By John Q. Hosedrinker 
Canada and Australia should collaborate as “strategic cousins” rather than competitors to strengthen their negotiating positions with global superpowers. This enhanced cooperation, particularly in critical minerals, defence, and trade, is crucial amidst a breakdown in the global architecture. Australia’s participation in the G7 critical minerals alliance underscores this commitment, alongside continued support for intelligence sharing through the Five Eyes network. While acknowledging challenges, the focus is on boosting investments, technical cooperation, and supply chain resilience to enhance strategic autonomy.
Read the original article here
The notion of Canadian Prime Minister Mark Carney proposing a partnership with Australia, framing them as “strategic cousins” to collectively push back against dominant superpowers, is certainly an intriguing one. It sparks a vision of a renewed, perhaps even reimagined, Commonwealth spirit, echoing sentiments of a potential CPTPP-EU bloc alliance and a desire for stronger inter-nation ties. This idea seems to be about more than just traditional diplomacy; it’s a call for a bold, almost audacious, collaboration, suggesting a willingness to embrace unconventional approaches, perhaps even a playful linguistic exchange where Canadians might start saying “Eh” and Australians could adopt “cunt” with social acceptance, symbolizing a deeper, more informal bond.
At its heart, this proposal appears to be a response to the evolving global landscape, where established powers are increasingly challenged and the influence of superpowers looms large. The suggestion of building something like a Lofstrom-style Vac-Lev across major trade routes, connecting Canada to Europe, and even extending its potential to revolutionizing space travel with coil-gun boosts, speaks to an ambition that goes beyond mere trade. It’s about envisioning futuristic solutions to global connectivity and access, solving both trade and space travel challenges simultaneously, and perhaps even fostering a shared sense of audacious innovation between the two nations. The imagery evoked is one of a united front, a playful yet powerful coalition of national symbols, from Canadian geese and bears to Australian cassowaries and emus, all standing together in a display of solidarity.
However, the practicalities and potential benefits for Australia of aligning more closely with Canada warrant careful consideration. While the idea of a partnership is appealing, it’s important to acknowledge the significant disparity in defense capabilities. Australia’s defense industry is deeply integrated with the United States and boasts a formidable military arsenal, including advanced destroyers, nuclear-powered submarines, and a comprehensive array of sophisticated weaponry. This investment is driven by Australia’s proximity to China and the perceived necessity of robust defense measures. In contrast, Canada’s defense capabilities are considerably less developed in these specific areas. This raises a pertinent question: what exactly would Canada bring to the table in such a partnership, beyond its number of people, which, while significant when combined with Australia’s, might not be enough to offset the military might of other global players.
Furthermore, the proposition of Carney teaming up with the current Australian government, led by Prime Minister Albo, has met with varied reactions. Some express skepticism, questioning Albo’s leadership and his government’s effectiveness, labeling them as “incompetent” and even “WEF liberal pussies,” suggesting a deep mistrust in their political acumen. This critical perspective implies that any alliance formed with such a government might be fundamentally flawed from the outset, questioning Carney’s strategic judgment if he believes this is the right partnership to pursue. The underlying sentiment is one of concern that such a collaboration might not be as robust or as beneficial as envisioned, especially if the foundational leadership is perceived as weak.
There’s also a prevailing sentiment that the world, and by extension countries like Canada and Australia, are increasingly at the mercy of the United States. The current US administration is seen as leveraging its power in an “unhealthy way” and being “functionally untouchable.” This perspective casts a shadow of doubt on the feasibility of smaller nations effectively challenging dominant superpowers, suggesting that any attempt to do so might lead to a “one-sided escalation” or leave them in a “worse position.” The idea that the world order was built on the premise of the US being the “good guys,” and the uncertainty of what happens if that premise falters, highlights a deep-seated anxiety about global stability and the effectiveness of independent action for nations not at the apex of power.
Despite these reservations, the idea of revitalizing alliances and seeking new partnerships resonates with many. The concept of CANZUK, a proposed political union between Canada, Australia, New Zealand, and the United Kingdom, has seen a resurgence of interest, particularly in the wake of Brexit and shifts in US foreign policy. This renewed enthusiasm suggests a collective desire to strengthen ties among like-minded nations, to “put the band back together” and explore new avenues for cooperation. The mention of cricket within this context hints at a cultural affinity that underpins these potential alliances, suggesting that shared traditions and values could be a significant factor in forging stronger bonds.
The economic dimension of such alliances is also a key consideration. The mention of Canada potentially joining the EU, or a similar bloc, alongside the CPTPP, indicates a desire for broader economic integration. However, there’s also a sense that some international blocs, like the EU, might be more interested in military cooperation than economic partnership, leading to frustration. The perceived “inaction” of the EU is also a point of contention, suggesting a preference for more decisive and proactive partners. The idea of free trade is appealing, but the ability to implement ambitious infrastructure projects, like high-speed rail, is seen as a potential stumbling block, especially when contrasted with futuristic visions like the Vac-Lev system.
Ultimately, the proposal from Mark Carney for Canada and Australia to unite as “strategic cousins” against dominant superpowers is a call for a bold, forward-thinking approach to international relations. It taps into a desire for greater autonomy and influence in a complex world. While challenges and criticisms exist regarding the practicalities, the differing defense capabilities, and the perceived weaknesses of current leaderships, the underlying sentiment of seeking stronger alliances and innovative solutions for global challenges is undeniable. It’s a vision that, while ambitious, sparks conversations about shared futures and the potential for a more balanced global order.