Canada must avoid a BRICS-like quandary as it forges stronger ties with Europe

Strasbourg, France, is the perfect place to build an alliance.

As the official seat of the European Parliament, this historic city located in France’s northeast near the border with Germany, is steeped in cross-cultural influences.

A testament to the reconciliation of the continent’s most influential countries after the Second World War, it provides a fitting backdrop for Prime Minister Mark Carney’s mission to strengthen Canada’s economic and security ties with Europe.

Mr. Carney, who will address the European Parliament on Thursday, is keen to build a purposeful partnership between Canada and the European Union as both jurisdictions contend with an increasingly protectionist United States.

“We’re not looking to become a member of the European Union,” Mr. Carney told journalists on Sunday after The Wall Street Journal reported that he was proposing Canada become an “associate member of the European Union.” It is a designation that does not yet exist.

“What we are looking – and will begin discussions for – is a unique alliance between Canada and the European Union. We share the same values, we have the same priorities and we have very complementary strengths.”

Analysis: The EU loves Carney. That won’t necessarily make striking trade deals any easier

On the face of it, a strategic partnership with the EU is exactly what Canada ought to pursue at this juncture. As someone with ties to Europe – my husband and children are citizens of France – I welcome Mr. Carney’s effort.

But as a Canadian living a tricultural reality (my parents are from India), I am concerned that Mr. Carney is underestimating the complexity of what my French husband and children call “European conversations.”

If your relatives hail from Europe, you know exactly what I am talking about – and it has nothing to do with language proficiency. It is about differing cultural perspectives and political objectives that are, in part, informed by geography and national considerations.

The inability to reconcile such differences has proven to be an obstacle for another informal intergovernmental bloc that aspires to offset U.S. hegemony. Last weekend’s BRICS summit in New Delhi offers a timely reality check about cohesion and cleavages within any coalition in the Trump 2.0 era.

BRICS refers to the group of 11 emerging economies led by Brazil, Russia, India, China, and South Africa.

Representing nearly 50 per cent of the world’s population, 40 per cent of GDP and 26 per cent of trade, BRICS was envisioned as a collaborative forum for developing countries overlooked by U.S.-led groups such as the G7.

Analysis: Hardball stand with Trump sets Canada apart from all the trading partners that acquiesced

Not that long ago, BRICS members discussed creating a common currency to compete with the U.S. dollar, a proposal that raised the ire of U.S. President Donald Trump.

Indian Prime Minister Narendra Modi, who chaired a BRICS session on inclusive global governance on Saturday, was careful to avoid further antagonizing Mr. Trump.

Although Mr. Modi urged BRICS delegates to turn the “pyramid of privilege” into a “platform of partnership,” the summit’s statement shied away from blaming the U.S. for “the rise of unilateral tariff and non-tariff measures” that distort trade.

There are other reasons to be skeptical that the BRICS can offset U.S. influence. The bloc’s membership, which also includes Iran, Saudi Arabia and the United Arab Emirates, is divided over other geopolitical issues.

Iran, for instance, has attacked both Saudi Arabia and the UAE during its war with the U.S. and Israel.

The BRICS group is also split over Russia’s military aggression against Ukraine. Thus, it offered only a milquetoast statement on strengthening international peace and security.

“We underscore that security among all countries is indivisible and reiterate our commitment to the peaceful resolution of international disputes through dialogue, consultation and diplomacy.”

Canada, of course, is a developed country that is seeking an alliance with other industrialized countries. Still, it, too, may encounter difficulties in papering over industrial and geopolitical differences with EU members despite shared democratic values.

Potential sources of conflict include Canada’s energy ambitions, which still largely revolve around fossil fuels. There are also differing labour rules and manufacturing standards.

Canada’s interprovincial trade barriers, meanwhile, have long frustrated European businesses. And 10 EU countries have yet to ratify the Canada-European Union Comprehensive Economic and Trade Agreement.

EU countries don’t always achieve consensus.

Case in point, France this week made what other EU countries described as an “astonishing” request to lift sanctions on an Uzbek-Russian oligarch to facilitate a prisoner exchange, according to a report in the Financial Times.

To his credit, Mr. Carney is focused on protecting Canadian sovereignty. Still, it could be tricky to avoid a BRICS-like quandary as Canada forges stronger ties with the EU.