Connect with us
[the_ad id="89560"]

MacDonald Laurier Institute

Canada, it’s not racist or xenophobic to talk about immigration

Published

11 months ago

18 minute read

From the MacDonald Laurier Institute

By Joe Adam George

The sustained public antics post-October 7 has caused otherwise pro-immigrant Canadians to question the viability of our current policy

Since 1971, when Prime Minister Pierre Trudeau officially adopted a policy of multiculturalism, Canada has enthusiastically promoted and celebrated cultural diversity as a fundamental element of our national identity.

Perhaps wanting to step out of his father’s shadow and create his own legacy, in 2015, Prime Minister Justin Trudeau upped the multicultural ante by several notches, declaring to the world that Canada would become the “first post-national state”. In a now-infamous interview Trudeau claimed “there is no core identity, no mainstream in Canada.”

Last year, his government announced plans to welcome 500,000 new immigrants per year by 2025 and maintain those numbers annually in the subsequent years. Amidst growing public opposition to high immigration levels, Statistics Canada reported last month that Canada’s population grew by more than 430,000 during the third quarter of 2023 alone, marking the fastest pace of population growth since 1957 and pushing the country’s population past 40.5 million.

PM Trudeau’s pursuit of a post-national vision for Canada – through a blend of substantial hikes in immigration and a systemic push of woke progressivism that has effectively revised and erased Canadian history – has come at a significant cost to Canada’s national unity and security.

Examples of this disunity and lack of social integration have been particularly apparent in recent months. Following Hamas’ October 7 attacks against innocent Israeli civilians, the Jewish community in Canada have been subject to incessant acts of malice and violence by pro-Palestine protestors. Over the last three months, these dissenters have become a nuisance and a threat to all Canadians – from blocking traffic at major intersections and disrupting Christmas celebration events to intimidating businesses and shoppers, and in some extremely worrying instances, plotting to carry out terror attacks on Canadian soil.

Raging antisemitic and anti-Western speeches by controversial Muslim imams like Adil Charkaoui and Sheikh Younus Kathrada have added fuel to the fire (Charkaoui served jail time in 2003 on charges of terrorism and was later allowed a pathway to Canadian citizenship by a judge).

Predictably, questions about uncontrolled immigration and limited social integration have gained considerable prominence in the public square, so much so that the once-taboo topic of immigration could become a hot-button issue in the next federal election. The immigration discourse was already gaining traction on account of joint economic woes and the housing crisis, but the sustained public antics post-October 7 has caused otherwise pro-immigrant Canadians to question the viability of our current policy.

Eric Kaufmann, professor of politics at the University of Buckingham and Senior Fellow at the Macdonald-Laurier Institute, said to me in an interview, “A lot of the talk about integration misses the mark because it only takes into account integration indicators like people getting jobs, learning the language, voting, participating economically and politically, and even feeling a certain attachment to their adopted country, all of which I think are going reasonably well. The main driver for integration problems that we are currently seeing in Western countries is the degree of ethnocultural shifting that is taking place on account of mass immigration. This is bringing a much greater diversity of ethnic identities and religions and results in the importation of overseas conflicts into Western societies leading to inter-communal clashes between groups such as Sikh-Hindu, Muslim-Hindu or Muslim-Jew. The other factor is Islam and its perceived incompatibility with Western culture and values. All this contributes to the rise of populist movements across the globe, particularly in Europe.” Last month, an Angus Reid poll found that more than two-in-five (43%) Canadians believe Islam to be a “harmful presence” to their country.

Out of the over 1.3 million new immigrants who permanently settled in Canada from 2016 to 2021, approximately 1.14 million of them belonged to racialized communities, with most of them coming from South Asian, African and Arab countries. In a 2018 paper, Kaufmann and Matthew Goodwin argue that white Canadians will be a minority around the year 2050. It must be pointed out that this discussion is not about any deranged notion of preserving racial purity but about the effect of quick and massive ethnocultural change. Even with some mixing between cultures, geographic, marital and social patterns remain highly structured by ethnic identity in Canada; this is as true of the majority as of minorities, with white movers avoiding more diverse locations such as Richmond, BC or Brampton, ON. This attachment to one’s own group has been proven in the scholarly literature to be independent of  any dislike of outgroups (except at times of violent conflict). Yet any mention of a sense of loss in the disruption of a previously dominant culture is immediately taken as hostility to outgroups and thus racist – a dishonest assessment.

Other countries that have traditionally welcomed a significant number of immigrants are now admitting that their immigration levels are out of control. Leaders (often privately) recognize that while linking immigration to job market needs, infrastructure capacity and economic growth opportunities is vital, greater value ought to be attached to encouraging immigrants to integrate and contribute to advancing a shared national vision. With elections looming in some of these countries, governments are taking belated measures to reduce the overall intake to appease their electorates.

The Danish government has advocated for a “zero refugee” policy. Australia announced new policies that are expected to cut down immigration by 50%. The UK Parliament passed a bill – dubbed “the toughest ever anti-illegal immigration legislation” – which aims to send illegal asylum-seekers to Rwanda. Germany approved legislation that would make it easier for authorities to quickly deport rejected asylum seekers. U.S. lawmakers are negotiating a deal to enforce security along its southern border with Mexico to combat illegal crossings.

It is worth highlighting that Denmark, Australia and Germany are run by left-wing or centre-left governments; mass immigration and social integration can be issues of concern to parties of all political stripes and not limited to “racist right-wing bigots” and “conservatives” as some might lazily portray. When asked which country Canada could take inspiration from to improve immigration controls, Kaufmann mentioned the Social Democrats in Denmark as exemplary.

“I think lowering numbers is absolutely at the heart of any successful immigration policy. I don’t think you can have high [immigration] numbers and not have a problem and you may even have different kinds of problems like antisemitism or anti-LGBTQ sentiments or communal conflicts or radicalization. Essentially, my view is that with high numbers and rapid cultural change, you simply get a loss of social connectedness. You have people in their bubbles moving around and that’s fine but when you get two groups that have an issue with each other, then you’re going to either have a conflict or you tend to get less civic-minded”, he said, citing renowned American political scientist, Robert Putnam’s thesis ‘E Pluribus Unum: Diversity and Community in the Twenty-first Century’. Putnam contends that sharp increases in immigration and ethnic diversity tend to reduce social solidarity and social capital in the short run, meaning social trust (even of one’s own race) would be lower, altruism and community cooperation rarer, and friends fewer, although on the flipside, it is likely to have long-term cultural, economic, fiscal, and developmental benefits.

When asked what continued mass immigration could mean for Canada, Kaufmann said, “I think Canada is moving in the direction of being a low-cohesion society. I mean, if that’s the choice they want to make, that’s fine. I think it’s partly because political correctness is stronger in Canada than almost anywhere else. So, it’s impossible to really have an honest debate about immigration which is one reason why the numbers are so high in Canada compared to other countries. It’s about what the elites will allow you to talk about in a democracy without labeling you a racist, which is completely dishonest, but that’s the way the debate has been conducted in Canada, as some sort of a sacred cow. It’s less sacred in Europe and so there’s more of a real debate around immigration numbers.”

Last month, fueled by concerns over growing antisemitism, the German state of Saxony-Anhalt made it mandatory for applicants wishing to live in the state to recognize Israel’s right to exist. In 2006, the Netherlands made it compulsory for prospective immigrants to watch a film with images of gay men kissing or topless women as part of the civic integration exam to test their readiness to participate in the Dutch liberal society.

When asked if such a values-based test or declaration for prospective immigrants was feasible, Kaufmann said, “People are allowed to have different opinions, even if they may be obnoxious. Even within the citizenry, there are people who don’t recognize the state of Israel and that’s an opinion you’re allowed to have. I think the test should probably focus on subjects like toleration of gays, Jews and women. However, I don’t think Canada is willing to consider qualitative culture-based criteria, such as assimilability to Canadian values, to assess potential immigrants, like they currently do in countries like Denmark, even though I think it would be a good idea. Canadian immigration is completely rooted in voodoo-based reasoning and there’s no economic or demographic rationale to it. The idea that immigration is a sustainable solution to the aging problem, for instance, has been comprehensively debunked. Somehow, it is a religion amongst Canadian elites and to some degree, across political parties. The Conservatives are too scared to touch it out of fear of being branded as racist and anti-immigrant by other parties and the media, even though most of their voters want a lot lower numbers. Regardless, you’ve got a cross-party consensus which is not based in reality.”

In 2016, federal Conservative leadership hopeful Kellie Leitch was heavily criticized, even by members of her own party, for floating the idea of screening out would-be immigrants to Canada, if they were openly intolerant or did not accept Canadian values and traditions such as respect and tolerance for other cultures, freedom of speech and equality.

The systematic dismantling and belittling of Canada’s history by our governments and institutions has left many immigrants seeing very little worth embracing in Canada, often resulting in a retention of their original values– some of which are contradictory to Canadian values and pose a hazard to the safety and security of vulnerable groups like LGBTQ, Jews, women and children.

While Kaufmann does not think Trudeau’s post-national comments have had an impact on the ground on their own, he said they reflect the mindset of the cultural left-dominated or progressive-dominated society.

“The media and the political culture in Canada are dominated by progressivism on any cultural issues, whether that be LGBTQ, religion, ethnicity or immigration. The longstanding narrative in Canadian academia about Canadian identity is that Canada’s just a multicultural country and the only thing it stands for is tolerance and diversity. In a way, multiculturalism is, more or less, a restatement of a post-national country that doesn’t really have a national identity and that’s what the elites want. It is a national identity that claims to have the moral high ground by proclaiming we don’t care about ethnicity or culture because we’re so virtuous and that is really what Trudeau implied. This is still a kind of national identity but based on pride in being holier than thou. His comments reflect an elitist philosophy that has led to record levels of immigration and poor integration.”

The Israel-Hamas war has highlighted the failure of integration inevitably resulting from rapid and uncontrolled mass immigration. Scenes of protestors disrupting Black Friday shopping and Christmas celebrations, or even threatening to kill people in the presence of police officers, were unimaginable in Canada not long ago.

First or second-generation immigrants like me – whether they be permanent residents, students, illegal aliens, or citizens – have immensely benefitted from the magnanimity of Western countries like Canada. In many cases we were offered refuge from the hatred, tyranny, racism, sexism, terrorism, and violence of our home countries. It should not be considered controversial or racist to point out instances of fellow immigrants treating Western generosity and tolerance as weaknesses to be manipulated, bragging about their growing numbers and the political clout they have amassed in liberal democracies (apparently without awareness of the hypocrisy apparent in their support for illiberal tyrannies whose violence drove them to take refuge in the West in the first place). Aaron Wudrick, Director of Domestic Policy at the Macdonald-Laurier Institute, encapsulates this view accurately in his tweet: “The important question isn’t how Canadians identify in terms of ethnicity. It’s whether they identify as *Canadian* and feel any attachment, belonging or commitment to our shared institutions.”

It is dishonest and irrational to label everyone concerned about out-of-control immigration numbers and the need for social cohesion as racist or xenophobic. The sooner we rid ourselves of fallacious name calling, the sooner we can start a serious debate about the best way forward for a compassionate and sustainable immigration policy that prioritizes Canada’s long-term national unity, security and economic interests.

Joe Adam George is a former foreign policy and national security research intern with the Washington, D.C.-based policy think tank, Hudson Institute, and a communications strategist.

Before Post

Related Topics:

Todayville is a digital media and technology company. We profile unique stories and events in our community. Register and promote your community event for free.

Follow Author

More from this author
Business / 3 hours ago

A Rush to the Exits: It’s Not Just Immigration, Canada Has an Emigration Crisis

Alberta / 3 hours ago

REPORT: Alberta municipalities hit with $37 million carbon tax tab in 2023

Frontier Centre for Public Policy / 11 hours ago

It’s Time To Stop Church Arsons And What Fuels Them

Crime

Mexican cartels are a direct threat to Canada’s public safety, and the future of North American trade

Published on November 21, 2024

By

From the Macdonald Laurier Institute

By Gary J. Hale for Inside Policy

RCMP raided a fentanyl ‘superlab’ in Falkland, BC, with ties to a transnational criminal network that spans from Mexico to China.

On October 31, residents of Falkland, BC, were readying their children for a night of Halloween fun. Little did they know that their “quaint, quiet, and low-key little village” was about to make national headlines for all the wrong reasons.

On that day, RCMP announced that it had raided a fentanyl “superlab” of scary proportions near Falkland – one that police called the “largest and most sophisticated” drug operation in Canada. Officers seized nearly half-a-billion-dollars’ worth of illicit materials, including 54 kilograms of finished fentanyl, 390 kilograms of methamphetamine, 35 kilograms of cocaine, 15 kilograms of MDMA, and six kilograms of cannabis” as well as AR-15-style guns, silencers, small explosive devices, body armour, and vast amounts of ammunition.

They also found massive quantities of “precursor chemicals” used to make the drugs. This strongly suggests that the superlab was tied into a transnational criminal network that spans from Mexico to China – one that uses North America’s transportation supply chains to spread its poisonous cargo across Canada and the United States.

The Canada-US-Mexico relationship is comprised of many interests, but the economic benefits of trade between the nations is one of the driving forces that keep these neighbours profitably engaged. The CUSMA trade agreement is the successor to NAFTA and is the strongest example globally of a successful economic co-operation treaty. It benefits all three signatories. This level of interdependence under CUSMA requires all parties to recognize their respective vulnerabilities and attempt to mitigate any threats, risks, or dangers to trade and to the overall relationship. What happens to one affects all the others.

The supply chain, and the transport infrastructure that supports it, affects the balance books of all three. While the supply chain is robust and currently experiences only occasional delays, the different types of transport that make up the supply chain – such as trucks, trains, and sea-going vessels – are extremely vulnerable to disruption or stoppages because of the unchecked violence and crime attributed to the activities of Mexican Transnational Criminal Organizations (TCOs). These cartels operate throughout Mexico, from the Pacific ports to the northern plains at the US-Mexico border.

The sophistication of the Falkland superlab strongly suggests connectivity to multi-national production, transportation, and distribution networks that likely include China (supply of raw products) and Mexico (clandestine laboratory expertise).

For most Canadians, Mexican cartels call to mind the stereotypical villains of TV and movie police dramas. But their power and influence is very real – as is the threat they pose to all three CUSMA nations.

Mexico’s cartels: a deadly and growing threat

Mexican cartels started as drug trafficking organizations (DTOs) in the 1960s. By the late 1990s they had evolved to become transnational enterprises as they expanded their business beyond locally produced drugs (originally marijuana and heroin) to include primarily Colombian cocaine that they transported through Mexico en route to the US and Canada.

Marijuana and the opium poppy are cultivated in Mexico and, in the case of weed, taken to market in raw form. While the cartels required some chemicals sourced from outside Mexico to extract opium from the poppy and convert it into heroin, the large-scale, multi-ton production of synthetic drugs like Methamphetamine and today Fentanyl expanded the demand for sources of precursor chemicals (where the chemical is slightly altered at the molecular level to become the drug) and essential chemicals (chemicals used to extract, process, or clean the drugs.)

The need to acquire cocaine and chemicals internationalized the cartels. Mexican TCO’s now operate on every continent. That presence involves all the critical stages of the criminal business cycle: production, transportation, distribution, and re-capitalization. Some of the money from drug proceeds flow south from Canada and the US back to Mexico to be retained as profits, while other funds are used to keep the enterprise well-funded and operational.

In Mexico, the scope of their activities is economy-wide; they now operate many lines of criminal business. Some directly affect Mexico’s economic security, such as petroleum theft, intellectual property theft (mainly pirated DVDs and CDs), adulterating drinking alcohol, and exploiting public utilities. Others are in “traditional” criminal markets, such as prostitution, extortion, kidnapping, weapons smuggling, migrant smuggling and human trafficking. Organized auto theft has also become another revenue stream.

Criminal Actors

The Cartel de Sinaloa (CDS or Sinaloa Cartel) and the Cartel Jalisco Nueva Generacion (CJNG) are the two principal TCO’s vying for territorial control of Mexico’s air, land, and maritime ports, as well as illegal crossing points. These points on the cartel map are known as “plazas,” and are often between formal ports of entry into the US. By controlling territories crucial for the inbound and outbound movement of drugs, precursors, people, and illegal proceeds, the cartels secretly transport illicit goods and people through commercial supply chains, thus subjecting the transportation segment of legitimate North American trade to the most risk.

That is giving the cartels the power to impair – and even control – the movement of Mexico’s legitimate trade. While largely kept out of the public domain, incidents of forced payment of criminal taxation fees, called “cuotas,” and other similar threats to international business operations are already occurring. For instance, cuotas are being imposed on the transnational business of exporting used cars from the US to Mexico. They’re also being forced on Mexican avocado and lime exporters before the cartels will allow their products to cross the border to the US and international markets. This has crippled that particular trade. Unfortunately, the Mexican government has been slow to react, and the extortion persists throughout Mexico. It is worth repeating – these entirely legitimate goods reach the market only after cartel conditions are met and bribes paid.

The free trade and soft border policies of the US of recent years have allowed cartel operatives to enter that country and work the drug trade with limited consequence. In May, the U.S. Drug Enforcement Administration (DEA) published the National Drug Threat Assessment 2024, where it reported that the Jalisco and Sinaloa cartels operate in all 50 US states and are engaged in armed violence in American cities as they fight for market shares of the sales of Methamphetamine, Fentanyl, and other drugs sourced from Mexico.

The DEA’s findings should sound alarms in Canada. Canada and the US have similar trade and immigration policies, which allow the Mexican cartels to easily enter and control the wholesale component of the drug trade. The long-term effects of the drug trade are the billions of dollars gained that allow for the corruption of government officials. Canada should be on guard: Mexican drug cartels in Canada could begin to not only kill ordinary Canadians by knowingly selling them deadly drugs like Fentanyl – their operatives can also embed themselves in Canadian society, as they have in the US, leading to ordinary citizens on Canadian streets being victimized by the armed violence cartels regularly use to assert their position and power.

Organized crime and Mexican governance

Canada faces these threats directly, but the indirect ones that the cartels present to Mexican governance are no less consequential to Canada in the long term – and likely sooner. Illicit agreements between corrupt Mexican government officials and the cartels assure that the crime organizations retain control of territory and have freedom to operate.

That threat is becoming increasingly existential. Cartel fighters are well disciplined, well equipped and strong enough to challenge Mexico’s military, currently the government’s main tool to fight them. Should the TCOs come to dominate Mexican society or gain decisive influence over government policy, Mexico’s government risks being declared a narco-democracy and the US may come to see the cartels as a threat to national security. That in turn could lead to a US military intervention in Mexico – not an outcome desired by either side.

While that scenario may be considered extreme, it is not as far from reality as many may think. While in many respects the US-Mexico trading relationship remains unchanged, the overall political context has become testy – and could be a real flashpoint for the incoming Trump administration.

Political developments in Mexico have played a role. After his election in 2018, former Mexican President Andrés Manuel López Obrador (commonly referred to his initials, AMLO) demonstrated a disdain for all things North American. This included frequent complaints of US interference or violation of Mexican sovereignty – complaints that were more about keeping Mexican government domestic actions out of the public eye. To retain a shroud of secrecy over government corruption, Mexico under Amlo started in 2022 to limit the activities and numbers of US federal law enforcement agencies operating there, particularly the FBI, DEA, ATF and ICE. These agencies formerly enjoyed a close relationship with the Mexican Federal Police – a force AMLO disbanded and replaced with the National Guard. The AMLO administration reduced the number of US assets and agents in Mexico, particularly singling out the DEA for the most punitive restrictions.

During his administration, AMLO placed the army and navy in charge of all ports of entry and gave them responsibility for all domestic public safety and security by subordinating the Guardia Nacional (GN), or National Guard, to the army. The GN, the only federal law enforcement agency, has been taken over by military officials who are sometimes corrupt and in league with the cartels.

Mexican President Claudia Sheinbaum, who took office in 2024, has continued AMLO’s organizational moves. Sheinbaum comes from the same political party and has so far extended carte blanche to the military, whose administration is opaque and now operates with impunity, under the guise of “national security” and “sovereignty” concerns.

It is expected that Sheinbaum will continue to shield American eyes from Mexico law enforcement and judicial affairs. The fear in the US law enforcement and national security community is that Sheinbaum may even declare DEA non grata, much as then Venezuelan President Hugo Chavez in 2005 and Bolivian President Evo Morales in 2008 did in their countries. Both were anti-American leftists of the same mindset as AMLO and Sheinbaum, who feared detection of their connections to the illegal drug trade.

Sheinbaum has publicly demonstrated disinterest in the consistent application of the rule of law against the TCOs by stating that she will continue the “hugs not bullets” (“abrazos, no balazos”) non-confrontational, non-interventional posture towards organized crime. Agreements with corrupt government officials will allow the cartels to expand their business and to operate with impunity. Through intimidation, bribery, and murder, the cartels affect decision making at the municipal, state, and federal levels of Mexican government. That leverage, while performed outside the public eye, has the potential to negatively affect supply and demand among the three countries at the very least, and at worst, to signal that cartels in Mexico are directly or indirectly involved in the formulation of government security, immigration, drug, and trade policy.

AMLO enacted constitutional changes that will provide Sheinbaum with the powers of a dictator, giving her administration unchecked control of the executive, legislative, and judicial branches of government. As a result, the judiciary in Mexico is in crisis mode with 8 of 11 Supreme Court Justices resigning in October 2024 to protest the unconstitutional disregard for due process that started with AMLO and continues with Sheinbaum thanks to a “voting for judges” law that she and AMLO have rammed into operation without debate. This development portends even more corruption.

Without the existence of an independent judicial system, these institutional changes could give pause to US and Canadian negotiators when it comes time to renew CUSMA in 2026.

Beyond 2025: Mexican organized crime as a threat to the US and Canada, and Greater North American implications

Most worrying, the cartels will be in a yet stronger position to affect and even dictate the pace and volume of legitimate trade between the US and Mexico under Sheinbaum. This makes Mexico the weakest link among the three CUSMA members.

The US and Canada should therefore be concerned about the strength and power of the cartels because the current trajectory could provide them a greater role in Mexico’s performance as a trade partner. Should this trend continue, the US would likely begin to see Mexico through the lens of a threat to critical components of its national security: 1) the public safety of US citizens being killed in epidemic proportions by the drugs produced by citizens of Mexico; 2) the negative impact or increased cost of commerce that supplies goods to the American market; and 3) the CUSMA relationship that sustains the economic strength of all three participating countries.

This worrisome evolution requires proactivity by Canada and the US to insist that Sheinbaum reverse the gains that the cartels have made to influence policy and erode the government’s monopoly on territorial control and the use of violence, and reverse Mexico’s limits on drug enforcement co-operation with what should be its partners to the north. Pressure should also be applied to demand a return to a drug policy model that includes international law enforcement co-operation and a continuation towards the transformation of the Mexican judicial system from a mixed inquisitorial or accusatorial system to an adversarial system that employs the use of juries, witness testimony, oral hearings and trials, and cross-examination of witnesses, as opposed to a system where cartel-influenced elections could dictate judicial outcomes.

The implications of the further development of a Mexico narco-democracy for US-Mexico-Canada relations would be devastating. Co-operation on public safety and security would cease completely, allowing the cartels to take full control of commercial supply lines, significantly reducing trade between the three nations – likely causing the CUSMA trade deal to fracture until governance returned to duly elected civilian officials.

Continental security and Canada’s contribution

The continued success of CUSMA lies with Mexico more than any other country. Should Mexico continue on its path to autocracy, it could upset the trade deal, crucial to the prosperity of all three countries. Canada is not immune from what on the surface may appear to be mostly bilateral, US-Mexico issues, because, regardless of the commodity – whether it’s consumables or manufactured items – the cartels are positioned and empowered to affect imports, exports, trade, and migration throughout North America.

For the foreseeable future, Mexico is not going to voluntarily change its security posture. This enables the cartels to remain persistent threats, especially to trade. Canada and the US need to continue to jointly insist that Mexico take a stronger stance against organized crime and that it take steps to strengthen the judiciary and the rule of law in that country.

Gary J. Hale served 31 years in the Drug Enforcement Administration (DEA), retiring as an executive-level intelligence analyst. In 2010, he was appointed as Drug Policy fellow and Mexico Studies Scholar at the James A. Baker III Institute for Public Policy at Rice University in Houston, Texas.

Continue Reading

Business

Canada’s struggle against transnational crime & money laundering

Published on November 7, 2024

By

From the Macdonald-Laurier Institute

By Alex Dalziel and Jamie Ferrill

In this episode of the Macdonald-Laurier Institute’s Inside Policy Talks podcast, Senior Fellow and National Security Project Lead Alex Dalziel explores the underreported issue of trade-based money laundering (TBML) with Dr. Jamie Ferrill, the head of financial crime studies at Charles Sturt University in Canberra, Australia and a former Canada Border Services Agency officer.

The discussion focuses on how organized crime groups use global trade transactions to disguise illicit proceeds and the threat this presents to the Canada’s trade relationship with the US and beyond.

Definition of TBML: Trade-based money laundering disguises criminal proceeds by moving value through trade transactions instead of transferring physical cash. Criminals (usually) exploit international trade by  manipulating trade documents, engaging in phantom shipping, and altering invoices to disguise illicit funds as legitimate commerce, bypassing conventional financial scrutiny. As Dr. Ferrill explains, “we have dirty money that’s been generated through things like drug trafficking, human trafficking, arms trafficking, sex trafficking, and that money needs to be cleaned in one way or another. Trade is one of the ways that that’s done.”

A Pervasive Problem: TBML is challenging to detect due to the vast scale and complexity of global trade, making it an attractive channel for organized crime groups. Although global estimates are imprecise, the Financial Action Task Force and The United Nations Office on Drugs and Crime (UNODC) suggests 2-5% of GDP could be tied to money laundering, representing trillions of dollars annually. In Canada, this could mean over $70 billion in potentially laundered funds each year. Despite the scope of TBML, Canada has seen no successful prosecutions for criminal money laundering through trade, highlighting significant gaps in identifying, investigating and prosecuting these complex cases.

Canada’s Vulnerabilities: Along with the sheer volume and complexity of global trade, Canada’s vulnerabilities stem from gaps in anti-money laundering regulation, particularly in high-risk sectors like real estate, luxury goods, and legal services, where criminals exploit weak oversight. Global trade exemplifies the vulnerabilities in oversight, where gaps and limited controls create substantial opportunities for money laundering. A lack of comprehensive export controls also limits Canada’s ability to monitor goods leaving the country effectively. Dr. Ferrill notes that “If we’re seen as this weak link in the process, that’s going to have significant implications on trade partnerships,” underscoring the potential political risks to bilateral trade if Canada fails to address these issues.

International and Private Sector Cooperation: Combating TBML effectively requires strong international cooperation, particularly between Canada and key trade partners like the U.S. The private sector—including freight forwarders, customs brokers, and financial institutions—plays a crucial role in spotting suspicious activities along the supply chain. As Dr. Ferrill emphasizes, “Canada and the U.S. can definitely work together more efficiently and effectively to share and then come up with some better strategies,” pointing to the need for increased collaboration to strengthen oversight and disrupt these transnational crime networks.

Looking to further understand the threat of transnational organized crime to Canada’s borders?

Check out Inside Policy Talks recent podcasts with Christian Leuprecht, Todd Hataley  and Alan Bersin.

To learn more about Dr. Ferrill’s research on TBML, check out her chapter in Dirty Money: Financial Crime in Canada.

Continue Reading

Trending

X