Canada and the Principle of Universality
| Date | 01 March 1967 |
| Author | Alastair M. Taylor |
| DOI | 10.1177/002070206702200102 |
| Published date | 01 March 1967 |
| Subject Matter | Article |
Canada
and
the
Principle
of
Universality
Alastair
M.
Taylor*
On
the
subject
of
universalizing
membership
in
international
organizations, Canada's posture
has
all
too
often
approached
that
of
the
spiritual
peer
in
the
House
of
Lords
who
proclaimed
that
he
was
a
Christian
so
long
as
nobody
pressed him
too
far.
Nevertheless,
Ottawa
did
initiate
what
various
observers
of
the
Washington
scene
considered
a
bold
step
in
helping
to
break
the
membership
log-jam
at
the
United
Nations
in
1955-and
with
consequences
advantageous
alike
to
that
Organization
and
to
Canada's
own
international
prestige.
Hence,
Paul
Martin's
advoc-
acy
at
the
General
Assembly
on
23
November,
1966,
of
according
Peking
the
permanent
seat
on
the
Security
Council
to
which
China
is
entitled under
the
Charter,
and
of
also
giving
it
a seat
in
the
General
Assembly
(where
the
Taiwan
government
would
similarly
have
a
vote)
is
in
keeping
with
a
Canadian
approach
at
once
acceptable
but
cautious.
True,
Opposition
Leader
John
Diefenbaker
asked
in
the
Commons
the
next
day
what
had hap-
pened in
Peking
or
elsewhere
to
reverse
the
Government's
policy
from
the
previous
session
of
the
Assembly
when
it
had
voted
against
Mainland
China's
admission.
But the
Government
has
now
adopted
the
argument-similar
to
that
advanced
by
France
-that
it
was
unimportant
to ask
China
at
this
stage
whether
it
wanted
to
be
a
Member
and
intended
to
adhere
to
the
Charter.
The
first
requirement
was
to
find
a
basis
for
getting Peking
to
the
East
River.
Ottawa
was
resolved-in
Mr
Martin's
words-
to
move
from
the
"intractable,
fixed
positions
[which]
have
enslaved
us,
and
have
prevented us from making progress."
Many
if
not
most,
Canadians
are
likely
to
be
less
critical
of
this
move
than
of
the
seventeen
years
of
procrastination
and
ambivalence
preceding
the
Government's
decision.
Yet
the
advo-
cacy
of
a
two-Chinas
proposal
in
the
name
of
universality
raises
some
far-reaching
questions
whose
answers
should
be
based
upon
the
same
logic
that
supposedly
dictated
Ottawa's
current
change
Professor
of
Political
Studies
and
Geography,
Queen's
University
To continue reading
Request your trial