POL312 week 10
Key Words Notes
December 3 rd
Takes place in UC266
2 essay questions: each of equal value.
Part A: The first question is mandatory, you must answer.
Part B: students will answer one question of their choice from a
list of several questions available.
The test covers all material since the start of the course. The
tests centers on developing and applying to the evidence major
theories and concepts of foreign policy.
The most important are the three perspectives on foreign policy,
and the meta-theory of hegemonic transition.
Answer the question asked and answer all parts of the question.
What will the test look like?
- Part A:
a. how well does each of the three theoretical perspectives
(LI, PD, CNR) account for the initial foreign policy
doctrine and early international affairs resource
distribution of each newly elected Canadian government
from 1984 to the present. (ie. Mulroney, Chrétien, Martin,
and Harper)? How well does the theory of hegemonic
transition in the international account for the pattern you
- Part B:
a. To what extent have particular Canadian national
interest and distinct national values have been
determined and been advanced by Canadian foreign
policy in the Harper years.
b. What are the major similarities and differences in CFP
decision across the St. Laurence, Diefenbaker and the
Trudeau years. How much and how does the pattern
support the argument that Canada was an emerging
power in a changing world.
c. Which single case of Key decision in CFP since 1845
(apart from 1962 Cuban Missile crisis) most reflects the
pattern predicted by the PD perspective and how. (PROF:
nuclear deterrence in 1963) how much and how do the
other theoretical perspective help account for the case.
d. Despite repeated complaints of a commitment gapping
CFP broadly defines and endless pleas that more money
should be spent by Canada on its International Affairs
distribution of resources in international affairs of each
Canadian government since 1968 has faithfully reflected
each governments defining doctrine in foreign policy. Discuss.
Jan 10, 2014: we have a special event-day long conference
on the G8 and G20.
Summit Watch: the PM is not traveling this week. He is
boycotting the summit he should be at.
Canada as number one. We had been doing resource, but that is
relatively easy. We have a lot of resources. Lets switch to the
next item: (recall the three main things: references, population,
and technology) Lets pick up population. Which isn’t just
number of people. Canada is actually growing population wise
because of migration. Places like Germany and Japan are
shrinking in population. We, on the other hand are growing.
Population is human capital
- Canada has the world’s busiest public library in the world
per capita. This means free educational references.
- In absolute numbers, we are number 2 after Hong Kong.
Hong Kong has three times the population of Toronto, which
is why they are the absolute winner.
- This is a measure of literacy.
- A measure of egalitarianism, because basically anyone can
use the public library .
- Also a measure of social cohesion. Libraries are a social
- Also a measure of multiculturalism, because we have very
If Canada is number one, by definition middle power it cannot be
MULRONY/CAMPBELL YEARS OF CFP
The arrival of a progressive government under Brian Mulroney
on September 17 1984 appeared to mark a decisive change in
the long-standing trudeauvian or Pearsonian approach to
The perspective change was most apparent in the Canadian-
Mulroney promised to restore ‘super’ relations with the United
States. a country to which he would give a “benefit of the doubt.”
He launched on a campaign to get a secure a comprehensive free
trade agreement with the US. the campaign gave rise to a public
and scholarly debate about what Canadian foreign policy and
domestic policy identity existence would be. So the debate
continued with KAFTA at the centerpiece, to the end o the
Mulroney government until 1993, which is when Campbell took over.
What are the competing school of thoughts about Mulroney and
CFP at this time.
- The first school of thought claims continentalism:
a. KAFTA centerpiece.
b. WHAT? Mulroney’s priority was to maintain a close and
supportive relationship with the US.
c. WHY? Few reasons:
i. Due to the PM personal beliefs. Was he really a
member of the elite? Or was he a rational
calculator. Due to his government’s rational
calculations of a rising American strength and a
declining Canada’s weakness in a changing world.
ii. As David said in 1985 beginning of the Mulroney
years “policy is likely to differ from Trudeau in a
number of ways. the sharpest difference will
probably be around the Canadian American
relations which the PM sees as a the corner stone
of Canadian Foreign policy.” Terrance continues:
“Mulroney will attempt to fashion a special
relationship where each country recognizes of the
other as a neighbor ally and best friend. And
towards NATO and east west relations the
Mulroney government can be expected to support
the Thatcher and Regan position”
d. This school sees a sudden shift to a PD pattern after
Pierre Trudeau. US is the centerpiece of this school of
- The second School of thought sees Constructive
a. It suggests Mulroney continental challenge to the
prevailing Personas or the most recent truduvaism was a
b. PD doesn’t catch on. Just as Trudaeu’s CNR challenge had
been. The argument here is that Trudeau came in and
tried a new form of policy, which is well changed.
c. Once again he pulled back into tried and true Liberal
d. Evidence: there is a law in CFP that pertains well to
the Mulroney years. Whenever Mulroney faced a
direct choice between the US and the UN they would
almost always chose the UN over the US. this
overwhelming tendency to pick the UN over the US
suggests that Constructivist internationalism had come
back very quickly during Mulroney’s time. e. UN is the centerpiece of this school of thought.
f. In 1989 (beginning of Mulroney’s second majority
mandate), Margaret wrote “respects for international
institutions and enthusiasm for role playing within them
had been consistent themes in CFP since WWII”
g. The retreat from multilateralism, which is a feature of
recent US foreign policy, particularly under the Regan
administration no echo’s in Ottawa. So reganism didn’t
h. One need not expect a constant damping down of
multilateral. it would remain a bug thing.
i. On tehcontrart multilateral and Canadian policy will
continue to reactive considerable emphasize from the
government. This is a higher Liberal internationalist
school of thought.
- Globalism: (prof labeled it)
a. This school of thought see assertive globalism arising at
the mid-point of the Mulroney years.
b. First half: first mandate. Second half: Second mandate. So
assertive globalism arriving at mid point. This matters
because why do we see a shift? Is it the same Mulroney,
political party, same set up?
c. Majority mandate both times there are all these potential
cause. If there is a big change in the mid-point it is the
external determinants. It is the world that drove that
d. This school of thought takes its cues from Mulroney’s
thought that Canada had 4 best friends: US, Britain,
Israel, and France.
i. Mulroney had a number of seats in Francophone
Quebec. Not very progressive prime minters since 1945
e. Andrew Cohen captured it perfectly. He declares at the
start of the second mandate “Long cast as a middle
power, Canada seems less midland today. What it lacks in
power it makes up in influence. Where it sometimes fails
in its relations with one country it often succeeds in its
relations with other countries. It seems to be everywhere
with a role to play everywhere.” He continues,
“Overwhelmed by this diversity of interest (activity
component two) the conservative government spent
much of its first term assessing positions. Foreign policy
is most likely to be important to the government in its
second term. If there was a time for Canada to perform
on the stage, it is now. Whatever the designation, middle power, principal power Canada is a player of authority
PROF thesis: we need to look beyond these, and not just examine
the three. Basically none of the above, rather the prof argues
that the record shows Canada sustained assertive globalism
almost from the start. The big shift was at the mi d point,
but we can see signs of assertive globalism almost from the
start of the Mulroney years. In the minority during the first
year probably, by the second, and increasingly in the first
term you can chart globalism. At least you can if you are
equipped with CNR perspective.
Sustained globalism starts to become dominate at the mid
waypoint. The question is, why?
- governmental determinants
- societal determinates
- External determinants (the meta-theory of hegemonic
transition. And its main component is the decline of the Us
and the diffusion of their capabilities)
The United States decline and rise:
- 1980 we begin with the US decline, the US had only 35% of
the relative capabilities of the worlds 9 major powers.
- 1985: we have the Regan revival. US relative capabilities
amongst the major powers had soared to 46% in 5 years. If
you look just within the G7 everyone but Soviet Union and
china, the US share had leapt in those years from 41% to
- The untied states Regan’s mandate almost restored to the
hegemonic that it had at the beginning of the post world war.
it was an extraordinary leap..
Canada’s decline and rise: