Canada’s election will be marked by foreign interference. We aren’t ready.

We were warned. For years, experts, officials, and even a federal commission told us foreign states were interfering in Canadian politics, including our elections, and had no plans to stop. Indeed, they were getting better at it, more sophisticated, harder to detect and counter. And we weren’t ready.

Now that the country’s 45th general election is underway, foreign interference is once again a live, headline issue. The campaign isn’t even a week old, but already the stories of foreign meddling, past and present, are piling up. 

The Globe and Mail broke two stories in the past few days. A CSIS source alleges India interfered in the 2022 Conservative leadership race to help Pierre Poilievre get elected, but Poilievre wasn't made aware because he didn’t get, and still doesn’t have, security clearance. The Globe is also reporting that Liberal Party MP Chandra Arya was kept from running for the party leadership and for re-election in his riding because of alleged foreign interference, also linked to India. 

In some ways, this is old news – or new versions of old news. For instance, in the 2019 election, China allegedly funded pro-China candidates, and former Conservative Party leader Erin O’Toole says Chinese interference cost his party as many as nine seats in the 2021 contest. That same year, a Chinese diplomat even threatened Conservative MP Michael Chong, and was declared persona non grata by Canada in 2023.

None of this should be too surprising. Canada’s Security and Intelligence Threats to Elections (SITE) task force has warned that, once more, China, Russia and India are likely to interfere in the current election in a bid to advance their national interests, particularly through the use of social media, artificial intelligence and networks around the world. Their tools and tactics rely first and foremost on spreading information, particularly mis- and disinformation, aimed at shaping political discourse and electoral outcomes.

Some Canadian politicians aren’t helping matters. Alberta premier Danielle Smith, whom Observer columnist Max Fawcett identified as “Mark Carney’s secret weapon,” made headlines for a March 8 interview with US-outlet Breitbart in which she says of Trump’s tariffs on Canada, "What I fear, is that the longer this dispute goes on, politicians posture, and it seems to be benefiting the Liberals right now.” 

Smith said she pushed the Trump administration to “put things on pause” until after the election so Canada could have “the best person at the table make the argument for how they would deal with it.” That person, she said, was Pierre Poilievre, whose perspective “on balance” would be “very much in sync with the new direction in America.” 

It may look as if Smith courted foreign help to elect Poilievre, but that wouldn’t necessarily be interference as defined by law. When the story broke, critics cried collusion and foreign interference, which she denies. And she’s supported by Canada’s chief electoral officer Stéphane Perrault, who says Smith broke no election laws. But while she may not have broken any laws, her approach to making Canada’s case to the U.S. amounts to asking a foreign power to make policy decisions to shape domestic electoral outcomes – something Canadians ought to be concerned about, especially right now.

Sorting out what counts as foreign interference and what doesn’t is tricky, though. In January, Trump advisor Elon Musk called Justin Trudeau an “insufferable tool” and voiced his support for Poilievre. In response to complaints that this was foreign interference, SITE noted public opinions don’t meet that bar. Musk’s public statements were opinions, which anyone is free to evaluate for themselves. Officials are more concerned about covert efforts by foreign states to manipulate election outcomes through clandestine means.

The distinction between foreign, clandestine efforts and public statements open to debate is important. We ought to protect and defend free expression in the public sphere by Canadians and non-Canadians alike. Imagine if, say, another country such as the U.S. or India tried to ban Canadians talking about them and their elections on social media or in the press? We’d oppose that, and rightfully so. Yet not all of us can tell the difference between organic and inorganic information, between good-faith argument or opinion and foreign-funded, covert attempts to manipulate the public, for instance by sharing fake news or doctored images, or launching bot-based online harassment campaigns. And that is a going concern.

Despite the warnings, the federal reports, the news stories and the watchful eye of SITE, Canadians aren’t prepared to deal with the threat of foreign interference, nor is our endangered media system. Addressing foreign interference requires vigilant citizens who read carefully and aren’t too quick to boost messages on social media that match their existing preferences and preconceived notions. It requires politicians who refuse to weaponize foreign interference against their opponents and campaign heads who refuse help from dodgy sources. And it requires a healthy supply of good, reliable information that will displace and overrun the bad information. These needs come at a time when polarization and distrust are growing and media outlets are cutting back or closing shop all together, especially locally. 

We need to try to counter foreign threats nonetheless. We have thoroughly entered an era of foreign interference that includes our (erstwhile) ally, the U.S. government, as a threat for the first time. Managing our democratic institutions during this time requires that we prepare and adapt, as a state and as individuals, without giving in to overbearing calls for censorship. That’s a project that must begin with recognizing, in real time, that we face a problem that cuts across partisan and other lines – a challenge that may be bigger than the interference itself, but one that is nonetheless worth facing head on, and heads up.