An election now? Are we ready for disinformation and foreign interference?

Une élection maintenant ? Sommes-nous prêts pour la désinformation et l'ingérence étrangère ?

(An “Elbows Up” gathering on Parliament Hill in Ottawa on Sunday, March 16. Its organizers have announced another for Toronto for March 22 at Nathan Phillips Square, 2:30-4pm.)

(Pour le texte français, voir l'article séparée intitulée « Une élection maintenant ? Sommes-nous prêts pour la désinformation et l'ingérence étrangère » ?)

Themes of today’s newsletter

Happy St. Patrick’s Day, everyone, and thank you to all those who engaged with the newsletter of March 8, “Canada’s Future,” and the six connected “What Must We Do?” discussions on this Pledge for Canada Substack site. We have added some relevant new pieces to each of them (** - see the summary of additions at the end of this post). Let us know what you think.

Today’s newsletter focuses on external and internal threats to the solidarity necessary to beat back the threats to Canada and build a more resilient Canada and more robust democracy.

We are posing two related questions for your reflection and discussion.

First, what are the risks to our security and democracy of disinformation, especially from Musk’s toxic X (so toxic that the Supreme Court of Canada has just announced it is leaving X )?

And second, will an election in our always-adversarial, first-past-the-post system undermine the unity and projection of unity necessary as we develop our national plans -- especially if we cannot manage the disinformation and foreign interference we can assuredly expect around the election?

Plutocracy, Foreign States, and Disinformation

Can Canadians have confidence that the measures necessary to protect against online disinformation and foreign meddling are in place?

A major wake-up call has received limited attention because of everything else going on. But we cannot afford to ignore it. The Canadian Security Establishment predicted in a report on March 3 a surge of use of AI for election interference by China, Russia and Iran on March 3. Here is their summary conclusion:

We assess that the PRC, Russia, and Iran will very likely use AI tools to attempt to interfere with Canada’s 2025 federal election, including to support disinformation campaigns and hack-and-leak operations. …. Canadian politicians and political parties are at heightened risk of being targeted by cyber threat actors, particularly through phishing attempts.

Despite these threats, we judge that it is very unlikely that AI-enabled activities will fundamentally undermine the integrity of Canada's next general election. CSE is working closely with federal partners to ensure the security of our democratic processes and defend our elections from cyber threats.

Are we really going to go into an election on a bill of faith that CSE’s “very unlikely” judgment and its “working closely” promise are all we need? Parliament has not met for three months. Surely it needs to form its own judgment of preparedness. It also needs assurances about what has been done to prepare the next election given the Hogue Commission on Foreign Interference report and recommendations were released at the end of January during prorogation.

And what about interference from the US?

Musk has shown absolutely no compunction about interfering in the politics of foreign countries, supporting parties that best conform to his techno-fascism, and spreading in his own country and globally his toxic mix of misinformation and conspiracy theories that inflame divisions and exploit fault line. What better example of how plutocracy undermines democracy and democratic values than the enormous power Musk has managed to accumulate and exercise through his ownership of X (surely to be deepened by his AI investments), his corporate holdings and now his integration into the US White House.

Image from the CBC with the caption: “Elon Musk gestures as he speaks on screen during a central election campaign event for the far-right Alternative für Deutschland (AfD) party in Halle, Germany, on Jan. 25. (Karina Hessland/Reuters)”

Member of Parliament Charlie Angus has been leading efforts to alert Elections Canada up to these dangers of election interference, asking whether Elections Canada has the regulatory power and the institutional will to engage in oversight of what X/Musk might do. The response form the Chief Electoral Officer of Canada has not been encouraging. Here is Charlie’s letter to the Chief Electoral Officer and here is his summary of why he is concerned, the CEO response and his efforts with the Elections Canada enforcement officer, the Commissioner of Elections Canada.

Professor Ron Diebert, the head of Citizen Lab at the University of Toronto and a world-authority on digital surveillance and its use to undermine democracy, has written in Macleans a few days ago day about the ways in which the US is descending into an authoritarian state with techno-fascist elements and dragging the Canadian government into its web. See “The U.S. Wants Canada to Become A Police State: Appeasing Trump’s border demands only emboldens authoritarians worldwide. Here’s why we must resist.” Diebert warns that Musk’s integration into the US security apparatus and Trump’s commitment to silence or punish his critics cannot be ignored by Canada.

United States Senator Chris Murphy delivered a 30-minute speech on the floor of the Senate, diagramming the interpenetration of the corruption of the Musk and Trump ‘business’ world with the Trump and Musk ‘government’ world. This will shake anyone who has, until now, not been sufficiently shaken. See “Six Weeks In, This White House Is On Its Way To Being The Most Corrupt In U.S. History” on YouTube.

And, one of the world’s leading historians and analysts of fascism, Yale professor Tim Snyder, just published a newsletter only yesterday entitled “Blame Canada: Our warmongering, drugged-out conspiracy theory” He explains how the evolving fascism within the US Republican administration connects up with the threat to Canada. He starts by reminding the readers of how propaganda was used to soften up Germans for an image of Poland as enemy before the invasion of that country:

Hitler… and his propagandists piled up the fictions about Poland. They pretended that Poland did not really exist as a state, but also that Poland was the aggressor and had started the war.

He then concludes:

The fentanyl propaganda is most likely designed to prepare Americans to see Canada as an enemy. The only way for the United States to achieve such a territorial aggrandizement would be threats intending to make Canadians surrender, or an actual invasion of Canada. In such a pursuit, associating Canada with our addiction crisis is useful propaganda.

Why not blame the Canadians for what we do to ourselves? And then punish them for it? And when they do not solve an essentially American problem, as of course they cannot, then let Canadians be targeted for further lies and hatred.

The “Blame Canada” song from South Park was always a satire of America, but at least a comforting one, as it showed American self-awareness. Its last two lines: “We must blame them and cause a fuss/Before somebody thinks of blaming us!” This is now happening, as reality, and it has to be faced.

After reading Snyder, have a look at the remarkable public-service effort on the “Letter from a Maritimer” Substack publication of Elisabeth Rybak to provide a detailed timeline of the threats and tensions and is aimed at educating American audiences. But it is useful – big time – for us as well. With it in hand, one can draw more informed conclusions about what this pattern of conduct might or might not mean and where it might or might not lead to. The Pledge has already begun sharing this with news agencies in the US – including one major legacy broadcaster that sent back the message that this summary was valuable. Written by Mugsy Margolit, read it here.

So, what do we do – at a moment when news reporting is assuming the Prime Minister intends to have an election called as soon as the end of this week?

To kick start the conversation alongside all the above contributions, here’s a Canadian Press news article (“Should Canada ban X and Tesla? Why calls are growing”) from February 3 in which Charlie Angus and former Foreign Minister Lloyd Axworthy are quoted as calling for bold action – their calls coming over six weeks ago and yet we have heard nothing from Ottawa.

What do you think?

Is now the time for an election and are we ready?

There is no shortage of commentary that we need an election – to hear from the parties just what their plans are to fight the tariffs, to build a stronger Canada, and to secure a mandate from Canadians to deal with the US. Here is an example from the Globe and Mail editorial board. (* - It is also reproduced below as appendix 1 because it is available only to Globe subscribers via the link.).

Mark Bourrie offers the Liberals some advice about why they should not rush to an election. Putting aside any partisan reasons in the advice, and looking especially at his fourth and fifth reasons (the need to recall Parliament for a relief bill), what are your thoughts? See: “Mr. Carney, please don’t call an election now”

Are we really ready for an election given the risks of foreign interference? Will an election simply deepen our divisions when it’s unity – or as close to it as possible -- that we need? And what of the issues that need immediate attention? We are already seeing layoffs at Algoma Steel and we can expect carnage in the automobile assembly and parts industry.

***

*Appendix 1:

The election Canadians need now

The Editorial Board, Globe and Mail

Published March 12, 2025

Mark Carney was chosen as the new Liberal Party leader on Sunday. This week, he will be sworn in as prime minister by the Governor-General, and he will name a cabinet. Then comes his first critical decision: when to trigger a general election.

The only correct answer is, “Immediately.”

There are indications that Mr. Carney has already decided to act fairly quickly. Insiders on his team have told the Globe and Mail that he likely will call a vote for April 28 or May 5.

That’s not bad. But he could do even better than that, if he wanted. The shortest allowable campaign is 37 days (the longest is 51), which means Canadians could go to the polls on April 21 were he to ask Rideau Hall to call an election as soon as this week.

Why the rush, you ask? A big reason is that a federal general election is overdue, and the only thing that has prevented one from taking place before now has been crude Liberal Party self-interest.

The government of Prime Minister Justin Trudeau was in zombie mode last fall, when the party stood more than 20 points behind the Conservative Party in the polls, and Mr. Trudeau’s personal approval ratings were just as rank.

Mr. Trudeau was finally pushed out by his caucus in early January, when he prorogued Parliament until March 24 and said he would step down the minute the party named a new leader.

Thanks to prorogation, this government has limped on without the demonstrated backing of Parliament through a confidence vote, and with the threat of a non-confidence vote hanging over its head.

Mr. Carney, too, lacks the demonstrated confidence of Parliament. He doesn’t even hold a seat in the House; he will be the first Canadian prime minister to come to power without ever having been elected to office. He needs to let all Canadians, and not the approximately 130,000 registered Liberals who voted for him in the leadership race, choose who leads this country without delay.

But above all, in a time of crisis like this, when the United States is waging a harmful trade war and openly threatening to annex some or all of the country, Canada needs to be led by a government with a strong mandate to fight back by all means necessary.

Some might argue that holding an election now, when U.S. President Donald Trump is planning to unleash another round of tariffs on Canadian goods on April 2 – right in the middle of the campaign – is a distraction from the emergency facing the country.

But that misses the point. Mr. Trump would eat a lame-duck Liberal government for lunch, knowing it doesn’t have broad public support, let alone a mandate from voters. He only respects strength.

Others might worry that an election would be divisive at a time when national unity is critical. But again, continuing with the Liberal government, or with some sort of unity government, comes across as desperation and improvisation, instead of as resolute self-determination.

No, Canadians need an election now so they find out what each party is proposing, to hear the parties’ leaders debate and defend their ideas and, frankly, to get to see Mr. Carney’s technocrat chops tested on the campaign trail by Conservative Leader Pierre Poilievre’s everyman populism.

Some voters will no doubt be watching to see who they think could best handle the mercurial Mr. Trump (we mean no offence to mercury). But leading Canada over the next four years will be about so much more than simply trying to figure out what makes him tick.

Canadians are ready for bold actions from their government – actions that will address the economic issues that have put the country at the mercy of a capricious U.S. President, that will make it less dependent on an unreliable ally, and which will allow it to defend itself, its interests and its democratic allies in a credible and forceful way.

We are in the final days of the old Canada, in which the complacency caused by the country’s over-reliance on the United States for trade and defence kept our ambitions small and our horizons limited.

A new, more mature and confident Canada begins with an election that has been put off for too long. If this country intends to grow up and take its place in the world, the time to start is today.

**Appendix 2:

Here is a summary of additions to the six “What Must We Do” posts and discussions:

· Work and Livelihood in Canada’s future (letter from the CLC to PM Mark Carney with four immediate-term demands)

· both Authoritarian US & Defending Canada’s Democracy (the same two pieces added in both, being a Canadian professor Ron Deibert’s presentation to the US Senate’s Intelligence Committee on the US descent into authoritarianism and techno-fascism and its knock-on effects for Canada and the world and the above-mentioned Tim Snyder piece)

· Building a country & Business in a Future Canada (same article from a labour economist, Angela McEwan, outlining a progressive economic strategy that, amongst other things, argues that the emphasis on lifting interprovincial trade barriers exaggerates the benefits)

· Military and Civil Defence (a debate in the form of two contrasting articles on whether Canada must or should increase defence spending, one from Dan Gardner and one from Luke Savage).