speaking. Interpretation for those on Zoom is at the bottom of your screen. You have a choice of floor, English or French. For those in the room, you can use the earpiece and select the desired channel.

In accordance with our routine motion, I am informing the committee that all witnesses have completed the required connection tests in advance of our meeting.

Pursuant to Standing Order 108(2) and the motions adopted by the committee on Monday, January 31, 2022, and Thursday, February 2, 2023, the committee is holding a briefing with the ambassador and permanent representative of Canada to the United Nations.

It is now my great honour to welcome to our committee His Excellency Robert Rae, our ambassador and permanent representative to the United Nations.

Ambassador Rae, we're very grateful that you're joining us today. You have five minutes for opening remarks, after which we will open it to the members for questions.

The floor is yours for five minutes, sir.

[His Excellency Robert Rae, Ambassador and Permanent Representative of Canada to the United Nations, Department of Foreign Affairs, Trade and Development]

Thank you very much, Mr. Chairman.

I'm happy to give a brief report and then answer any of your questions. I very much appreciate the opportunity.

My work began in the summer of 2020 as Canada, the world and the UN were faced with a series of difficult challenges, including the worst global pandemic since 1918, the highest number of refugees and displaced people since the end of World War II, serious conflicts both within and between countries that were exacerbated by the presence of extremist groups and authoritarian governments, climate change, and the financial, economic and social consequences of all these cascading crises.

As Ambassador I lead a diverse and talented team of foreign service officers, members of Canada’s armed forces and police, as well as experts in supporting our needs in the fields of communications technology, information and our responsibility to host a myriad of events, visits, and conferences over a full schedule throughout the year.

When I first arrived in New York, the United Nations and Canada’s offices in New York were affected by COVID‑19. We are now operating at full speed and on all cylinders.

My first obligation is to lead this team, to co‑ordinate our operations with headquarters in Ottawa, and to ensure that our work is conducted with integrity and intelligence. I am very proud of how we represent Canada and Canadians.

My additional duties include serving as chair of the UN Peacebuilding Commission from 2020 to 2021; serving as chair of the ECOSOC advisory committee on Haiti throughout my time in New York; and chairing a number of “group of friends”, including those on Afghanistan, Myanmar, children and armed conflict, and financing for development. I've also served as chair of the New York working group of the assembly of states parties of the International Criminal Court, which means that I also serve as vice-president of the assembly from 2021 to the end of this year.

In July of this year, Canada will assume the vice-presidency of ECOSOC, which, together with the General Assembly and the Security Council, is the UN body whose responsibilities are set out in the UN Charter. In the ordinary course of events, Canada could expect to assume the presidency of ECOSOC in 2024-25.

Several additional crises have profoundly affected the course of our work as a mission. Both Iraq and Syria have been the source of ongoing issues involving conflict and displacement and refugee issues. The collapse of the elected government of Afghanistan and the takeover by the Taliban in December of 2021 created hundreds of thousands of displaced refugees. The treatment of women has led to the allegation of gender apartheid. We've been dealing with difficult issues affecting women in Iran and Afghanistan. In keeping with our feminist foreign assistance policy, it remains the focus of our activity.

The Russian invasion of Ukraine has led to millions of refugees internally displaced and to ongoing debates and discussions in the UNGA. The growing humanitarian and political crisis in Haiti involves Canada directly in many discussions. Myanmar and the Rohingya crisis have led to major issues of conflict, humanitarian disaster and important questions of accountability. We see the same thing happening in the Sahel. There are human rights crises in Iran, Afghanistan, China and many other places. We raise these on a consistent basis. We also have to deal with the displacement issue in Venezuela, Colombia and Central America.

This world in turmoil has a substantial effect on our work as a mission, on my role as an adviser to the ministers in GAC and the Prime Minister and his staff and, of course, on my role as ambassador here.

The world is a deeply troubled place at the moment, and my responsibility is both to report to Ottawa on the consequences on wars, conflicts, financial collapses, shifting loyalties and complex events, and to help explain to Canadians, members of the United Nations, and an active civil society how we see the world. My role involves both traditional diplomacy and defending our interests and values in the public sphere.

As leader of the Canadian delegation I am proud to be able to speak out on issues such as human rights, the rule of law, gender equality, Canada’s feminist foreign assistance policy, peace and conflict, climate change and the other compelling issues of the day.

I am also proud to be able to reflect Canada’s views in any number of closed door conversations among both like-minded countries and countries that often disagree with us as well as with each other.

I'm very pleased to answer your questions in the time available. I would also say that I'm happy to return to the committee whenever that is helpful.

Thank you, Mr. Chair.

[The Chair, Liberal, Ali Ehsassi]

Thank you, Mr. Ambassador.

We will now go to the members for questions.

The first member is MP Genuis for six minutes.

[Garnett Genuis, Conservative, Sherwood Park—Fort Saskatchewan, AB]

Thank you, Chair.

Thank you, Ambassador Rae. I'm pleased to hear that you're happy to return to the committee again in the future. There are many issues, and it has taken a while to book you. Anyway, I will leave that there. We welcome you back again.

I want to start by asking about genocide recognition. We know that when the House of Commons recognizes a genocide, it doesn't necessarily mean that the Government of Canada recognizes that genocide, nor does it mean that it's advocating for that recognition internationally.

Your office could play an important role advocating for genocide recognition in certain cases on the world stage, but there have been a number of recent cases of genocide recognition in the House on which the government has not commented either way. I want to ask you about certain specific instances, whether your office is advocating for broader international recognition of those genocides and what the position of the Government of Canada is.

Let's start with the Tamil genocide at the end of the Sri Lankan civil war. Does the Government of Canada regard this as a genocide and is your office advocating for broader genocide recognition?

[Robert Rae]

It's not just my office, Mr. Genuis. It's also our office in Geneva, which is very involved in the issue of what's happened to the Tamils.

I have been very involved with this issue since my work at the Forum of Federations, going back to the end of the last century, so this has been a long time coming.

There are two questions around recognition. One is whether we describe things as a genocide in our speeches and in our comments. The answer is yes. The second is that the official or formal recognition of a genocide is something that takes place between state parties at the ICJ, the International Court of Justice, as you well know.

The UN does not normally make a declaration in the General Assembly with respect to that question, but it is something that we do not hesitate to mention in our speeches, whether it's to do with the situation affecting the Tamils, the situation affecting the Uighurs or many other situations with which—if I may say so, given our friendship over the years—both you and I are very familiar.

Yes, it is something that we discuss on a frequent basis.

[Garnett Genuis, Conservative, Sherwood Park—Fort Saskatchewan, AB]

Thank you.

If I can sharpen the question to be precise, though, is it the position of the Government of Canada that genocide took place toward Tamils at the end of the Sri Lankan civil war?

[Robert Rae]

Not that I'm aware of. I have not seen that as an official position of the government. It doesn't take away in any respect from our ability as a delegation to refer specifically to the situation involving the Tamils. As you may know, this is something with which I'm extremely familiar.

[Garnett Genuis, Conservative, Sherwood Park—Fort Saskatchewan, AB]

Do you use the word “genocide” when you refer to that situation in your dialogue with other countries or in your speeches? Are you able to use the—

[Robert Rae]

I have done, and I don't hesitate to have very candid discussions with other countries on that subject, as well as on a number of others.

[Garnett Genuis, Conservative, Sherwood Park—Fort Saskatchewan, AB]

You use the word “genocide”. At the same time, you're not familiar with the Government of Canada taking that official position around recognition, but you don't see the lack of recognition by the government as an impediment to your using the word “genocide” in the course of your conversations.

Did I understand that correctly?

[Robert Rae]

That's correct.

[Garnett Genuis, Conservative, Sherwood Park—Fort Saskatchewan, AB]

Is the same broadly true of the Uighur genocide?

[Robert Rae]

We have been very actively involved. Canada, in fact, led the way in the gathering together of a number of countries—I think we're now up to over 50—that have agreed with us with respect to writing a very strong letter to make a very strong declaration with a number of other countries on the situation affecting the Uighurs.

The fact that Parliament has stated that something is a genocide is something that I would frequently refer to in my own public speeches and utterances. I have no hesitation in using the word.

[Garnett Genuis, Conservative, Sherwood Park—Fort Saskatchewan, AB]

Okay. It sounds like it's broadly the same. You use the word, but the Government of Canada's recognition is....

It seems to me that maybe sends a bit of a confusing message, but I'd certainly rather you use the word than not use the word. In that sense, I would encourage you in that, even if it maybe goes beyond the parameters of the words used by the minister.

Ambassador, I want to ask you—

[Robert Rae]

If I may, on that question, Mr. Genuis, I don't want to interrupt you, but....

On the Rohingya situation, for example, as you know, the Government of Canada is now intervening at the ICJ on the Rohingya genocide case.

[Garnett Genuis, Conservative, Sherwood Park—Fort Saskatchewan, AB]

Yes, and we'll keep pushing on that.

In the time I have left, I want to add in one more question.

I'm hearing a lot of concern from people in various places in Canada about the situation in India. I wonder if you can share with us what the Government of Canada's position is with respect to the current situation in Punjab and in India in general. What is your perspective and the government's perspective on unfolding events?

[Robert Rae]

That's a huge topic.

India is the largest democracy in the world. It has a democratically elected government. The Government of India is one we have a strong and powerful relationship with as a government. They're a federal country. There's a tremendous amount of diversity in India.

The simple answer is no. Do we comment on the human rights situation in India? Not officially. Do I have conversations with other members of the General Assembly about what's happening in India? Of course I do.

I think it's a situation that I would distinguish from some of the others that you've mentioned in terms of how we respond to the situation in India.

[Garnett Genuis, Conservative, Sherwood Park—Fort Saskatchewan, AB]

Obviously, it's distinct.

Can you share with us the nature of those conversations you're having, just in the interest of transparency, so we have an understanding of what is being said on our behalf?

[Robert Rae]

I think there is an ongoing debate in India itself about the question of nationalism, how that populist nationalism is expressed and what the treatment of various minorities in the country is. I don't equate that situation in the same way as I do some others.

Obviously, as you may know, I was asked by the Government of Canada 17 years ago to look at the Air India bombing. I became quite familiar with the challenges that gave rise to that tragic situation. I've always felt it's important for us to fully appreciate the fact that India has an elected government. It's a government that's elected and re-elected, and in which elections are challenged at the federal level in India, as well as in all the states.

It's a very different approach, if you like, than we would take in some other situations where the governments are not elected, not democratic and are highly repressive. One has to deal with these situations with a great deal of sensitivity and understanding.

[The Chair, Liberal, Ali Ehsassi]

Thank you, Mr. Ambassador.

We next to go MP Sarai.

You have six minutes.

[Randeep Sarai, Liberal, Surrey Centre, BC]

Ambassador Rae, it's good to see you back. It's always a pleasure to have you here at our committee.

I'm going to ask you more about what happened in Ukraine.

Can you walk us through the horrible day when Russia illegally launched an invasion into Ukraine? Perhaps, what were you doing at the time? Who did you talk to? What did your multilateral engagement look like? What were your counterparts thinking at the time?

If you could enlighten us, that would be great.

[Robert Rae]

As you may know, Randeep—if I may—I was here in New York. We were watching very carefully with a great deal of concern the growing speculation that Russia could, in fact, launch an attack on Ukraine. The Security Council was meeting in the evening at the very time that the war was launched. The Russian member, the chairman of the committee at the time, was not aware of the fact that this was about to happen. I don't believe he knew. He certainly didn't indicate that he had any idea about it.

As it unfolded that evening, it became clear that the attack was going to be a very direct assault on Kyiv, the capital of Ukraine, as opposed to much speculation that the war would be limited to ongoing conflict in Donetsk and Luhansk. What we saw right away was that this was going to be a massive attack.

A number of us were there together talking with each other about how we would respond. The answer was that we were going to do everything we could to make sure that, because we knew the Russians would exercise a veto over anything that the Security Council might or might not be able to do, the centre of action shifted to the General Assembly, which is exactly what happened. We were very much part of those conversations and discussions about how we would proceed together, what the resolutions in the General Assembly would look like and how we would begin to mobilize international support for what was taking place.

At the same time, we needed to start having conversations with the UN Secretariat and with the organization known as OCHA, which is the humanitarian coordinating agency of the UN, about how we would have to be able to mobilize all of the on-the-ground efforts to support people who would be so much affected by the war as it unfolded.

Obviously, I was in constant conversation with officials in Ottawa, both on the phone and through emails, etc., talking about how we would coordinate our activities and what it would mean, as well as activities that would be taking place in Geneva and elsewhere.

It was a very busy time. February 24 was not a date I am going to forget very easily. It was a very dramatic moment.

[Randeep Sarai, Liberal, Surrey Centre, BC]

Ambassador Rae, could you also tell us what your conversations with your counterparts are with respect to sanctions and the military and humanitarian aid that has been given to Ukraine?

Has it been effective? Have there been repercussions in terms of some of the countries that are typically receiving potash, fertilizer or grains from that region? Has there been a domino effect in terms of any negative impact on them and vice versa? Has the impact been weakening Russia in regard to its aggression against Ukraine?

[Robert Rae]

On the question of the overall impact, I think there's no question that the fallout from the war and its economic and social impacts have been enormous. It has been on Ukraine. The humanitarian situation in Ukraine remains extremely difficult. Bombs can come at you anywhere in the country at any time. It's clear that Russians have been targeting civilian infrastructure and civilian sites. They've killed thousands and thousands of innocent people who are not involved in the conflict.

It's had a traumatic impact on Ukraine, but it's also had a strong economic and social impact on the rest of the world, because Ukraine, as you pointed out, is a major supplier of food and fertilizer. The ports in Ukraine have been widely used, through the Black Sea, to get food products throughout the world. Those supply lines were disrupted. A number of the ports, including Mariupol, were completely and utterly destroyed. Russians have continued to bomb in Odessa, despite the fact that there's a deal now to get the grain out. The impacts have been extraordinary, as I said, on the people of Ukraine and globally.

Globally, naturally, I have to say there was a perception expressed by a number of countries that the west is responding this way to Ukraine and Ukrainian refugees, to the humanitarian needs with the amount of aid that we're supplying, but when it came to their situation they don't see the same level of response. That's been an ongoing challenge for us, as one of those countries that has been so supportive of Ukraine, to say that we can actually be supportive of more than one group at a time.

I think Canada's immigration policies and our refugee policies have helped us in terms of our own credibility as a country in saying, “Here's what we're doing across the board.” We have, subject to what happens this afternoon at four o'clock, maintained a very high level of support and assistance to a number of countries. We have maintained our emergency assistance. We've maintained and increased our support for the humanitarian agencies, for OCHA, not only in the work that it does in Ukraine, but throughout the world. Our overall share of the UN budget remains very high. We're among the top-10 donors to the United Nations and all of its agencies. We're keeping a strong position in talking to African countries, Asian countries and others that are recipients of large amounts of food products and other things from the region. We're saying that we're doing what we can to help.

I don't think anyone should underestimate the impact of the food inflation, the impact of the cost of inputs into agriculture and the overall impact this is having on developing countries. It's had a serious impact on their financial, economic and social situations. I don't think we should underestimate it.

[The Chair, Liberal, Ali Ehsassi]

Thank you.

We now go to Mr. Bergeron.

You have six minutes, sir.