|
...the United States. This is not simply to court favour; it is because Canadians, along with Americans, value freedom, seek to live in a secure environment, and hope to prosper in a global economy.
It is particularly short-sighted to conclude that, because the United States is the target of choice for many terrorists, Canada is somehow safe and immune. Resentments against the U.S. can also reflect resentments against the wealthy, liberal, democratic West. Canada is a rich and very open society. As a result, it is vulnerable. The ultimate risk of weapons of mass destruction (WMD) has not yet been encountered: the toxic nexus of these weapons in the hands of terrorists willing to use them for catastrophic consequences. There is no need to be alarmist about that possibility, just realistic. Canada has as much at stake as the U.S.--the ability of citizens to live and work peacefully at home and to operate in what really has become a global village.
That is the context in which Canada must approach its relationship with the U.S.
On a practical level, however, when we need something from the U.S., what do we offer in return that is of interest? And how can Canada get U.S. attention in ways that will bear fruit? The relationship with the United States is the most sensitive area of foreign policy in Canada. In contrast, the issue is almost invisible in the United States. In part, that is what makes it so sensitive in Canada.
This Commentary is not about Canada-U.S. bilateral relations in the narrow sense of trade disputes or border problems. It is about the political relationship between the two countries in the handling of international crises.
Canada is in the unique position of being a neighbour of the most powerful country in the world, sharing many, though not all, of the characteristics of U.S. society. How the United States conducts its foreign policy has a direct impact on Canada and is the subject of constant discussion in the country. When an international crisis looms and important foreign policy decisions have to be taken, the emphasis in Canada is often primarily on where the Canadian position is in relation to that of the United States. Headlines tend to suggest such themes as Canada Follows U.S. Lead, or Canada Opposes U.S.
Canadian policy positions are often judged in terms of their degree of difference from those of the United States. In my view, this is unhelpful.
How should we evaluate the positions we take in foreign policy crisis management? Essentially we should look at results and how they serve Canadian interests and reflect Canadian values. I would define Canada's basic interests as the security and economic well-being of its people. These interests can best be pursued in a stable, peaceful world. Thus, we have an interest in promoting solutions to crises that contribute to such a world.
I believe in foreign policy based on realism and on Canadian interests. An interests-based foreign policy avoids arbitrariness and minimizes the role of short-term political gains in decision making. However, I also believe that foreign policy should reflect Canadian values. Our values cause us to look beyond our basic interests to such issues as social justice and human rights. This is an aspect of Canadian foreign policy of which Canadians are justifiably proud. The willingness and ability of Canada and other democracies to intervene internationally if human rights are being systematically violated is an important step forward in world affairs. Interests and values are often seen as contradictory, part of a zero-sum game. They need not be. Interests can be pursued in ways that reflect a country's values. The protection of human rights in a failed state can lay the ground work for the successful realization of interests--security for Canadians in a more peaceful, stable world.
Managing Crises
This paper focuses on Canadian and U.S. handling of international crises. Crisis management is often a good test of a government and of a nation's psyche because there is a need to react swiftly to events that may not have been foreseen. Political leaders must act instinctively and weigh costs and benefits, values and interests, in ways that define who they are. Decisions are remembered and precedents are set, even if they are not intended. Broad conceptual foreign policy reviews can be quickly and completely overshadowed by a few key decisions and statements at a time of crisis.
Before taking important foreign policy decisions or responding to international crises, most countries consult a great deal with friends and allies. This is part of normal diplomacy. Countries pay particular attention to their key partners and most try to have a pretty good reading of the position of the United States before they decide what to do. Canada is no exception. For Ottawa, awareness of U.S. positions is critical to calculating how Canadian interests and values can be applied in any situation.
In a crisis,...
NOTE: All illustrations and photos
have been removed from this article.
Looking for additional articles?
Search our database of over 3 million articles.
Looking for more in-depth information on this industry?
Search our complete database of Industry & Market reports by text, subject, publication
name or publication date.
About Goliath
Whether you're looking for sales prospects, competitive information, company
analysis or best practices in managing your organization,
Goliath can help you meet your business needs.
Our extensive business information databases empower business
professionals with both the breadth and depth of credible,
authoritative information they need to support their business
goals. Whether it be strategic planning, sales prospecting,
company research or defining management best practices -
Goliath is your leading source for accurate information.
|
%20%20&position=1)