Written by: Yves Engler

Two forces have traditionally determined Canadian foreign policy: Support for empire and Canadian corporate interests abroad.

Generally, these forces align. But occasionally they clash as has recently been the case with mining firms and China. Much of Canada’s powerful global mining industry opposes Ottawa following the US into conflict with its only “peer competitor”.

As part of its anti-China policy, Washington has hyped Chinese influence over certain “strategic” minerals. In response, Ottawa imposed a new security review restricting companies from “non-like-minded” states — China — from partnering or purchasing firms focused on 31 minerals, including lithium, nickel and copper. Ottawa ordered several Chinese firms to divest their shares from Canadian lithium companies and stopped Carbon One New Energy from purchasing a fifth of SRG Mining, which has a graphite project in Guinea (to make batteries for the European market). They also stopped Zijin Mining from buying 15 per cent of Solaris Resources, which controls minerals in Ecuador.

As part of the resource panic the Pentagon has begun financing Canadian mining projects. In “What's behind a historic, unusual U.S. military cash transfer to Canadian mines”, CBC News detailed $15 million in Pentagon funding for projects to extract and process copper, graphite, gold and cobalt. They are offering grants to assist Canadian companies with feasibility studies and permitting. In exchange the US military gets first dibs on purchasing the resources (at market rate) under certain security conditions.

While mining companies are happy to have access to Pentagon funding, some powerful, unsavoury players shaping Canadian foreign policy have pushed back against the anti-China policy. A year ago, Barrick Gold CEO Mark Bristow criticized these measures and said his company wouldn’t exclude new investment from Chinese companies. At the Prospectors & Developers Association of Canada conference in March, Ivanhoe CEO Robert Friedland argued that, as a Northern Miner headline put it: “Make metals with China not war, Friedland tells PDAC.”

The corporate interests vs empire tension has also played out in the pages of the Globe and Mail. The business section of a paper leading the charge against China has published many articles and commentaries advocating the mining industry’s criticism of the restrictions.

The China mining tussle highlights the state’s ability to assert its authority towards corporations when desired. After SRG Mining suggested it would redomicile to the UAE to bypass restrictions on selling a fifth of the company to a Chinese firm, Francois Philippe Champagne clapped back. At last year’s PDAC conference the industry minister declared, “I would say to anyone watching or reading, it’s never smart to try to circumvent the rules. The Government of Canada has a number of tools in our toolbox to make sure Canadian law is upheld.”

It is illuminating to contrast the government’s willingness get tough on firms partnering with Chinese firms to their response to civil society groups calling for better legislation on pursuing mining companies domestically for their international abuses. For decades the government rejected calls for better rules on restricting public assistance for firms violating rights abroad on the grounds it would be complicated and could lead to companies moving their operations abroad.

Prior to being elected Trudeau promised an ombudsperson to lessen Canadian mining abuses abroad but he failed to follow through. After dragging their feet on the issue for three years the Liberals announced a Canadian Ombudsperson for Responsible Enterprise (CORE), which had relatively robust investigative powers and the ability to limit public assistance to firms found responsible for abuses. But actual legislation broadened (diluted) CORE’s mandate beyond mining and when the mining industry launched a major lobbying campaign the government buckled completely. Ultimately, the position became a largely powerless advisor to the Minister of International Trade.

As a result, almost all the grassroots campaigners and mining-affected communities gave up on the position, leaving space for others to turn it into a tool to assist the US empire’s bid to demonize China. CORE has almost entirely dealt with ‘forced’ Uygur labour and even though it only has advisory powers, in the current climate, the trade minister is likely to accept any recommendation the ombudsperson delivers regarding Xinjiang. In effect, a position promoted by internationalists to curtail the epidemic of Canadian mining abuses has morphed into a tool to assist Washington in its bid to contain China’s rise.

Ottawa is willing to impede corporate interests to assist the US empire. It is not willing to do so to protect indigenous or peasant communities from being trampled on by Canadian mining companies.

However, the conflict between some corporate interests’ desire to utilize Chinese investment and Canadian foreign policy kowtowing to US Empire is ultimately resolved will be interesting to monitor. But no one should expect the interests of ordinary Canadians to be even considered.

Yves Engler is the author of 13 books. His latest book, available now, is "Canada's Long Fight Against Democracy”.

Editor’s note: The Canada Files is the country's only news outlet focused on Canadian foreign policy. We've provided critical investigations & hard-hitting analysis on Canadian foreign policy since 2019, and need your support.

Please consider setting up a monthly or annual donation through Donorbox.

More Articles

Featured