Search

Conventional wisdom holds that governments matter. That a new government, particularly one of a different political party, will make substantial changes to the policies of the state they were elected to lead. The focus of this paper is on whether party affiliation matters in determining Canada's priorities and policies in its trade relationship with the United States (US). It will compare policy statements and performances of Liberal, Progressive Conservative, and Conservative governments from 1968 to the present and it will argue that party affiliation has had little impact on Canada's US trade policy over this period. The analysis will proceed in four parts. In the first part, the role of political parties in Canada will be outlined briefly. This will be followed by an overview of Canada's exports to the US. The third section of the paper will examine the economic priorities of Canadian governments concerning the US from 1968 to present as gleaned from major policy statements (e.g. white papers and speeches). The final part of the paper will set out some of the reasons why party affiliation has had little substantive impact on Canada's trade policy with the US over the last forty years. ..PAT.-Unpublished Manuscript [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Despite renewed interest in international security cooperation after 9-11, security coordination between Mexico, Canada and the United States has been limited. Lack of policy coordination between these three countries is no surprise. They all have developed different security doctrines and practices that are not likely to be changed in the near future. Hence, this paper will analyze the security policies of three North American countries from the end of World War II to the September 11 attacks. Post-World War II analysis will allow me to analyze how structural conditions regarding bipolarity interacted with the domestic conditions of each country. The second period to be analyzed, pre-September 11, will illustrate how structural changes are not immediately translated into new security doctrines, at least not in the near future. Policy adaptation tends to be slow and not always progressive. This paper will be structured in five sections. The first three sections will examine each country’s security doctrines during the Cold War period, focusing on the interaction between international and domestic politics. The fourth section will compare and contrast how each country reacted differently vis-à-vis the end of the Cold War. Finally, the last section will evaluate the implications of these findings and its impact on North American security cooperation. ..PAT.-Unpublished Manuscript [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

My study examines the conditions under which middle power states, such as Canada, the Netherlands, and Norway, may exercise effective leadership in the realm of human security. I hypothesize that a middle power-led human security initiative is more likely to be successful if the initiative does not threaten the fundamental principles of the superpower. My paper demonstrates that although it is possible for a human security initiative to overcome American opposition that is based on political or military interests, an initiative will be less likely to succeed if it challenges the core principles of the United States. I test the hypothesis by conducting a qualitative analysis of four cases of human security initiatives where the middle powers have played leadership roles. The cases include the endeavor to create a United Nations rapid deployment peacekeeping force, which led to the formation of the Standby High Readiness Brigade for United Nations Operations (SHIRBRIG) in 1996; the campaign to ban anti-personnel landmines, which resulted in the 1997 Ottawa Convention; the struggle to establish the International Criminal Court, which came into existence in 2002; and the unsuccessful attempt to regulate the legal trade in small arms and light weapons. The United States has taken different positions on these issues. The U.S. approved of the idea of a standby UN rapid response force, but did not participate in the establishment of SHIRBRIG. Washington objected to the Ottawa Convention on the basis of a conflict with U.S. military interests, and opposed the International Criminal Court due to the influence of certain groups in the American foreign policy establishment. Finally, the U.S. rejected the adoption of restrictions on the licit small arms trade due to a clash with an American principle protected by the U.S. Constitution: the right to bear arms. By illustrating that smaller states can assume leadership on global security, my paper counters the trend in international security studies of focusing almost exclusively on great power leadership, a tendency which has been reinforced by the decades-long predominance of the realist approach to international relations. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

During the post Cold War era and accelerating after 9/11, Canada adopted a more aggresive militaristic role in order to secure a more intimate and ultimately rewarding position beside the US as a subdominant player in the expanding New World Order - a states system Wood evocatively labels the Empire of Capital. In this paper, I theorize the more aggressive militaristic role of the Canadian state within this Empire of Capital. First, I examine geopolitical and economic rationales for the war in Afghanistan. Second, I examine ideologies of race, class, and gender undergirding the militarism of the empire. Third, I examine how the Bush and R2P doctrines instituionalize and legitimize empire. Finally, I examine the mythology that Canada is a peaceful state. ..PAT.-Unpublished Manuscript [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

This paper examines the evolution of the Canada-U.S, continental security relationship since September 2001. ..PAT.-Conference Proceeding [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

This paper examines the evolution of Canada-U.S. continental security relations since September 2001. ..PAT.-Conference Proceeding [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Constructivist theories of securitization are built on a foundation of communicative action tenets. While this represents an important and innovative advance in international relations theory, securitization ignores some of the components involved in a successful communicative act. Williams (2003) calls for securitization theory to incorporate the hitherto ignored effects of mass media and in this paper we answer this call. We first show that securitization's specification of leaders' speech acts and audiences' legitimative discourse presumes mass media actors are indifferent in how they convey leader representations and justifications of crises. We take this presumption as an empirical question and execute a study of whether the national presses of ally countries differently emphasized the frames Bush invoked in their news coverage of key September 11th speeches. We show from comparisons of chi-square distributions and regression analyses that, far from being passive conveyers of speech frames, the national presses of the US, Canada, France, Britain and Ireland (1) did not convey all of Bush's securitizing problem representations and response justifications proportionate to the extent Bush invoked them in his speeches, and (2) that for each national press factors based on professional norms and/or organizational routines increased the likelihood that a speech sentence would be conveyed in a news story. We discuss the implications of our findings for how securitization theory should conceptualize media actors when redressing this gap in its explanatory models. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

This paper traces how Canada's engagement with failed and fragile states has been shaped by shifts in the relative power and influence of Canada's foreign affairs and defence departments. The paper argues that, despite the Department of Foreign Affairs and International Trade's (DFAIT) rhetorical commitment to benevolent norms for intervention in fragile and failed states, Canada's approach to these states has been co-opted and recast by the Department of National Defence (DND), which is using the discourse of failed and fragile states to promote a Canadian participation in the war on terror, justify increased defence spending, and bolster the case for the maintenance and deployment of combat-capable armed forces. In its 2005 International Policy Statement (IPS), the Canadian government declared that "Among the greatest contemporary security threats are those resulting from a large number of fragile and poorly governed states." Meant to unify Canada's future diplomatic, development, and defence activities under a single set of policy objectives, the IPS's focus on fragile and failed states represented a rare instance of rhetorical harmony between the DFAIT and DND. By expressing their shared commitment to address failed and fragile states, the two departments appeared to have bridged their recognized disagreements over the direction of Canadian international affairs. In practice, however, this has not led to unified policies or a harmonious approach to the problem. The consensus, if ever there really was one, has failed. Current bureaucratic relations and policies reflect the defence department's ascendancy. Due to the Canadian government's current focus on the war on terror, rebuilding the Canadian Armed Forces, and strengthening relations with the United States, DND's reading of the fragile and failed state problematic has dominated and supplanted DFAIT's. Though DFAIT and the public pronouncements of the defence department still emphasize an approach to failed and fragile states that reflects benevolent norms, these declarations have been reduced to 'window dressing'. Due to the Canadian government's current focus on the war on terror, rebuilding the Canadian Armed Forces, and strengthening relations with the United States, DND's reading of the fragile and failed state problematic has dominated and supplanted DFAIT's. ..PAT.-Unpublished Manuscript [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Civil or homeland security provides an interesting case for the study of norms transmission. The ‘norm-takers’ in these cases are often officials in cities or arms of government not typically responsible for foreign policy or defence: transportation, civil infrastructure protection, and emergency management. These levels and branches of government are not an obvious site for international relations and security policy, but they have become the focus of policy for preventing and responding to terrorism. However, there is some precedent for civil security norms penetrating arms of government not typical seen to be engaged in international security: the civil defence policies of the cold war. I apply Amitav Acharya’s idea of norm localization, whereby local norms-takers engage in a dynamic process of interaction to adapt local and transnational norms to match each other, to civil security. How do local officials localize regional and global anti-terrorism norms to environments where global security is a new priority, but which already have well-established norms for dealing with natural disasters, crime, and other emergencies? The literature on norms diffusion typically posits a trickle-down effect, with transnational norms-entrepreneurs generating norms to be implemented domestically. But in this situation where local actors possess expertise in emergency response, is there evidence of a trickle-up effect, with local practice influencing regional or international norms? This paper will also contribute to the literature on the life-cycle of norms because it will focus on a case where localization may include re-invigorating the dormant norms of civil defence. Empirically, the paper will examine Canadian civil security policy, with a focus on the all-hazards norm for responding to emergencies. ..PAT.-Unpublished Manuscript [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

The crashing of planes into the World Trade Center in New York City and the Pentagon in Washington DC on September 11, 2001 altered instantly American thinking about itself and other states. Gone was the view that the US was shielded from foreign incursions and problems. The barriers of the oceans had been breached and the American homeland became a theatre of war for the first time since the War of 1812. This paper will examine the emergence of a new image of Canada as a security threat to the US in the aftermath of the 9-11 terrorist attacks. The paper will argue that the traditional image of Canada as a friendly, benign neighbor has been challenged by this new image of Canada as a source of insecurity in the post 9-11 period, and that the existence of these dual images has had significant policy implications for Canada, particularly in terms of the making of Canada policy in the US. ..PAT.-Unpublished Manuscript [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Since September 11, 2001, immigrant communities in North America and Western Europe have come under increasing scrutiny. In both Canada and the United States, concern has been expressed that terrorist groups have benefited from the relative openness of borders and multicultural systems of integration. Security cooperation between the two countries has been extensive, including legislation to combat the financing of terrorist groups, tight monitoring of charity organizations and immigrant communities, and detention of suspected terrorists. All of these actions have had a direct impact on the lives of American and Canadian citizens, permanent residents and new immigrants. At the same time, counterterrorism measures have generated heated debate in both countries. In Canada, for example, the US-sponsored rendition of Canadian citizen, Maher Arar, has led to the formation of the Arar Commission, which is mandated to recommend a review mechanism for the Royal Canadian Mounted Police. In this context, understanding changing interactions between state authorities and immigration communities assumes critical importance. This paper will investigate the impact of the post 9/11 security environment on diaspora groups in the United States and Canada. Using social movement theory, the study will undertake a comparative exploration of how Middle Eastern and South Asian groups have mobilized in response to counterterrorism measures. Particular emphasis will be placed on understanding the variations in the extent and nature of group mobilization in the two countries. The paper will conclude with insights on the implication of these variations (or similarities) on bilateral security cooperation. ..PAT.-Unpublished Manuscript [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Decrying the erosion of freedom in the name of security, the International Civil Liberties Monitoring Group reports that since the events of September 11th the surveillance and policing of people have been intensified by the use of new mechanisms: "sneak and peak" in the US, "stop and search" in the UK, "preventative detention" in Canada and "indefinite detention without trial" worldwide. Within the frame of the "war on terror," the relationship between civil liberties and security is being transformed. This paper argues, however, that these developments do not merely signal an erosion of civil rights in the name of national and international security, but a reconstitution of the meaning of liberty and freedom. By examining representations of liberty within contemporary security practices in the US, the UK and Canada, this paper will illuminate the conditions under which current security measures have been rationalized and deemed necessary for the continuation of liberal democracy itself. As security is posited as both entwined with the protection of territorialized nation-states while also imperative for the protection of liberty, this paper considers how new practices of security have come to serve as mechanisms for the liberal governance of populations. ..PAT.-Conference Proceeding [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Despite its trilateral format, the Security and Prosperity Partnership of North America (SPP) has been criticized for reinforcing a “double-bilateral” structure more conducive to deepening Canada-U.S. ties at the expense of a more egalitarian inclusion of ..PAT.-Unpublished Manuscript [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

This paper aims to discuss the impact of the recent Canadian statements on national security and foreign policy on the cooperation in the field of non-military security between Canada and the United States of America. We will start by analyzing comparatively the new statement from april 2005 and the former White Book from 1995 and than we will try to see what changes have already been made on the ground - at Canada-US border for instance - and what could be the consequences at mid- and long-term. A research variable will be the question of Canadian values, which are partially common and partially different from the US ones. ..PAT.-Conference Proceeding [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

After 9-11, the United States underwent the most significant restructuring of its national security architecture since the end of World War II. The Homeland Security Act of 2002 and the National Security Act of 1947 both led to the creation of new Cabinet-level Departments and the merging of many federal agencies into new organizational structures to deal with the new threats and security challenges to the United States. The Department of Defense also underwent significant changes with the creation of a completely new Unified Command, U.S. Northern Command (NORTHCOM), chartered with providing the military response to Homeland Defense. Within NORTHCOM, there is a new challenge of expanding regional security cooperation beyond the traditional bilateral relations with Canada under the North American Air Defense Command (NORAD), to now include Mexico under the concept of ?perimeter defense? of the Northern Hemisphere against the threat of terrorism. Yet, such an expansion of mission and security cooperation between the United States, Mexico, and Canada involves many complex issues concerning ?regional governance? and the formation of new security relationships between all three nations. This paper will address Mexican challenges to cooperate with the US and Canada and the dilemmas in the construction of a new regional security perimeter. ..PAT.-Conference Proceeding [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

The paper reports on studies conducted in Canada as part of a cross-national exploration of Muslim diasporic identities in the post 9/11 world. Muslims constitute the second-largest religious affiliation in Canada and are an increasingly important socio-political force. The close proximity of Canada to the USA in an era of homeland security, the war against terrorism and the invasion of Iraq, has conditioned a complex of actions and reactions. Both within the Muslim community and between that community and other Canadians, social relations and social representations have recently been undergoing profound reconfigurations, reflective of the ebbs and flows of global forces. Despite the presence in Canada of a significant anti-terrorist discourse and some associated anti-Muslim hostility, the overall discursive tenor of both Muslims and non-Muslims has been one of positive engagement and assertive integration. The principal orientations have been those of efficacious citizenship, anti-racism and the development of community relations of trust and understanding. The study is multi-method and incorporates documentary analysis, in-depth interviewing, content analysis and discourse analysis. ..PAT.-Conference Proceeding [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]