What is Prime Minister Mark Carney’s Cuba policy?

Both Canada and Cuba know a thing or two about being dependent on the United States.

It is one of the many things that the two countries share in common. They also understand what it takes to reduce their vulnerability to Washington and how to go about carving out an independent path.

Ever since the 1959 Cuban Revolution, Canada has pointed to its normal bilateral relations with Havana as a clear illustration of Canadian foreign policy autonomy. The Cubans, for their part, have often maintained that a cordial relationship with Ottawa exposes the inanity of a long-standing U.S. policy of isolation and punishment.

I was reminded of a recent class in my Canadian-American Relations course that focused on the 1962 Cuban Missile Crisis. Former Prime Minister John Diefenbaker was adamant that Canada was not going to be dictated to by the John Kennedy Administration on how his government should best respond to the crisis. In his memoir, he made his thoughts perfectly clear: “We were not a satellite state at the beck and call of an imperial master.”

While public opinion surveys at the time indicated that a good many Canadians supported the U.S. handling of the missile crisis in Cuba, subsequent polling has clearly shown that the overwhelming majority of Canadians endorse continued diplomatic and economic relations with the island.

Even former Conservative Prime Minister Stephen Harper knew better than to play with political fire by disengaging from dialogue and commerce with Cuba.

Canadians have often prided themselves on espousing a Cuba approach that differs from that of the U.S. They subscribe to the view that engagement, exchanges and people-to-people contacts are a more effective way to nudge Havana toward greater democratization, respect for human rights and economic liberalization.

But the relationship has been operating mostly on auto-pilot for the last ten years or so. Under Liberal governments, Canada-Cuba relations have been largely down-graded, taken for granted and, in some respects, disrespected. Official Ottawa has not imposed a U.S.-styled “maximum pressure” campaign against Havana, but it has inched closer to a more hardline Cuba policy based on demanding fundamental Cuban governmental changes.

Today, Cuba is facing arguably the most significant humanitarian crisis since the revolution. Some of the blame obviously rests with the policy decisions of the current Cuban government. But the U.S. economic and oil blockade has seriously exacerbated the conditions on the ground.

In the past, the Canadian government was willing to help out the Cuban people in their time of need.

I recall a few years ago when a Cuban woman recalled fondly the time when former Prime Minister Jean Chrétien sent a container ship of humanitarian aid to the island in the early 1990s. Ordinary Canadian citizens continue to provide help and financial support to Cubans, which explains why they view Canadians as if they are members of their families.

Still, the governing Liberals under Mark Carney have been remarkably quiet about current developments in Cuba. They have said precious little about U.S. President Trump’s illegal fuel embargo of the island and his inflammatory rhetoric about a “friendly takeover of Cuba.” It makes me wonder what Diefenbaker and former Prime Minister Pierre Elliott Trudeau would think about Carney’s response to the crisis in Cuba thus far.

At this moment, the best that Ottawa can offer is a fast-tracked humanitarian aid initiative of $8 million, while tiny CARICOM countries are contemplating a “very significant” assistance package. What is noticeably absent from Canada’s response, though, is any mention of providing any oil and gas shipments. Does not Suncor’s Petro-Canada or New Brunswick’s Irving Oil have the means of getting desperately-needed fuel to Cuba?

It’s hard not to think that Canada’s reluctance to assist the Cubans is not tied to Trump’s erratic Washington. With sector-specific U.S. tariffs still in place (and Trump looking to add other sectors of the Canadian economy) and desultory talks going on to renew the USMCA trade pact, Ottawa evidently does not want to rock the Canada-U.S. boat. To put it bluntly, Carney is afraid to arrange any oil shipments to Cuba because he doesn’t want to derail our bilateral trade agenda.

What happened to our “Made-in-Canada” Cuba policy from the 1960s? Why does PM Carney think that sacrificing our independence on Cuba jibes with his “elbows up” and “strategic autonomy” of his Davos speech? More importantly, does he actually think that capitulating to the U.S. on Cuba will be a political winner in Canada?

Now, we have seen Carney undertake a change in language in terms of the U.S. and Israeli bombing campaign against the Islamic Republic of Iran. But I’m hard-pressed to believe that he would contemplate a similar course correction with respect to Cuba.

More to the point, we can’t seriously talk about reducing our dependence on the U.S. as we simultaneously compromise our political sovereignty by leaving the Cubans to mostly fend for themselves.

We can do better, and the historical Canada-Cuba relationship deserves better.

Peter McKenna is professor of political science at the University of Prince Edward Island in Charlottetown.