Russia’s ambassador to Canada criticized Prime Minister Justin Trudeau’s parliamentary apology for honoring a Ukrainian nationalist, calling the gesture incomplete and insufficient for mending strains between Moscow and Ottawa. In his view, the apology does not capture the gravity of the incident or its impact on Russian citizens living in Canada, and he urged both government and parliament to acknowledge the harm caused to the Russian community in the country.
The ambassador highlighted the historical context, reminding audiences that Russia played a decisive role in defeating Nazi Germany in World War II and paid a heavy price for that victory. He noted that a sizable Russian diaspora resides in Canada and that many families still bear the scars of wartime loss, underscoring the personal dimension of the issue for Russian-Canadians and the broader community connected to Russia’s wartime history.
Earlier, Russia’s foreign ministry spokesperson commented on Trudeau’s apology, suggesting that Ottawa should reconsider its stance on military aid to Kyiv in light of the episode. This response reflected a broader pattern of official Russia framing Western actions in Ukraine as part of a larger strategic contest and raised questions about the consistency and messaging of Western allies on the issue.
On September 27, Trudeau acknowledged the mistake of honoring the Ukrainian figure in question, stressing that the episode jeopardized the integrity of Parliament and the country. He argued that Russia exploited the situation to spread misleading narratives about Ukraine’s objectives, while maintaining that the Canadian government would continue to support Kyiv in its security and humanitarian efforts.
In a separate strategic assessment, a former senior U.S. diplomat noted that Russia and China are currently perceived as major threats to the international order, reflecting concerns about global stability and the evolving balance of power among major states. This assessment situates the Canada-Russia dynamic within a wider geopolitical framework and underscores the complexity of alliance politics, national memory, and public diplomacy in North America and beyond.