After the Peace of Westphalia, borders and respect for territorial sovereignty became the norm. Hence, trade could not be carried on as before. Bartering and international free trade with no binding contract was no longer possible. Treaties and agreements between respective nation-states were necessary to ensure smooth operations.

The two main modern international trade agreements in which Canada participates are bilateral and multilateral trade agreements. Bilateral and multilateral agreements involve two or more countries entering a Free Trade Agreement (FTA) (Irwin, 2018). They are useful in taking down domestic and international trade barriers while simultaneously providing other advantages (Irwin, 2018). For one, bilateral and multilateral trade agreements involving multiple countries offer a wider array of economic and commercial development (Irwin, 2018). It is also a good way to take down political barriers between countries which see an advantage in accepting trade agreements with each other (Irwin, 2018). Though unilateral trade agreements are also possible, they restrict trade and are not as popular.

Canada, much like other countries, is just as involved in the international trade scene. The North American country has entered mostly bilateral and multilateral international trade agreements with countries and organizations such as Colombia, Israel, Ukraine, and ten countries in the Indo-Pacific through the Comprehensive and Progressive Agreement for Trans-Pacific Partnership (CPTPP). Under the guise of political neutrality, Canada has consistently uplifted the development of parties dominating the trade market, like Japan, which is a part of the CPTPP, and oppressive ones, like Israel. Simultaneously, Canada has continuously failed to do the same for low-income and rising countries such as Colombia, Ukraine, and Taiwan.

In 2014, Canada had the chance to implement measures to better human rights and conditions in Colombia with a Human Rights Impact Assessment (HRIA) that was a big part of the FTA the two countries signed. However, Canada’s negligence led to the failure of this assessment. Furthermore, when the Russo-Ukrainian war began, Canada was quick to jump to Ukraine’s aid with an FTA meant to better working conditions for Ukrainians and improve unemployment while supporting the country’s economy. However, it is not as easily achieved in practice as it is in theory. Hypocritically, Canada has decided to maintain a neutral stance in the Israel-Palestinian conflict. Yet, through Canada’s support of the Israeli economy, the country is actively participating in the annexation of Palestinian territories. Similarly, Taiwan is a nation that has been attempting to separate from the Republic of China with mixed support from other countries. Despite being a crucial agent in the international trade market, Taiwan’s request to join the CPTPP was denied as the other countries, including Canada, wanted to maintain good relations with China, even if it meant denying Taiwan its recognition as a country. Once more, in the name of political neutrality, Canada stunts the growth of an emerging nation.

Historical Context
According to Bercuson (2020), until the 1850s, Canada, a British colony at the time, traded almost exclusively with the United Kingdom (UK). However, when the UK adopted free trade, Canadian markets were heavily affected (Bercuson, 2020). Soon after, Canada began seeking a trading partner in the US (Bercuson, 2020). The two drafted the Reciprocity Agreement that lasted for about 10 years (Bercuson, 2020). However, the Civil War in the US put an end to the agreement because of Canada’s ties with the UK (Bercuson, 2020). Despite a short pause in trade between the two, it resumed soon after as Canada and the US were vital trade partners to one another at the time (Bercuson, 2020). Canada also attempted to bring in trade from other countries such as Australia, France, and Belgium, but were faced with resistance from the UK (Bercuson, 2020). Later on, World War 1 intensely stimulated trade between Canada and the US because of the difficult times (Bercuson, 2020). Furthermore, by the end of the 1920s, Canada had managed to secure trade with many countries such as “Australia, Belgium, British Guiana, British Honduras, British West Indies, France, the Netherlands and Czechoslovakia” (Bercuson, 2020). Historically, Canada has always been interested in foreign markets and has never stopped at trading solely with the US. Bercuson says towards the end of the paper that “while the United States was (and is) obviously Canada’s major trade partner, Canada almost continually sought trade relations with other countries and, of course, to also maintain as much trade as possible with Great Britain” (2020). Canada has perpetually attempted to keep all doors open by stepping on as few toes as possible, which is a mentality that can be linked to the country’s current political and commercial actions.

In 2014, Canada and Colombia signed the Canada-Colombia Free Trade Agreement (CCFTA) that, on top of the trade benefits, included a first-of-its-kind Human Rights Impact Assessment (HRIA) (Rochlin, 2014). A HRIA is “defined as an instrument for examining policies, legislation, programs and projects to identify and measure their effects on human rights” (Rochlin, 2014). Colombia has a very prolific extractive sector, and the trade agreement allowed Canada to take full advantage of it. Canadian mining corporations have historically been abusive to Latin American countries (Rochlin, 2014). Hence, concerns for human rights and the protection of Colombian workers were raised as “the regions in Colombia where the extractive sector is concentrated are home to over 80% of the human rights abuses in the country” (Rochlin, 2014). This brought the implementation of the HRIA as an integral part of the CCFTA. Unfortunately, this concern from Canada soon proved to be performative as, by the second year, the reports were already being misused. Rochlin (2014) says that “[o]nly trade data are examined in the report, investment data are not mentioned at all with regard to human rights” . Furthermore, Rochlin’s article (2014) also mentions that “[a]ny potentially serious human rights problems associated with Canada’s economic role in Colombia were ignored” . The conclusions that were drawn pointed towards Canada’s inefficiency in addressing the human rights concerns of Colombian workers. Lastly, “[t]he impact of future actions taken by Canada under the [CCTFA] is expected to be minimal” (Rochlin, 2014). In its attempt at political correctness, Canada has only managed to worsen its hypocritical reputation by promising help and not following through or ensuring significant changes can be reaped from the HRIA.

When the Russo-Ukrainian war was raging in Eastern Europe, most of the world sided with Ukraine against Russia. Canada is no exception. Not long after the war began, Canada entered a preferential trade agreement with Ukraine: the Canada-Ukraine Free Trade Agreement (CUFTA). This agreement is meant to increase the trade flow between the two countries to support Ukraine’s economy in war times (Canada, 2024). Additionally, it is theoretically expected to help improve the human rights conditions in Ukraine and support domestic reforms (Bogdanova, 2021). Bogdanova (2021) explains that despite being home to many skilled artisans and workers, Ukraine suffers from poor labour conditions and wages. In theory, CUFTA would be of great help to these areas of humanitarian growth. However, the research was conducted solely by reviewing legal documents and how they would apply in theory. In practice, however, CUFTA’s impact is not expected to be as significant as theoretical documents may outline. The globalization brought by a similar agreement to CUFTA, the Comprehensive Economic and Trade Agreement (CETA), has been proven not to help humanitarian concerns (Fileva, 2021). One of the main objectives of CUFTA is to propel Ukraine as a major international trader and involve it more in the globalization of Europe. In spite of that, “globalization wasn’t really helpful in the continuous process of unemployment, raising the labour standards and lowering the exploitation of the working force” (Fileva, 2021). Hence, Canada’s promise to help globalize Ukraine came with a possible worsening of Ukraine’s human rights and labour conditions issues. Despite the theoretical help that CUFTA would bring as outlined by Bogdanova (2021), it is offset in practice by the new problems that globalization poses.

Canada’s trade agreements also diminish the importance of other nations’ self-determination, such as Palestine and Taiwan. Unlike with the Russo-Ukrainian war, Canada has insisted on keeping a supposedly neutral stance on the Israeli-Palestinian conflict. Nonetheless, it is still involved in a trade agreement with Israel that undermines Palestine’s struggles (Bueckert, 2023). The Canada-Israel Free Trade Agreement (CIFTA) has been designed in a way that “Canada does not make any distinction between trade with Israel, Palestine, or illegal Israeli settlements, but categorizes all trade in the territories under Israeli control as if it were simply ‘Israeli’” (Bueckert, 2023). Moreover, Palestinians benefit very minimally from the massive trade between Canada and Israel (Bueckert, 2023). Hence, despite an ostensibly neutral stance on the conflict, Canada is perpetuating Israel’s oppressive ideology by assuming the annexation of Palestine. Similarly, Taiwan, which is considered part of China’s territory, has attempted to join the Comprehensive and Progressive Agreement for Trans-Pacific Partnership (CPTPP), but was met with rebuttals from other countries, including Canada (Stephens, 2020). Taiwan is a giant in international commerce, and its addition to the CPTPP could immensely benefit all the members of the agreement. However, by accepting Taiwan in this multilateral trade agreement, Canada and every other Indo-Pacific country involved would be recognizing Taiwan’s sovereignty against China’s wishes, essentially compromising trade with it (Stephens, 2020). Therefore, despite saying it does not take a stand on the sovereignty battle between China and Taiwan, Canada fundamentally does so with its actions and impairs Taiwan’s accession.

In conclusion, Canada’s chase for international trade markets has been ongoing since the 1850s, with little to no change in its business model. Canada could be qualified as a greedy country. From trading with the US while keeping the door open to British trade to attempting not to ruffle any other country’s feathers by using political neutrality as a shield. This can be seen with the cases of the Israeli-Palestinian conflict and Taiwan’s fight for accession. In both situations, Canada claimed neutrality while its actions showed a clear favouritism towards the most financially viable trading party at the expense of the struggling one. While this isn’t inherently a bad choice, the lack of transparency and accountability from the Canadian government is the problem. Canada openly picks sides only when there isn’t much to lose, like in the Russo-Ukrainian war. From its stance on this conflict, Canada gained good publicity for attempting to globalize, uplift, and improve conditions in Ukraine. However, even when major human rights improvements are possible with Canada’s help, the country still chooses to hide rather than act, as seen with the Human Rights Investment Assessment in Colombia. Such a significant measure as this one being implemented was a massive step forward until it began being misused by Canadian mining corporations. By acting hypocritically with its international trade agreements in the situations mentioned above, Canada protects and benefits itself while actively harming developing countries with negligence in the cases of Colombia and Ukraine, and with denial of territorial sovereignty in the cases of Palestine and Taiwan.

Works Cited

Bercuson, D. (2020). Canada’s Historical Search for Markets. Directory of Open Access Journals. https://doi.org/10.11575/sppp.v13i0.70036

Bogdanova, I. (2021). Turning Crisis into Opportunity: Unfolding Ukraine’s Trade Potential with the Canada-Ukraine Free Trade Agreement. East/West: Journal of Ukrainian Studies, 8(2), 151–191.
https://doi.org/10.21226/ewjus561.

Bueckert, M. (2023). Annexing Palestine Through Trade: CIFTA and the Occupied Palestinian Territories. In CJPME. https://www.cjpme.org/annexing_palestine_through_trade.

Canada, G. A. (2024, July). Modernized Canada-Ukraine Free Trade Agreement enters into force. Canada.ca; Government of Canada. https://www.canada.ca/en/global-affairs/news/2024/07/modernized-
canada-ukraine-free-trade-agreement-enters-into-force.html

Fileva, M. (2021). The Impact of Globalization and the Interconnectedness with them Comprehensive Economic and Trade Agreement Between Canada and the European Union. Journal of
Liberty and International Affairs, Institute for Research and European Studies – Bitola, 7(1), 106–119. https://doi.org/10.47305/jlia21170106f.

Goff, P. M. (2021). Bringing Indigenous Goals and Concerns into the Progressive Trade Agenda. Interventions Économiques. https://doi. org/10.4000/interventionseconomiques.12777.

Irwin, D. A. (2018, August 29). International Trade Agreements – Econlib. Econlib. https://www.econlib.org/library/Enc/InternationalTradeAgreements.html.

Rochlin, J. (2014). A golden opportunity lost: Canada’s human rights impact assessment and the free trade agreement with Colombia. The International Journal of Human Rights, 18(4-5), 545–566. HeinOnline. https://doi.org/10.1080/13642987.2014.917627.

Stephens, H. (2020). Challenges and Prospects for the CPTPP in a Changing Global Economy: Taiwanese Accession and Canada’s Role. School of Public Policy Publications, 13(29). https://doi. org/10.11575/sppp.v13i0.71216.