Directions in Canada's International Security Policy
| Author | David B. Dewitt |
| Published date | 01 June 2000 |
| Date | 01 June 2000 |
| DOI | http://doi.org/10.1177/002070200005500201 |
| Subject Matter | Article |
DAVID
B.
DEWITT
Directions
in
Canada's
international
security
policy
From
marginal
actor
at
the
centre
to
central
actor
at
the
margins
INTRODUCTION:
DEFENCE
AND
SECURITY
Er
some
time
now,
Canadians
have
not
been overly
concerned about
national
defence.'
They
have
felt
no
threat
of
imminent
invasion;
they
have
not
seen
their
core
values
or
institutions under
challenge
by
some
foreign,
or
even
some
domestic,
force;
they
have
not
been
coerced
into
domestic
or
foreign
policies
inimical to
their
prefer-
ences.
2
Indeed,
the
idea
of
national
defence
seems
to
be
of
decreasing
relevance
to most
Canadians,
except
for
the
perception
by some
that
Director,
Centre
for
International
and
Security
Studies,
Professor
of
Political
Science,
York
Universitý
Toronto.
This
article
is
a
revised
and
updated
version
ofapaperpresented
to
a
Canadian
studies
conference
at
Mount
Allison University
in April
1998.
The
proceedings
appear
in
MichaelJ.
Tucker,
Raymond
B.
Blake,
and
PJE.
Bryden,
eds,
Canada
and
the
New
World
Order
(Toronto:
Irwin
2000).
The
revision
benefited
from
thorough comments
and
gen-
erous
advice
from
Denis Stairs
and
Martin
Shadwick.
tAlthough
I
acknowledge
-
indeed
I
have
been
part
of
-
the
debate
concerning
the
inclusiveness
of
the
concept
of
'security,'
my
primary
focus
in
this
article
is on
the
role
of
the
Canadian
armed
forces
in
Canada's
security
and
defence
policy.
I
will
not,
therefore,
address
in
any
detail 'non-traditional'
security
challenges
such
as
envi-
ronmental
security.
2
See
Martin
Shadwick,
'Defence
and
public opinion
in
Canada,'
in David
E.
Code
and
Ian
Cameron,
eds, Defence
and
Public
Opinion
(Ottawa:
Conference
of
Defence
Associations
Institute
1994).
INTERNATIONAL
JOURNAL
Spring
2000
David
B.
Dewitt
the
movement for Quebec
sovereignty
directly
challenges
Canadian
security.'
But
that
does
not
mean
that
there
has
been
no
activity
in
this
sec-
tor
of
public
life.
Since 1993
a
series
of
government
documents
has
emanated
from
the
House,
Senate,
and
the
Departments
of
Foreign
Affairs
and International
Trade
(DFAIT)
and
of
National
Defence
(DND);
4
parliament
has
convened
hearings;
and
the
informed
public
has
offered
its
assessments
of
foreign
and
defence
policy.'
To
this
list
can be
added
the
special
reports
commissioned
to address
specific
concerns,
including
the
Reserves,
the
Somalia
Inquiry, maritime
and
naval
issues,
United
Nations
rapid
reaction
capability,
procurement
matters
such
as
fixed
wing
and
helicopter
aircraft
and
conventionally
powered
submarines,
the
military
justice
system,
and
the
'quality
of
life'
concerns
of
the
families
of
members
of
the
Canadian
Armed
Forces.
What
animates
many
of
these efforts
is
a
need
to
reorganize,
reform,
and
refocus
the
Canadian
military
in
the
post-cold
war
world
and
to
relocate
it
within
Canadian
society.
Both
DFAIT
and
DND
undertook
internal
assessments
in
the
late
1980s
of
their
respective
capacities
to
formulate
and
implement
poli-
cies
attuned
to
the
dramatic
changes
unfolding
during
the
period,
especially
around
East-West
relations.
Already,
then, some
analysts
in
Ottawa
and
in
the
academic
community
were
keenly
aware
of
the
need
to
rethink
their
ideas
about
international
security.
6
But
even
with
well
informed
reviews
and
reports,
the
analyses
and sentiments
have
still
not
been codified
or
consolidated into
an
overall
strategic
view
of
Canada's
place in
the
world
of
war
and
peace.
This
is
not
the
3
More
recently,
concerns
have been
raised
by
illegal
Chinese
boat people
and
the
Canada-United
States
discussion
over
the security
of
common
borders
from
people-
smuggling
and
the
hypothesized
relationship with
terrorist
activities.
The
prevailing
discourse
in
these
latter
issues
is
one
of
security rather
than
defence,
as
they
are
presented
in
the context
of
a
prevailing
and
widespread
global
menace
and are
linked
to
the
vulnerability
of
'Western
democratic societies.'
4
See,
for example,
Douglas
L.
Bland,
ed,
Canada's
National
Defence.
I:
Defence
Policy
(Kingston: School
of
Policy
Studies,
Queen's
University,
1998).
5
For
example,
Canada
21,
Canada
and
Common
Securityin
the
Twenty-First
Century
(Toronto:
Centre
for
International
Studies, University
of
Toronto
1994).
6
For
a
modest
contribution
to
the debate,
see
David
B.
Dewitt
and
David
Leyton-
Brown,
eds,
Canada's
International
Security Policy
(Toronto:
Prentice-Hall
1995).
Even
the
auditor
general
has
attempted
to expand
the parameters
of
the
defence/security
debate.
Report
of
the
Auditor
General
of
Canada
to the
House
of
Commons,
Equipping and Modernizing
the
Canadian
Forces
(Ottawa:
April
1998).
168
INTERNATIONAL
JOURNAL
Spring2000
To continue reading
Request your trial