‘Diaspora politics are a dangerous business’: Former Canadian ambassador on the ongoing threat of foreign interference

Fault Lines examines the pressures pulling Canadian society apart and the principles that can hold it together. We look beyond headlines to understand how institutions, communities, and democratic norms are fraying. Our mission is to show how better choices can repair what is broken. You can listen to this episode on Amazon, Apple, and Spotify. Episode Description Canada’s approach to foreign interference has emerged as a significant political concern, with questions mounting about whether current government responses adequately address the evolving nature of threats to democratic institutions. The issue has gained prominence following revelations about attempts by foreign actors to influence Canadian politics and target diaspora communities. The government’s response to interference concerns has been characterized as reactive rather than proactive, with policy measures typically following sustained media attention to specific incidents. This pattern has raised concerns about whether Canada’s institutional framework can keep pace with sophisticated and constantly evolving interference tactics. Foreign interference is not a static challenge that can be addressed through one-time solutions, but rather a dynamic threat requiring continuous adaptation and vigilance. A particularly troubling aspect of the interference landscape involves the role of foreign diplomatic officials operating within Canada. Consular representatives from certain countries have assumed unusually prominent positions in Canadian political circles, receiving levels of deference and access that exceed normal diplomatic protocols. This stands in stark contrast to the restrictions placed on Canadian diplomats abroad, who often face significant limitations on their movements and activities in countries like China. The targeting of Canadian politicians and candidates represents an escalation in interference tactics. Several members of parliament and political candidates have faced direct threats, with concerns extending to family members living abroad. These incidents highlight how interference has moved beyond subtle influence operations to more aggressive intimidation tactics aimed at shaping political outcomes and silencing critics. Canada’s proposed foreign agent registry has drawn comparisons to similar frameworks in Australia, the United Kingdom, and the United States. The Australian model, implemented around 2019, has demonstrated both the necessity and difficulty of creating effective registration systems. Initial attempts often prove either too broad, capturing innocent activities, or too narrow, missing sophisticated influence networks that operate through complex corporate structures and intermediaries. The success of any registry system depends heavily on sustained political leadership and cooperation among government agencies. Security organizations traditionally guard their jurisdictions carefully, and effective coordination requires clear direction from the highest levels of government. Without visible prime ministerial commitment, bureaucratic resistance can undermine implementation efforts. Proposed penalties for registry violations have sparked debate about whether enforcement mechanisms carry sufficient deterrent effect. Critics argue that minimal fines fail to reflect the seriousness of attacks on democratic institutions and may not discourage well-resourced foreign actors from continuing interference activities. The structure and leadership of oversight bodies remains contentious. While independence from partisan politics is essential, questions persist about whether appointed officials can summon the political instincts and public accountability necessary to respond effectively to democratic threats. The challenge lies in balancing technical expertise with the political sensitivity required to recognize and respond to public concerns. Diaspora communities face particular vulnerability to foreign interference, often experiencing harassment, threats, and pressure from their countries of origin. These communities sometimes find themselves without adequate protection or support from Canadian authorities, despite facing coordinated campaigns of intimidation. The establishment of unofficial police stations by foreign governments on Canadian soil represents one extreme example of such overreach. This is an automated summary. Please check against delivery.