Canadian International Policy Options
Canada’s role in the world has slowly evolved from that of Britain’s colony and puppet, to a “middle-power” nation who speaks for itself. Whether it’s taking action on climate change or combating terrorism, Canada has had a big role in different arenas on an international scale. This world, however, has changed dramatically since the Cold War. With different actors and different issues taking center stage, various arguments have emerged regarding how Canada should conduct and present itself globally. Should we have a more robust foreign policy lenient towards the United States? Or should Canada be more interested in strengthening ties to other global leaders and distance itself from Washington? Former Canadian ambassador to the United States, Allan Gotlieb, and Oxford University professor, Jennifer Welsh, both present interesting views on what ought to be Canada’s global initiative.
Exemplar notes:
This brief introduction to the issues gives a quick overview of what will be presented in the paper, and provides some background information pertinent to understanding the topic. This introduction is clear and concise, though it does not present a thesis statement in the form of a stance or argument. Because this is a compare and contrast paper, the final sentence of the introduction (which states the ‘point’ of the paper) is sufficient in this case.
According to Welsh, Canada needs to distance itself from the United States and focus on being a world leader, forging relationships with other nations in order to begin solving issues. She points to the fact of how the main focus of our foreign relations policy revolves around the US, posing the question of whether Canada even needs a foreign policy at all. Welsh gives the example of Switzerland, and how they focus on domestic issues rather than international problems. However, she rightly emphasizes that Canada is not in the same situation as the
Swiss, referring to our geography and coastline, in which we are both “isolated and exposed”. Add to that our close proximity to a superpower, and we have a strong case for needing to build beneficial international relationships. She believes Canada can and should do more than the Swiss for several reasons. Our economic situation is much different; with Canada’s GDP four time that of Switzerland, we are a strong member of the G8.
With our changing world and the decline of the US as a superpower, Welsh believes that Canada can’t afford to be tied to America, and should instead pursue relations with possible future superpowers. She also takes into consideration our immigrant and ethnic makeover, as well as how Canada has opened the door to the world’s needy. All this, in Welsh’s view, should be proof enough that Canada has the ability to play a more global role and be a key player in tackling global issues going forward.
Exemplar notes:
This section focuses on one side of the issue. The author does an effective job of summarizing Welsh’s views to include only the key points of her argument. They include specific examples and Welsh’s comparison of Canada with Switzerland, which is crucial to her stance.
In contrast, Allan Gotlieb explores how Canada has gone through two polar opposite foreign policy stances in its history; one of realism, and one with an idealistic approach. A realist-based policy supports close relations with the United State, and would be in favor of increasing national security without jeopardizing sovereignty and independence. An idealistic/romantic policy would see its goal as promoting democracy, protecting victims, and having a positive yet relatively unrealistic outlook of the world. With the former being a “do-good” policy and the latter being “feel-good”, Gotlieb provides an in-depth explanation as to why Canada should follow a foreign policy based on realism. Unlike Welsh, Gotlieb sees that a close relationship with the world’s only current superpower is an advantage for Canada. He believes the United States is the only nation that “articulates and acts on a global strategic vision.” A country like Canada can influence the US in a close relationship, further establishing our credibility in the world. Furthermore, a foreign policy based on the UN should not be a foundation for Canadian foreign policy. Almost any issue that requires tackling needs American backing, trumping the sometimes anti-American UN. Basically, the UN can’t accomplish anything without US support.
Exemplar notes:
As with the previous section, this paragraph examines Gotlieb’s arguments and summarizes them to include the most important aspects. The author explains where Gotlieb’s views differ from Welsh’s, and takes into consideration the effect of political ideologies on forming policy stances.
After reading both articles in depth, I find myself leaning slightly more towards Gotlieb’s views. I believe Canada can achieve more in a close relationship with the US, since we see eye-to-eye on many issues. Acting as a “secretary” to a superpower will elevate our credibility amongst other nations. I will state, however, that a close relationship with the Americans does not give them the right to dictate our foreign policy, nor does it give us the obligation to support every decision they make on certain issues. Maintaining a close relationship to the United States could actually help Canada to pursue many of the things Welsh considers to be of importance, and being involved with a strong global leader does not necessarily diminish our own strength.
Exemplar notes:
The author provides a brief discussion regarding which of the two authors’ views they sympathize with more, and then justify their opinion by referring to the information outlined in their summaries.
Notes
Romanticism and Realism in Canada’s Foreign Policy by Allan Gotlieb
Gotlieb sees that Canadians have split views about where we should stand in the world
He refers to two foreign policy stances: a realist-based foreign policy and an idealistic/romantic view
The realist viewpoint examines present reality and usually calls for governmental protection of the national interest. Sovereignty, security, prosperity, and economic trade relations are the main focuses of this group
On the polar side of realism is the idealistic/romantic foreign policy stance. They have a very visionary and dreamy outlook on the world and strive to promote democracy, care for victims of crises, and raise the standard of living for the poor. (That last point, in my opinion, would require socialism to take place, or a “Robin Hood” mentality; take from the rich and give to the poor).
The biggest challenge for realists is to improve relations with the US in order to make Canada more secure, without lowering national interests
On the other hand, the idealists support setting up new international norms to constrain a powerful country’s rule, presumably the United States
The author lists several conclusions of how Canada’s foreign policy shifted over the last decades:
Both Realism and Romanticism have battled to take control of Canada’s foreign policy o they’ve created confusion on either side is reluctant to commit the necessary resources to do what they promise
Gotlieb backs a realist-based foreign policy, stating the avoidance of a dreamy outlook on the world and to stick to reality. He lists a number of requirements for the implementation of a realist-based policy:
Recognize that the United States, in this day and age, is the world’s dominant figure in international affairs. He believes the United States is, in his words, “the only state that articulates and acts on a global strategic vision.” The worst thing that could happen is Canada trying to be different from the US “just for the sake of being different.” Influencing the world’s greatest superpower is an advantage for Canada, establishing credibility among the world’s states
Canada’s role as a middle power can never be reestablished. He also mentions how we do not meet the requirements of a middle power with an economy this large
Canadians need to deliver themselves from the myth that our foreign policy has to be based on the UN. He mentions how the UN is not the only group that can provide legitimacy on armed intervention
Canada needs to abandon its ties with global rule-making o This “utopia” vision needs to be eliminated from our foreign policy
The UN is not an alternative to the US, with the former needing help from the latter in order to accomplish major wishes on the global front
Canada needs to be willing to invest in resources such as the military in order to set out on foreign policy promises made
One important requirement is the realization that our geography is tied to our sovereignty. Participation and cooperation with our neighbor to the south is vital in insuring that we have a safe continent and establish commitments that forges bonding
Fulfilling Canada’s Global Promise by Jennifer M. Welsh
The author sarcastically poses the question if Canada even needs a foreign policy, since the US is our mains focus and we almost mirror what the US does
She compares Canada and Switzerland. The Swiss focus more on domestic issues and are neutral when it comes to international issues
The Swiss sample may be tempting, but Welsh stresses the importance of our place in the world and how Canada can and needs to do more than the Swiss.
We are located in a very unique place, surrounded by two oceans and neighboring a superpower.
Our economy is 4 times that of the Swiss
Focusing only on the United States doesn’t make sense, since pretty soon the US will be matched by other countries in the superpower range
Our diversity as Canadians opens the door of more global relationships, encouraging us to do more
Like Gotlieb, the author stresses the importance of investing in foreign-affairs resources in order
to achieve anything
Exemplar notes:
These are the author’s notes from their close reading of the articles. Notice that they take concise, point-form jot notes, including only what they consider to be important. However, they did not include all of this information in their paper; they cut it down even further in order to really ensure they used only the most crucial points. It is important to take notes as you go, even if you don’t end up using them all, because this will allow you to really get an idea of what the main tenets of the readings are. (And, it could be very useful for later studying!)
4
1
1
The post Canadian International Policy Options Canada’s role in the world has slowly evolved appeared first on PapersSpot.
