Scott W. See. The History of Canada. Second Edition

Подождите немного. Документ загружается.

the necessity for the war was presented and more defined conditions

were set. An overwhelming majority of Canadians have opposed the

United States and its dwindling number of allies in its Iraq adventure,

which continues in 2010. Most draw sharp distinctions between the

wars in Afghanistan and Iraq; these illustrate a Canadian ability to

distinguish between conflicts that are necessary and ones that are

misguided and perhaps illegal.

Canada continues to follow a path of providing aid and peaceful

support to countries around the world, although its commitment to

peacekeeping has fallen off in the first decade of the twenty-first

century. In 2004 the Martin administration issued a comprehensive

statement on Canadian security: “Securing an Open Society:

Canada’s National Security Policy.” It elaborated a plan to protect

Canadians at home and abroad; moreover, in a note that echoed the

sentiments of Mackenzie King on the eve of the Second World War, it

indicated that Canada would not be used as a base to threaten its

allies. In an important International Policy Statement in 2005, Martin

announced that Canada’s foreign policy would adhere to a multi-

lateral system that would be grounded in clearly defined rules;

support for human rights in an international context, enunciated so

clearly during Trudeau ’ s administration, would remain an essential

ingredient of Canadian foreign policy. In 2005 a Security and

Prosperity Partnership of North America was established with

Mexican President Vicente Fox, Martin, and Bush to improve the

collaboration between the three countries on the order of security,

goods, environment, and technology. Development aid to countries

became a priority, and this agenda has been reinforced by Harper’s

government. Finally, Canada’s role as a major country in peace-

keeping efforts dropped rather precipitously in the new century. After

reaching a threshold in 2001, by 2007 it ranked about halfway down

an international list of contributors, with a little over one hundred

personnel on active peacekeeping duty.

North American Defense and Issues

with the United States

The relationship between Canada and the United States in the first

decade of the twenty-first century has been cast almost exclusively

250 A Foreign Policy in the Post–Cold War Era

through the twin lenses of trade and 9/11. The Liberal administra-

tions of Chrétien and Martin struggled to navigate the unilateral

agenda of President George W. Bush’ s administration and the

bellicose language of American policymakers as they settled into

their nebulously defined “war on terrorism.” The attacks of 9/11

dramatically intensified a focus on the border between the two

countries, and as the decade unfolded the Bush administration turned

its attention to reinvigorating its missile defenses in North America.

Starting in 2002, the new Department of Homeland Security

intensified its efforts to monitor the border. The ideal of catching

terrorists who would use Canada as a route to enter the United States

was one component; another was a growing attempt, clearly driven

by political and popular support, to stem the flow of illegal

immigrants into the United States. Traffic across the border became

increasingly difficult as the decade unfolded and border security

personnel became more alert and at times officious. The intensified

security along the border, including the requirement by the end of the

decade that Americans carry passports so they can return to the

country from Canada, has impeded the flow of goods and become a

concern for businesses on both sides of the border. Moreover, most

Canadians who travel regularly to the United States can share

anecdotal evidence of how the border has become more difficult, and

sometimes unpleasant, to cross. At the close of this century’s first

decade the familiar axiom of the world’s largest undefended

boundary seems less applicable; perhaps it will recede as an iconic

illustration of the relationship between the two countries.

More contentious and problematic was the Bush administration’s

reinvigoration of a defensive missile network to protect North

America from terrorist attack. Most Canadians opposed the idea of

resurrecting the missile defenses; many considered it a needless

resurrection of technological policies that may have been appropriate

at the height of the Cold War, but seemed to be largely irrelevant in

the modern age of terrorism. The Bush administration created the

U.S. Northern Command (USNORTHCOM) to solidify the defense of

North America in 2002. Although pressures continued to be applied

by the Bush administration for cooperation by his Canadian

counterparts, opposition to the idea mounted. Paul Martin’s

government, with strong popular support, officially rejected an

American plan to reconstruct a missile defensive network in 2005.

A Foreign Policy in the Post–Cold War Era 251

Bush was widely unpopular in Canada; indeed, on a number of

occasions Canadians publicly voiced their harsh assessments of the

American president. For example, Bush was variously called a

“moron” and “a failed statesman” by politicians and representatives

of the federal government. NORAD, a legacy of the Cold War, was

renewed in 2006 after strained discussions with American policy-

makers. The agreement was largely symbolic; nonetheless it indicated

a reluctance on the part of Canada to completely jettison its well-

established defensive connections with the United States.

Other issues have tested the resiliency of the relationship between

the two countries recently. Tensions over the United States policy of

torture and relocation of suspected terrorists to other countries for

incarceration and interrogation have revealed some of the most

glaring differences between the two countries. One case involved

Maher Arar, a Syrian-born software engineer who was captured in

New York in 2002 because of his suspected terrorist links. Arar was

forcibly transported to Syria, where he was subjected to torture and

deprivation. After his release in 2003 Arar mounted a legal campaign

to expose his treatment and seek compensation from the Americans.

The case triggered a sensitive diplomatic dispute, with the United

States emphatically rejecting Arar’s case or even acknowledging its

role in his rendition to Syria. Ultimately the Canadian government

compensated Arar for $11.5 million, but the United States maintained

its decree that Arar could not enter the country. Another contentious

case involved Omar Khadr, a Canadian citizen, who was fifteen years

old when he was captured in Afghanistan after killing an American

soldier with a grenade. His father was a member of al-Qaeda; Khadr

was taken to the American military base at Guantanamo, which was

swiftly became a lightening rod for opposition to America’sdraconian

policies in the age of terrorism. For many years, and without a formal

charge, he was severely interrogated. In 2010 he is still being held by

the American authorities, and his case is winding its way through the

judicial system at a glacial pace.

Other issues are less contentious, yet nonetheless instructive in

defining the ongoing relationship between the two countries. For

many Americans, the issue of importing cheaper prescription drugs

from Canada became an important agenda in the early twenty-first

century. The Canadian government’s adoption of a plan to permit the

medical use of marijuana and decriminalize recreational use of the

252 A Foreign Policy in the Post–Cold War Era

drug set off a predictable firestorm of debate in the United States;

American opponents of following a similar policy inevitably cast their

Canadian neighbors in the role of left-leaning progressives or worse.

Interestingly, as the American debate on a comprehensive plan for

medical care intensified during the decade, Canadian Medicare

became a foil for Americans. Proponents touted Canada’s compre-

hensive system as one of the leading models of health care in the

world; opponents sought out Canadian critics and cited supposed

evidence of its flaws, including the system’s inequality across the

country, its cost, and the waiting lists for certain medical treatments,

as reasons for not following Canada’s lead.

Finally, Canadians closely watched the remarkable election of

Barack Obama, the first African-American president of the United

States. Most Canadians made little secret of their displeasure with

Bush and his policies, and many openly supported the Democratic

candidate in his campaign against Republican John McCain.

Remarkably, with evidence that disappointed Stephen Harper,

pollsters pointed out that not since the election of John F. Kennedy

had an American president been more popular than a sitting prime

minister. Despite his obviously different policy agendas of conserva-

tive governance, Harper continues to signal his desire to work closely

with the United States on a number of issues. Instructively, however,

and in a typically Canadian fashion, he remains vigilant about

protecting Canada’s interests: “Stand up for Canada” was one of his

signature campaign slogans in 2006. Among other matters, trade, the

border, and Arctic sovereignty loomed large.

Themes for the Twenty-First Century: Territorial

Control and Environmentalism

Although it is impossible to predict where Canada’s foreign policy

will head in the twenty-first century, in the recent past it is abundantly

clear that a powerful linkage connects environmental themes and

border concerns. Canada signed the Kyoto protocol in 1997, which

was designed to have the countries that signed cut their greenhouse

gas emissions by certain deadlines, despite the fact that numerous and

vocal opponents from the business community and resource

developers had significant reservations with its terms and possible

A Foreign Policy in the Post–Cold War Era 253

impact on the Canadian economy in the new century. Stephen

Harper’s scaled back Canada’s support for the Kyoto terms when he

became prime minister, but he continued to signal his government’s

interest in protecting the environment. Three brief case studies will

illustrate the bonds that exist between environmental themes and

Canadian interests.

Harper’s government has made a priority of promoting Canada’s

case for sovereignty in its territorial claims in the Arctic. According to

the 1982 United Nations Convention on the Law of the Sea, of which

Canada was a signatory, countries enjoy a twelve-mile limit for full

sovereignty in oceans. However, in international straits that link two

major seas, a country cannot prevent the international passage of

ships. At the same time, nations that lay claim to such waterways

have the right to oversee and legislate for environmental themes. The

Northwest passage through the Canadian archipelago of islands that

connects the Pacific and Atlantic oceans, according to most

international legal opinion, falls into the category of international

space. Canadian claims an historical right to those waterways, a point

that has not been accepted by other countries with an interest in the

Arctic, including the United States, Denmark, and Russia. Since the

late 1960s the United States has challenged the Canadian case by

sending ships and submarines through the Northwest passage,

sometimes with forewarning and sometimes without. In 2005 the

Danes occupied Hans Island, which is situated between its possession

in Greenland and Canada’s Ellesmere Island. This led to a brief but

intense diplomatic contretemps. In addition to the question of

passage, the Arctic space has abundant yet mostly untapped resources

that could promise to be of great value in the twenty-first century.

With the northern icecap of the planet warming at an alarming

pace—twice the global rate of temperature increase—some climate

change scientists predict that perhaps half of the ice cover could

disappear by the turn of the next century. This means that by mid-

century ships might be able to make voyages through the Northwest

passage, unimpeded by ice, in the summer months. Few Canadians,

including its current prime minister, would disagree on the point that

their claim to sovereignty in the Arctic will remain of paramount

national interest as the century unfolds (see “Canada’s Position on

Arctic Sovereignty” in the Documents section).

254 A Foreign Policy in the Post–Cold War Era

Analogous themes that highlight the border and environmental

themes include the case of Devils Lake, North Dakota. In 2003 the

state made plans to construct an emergency outlet to expedite runoff

in the case of flooding. Residents in neighboring Manitoba, including

provincial officials and First Nations’ people, were alarmed because

the runoff could potentially affect Canadian waterways. Devils Lake

is in a closed ecosystem, but the construction of an emergency outlet

could release waters from the lake that are high in contaminates and

pollutants such as phosphorous, sulfate, and mercury. The Interna-

tional Joint Commission, an organization that celebrated its one-

hundredth birthday in 2009, studied the case and supported the

arguments presented by the Canadians. Nonetheless, plans went

ahead for the construction of the outlet.

A third example of the linkages between environmental concerns

and territorial space involves the shared waterways between New

Brunswick and Maine. Plans to construct a terminal to unload

shipments of Liquefied Natural Gas (LNG) in Eastport, Maine,

triggered a sharp response in neighboring New Brunswick because

the massive tankers that are designed to carry the dangerous cargo

would have to pass through Canadian waters on their way to

Eastport. LNG tankers present a potential problem that concerns

environmentalists, including the possibility of spills or a catastrophic

accident similar to the fate of the Exxon Valdez, a supertanker that

ran aground and spilled oil in Prince William Sound, Alaska, in 1989.

Despite the fact that New Brunswick and Maine worked assiduously

to improve their business and tourist connections, the issue triggered

a difficult series of diplomatic discussions. New Brunswick Premier

Shawn Graham and Maine Governor John Baldacci enlisted the

support of their respective federal governments to advance their

interests. The issue remains at a stalemate in 2010; the terminals have

not been constructed, and New Brunswickers have not yielded on

their position.

The twenty-first century will almost certainly witness more

concerns that are shaped by the themes of resource extraction,

environmental protection, and territorial sovereignty. The protection

and distribution of freshwater will no doubt become of paramount

importance as the century unfolds. Canada has about seven percent

of the world’s renewable freshwater, fourth in the world behind

A Foreign Policy in the Post–Cold War Era 255

Brazil, China, and Russia. The question of bulk water exports from

Canada to thirsty regions of the United States, especially in the

Southwest, has already become a contentious proposition in the first

decade of the century. NAFTA regulations on the subject of the

export of fresh water have been challenged by California, and no

doubt more cases will follow. There is also little question that

Canadians will remain vigilant as they protect their storehouse of

freshwater—the world’s most important resource.

Canadian Citizens Exercise their Rights

Canadians in the early twenty-first century have been active in

pursuing their rights, and debate has played out primarily in the

courts, the provincial legislatures, and the federal parliament in

Ottawa. Much of the discussion has been contextualized by the

Charter of Rights and Freedoms, which reached the quarter-century

mark in the first decade of the century. The struggle for the

articulation of rights can indeed be considered a global theme, and

it should be of no surprise that the articulation and protection of

essential human rights have become important barometers for

understanding contemporary Canadian society.

First Nations continue their struggle to articulate the special rights

of status Indians, especially in the contentious subject of marriage

outside of tribal groups. In 2006 the Indian Residential Schools

Settlement Agreement stipulated that about 80,000 Native peoples

would be eligible for reparations. This agreement stemmed from the

fact that Native peoples were forced to be educated in schools from

1874 to 1996 that were administered by the Department of Indian

Affairs. These schools, according to the case made against them by

First Nations, actively promoted assimilation by teaching Christian

and western values to the students. In the early twenty-first century

Canada’s Native peoples still cope with high rates of alcoholism,

mental illness, suicide, family violence, diabetes, and tuberculosis.

Numerous court cases involving sovereignty and land claims have

defined the judicial struggle for rights for aboriginal peoples in the

new century. In 2006 the Six Nations Confederacy engaged in a well-

orchestrated protest in blocking roads near Hamilton, Ontario. Their

256 Canadian Citizens Exercise their Rights

concern was that under the terms of a treaty in 1784, their band is not

bound to recognize the sovereignty of Canadian law. Finally, land

claims are ongoing in British Columbia with the Nisga’a; the issues

are not settled, but they are being closely watched by other members

of the First Nations. The creation of Nunavut in 1999, a self-

governing territory, was a triumph of using the courts to win the

argument for protecting the rights of Native peoples. Native peoples

across the country have been quite successful in using the language of

treaties and the Charter of Rights and Freedoms to advance their

interests. The further resolution of land claims will undoubtedly be a

central story of the twenty-first century.

The Charter of Rights and Freedoms has become the single most

import wellspring for advancing the interests of Canadian citizenry. It

has changed the court system and politics; individuals and groups

actively use the Charter to pursue their rights and seek redress for

their grievances. The Supreme Court, a creation of the early

Confederation era, has moved to a place of central importance in

determining the final resolution of cases that range from consumers’

rights to a controversial case in 2004 that confirmed the rights for

Canadians to have a same-sex marriage. This case determined that

parliament could constitutionally allow for same-sex marriages,

which it did in the Civil Marriage Act the following year. The court

case set off a firestorm of debate that mirrored the more general

arguments that have been made by detractors and advocates of the

growing power of the judicial system. Proponents argue that the

courts have the right to interpret laws, especially in the light of the

Canadian Constitution and its Charter of Rights and Freedoms; they

also generally agree that individual rights should trump the rights of

the state in the cases where the boundaries between the two are

ambiguous. Critics of the modern court dynamic, who are often

equally skeptical of the expansive rights issued in the Charter and

typically describe themselves political and social conservatives,

believe that the courts often overreach their mandate. Instead, the

critics argue, the courts should defer to the federal and provincial

legislatures. Canada’s courts have struck down dozens of laws in the

early twenty-first century; of particular note are gains made on behalf

of the gay and lesbian community, women, and individuals suspected

of crimes. Despite these vociferous and ongoing debates, the Charter

of Rights and Freedoms enjoys solid support among Canadian

Canadian Citizens Exercise their Rights 257

citizens. Most see the Charter, like the Medicare program, as one of

the essential, if not quintessential, ingredients that represents a

distinguishing feature of modern Canada.

Contemporary Canadian Culture

The definition and protection of a distinct Canadian culture have

been two of the most enduring themes in the country’s history since

Confederation. First, the proliferation of American newspapers and

magazines, and then the development of radio, movies, and

television, created an almost century-long discussion of the impact

that American culture has on Canadian self-identification. Despite

the warnings of the Massey Commission in the early 1950s and the

efforts of government agencies to ensure enough “Canadian content”

in radio and television programming, Canadians continue to

demonstrate a voracious appetite for all things American. They also

consume products from around the world. Thus, the issue perhaps is

not so much American in scope, but instead a product of the

increasing internationalization of cultural industries. Canada’s

publishers and music producers, for example, have extraordinary

high rates of foreign ownership. Nonetheless, Canada annually

celebrates the superior contributions of its writers and artists. These

ceremonies include the Juno Awards for music, the Genie Awards for

films, and the prestigious Governor General ’ s Awards for literature.

The Canadian-U.S. boundary seemed to matter little in a

consumer zone of shared tastes in popular culture. Canadian-made

films have captured the attention of American viewers, such as those

directed by David Cronenberg, Atom Egoyan, and Denis Arcand.

Vancouver and Toronto have become favorite locations for Holly-

wood’s movies. Canadian actors continued to seek warmer locations

to practice their art. The complete tally of Canadians in movies,

comedy, and newscasting in the United States would be long indeed.

A partial list from the late twentieth century included Robert

MacNeil, Peter Jennings, Jim Carrey, Michael J. Fox, Donald

Sutherland, Dan Aykroyd, William Shatner, and Hume Cronyn.

While the impressive number of their compatriots in the American

television and movie industries is a source of pride among Canadians,

258 Contemporary Canadian Culture

it is simultaneously a reminder of an ongoing talent drain to more

lucrative markets.

Canadian writers and musicians also enjoyed international

exposure. Some of the most respected writers of the modern era are

Margaret Laurence, Robertson Davies, Margaret Atwood, Alice

Munro, Timothy Findley, Antonine Maillet, Gabrielle Roy, Mordecai

Richler, Michael Ondaatje, W. O. Mitchell, Michel Tremblay, and

Farley Mowat. While many of their works were distinctively

Canadian in setting and composition, they clearly addressed issues

that touched a wider audience. A similar point can be made about

Canadian musicians. The deep traditions of country music and jazz,

as well as the rock industry of the postwar era, became international

in scope. Canadian musicians whose compositions became familiar to

millions included piano virtuosos such as Glenn Gould, jazz greats

such as Oscar Peterson, folk singers such as Anne Murray and

Gordon Lightfoot, and country crooners such as Hank Snow. From

its inception the rock industry was replete with Canadians. An

unbroken line reached from early rock stars such as Joni Mitchell and

Neil Young to late twentieth century pop attractions such as Céline

Dion, Bryan Adams, Alanis Morissette, and Shania Twain. More

recently, groups and artists such as Barenaked Ladies, Nickelback,

Broken Social Scene, and Drake have garnered an international

following. The ease in which these artists move across the border

suggests an international culture that can be interpreted in one of two

ways: either it indicates positive connections, a variation on the

“global village” theme, or it threatens the survival of a distinctive

Canadian culture (see “Canadian Insights Using Humor ” in the

Documents section).

Canadians found themselves confronting similar dilemmas with

the sports industry. The fate of the National Hockey League aptly

illustrates the issue. Started in 1917 with four Canadian teams, by the

1920s the NHL was dominated by American teams. In the early

twenty-first century the NHL’s players come from Canada, the

United States, and a growing number of European countries. As

humorists have long pointed out, hockey is the closest Canadians

come to having a national religion. Canada’s narrow victory in a

1972 hockey series with the Soviets triggered an unusual demonstra-

tion of national pride. By 2000 Canada also had two professional

baseball teams, the Montreal Expos and the Toronto Blue Jays. The

Contemporary Canadian Culture 259