Thank you very much.
Mr. Chair and honourable members of the committee, I really appreciate this invitation to speak to you today on the security situation in the Balkans. I'm going to take a slightly more historical perspective, but I was very interested in the questions that were asked, and I am happy to address more contemporary concerns.
As a vital crossroads between east and west, the Balkans have always served as a bellwether for global peace and security. From the assassination of Archduke Franz Ferdinand, which sparked World War I, to the wars that led to the dissolution of Yugoslavia and killed tens of thousands of civilians, geopolitical transitions clearly reveal themselves in the Balkans. The history of the region serves as a reminder that preventing conflict is far less costly than fighting wars and that what happens thousands of miles away can deeply impact Canada.
We are currently living through another such geopolitical transition. The number of conflicts worldwide is at its highest level since the end of World War II. The scaffolding of the liberal international order, long underpinned by the United States, is under stress and at risk of collapse.
Canadian foreign policy is still finding its footing in this shifting landscape. The government's stated objective is to build Canada strong by expanding export markets and by building our military strength, but we cannot ensure our security in a more divisive and violent world through military means alone. While the Prime Minister has discussed working together with other middle powers to provide new mechanisms to bolster our economic security, he has provided less clarity on what this means for our foreign policy in places like the Balkans.
Earlier in my career, I worked in Kosovo, first for the Canadian government and later as director of the International Crisis Group's office in Priština. This was a time when Canada punched above its weight internationally, making significant contributions to building stability and peace in the region.
During the current time of global uncertainty and upheaval, I've been reflecting on what Canadian foreign policy can learn from that era of engagement. What can our experience teach us about how to advance our interests in a complex world? Today, I will share some of those reflections to outline three lessons for Canadian policy born from both our successes and our mistakes in the Balkans.
First, Canadian foreign policy is at its best when the government provides a clear sense of direction or purpose, which I refer to as a “foreign policy compass”. Such a compass should not only reflect Canadian values and interests. It must also advance our reputation as a country that contributes to peace and stability, while being realistic about Canada's value-add as a middle power.
During the Balkan conflicts, our foreign policy compass was the human security agenda, centred on the protection of civilians. This compass enabled Canada to quickly respond to the rapidly changing situation on the ground, an environment where our objectives of protecting human rights and promoting security sometimes appear contradictory. While we must adapt that compass to our new geopolitical realities, we cannot forget our value-add and our principles.
Second, Canada's contributions to peace and stability in places like Bosnia and Kosovo can have a cascading effect, elevating our global standing and benefiting our broader foreign policy objectives. However, this requires Canada to deliver tangible results rather than rhetorical platitudes. Canada deployed a broad range of coordinated and complementary foreign policy tools in the region. This integrated approach included diplomatic assets, peacekeeping troops, police, civilian experts and the rapid disbursement of development assistance to promote security, as well as social and economic recovery.
Recognizing our limitations as a middle power, we worked through regional and international institutions such as NATO, the OSCE and the United Nations, while supporting the critically important role of the European Union as the key guarantor for future economic prosperity and stability. Given that preventing conflicts is far less costly than responding to them, we also supported research and advocacy for good governance, conflict prevention and peacebuilding.
Third, a narrow focus on national security is insufficient for managing complex global crises. National security approaches focus on the symptoms rather than the root drivers of conflict and often underestimate the strategic importance of civilian protection, expert diplomacy and development and humanitarian assistance.
In the Balkans, Canada did not shy away from using our military assets, deploying approximately 40,000 troops to the region over the course of our engagement. These deployments strengthened our armed forces by providing them with vital real-world training. Crucially, however, the military was not the only voice at the decision-making table. The deployment of military assets was one tool in Canada's broader foreign policy tool box.
What does this mean for Canada's ability to contribute to the fragile peace in the Balkans today? When promoting the foreign policy objective of “Canada Strong”, we must be keenly aware that our own security relies on our ability to contribute to a more stable and peaceful world in the Balkans and elsewhere.
While security in the Balkans is largely in the hands of our European partners, we can and should provide support where it's needed. We can do more than just sit at the table. We can put forward a clear and coherent agenda. Ultimately, we must carry the lessons of the Balkans forward as we navigate an increasingly complex and conflict-affected global landscape.
I look forward to your questions. Thank you.