U of O offers vision for Canada's role in the world
illustration by Devin Beauregard
Centre for International Policy Studies releases report on Canadian foreign policy
CANADA IS SLOW to react to changes in international affairs and does not have a concrete vision for its foreign policy, states a joint University of Ottawa and Carleton University study. The report, titled “Rethinking Canada’s International Priorities,” was published by the U of O’s Centre for International Policy Studies (CIPS) and Carleton’s Norman Paterson School of International Affairs (NPSIA) on March 29.
The report consists of a collection of essays by 10 researchers, including university professors, journalists, and former diplomats, who outline the international challenges facing Canada and propose policy options for addressing these challenges.
“Under minority governments, foreign policy has been narrowed and there is no discussion of the larger role for Canada in the world,” said Roland Paris, director of CIPS. “[The contributors] felt it was important to underline foreign policy as an issue in this country.”
The report opens a debate between four competing views on Canadian foreign policy: the first urging Canada to focus on its relations with United States, the second assigning Canada a leading role in international organizations, the third asking Canadian politicians to be more selective in foreign involvement, and the fourth calling on Canada to battle new threats to global security, such as global warming.
Paris and NPSIA director Fen Osler Hampson acknowledged the merits of all four views, but cautioned that Canadian foreign policy cannot be based on a single “one-dimensional” approach. Instead, they advocated addressing the tensions between the views and incorporating elements of each one into the final vision.
Contributors were encouraged not to discuss their papers until they were completed and ready for presentation at a November 2009 workshop in Ottawa to avoid reaching a consensus in their views.
“We wanted to get as many ideas onto the table as possible and to stimulate discussion,” said Paris.
The contributors still agreed on one point—their criticism of Canada’s current foreign policy agenda. The report argues that Canadian politicians lack leadership, resources, and clear priorities in their approach to global affairs.
“The world is undergoing a profound transformation, but you wouldn’t know it from looking at the current discussion of foreign policy in Canada,” said Paris.
Paris observed that discussion of foreign policy was particularly poor under Canada’s recent minority governments because they focused on short-term goals.
“Political calculations tend to be [focused on] shorter terms and [minority] governments tend to be more focused on immediate electoral implications,” he said. “The current government hasn’t had a particularly broad view of what foreign policy could accomplish. It has used foreign policy to build electoral support.”
Paris hopes that the report, which was distributed to parliamentarians, foreign policy experts, and academics, will facilitate public debate on Canada’s role in the world and serve as a foundation for the country’s future foreign policies.
The report is published as Canada prepares to host a G8 summit in June and continues to campaign for a seat on the United Nations’ Security Council, with the General Assembly scheduled to make a decision next fall.
The report also precedes the scheduled end to Canada’s mission in Afghanistan. Paris and Hampson noted that these circumstances make the study particularly relevant in the current context and make the task of creating a long-term strategy for Canada’s foreign policy more urgent.
The full text of the report is available at www.socialsciences.uottawa.ca/cepi-cips/eng/priorities.asp.
