Support strong Canadian climate journalism for 2025
A new poll suggests nearly three-quarters of Canadians believe NATO allies should prepare for military intervention as Russian aggression escalates in Ukraine, even as half hold out hope for a diplomatic resolution.
The online survey of 1,515 Canadians and 1,002 Americans was conducted by Leger between Friday and Sunday.
The survey cannot be assigned a margin of error because internet-based polls are not considered truly random samples.
The North Atlantic Treaty Organization has signalled its solidarity with Ukraine in the form of supplies, weapons and sanctions since the early days of Russia's latest incursion into its territory, but has not deployed troops for combat.
"This is the first time where people say, 'Give diplomacy and sanctions a chance but brace for potentially this becoming military involvement,'" said Leger executive vice-president Christian Bourque.
Approximately 49 per cent of Canadians still believe a diplomatic end to the war is possible, but 64 per cent said the conflict between Ukraine and Russia will be protracted, and will last many years.
Sixty-five per cent of Canadians said governments should impose more severe sanctions against Russia, even if it means higher gas prices for western countries, even though 62 per cent agreed the sanctions mainly hurt the Russian people and not Russian President Vladimir Putin directly. Only 35 per cent believe economic sanctions will actually convince Putin to back down.
Canadians seem to understand the stakes are high, and they increasingly believe the conflict could escalate into a world war, the poll shows. About three-quarters report they believe the situation has the potential to lead to a third world war in this latest poll, compared to 66 per cent of Canadians polled at the end of February when the conflict first began.
Nearly half of those polled, about 47 per cent, say they believe Putin will use nuclear weapons if the conflict doesn't go his way.
"The fear factor is high," Bourque said.
Under Article 5 of the North Atlantic Treaty, an attack on a NATO country is considered an attack on all NATO countries, and they all must help to restore security.
According to the poll, about two-thirds of Canadians believe Ukraine should be allowed to join NATO — a move that could draw the allied countries into direct conflict with Russia.
Ukraine, currently considered a NATO partner, has repeatedly requested to join the treaty and even enshrined that goal into the country's constitution in 2019.
As for who will win the conflict, 41 per cent of respondents admit they don't know, and the remaining 59 per cent are split. Russia will win the war, according to 27 per cent of those who responded, while 33 per cent believe Ukraine will successfully drive the Russians off.
This report by The Canadian Press was first published March 15, 2022.
Comments
Apparently three quarters of Canadians are deeply ignorant or jerking their knees without thinking or slaves to their emotions even when they need reason to avoid extinction, which is staring them in the face.
Let's be clear: If NATO fights directly in Ukraine, that is World War III. And there are two possibilities.
Either Russia's conventional armed forces are sufficient, in their back yard, to fight off everything NATO can throw at them an ocean away from NATO's main military power. In which case NATO fighting Russia in Ukraine will just cause massive bloodshed, particularly of those Ukrainians we are supposedly so sympathetic to.
Or, NATO is tough enough to defeat Russia's conventional forces. In which case the confllict goes nuclear and we ALL DIE. All of us. Me. You, reading this. Joe Biden. Vladimir Putin. Your parents, grandkids. Everyone Will Be Dead. Everyone in a city outside the third world will be dead just because there's enough bombs for every city, repeated multiple times over. Everyone in the countryside will be dead more slowly from fallout. Some people in the southern hemisphere will live long enough to see everything they were hoping to eat die from nuclear winter, a winter lasting years. But in a while, they'll be dead too. And three quarters of Canadians want this?
But ultimately, the problem here is not that we shouldn't make decisions based on opinion polls. The problem is that the media is being criminally irresponsible in an incredibly dangerous situation. The media should not be stoking war when war could mean we all go up in a nuclear fireball. They didn't do this during the original Cold War, they knew they had to take things seriously, they knew the world was real not just a movie. Time they re-learned some of that. Even this article, with its talk as though what polled Canadians think is more important than the survival of the human race, and its blithe mention of world war III without ever mentioning what that would mean, is part of the problem.
Calm down. Please stop the yelling, panic and full body jerking. It's really not necessary.
I am old enough to remember the Cuban missile crisis of 1962. The world was closer to WWIII in '62 when Russian ships were blockaded off the coast of Florida than we've ever been since. We were issued pamphlets in a Calgary elementary school illustrating how to duck and cover under a desk, or lay down on the floor of a car and cover up with a blanket when the air raid sirens went off and a nuclear blast was imminent. Yes, Canada had sirens then and they were tested regularly around that time. And yes, some disaster planners actually thought blankets would protect you, or maybe they were smart enough to fake it up as a prop. I'm here to write about it today, 60 years later.
I am not entirely convinced that Putin's threat is either way a bluff -- or not. His minions are probably reading these comments in some dingy basement in Moscow and writing memos confirming that the West / NATO / American puppets / western comments sections really are divided. He's banking on that, and the minions are directed to hack 'n divide with comments that push Putin's agenda. He's been planning this for a long time and has invested in our divisions. This tells us that he has a survival instinct for the long game, and that he'll be a ghost leader of a smoldering wasteland that glows in the dark if he pushes the red button.
Does that mean we must not intervene in this tragedy? No. If we stand on the sidelines, we'll be front row witnesses to a growing genocide. We can put more air and missile defence weapons into the hands of the Ukrainian armed forces, with training. They seem to be a lot better than the Russians are on the land, though they are greatly outnumbered and will need more anti-armour weapons.
The key is to always maintain a defensive posture and never turn to offensive measures. Ukrainians pulling the triggers and destroying the killing machines thrown at them within Ukraine's borders in defence of their own land is legitimate. NATO shooting at Russians or lobbing stuff into Russian territory over Ukraine must be avoided at all costs.
Putin may decide to cross the Rubicon and lob a missile at Warsaw or Riga and garner an instantaneous Article Five reaction from NATO members. The NATO bigwigs will need to chew on an appropriate response vis a vis the red button. Or possibly non-NATO Finland (NATO will be reluctant to respond, similarly as with Ukraine). That calculation doesn't add up, though. His conventional land forces are surprisingly incompetent and ill-supplied, and are now greatly diminished by the skills and courageous motivation of the much smaller Ukrainian army. NATO's weapons and personnel are superior. Why invite more embarrassing destruction and humiliation?
In all likelihood Putin will probably continue the rain of missiles launched from afar in the short term and further level Ukrainian cities. That will be tragic -- until Ukraine has the ability to shoot them down without firing into Russia. Putin could offer a "generous" ceasefire in order to regroup and try and get the Chinese to resupply his troops, while the West runs humanitarian aid convoys into the country. Meanwhile, the West must not stop supplying Ukraine with the means to defend itself from an uncaring megalomaniacal bully. Wear the beast down while sanctions and de-carbonization in EU continue with respect to Russian oil and gas and financial institutions. These and further strengthening of ties and co-operation among democracies are key to winning a long conflict, which doesn't mean that everyone doesn't suffer.
So do we want to follow Neville Chamberlain’s policy of appeasement? If we remember how well that worked perhaps not. Russia has always needed a year round seaport. Well they took over the Crimea and got their wish at least to some degree. Did that keep Putin satisfied? No it did not. Let’s take over the Ukraine, he probably thought. It has a lot of resources and that is what wars are fought over. Religion, resources and access to markets. If we keep appeasing Putin he will keep on taking if history is anything to go on. Do I think he will use nuclear weapons? Absolutely because he has backed himself into a corner where it will be necessary to follow through on his bluff. Do I think he will bomb the world into non existence. No. There would be no point in that. If we let him keep on taking over former Soviet Union countries he will just get stronger and stronger. Sometimes we have to stand up for what we believe in. Do we really want democracy? Or do we want to roll over and play dead while another Hitler just goes from one country to the next! I definitely do not want Putin to succeed!
So you think he will use nuclear weapons. But you want to precipitate that anyway.
Are you insane? Use of nuclear weapons cannot be done in a "just a little bit" kind of way. Seriously, if people who think like you manage to bring about this situation, and he uses them, then we will use them--only a bit more, just to show him who's boss. The escalation will be quick. True global thermonuclear war would be the inevitable result, probably mere hours after the initial tac-nuke exchange. No serious scholar of such things has any doubt of this. And this is too serious a matter for people to indulge in the luxury of Dunning-Krueger. When your armchair pontificating without any knowledge means EVERYONE DIES, it is time to stop with the self-indulgent lazy thinking and easy rah-rah.
People being idiots about Covid has meant large scale death. People being idiots about climate change threatens truly massive scale death, in the medium term . . . but maybe we'll be able to come up with something to stop civilization falling. Those things are very bad. But people being idiots about the prospect of nuclear war means UNIVERSAL death, potentially in the next few weeks. There is NO margin for self-indulgent foolishness here. It is time to be an adult.