the scenarios proposed in this article are incoherent. the canadian left has traditionally sought to work within the framework of international law, and has never been aggressive on these sorts of issues. even the bomarc issue was about defending existing international law. as a leftist voter, i would be downright alienated from either party if they were to take unilateral positions that argue against the processes at the united nations - and it would be a dramatic break from the legacy of both parties. we would be in a rather bizarre situation if the conservatives were all of a sudden the doves in the spectrum. further, the conservatives have been repeatedly belligerent on russia, pretty much on every issue.

rather, if this is an issue, i would expect the conservatives to take the offensive and use it to whip up their base. but this is really a small part of their base.

in the long run, canada and russia have more similarities than differences. we have similar economies. there are differences on governance, but they are not as great as some would claim. we really ought to be working together with the russians to build a more multilateral world.

canada was once on the brink of non-alignment, and this was a consensus position between the liberals and the ndp. i think this served us much better than harper's decision to align us squarely with nato on every issue under the sun.

www.cbc.ca/news/canada/north/russia-s-arctic-claim-to-north-pole-could-be-an-election-issue-1.3179714

Trilobite Lollipop
Ok, let's lets leave the IR textbooks written by Liberal profs aside for a second.

How is one of the most democratic nations on Earth so similar to one of the most authoritarian regimes?

Is there a footnote or a reference to Russia being a mafia-state in there somewhere? How about one on Putin becoming a de facto Czar?

If not, I would advise that you kindly ask your leftist prof to stop singing the Internationale and perhaps find a better textbook.

Jessica Murray
the idea that russia is an authoritarian, czarist regime is really not borne out by the evidence. as i stated, the differences are not as large as some would claim.

russia is a liberal, capitalist democracy. politically speaking, putin is a sort of an old-timey conservative, not that dissimilar from somebody like winston churchill. we tend to look at these old timey conservatives through some fairly warped glasses. if churchill were alive today, he would probably run for the bnp.

there's some problems in russia, but they're not dramatically stronger than problems that exist in other liberal, capitalist democracies. the biggest problem russia is going to be dealing with over the next few decades is how to reintegrate religion into society. right now, the most dangerous, authoritarian institution in russia is not the kremlin but the orthodox church. some kind of balance needs to be worked out, but i think the russians are capable of getting there, even if there's a few growing pains - like the church generating homophobia.

but, economically, we're both northern, resource-dependent nations. we consequently have a lot of shared economic interests. unfortunately, a strong sense of pro-american patriotism has blinded the current government to this truth.