A nation of feminist arms dealers? Canada and military exports
| Published date | 01 December 2017 |
| Author | Srdjan Vucetic |
| Date | 01 December 2017 |
| DOI | 10.1177/0020702017740156 |
| Subject Matter | Scholarly Essays |
Scholarly Essay
A nation of feminist
arms dealers? Canada
and military exports
Srdjan Vucetic
Graduate School of Public and International Affairs, University of
Ottawa, Ottawa, Ontario, Canada
Abstract
The Canada-Saudi light armoured vehicles deal is likely to be remembered as the
Trudeau government’s first scandal. Situating this deal in a historical-comparative
context and using the best available quantitative arms trade data, this analysis advances
two main claims. First, Canada’s Liberal governments are just as likely as Conservative
governments to encourage exports of Canadian military goods, including goods going to
human rights-abusing customers. Second, Canada’s overall arms exporting behaviour is
similar to the behaviour of its ‘‘international do-gooder’’ peers, Sweden and the
Netherlands. How Canadian governments will respond to the ever-increasing inter-
national demands for accountability in this area remains to be seen.
Keywords
Arms trade, human rights, Canadian foreign policy, Canada, LAVs, Saudi Arabia, militar-
ization, militarism
Introduction
The ‘‘Saudi arms deal’’ will be remembered as the first scandal of Prime Minister
Justin Trudeau’s Liberal government. In their 2015 campaign, the Liberals made
many promises, but notably absent was any notion of cancelling a $15-billion sale
of Ontario-built light armoured vehicles (LAVs) to Saudi Arabia. Instead, Trudeau
and his ministers stood by the deal the Conservatives had made, despite the ‘‘risk’’
of the Saudis using these vehicles for bloody internal repression and/or interven-
tions abroad. Then, in April 2016, The Globe and Mail published a heretofore secret
policy memorandum indicating that key export permits had been signed by the new
International Journal
2017, Vol. 72(4) 503–519
!The Author(s) 2017
Reprints and permissions:
sagepub.co.uk/journalsPermissions.nav
DOI: 10.1177/0020702017740156
journals.sagepub.com/home/ijx
Corresponding author:
Srdjan Vucetic, University of Ottawa, Graduate School of Public and International Affairs, 120 University,
FSS 6020, Ottawa, K1N 6N5, Ontario, Canada.
Emails: svucetic@uottawa.ca, svucetic@gmail.com
foreign affairs minister Ste
´phane Dion, rather than any of Dion’s predecessors in
the government of Stephen Harper.
1
The uproar was immediate. ‘‘The government lied to Canadians about who
signed what when in the Saudi arms deal,’’ declared New Democratic Party
(NDP) leader Thomas Mulcair.
2
Some reacted with outrage, others with wit. The
Beaverton, a satirical webzine, published a fictitious interview with Trudeau, a self-
declared feminist and champion of human rights:
I am going to keep saying loud and clear that I AM a feminist... and that I AM going
to keep selling weapons to an oppressive regime that imposes travel and employment
bans on women, until both statements are met with a shrug!
3
The LAV scandal raises both new and old questions about the nature, determin-
ants, and ethics of Canadian foreign policy.
4
In this article, I focus on two ques-
tions. One concerns partisanship and policy: most scholars of Canadian foreign
policy would agree that a Liberal-Conservative consensus exists in most foreign
policy areas most of the time,
5
but what of arms trade, including Canada’s export
control policies? Are Liberal and Conservative governments equally inclined to
facilitate exports of Canadian-made military goods, including goods going to
‘‘risky’’ destinations? Next, how does Canada’s overall arms-exporting record com-
pare internationally? The previous question leads logically to this one, given that
Saudi LAV-style scandals occur in virtually every democracy in which leaders
simultaneously support progressive foreign policy goals and export-oriented
1. Steven Chase, ‘‘Dion quietly approved arms sale to Saudi Arabia in April: Documents,’’ The Globe
and Mail, 12 April 2016. The newspaper placed the story on the front page, then followed up with a
series of dissections of the transaction penned by Chase, Paul Webster, and others. The deal—the
largest foreign sale of military goods in Canadian history—was first announced by the
Conservatives in February 2014.
2. Steven Chase, ‘‘Liberals accused of lying about Saudi arms deal,’’ The Globe and Mail, 13 April
2016. The NDP never opposed the LAV deal itself. On 24 January 2017, the Federal Court ruled to
reject the bid to stop the LAV deal launched by a Montreal-based group, Ope
´ration Droits Blinde
´s
(Armoured Rights Operation), which was led by Prof. Daniel Turp. The group’s website, http://
droitsblindes.org, has since been discontinued and the legality of the transaction is no longer
challenged.
3. Kevin Dowse, ‘‘Trudeau says he is ‘proud to be a feminist arms dealer,’’’ The Beaverton, 19 April
2016, https://www.thebeaverton.com/2016/04/trudeau-says-he-is-proud-to-be-a-feminist-arms-
dealer/ (accessed 7 October 2017).
4. Andrea Lane and Ellen Gutterman, ‘‘Beyond LAVs: Corruption, commercialization, and the
Canadian defence industry,’’ Canadian Foreign Policy Journal 23, no. 1 (2017): 77–92; and Erika
Simpson, ‘‘Canada’s arms deal with Saudi Arabia,’’ Peace Magazine 32, no. 2 (2016): 13–14.
5. Kim Nossal, Ste
´phane Roussel, and Ste
´phane Paquin, The Politics of Canadian Foreign Policy
(Montre
´al and Kingston: McGill-Queen’s University Press, 2015), 312. A small sample of studies:
Heather Smith, ‘‘Choosing not to see: Canada, climate change, and the Arctic,’’ International
Journal 65, no. 4 (2000): 931–942; Brian Bow, ‘‘Parties and partisanship in Canadian defence
policy,’’ International Journal 64, no. 1 (2008–2009): 67–88; Jonathan Paquin and Philippe
Beauregard, ‘‘Shedding light on Canada’s foreign policy alignment,’’ Canadian Journal of
Political Science 46, no. 3 (2013): 1–27; Justin Massie and Darko Brizic, ‘‘Rupture ide
´ologique et
rede
´finition de l’identite
´internationale du Canada: Harper et Chre
´tien face aux guerres en Libye et
au Kosovo,’’ Canadian Foreign Policy 20, no. 1 (2014): 19–28.
504 International Journal 72(4)
To continue reading
Request your trial