PSCI 3606 Study Guide - Final Guide: Middle Power, Soft Power, List Of Political Parties In Canada
14 Jun 2018
School
Department
Course
Professor
Section 1
Question 1
Does the US reward Canada for taking a collaborative approach to foreign policy? Does it punish
Canada for challenging the Us on foreign policy issues?
• The United States does not reward Canada for taking collaborative approach.
• The Canada- US relationship is one of the key dynamics of Canadian foreign policy and
often dominates Canada’s foreign policy agenda.
• In 1968, Stephan Clarkson identifies two central approaches:
- The quite approach: nurturing the American relationship should have our highest
priority and our general strategy should be affiliation, or close alignment and
cooperation with our superpower neighbor to achieve maximum diplomatic power.
- The independent approach: our relations with the US are only special due to our
dependence on American trade and capital inflows, so pursuing independence will
create new opportunities that be exploited to further our national interest.
Conceptualizing Canada- US relations
• As relations with the Us deepened, the two perspectives on how best to manage Canada-
Us relations become conceptualized:
- Continentalist: as Canada’s influence in the world depends on proving its influence in
Washington’s corridors of power and deeper interdependence with the US provides
some insurance against Washington’s arbitrary action, continental integration should
be accelerated and deepened.
- Nationalist: the US is also a threat to Canada’s interest as independence really means
dependence, so we should diversify our trading partners and continue pursues and
continue pursue low cost niche diplomacy, utilizing soft power, at the global level.
• However, as Lennox and bow note, the strict dichotomy of “quite diplomacy” versus
“independence” is problematic and suggests a false choice that does not exist in practice.
• Rather than dramatic shifts from one pole to another, Canada- Us relations have a high
degree of continuity regardless of which political parties are in the two countries.
• Under both Martin and Harper, Canada became focused on satisfying US demands to
“secure the Canadian border” and deepen security cooperation to ensure continues access
to the US economy.
• Security continentalism: largely defined by the ideas of collective defense and ‘defense
against help’
- Defense against help’: Canada must protect itself not to its own standards, but to
those of the United Sates, for fear that otherwise Americans officials would cross the
border and Help Canada defend itself by enforcing their own standards.
Beyond the border (Action Plan)
• In 2011, as part of conservative government’s Canada’s economic action plan, the
government announced a new joint initiative with the US, titled beyond the border which
is described as a practical road map, not a formal agreement
• Reframed under the framework of regulatory cooperation, this general approach of
increased collaboration and harmonization had continues under the Trudeau government
the American relationship
• as it is this relationship that gives Canada special influence through our geographical,
political and psychological proximity, nurturing the American relationship should have
find more resources at oneclass.com
find more resources at oneclass.com
the highest priority. Canada should not question the ultimate goals of the United States
that has, after all, world wide responsibilities for the defense of the free world. in addition
we must realize that Canada cannot survive economically without the goodwill of the
Americans upon whom we depend for our high standards of living, it would be
counterproductive to try to influence the American policies by publicly opposing them.
this would only reinforce the extremist elements advocating the policies we opposed.
Canada’s relationship with the United States are special because of the disparity of our
power and the degree to which we depend on American trade and capital inflows. The
huge military and political power of the US should make Canada particular critical of the
American policies.
Section 1
Question 2
Compare and contrast the analytical models of ‘middle power’ ‘principle power’ and ‘satellite
power’, which provides a more effective assessment of Canadian foreign policy capability and
historical practice?
- In international relations, the term middle power refers to a state that wields less
influence on the world stage than a superpower. As the term suggests, middle powers fall
in the middle of the scale measuring a country’s international influence. Where
superpowers have great influence over other countries, middle powers have moderate
influence over international events.
- Canada was considered to be a middle power during the postwar period — from 1945
until about 1960. Though Canada was not as powerful or prominent as the United
Kingdom or the United States during this time, it was an international player that
influenced events through moral leadership, peacekeeping and conflict mediation.
- Attempts at identifying middle powers focus on at least one, but more usually a
combination, of the following characteristics: considerations of state capacity,6 position
in the world order, the normative composition of the middle-power state–societal
complex, domestic class interests, and the role and influence of foreign policy-makers.
- Middle-power states typically adopt an activist style in that they interfere in global issues
beyond their immediate concern.
- Middle powers do not interfere in all situations of conflict, but they do interfere more
than non middle-power states with similar compositional profiles.
- Middle-power foreign policy often focuses on conflict reduction (broadly understood) in
the world system, by involving other like-minded states (in terms of the issue at hand) in
an attempt to arrive at a workable compromise, usually through multilateral channels and
institutions. Despite some disagreements with the hegemon and other major states
(especially over human rights issues16),
- middle powers do not challenge or threaten the global status quo—that is, the economic
and military–political ‘balance’ of power—nor the desirability of liberal democracy, in
any fundamental way.
• The term middle power had been conceived in the first place as a way of explaining to
the world that Canadians were of greater consequence that the Panamanians but could not
take on the obligation of the Americans or even the French.
• It was often presented in an theoretical manner to describe the pragmatic behavior of
Canadians foreign policy in the post war era:
find more resources at oneclass.com
find more resources at oneclass.com
- Functionally, it ranks us according to our critical capacity for action and influence-- a
state situated below the great powers but above developing countries.
- Behaviorally, it suggest that Canada’s capacity for contribution, interest and expertise
justifies our representation in decision making processes at the international level.
• It should also be known that Canada did not have the level of capacity to pursue power
independently, however, the image of the middle power both as explanatory theory and
perspective approach directly embedded within the theoretical tradition of liberal
institutionalism.
• Central to the this perspective is the concept of soft power (Joseph Bye) and the belief
that Canada, as a middle power, exerts some form of moral authority through culture,
values and sense of legitimacy.
- It is a good way in which it suggest that Canada can make a difference on the
international level. It is also a state that make good presentation and purpose.
- Soft power has its limits, we cant just emphasis on the soft power without thinking of
the hard power
Canada as a principle power
• The image of Canada as a principle power position it in the upper echelon of states, based
upon its relative capabilities and in particular surplus capability.
• Explicitly grounded in neo-realism, the other core theory of IR:
- Anarchy is all defining and leads to conflict and competition,
- State actors seek to maximize both absolute and relative gains, so state interaction is
perceived as a zero- sum game
- International institutions only have a marginal impact on state action and cooperation
only occurs if it is in the interests of the state.
The principle power model.
• The definition of principle power have three characteristics: 1. They stand at the top of
the international status ranking, collectively possessing decisive capability, and are
differentiated from lower ranking powers by both objective and subjective criteria. 2.
They act as principles in their international activities and associations, rather than as
agents for other states or grouping or as mediators between principle role in establishing
specifying and enforcing international order.
• Within the neo- realism, international stability is either established by a balance of power
and behavioral of principle powers are different then classical understanding the
hegemonic states within the neo-realism:
- What principle power seeks to do is trying to distinguish themselves from realism as a
whole, they act differently and have different roles.
- They are the states in the international hierarchy that stand at the top of the
international status ranking
- They act as principles in their international activities and associations, rather than as
agents for other states or grouping.
- They act rather than agents.
• With the decline of US hegemony, principle powers like Canada, have become more
important in shaping the international system.
- Requires four specific systemic conditions: 1. Decline of US hegemony, 2. Diffusion
of that power into an expanded top-tier/ 3. Multipolar system, 4. And location of
Canada within that top tier.
find more resources at oneclass.com
find more resources at oneclass.com
Document Summary
Secure the canadian border and deepen security cooperation to ensure continues access to the us economy: security continentalism: largely defined by the ideas of collective defense and defense against help". Americans upon whom we depend for our high standards of living, it would be counterproductive to try to influence the american policies by publicly opposing them. this would only reinforce the extremist elements advocating the policies we opposed. Canada"s relationship with the united states are special because of the disparity of our power and the degree to which we depend on american trade and capital inflows. The huge military and political power of the us should make canada particular critical of the. In international relations, the term middle power refers to a state that wields less influence on the world stage than a superpower. As the term suggests, middle powers fall in the middle of the scale measuring a country"s international influence.
