'Leave the oil in the ground': Same debates, different country
It's different in Guyana, Selwin reports: 'Where you have strong economic interests, that will prevail.' Between Exxon and Chevron, American companies 'now control the majority of Guyana's oil output … so it's heavily in the interest of the U.S. to protect their economic interests.'
Article content
(Exxon, operator and owner of 45 per cent of Guyana's Stabroek block, forecasts its output there to nearly double to 1.3 million bpd by the end of 2027. And Chevron now owns 30 per cent of the block.)
Article content
There's no denying Canada is economically tied to America's hip, yet this conversation with Selwin is a reminder of the choices Canada retains.
Article content
Foreign companies do invest in Canada's extractive sectors, but domestic ownership remains strong and influential. And while Canadians are struggling to define First Nations treaty rights within Confederation, we don't have another nation actually challenging our sovereignty. Venezuela is actively disputing Guyana's control over the Essequibo region, territory that makes up two-thirds of Guyana's landmass and includes oil and other resources.
Article content
Article content
Selwin has thought deeply about the issues that bubble in nation-building endeavours and he's savvy enough to know what's negotiable. Right now, he's especially focused on one question: Who benefits from Guyana's resource windfall?
Article content
After the first significant oil discovery in offshore Guyana was made by ExxonMobil, Selwin argued his country should adopt something similar to the Alaska sovereign wealth fund model.
Article content
'I believe it is critical that the public remains vigilant,' Selwin wrote then in a Guyanese newspaper, 'and so I urge that we go the path of Alaska by adopting a model of dividends for all. The introduction of the Alaska model of paying dividends to every Alaskan from their oil and gas resources would work wonders to strengthen the good governance model and ensure an engaged populace.'
Article content
Article content
How many Canadians know oilsands projects contribute roughly 3 per cent of our country's total GDP? How many Canadians understand the mechanics of equalization payments, how wealth is transferred from have to have-not provinces to ensure non-renewable resource bounty is shared?
Article content
Ultimately, a sovereign wealth fund was created in Guyana but, Selwin reports, the funds have largely been squandered. He did the math at the end of 2024, to see what the outcome could have been if the government of Guyana had heeded his advice. (He's a former investment banker, so his calculations are credible.) The fund would likely have grown to roughly $1.5 billion, he estimates, the equivalent of US$50,000 to $60,000 for every Guyanese citizen, and would continue to grow quickly, he adds.
Article content
Selwin is encouraging leaders in Guyana to focus not just on the building of physical infrastructure, but on the building of a culture of productivity in the country as well.
Article content
What's that, I ask. 'That's culture where it's not just about the pay,' he says, it's culture that 'respects the dignity of being productive.'
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
CTV News
a few seconds ago
- CTV News
Canada is trying to salvage its relationship with Mexico after falling out with Trump
MEXICO CITY - Prime Minister Mark Carney is scrambling to save his country's relationship with Mexico after it disintegrated late last year when Canadian officials suggested they'd be better off negotiating a trade deal with the Trump administration alone. Carney attempted to break the ice in a phone call with Mexican President Claudia Sheinbaum in July by complimenting an indigenous-made soccer ball she had gifted him at their last meeting and saying he hoped to visit Mexico soon. The warm overture, relayed to Reuters by three people familiar with the call, highlights Canada's attempt to repair the damage after a string of public slights by Canadian officials, including Ontario Premier Doug Ford, who said in November that any comparison of Canada to Mexico was 'the most insulting thing I've ever heard.' Mexico and Canada are in many ways natural allies. They've benefited from trilateral trade deals with the U.S. for 31 years: first the North American Free Trade Agreement in 1994 and subsequently the U.S.-Mexico-Canada Agreement that replaced it in 2020. But the relationship between the two countries has been beset by allegations of betrayal on both sides and memories of fraught negotiations with Trump. Top officials virtually stopped talking in November after former Canadian Prime Minister Justin Trudeau mused about cutting a trade deal with the U.S. without Mexico, suggesting the U.S. and Canada were more aligned on issues like China. A few days later, Trudeau flew to Mar-a-Lago for a surprise visit with U.S. President Donald Trump, stunning Mexican officials. It seemed as if Canada had already developed a strategy for dealing with Trump while Mexico was wringing its hands, one Mexican official said. An infuriated Sheinbaum directed her lieutenants to stop dealing with the Canadians, at least until Trudeau left office, according to the official, who spoke on condition of anonymity. Nine months later, Canada finds itself on the back foot with Trump while Mexico is reveling in its relative success. Last week, Trump gave Mexico a 90-day pause on new tariffs going into effect, keeping the rate at 25%, while raising tariffs on Canada to 35%. Now, in a remarkable about-face, Canadian officials are on a campaign to win back Mexico's favor and save the trilateral trade deal Trudeau suggested he was willing to ditch, according to two people with knowledge of the countries' tense relationship. That treaty continues to shield a large number of Canadian and Mexican exports to the U.S. from Trump's latest rounds of tariffs. Carney said on Tuesday that 'it's important to preserve' the trilateral agreement while Canada's foreign minister and finance minister traveled this week to Mexico for a two-day visit with top officials. Asked by Reuters whether the purpose of her visit was to repair shattered ties with Mexico, Canadian Foreign Minister Anita Anand said: 'It is extremely important for Canada to have a resilient relationship with Mexico, and indeed, I'm here to kick start that relationship.' Sheinbaum, on X, reiterated that message. 'We're strengthening the relationship between our countries,' she wrote. A spokesperson for Sheinbaum declined to comment. 'Look in the mirror' Whether they repair their partnership and become a tightly-knit bloc in negotiations with the U.S. will have lasting consequences not only for the three countries but the thousands of companies that depend on free trade in the region, from automakers to medical suppliers, three trade analysts said. 'The big question I have is whether there's a real sense of communication or coordination between Mexico and Canada,' said Kenneth Smith Ramos, a former trade negotiator for Mexico. 'I don't get the sense that is the case. I think both are operating bilaterally with the U.S. and that's it.' He said Mexico saved Canada from being ousted from the USMCA treaty when Canadian and U.S. negotiators got into a 'severe fight' during negotiations in 2018. 'Mexico insisted that the agreement remain trilateral,' said Smith, who represented Mexico in those negotiations, adding it's that history that likely made Mexican officials especially bitter when Canada appeared to spurn Mexico to curry favor with Trump. A Canadian source involved in the 2018 talks sharply disputed that characterization. 'The Mexican team went behind our back and negotiated their own bilateral deal with the U.S. Trump then used that to pressure Canada to make concessions,' said the source, who spoke on condition of anonymity. The source said the bad blood with Mexico stemming from the 2018 negotiations is part of the reason Canadian officials expressed interest last year in a bilateral deal with the U.S. 'If there are Mexicans who feel Canada betrayed them, they should look in the mirror.' Trading barbs After Trudeau came away from Mar-a-Lago empty-handed at the beginning of the year, the relationship became openly hostile with him and Trump trading barbs. Sheinbaum, meanwhile, insisted on staying on Trump's good side, virtually at any cost, according to three people familiar with her strategy. As the Canadians fell into a deeper rut with Trump, Carney, who replaced Trudeau as prime minister in March, sought to make amends with Mexico by inviting Sheinbaum to attend the Group of 7 summit in Canada. Sheinbaum delayed accepting for nearly three weeks but eventually assented. Trump left the summit early without meeting Sheinbaum, a development that 'worried' Mexico's president, one of her advisors said. Carney's invitation and Sheinbaum's attendance appeared to be a reset of sorts in the two countries' relationship, said Pedro Casas, CEO of the American Chamber of Commerce of Mexico. It sent a 'clear message' that the two leaders are 'in this together,' he said. The Canadian prime minister extended his good-faith gestures to Sheinbaum during their follow-up phone call in July. He told her that the following day Canada would announce limits on imports of steel produced in other countries in an effort to help the country's domestic steel sector, which is reeling from Trump's 50% tariffs. But Carney assured Sheinbaum that the measure wouldn't affect imports from Mexico, according to two people with knowledge of their conversation. Whatever her reservations about Canada, Sheinbaum has made clear she is completely invested in saving the trilateral trade deal with it and the U.S. If the three countries fail to renew the pact next year, the treaty will automatically expire in 2036, creating a potentially disastrous economic blow to Mexico. U.S. Secretary of Commerce Howard Lutnick has privately raised the idea of ditching the agreement in favor of a bilateral trade deal with Mexico, according to the Mexican official – a scenario the person said Mexico is not keen to pursue. Secretary Lutnick did not respond to a Reuters request for comment. The White House did not respond to a request for comment. 'Mexico knows very well that if we try to go head-to-head, toe-to-toe with Washington the asymmetry in the negotiations is going to favor the U.S,' said former Mexican trade negotiator Juan Carlos Baker. 'It's always better to have a three-player game.' Reporting by Emily Green, David Ljunggren and Stephen Eisenhammer. Editing by Christian Plumb and Michael Learmonth, Reuters
Winnipeg Free Press
a few seconds ago
- Winnipeg Free Press
What to know about past meetings between Putin and his American counterparts
Bilateral meetings between Russian President Vladimir Putin and his U.S. counterparts were a regular occurrence early in his tenure. But as tensions mounted between Moscow and the West following the illegal annexation of Ukraine's Crimean Peninsula in 2014 and allegations of meddling with the 2016 U.S. elections, those became increasingly less frequent, and their tone appeared less friendly. Here's what to know about past meetings between Russian and U.S. presidents: Putin and Joe Biden Putin and Joe Biden met only once while holding the presidency –- in Geneva in June 2021. Russia was amassing troops on the border with Ukraine, where large swaths of land in the east had long been occupied by Moscow-backed forces; Washington repeatedly accused Russia of cyberattacks. The Kremlin was intensifying its domestic crackdown on dissent, jailing opposition leader Alexei Navalny months earlier and harshly suppressing protests demanding his release. Putin and Biden talked for three hours, but no breakthroughs came out of the meeting. The two exchanged expressions of mutual respect, but firmly restated their starkly different views on all of the above. They spoke again via videoconference in December 2021 as tensions heightened over Ukraine. Biden threatened sanctions if Russia invaded Ukraine, and Putin demanded guarantees that Kyiv wouldn't join NATO –- something Washington and its allies said was a nonstarter. Another phone call between the two came in February 2022, less than two weeks before the full-scale invasion. Then the high-level contacts stopped cold, with no publicly disclosed conversations between Putin and Biden since the invasion. Putin and Donald Trump Putin met Trump met six times during the American's first term -– at and on the sidelines of G20 and APEC gatherings — but most famously in Helsinki in July 2018. That's where Trump stood next to Putin and appeared to accept his insistence that Moscow had not interfered with the 2016 U.S. presidential election and openly questioned the firm finding by his own intelligence agencies. His remarks were a stark illustration of Trump's willingness to upend decades of U.S. foreign policy and rattle Western allies in service of his political concerns. 'I have great confidence in my intelligence people, but I will tell you that President Putin was extremely strong and powerful in his denial today,' Trump said. 'He just said it's not Russia. I will say this: I don't see any reason why it would be.' Putin and Barack Obama U.S. President Barack Obama met with Putin nine times, and there were 12 more meetings with Dmitry Medvedev, who served as president in 2008-12. Putin became prime minister in a move that allowed him to reset Russia's presidential term limits and run again in 2012. Obama traveled to Russia twice — once to meet Medvedev in 2009 and again for a G20 summit 2013. Medvedev and Putin also traveled to the U.S. Under Medvedev, Moscow and Washington talked of 'resetting' Russia-U.S. relations post-Cold War and worked on arms control treaties. U.S. State Secretary Hillary Clinton famously presented a big 'reset' button to Foreign Minister Sergey Lavrov at a meeting in 2009. One problem: instead of 'reset' in Russian, they used another word meaning 'overload.' After Putin returned to office in 2012, tensions rose between the two countries. The Kremlin accused the West of interfering with Russian domestic affairs, saying it fomented anti-government protests that rocked Moscow just as Putin sought reelection. The authorities cracked down on dissent and civil society, drawing international condemnation. Obama canceled his visit to Moscow in 2013 after Russia granted asylum to Edward Snowden, a former National Security Agency contractor and whistleblower. In 2014, the Kremlin illegally annexed Crimea and threw its weight behind a separatist insurgency in eastern Ukraine. The U.S. and its allies responded with crippling sanctions. Relations plummeted to the lowest point since the Cold War. The Kremlin's 2015 military intervention in Syria to prop up Bashar Assad further complicated ties. Putin and Obama last met in China in September 2016, on the sidelines of a G20 summit, and held talks focused on Ukraine and Syria. Putin and George W. Bush Putin and George W. Bush met 28 times during Bush's two terms. They hosted each other for talks and informal meetings in Russia and the U.S., met regularly on the sidelines of international summits and forums, and boasted of improving ties between onetime rivals. After the first meeting with Putin in 2001, Bush said he 'looked the man in the eye' and 'found him very straightforward and trustworthy,' getting 'a sense of his soul.' In 2002, they signed the Strategic Offensive Reductions Treaty -– a nuclear arms pact that significantly reduced both countries' strategic nuclear warhead arsenal. Putin was the first world leader to call Bush after the 9/11 terrorist attack, offering his condolences and support, and welcomed the U.S. military deployment on the territory of Moscow's Central Asian allies for action in Afghanistan. He has called Bush 'a decent person and a good friend,' adding that good relations with him helped find a way out of 'the most acute and conflict situations.' —— Associated Press writer Yuras Karmanau contributed.
Edmonton Journal
31 minutes ago
- Edmonton Journal
The redcoats are coming — but this time the Americans invited them
Article content While he's aware of the role soldiers from Fort York played in the War of 1812, Jonathan Cole, who heads the American Bar Association's house of delegates, downplayed any suggestion that inviting redcoats to Monday's session is meant as a commentary on Trump's trade war or his musings about annexing Canada. Article content He noted the ABA's Toronto session has been years in the planning, pre-dating the recent friction between two countries that share the world's longest international land border. Article content 'It's a good chance to work together despite political issues,' Cole said in an interview from Nashville, Tennessee. Article content Fort York's history is a reminder of how 'the two countries have worked together since and have been such great allies,' Cole said. Article content He's excited the honour guard from Fort York is participating. 'They'll present both the American flag and the Canadian flag, and we'll have the national anthems sung for both countries as well before we begin our proceedings.' Article content Article content 'It was an unpleasant business for people in and around York at the time.' Article content Hickey argues the War of 1812 was 'essentially Canada's war of independence — and they won, so it is far better remembered in Canada than in the United States.' Article content Article content There are several ways to see the conflict, he said. Article content 'If you look at what happened on the battlefield and in the peace treaty (of Ghent) it looks like a draw because it was very hard to wage offensive warfare in the North American wilderness and when the United States was on the offensive early in the war they failed to make much headway in Canada,' Hickey said. Article content 'And when the British were in the driver's seat in the last year of the war, they didn't make much headway either.' Article content Article content But overall 'it's a clear British and Canadian victory because the United States went to war to force the British to give up the orders in council, which restricted American trade with the continent of Europe, and also to end impressment — the removal of seamen from American merchant vessels,' Hickey said. 'And neither of those issues was mentioned in the peace treaty' signed in December of 1814. Article content The only way to argue the U.S. benefitted from the conflict is, 'the British had a real problem after the war was over; nobody knew that was going to be the last Anglo-American war. And how were they going to defend Canada next time around from this growing expansionist colossus to the south?' Hickey said. 'They decided that their best tack was to accommodate the United States. And they pursued that policy in the course of the 19th Century, and ultimately it worked. There was a genuine Anglo-American accord by the 1890s. Then it turned into co-belligerency in World War One, and full-fledged alliance in World War Two that continues to this day. So, in the end, the United States got a little more respect for its sovereignty from the British.'
