Search

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United States, DND's reading of the fragile and failed state problematic has dominated and supplanted DFAIT's. ..PAT.-Unpublished Manuscript [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Recently, the idea of the green state has emerged as a way of understanding the state in the context of the international relations of the environment. By assuming the role of a public environmental trustee and responsible global environmental citizen, states can achieve changes at the international and domestic levels. However, for changes to be sustained and deep, policy needs to challenge rather than support the logic of ecologically destructive competitive capitalism and hierarchical globalization. This paper argues that Canada's historical commitment to green multilateralism makes it well-positioned to move toward the role of a green state, but that a major barrier remains Canada's continuing support of inequitable and unsustainable global relations of economic exchange based on competitiveness. Rather than forming a single coherent strategy on climate change, for example, two distinct and competing principles vie for dominance in Canadian international environmental policy: competitiveness and protection. As a result, Canada's climate change policies have been irregular and inconsistent. For example, Canada has recently departed from multilateral commitments agreed at Kyoto, while simultaneously claiming to take decisive action to reduce overall greenhouse gas emissions. ..PAT.-Unpublished Manuscript [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

How do states come to perceive that they are threatened by terrorism? And how do their specific features/characteristics determine their response to the threat? This paper examines the responses of Canada to international terrorism and highlights the different ways in which national identity determines when states will feel threatened and how they will respond. Canada is a good case study because we would expect it to follow American counter-terrorism policy closely for two reasons: first, because the Canadian economy is dependent on ties with the United States, and second, because of the close social, historical, and political links between the two countries.We ask how Canada came to see itself as threatened by international terrorism. We examine the responses of Canadians and the Canadian government to the attacks on the United States in September, 2001. We show that this threat perception is based on ideas of identity as much as on objective “facts”. We then discuss how dominant ideas about Canadian identity shaped the manner in which Canada responded to the threat. We do this by examining a number of policies enacted by the Canadian government in the years after 9/11, such as the 2001 Smart Border Accords and the Passenger Protect no-fly list, and find that they diverge from American policies in significant and interesting ways. We also examine Canadian responses to American counter-terrorism policies such as rendition and new passport requirements. Again, we find Canadian responses conditioned by Canadian identity. We conclude with some implications for theory and policy. ..PAT.-Unpublished Manuscript [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]

Canada stood amid the fervent promoters of the International Criminal Court (ICC) during Rome Diplomatic Conference in 1998. This State has provided technical assistance during the negotiation process and has played a leading role in establishing a consensual vision over sensitive issues. Although great opposition attempted to undermine the ICC's legitimacy and strength, Canada has supported this novel initiative supporting an evolving International Criminal Law (ICL) normative framework. The ICC's edification was a central pillar of Canada's human security politics. Yet, when examining interstate cooperation motivations, the ICC does not fulfil utilitarian principals' conceptual structure. Quite the opposite, in the light of State sovereignty, the ICC seems to generate more costs than benefits. The analysis must rather be based on a multidimensional argumentation and investigate internal motives supporting the creation of such independent and permanent international court. Political pondering takes into account material and cognitive considerations, leading to a decision that reflects State's identity and preferences, international ethic and strategic means. Using this analytical framework, it seems plausible to dissect Canada's motives to uphold the ICC's creation and to stand against its historically most important ally, the United States. ..PAT.-Unpublished Manuscript [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]