Does Politics Stop at the Water's Edge in Canada?
| Author | Brian Bow,David Black |
| DOI | 10.1177/002070200906400102 |
| Published date | 01 March 2009 |
| Date | 01 March 2009 |
| Subject Matter | Political Parties & Foreign Policy |
Brian Bow & David Black
Does politics stop at
the water’s edge in
Canada?
Party and partisanship in Canadian foreign policy
| International Journal | Winter 2008-09 | 7 |
Do political parties matter when it comes to Canadian foreign policy?
Conventional wisdom says they do. We often hear the argument that some
past decision would not have been made if only another party had been in
power, or that some current policy is likely to be overturned as soon as
another party comes into power. The parties themselveshave worked hard to
encourage this way of thinking, playing up the coherence and continuity of
foreign policy priorities within parties and the supposedly stark differences
between them. Yet there are some enduring patterns in Canadian foreign
policy that seem to over-ride party differences.Governing parties sometimes
pursue policies that seem starkly at odds with what they have told us about
their purposes and priorities. And while Canadians seem to have strong
feelings about parties’ foreign policy choices, opinion polls suggest that
foreign policy issues usually have little to do with most Canadians’ voting
decisions.In fact there are a number of reasonswhy we might expect political
parties to matter very little in Canada, perhaps even less than in other
Brian Bow is assistan t professor of political scienc e and faculty fellow at the Centre for
Foreign Policy Studies at Dalhousie University. David Black is professor ofpolitical science
and director of the Centre for Foreign Policy Studies at Dalhousie University.
| Brian Bow & David Black |
| 8 | Winter 2008-09 | International Journal |
comparable countries. How do we reconcile these apparent discrepancies?
When and how does party make a difference?
Much has been written about the question of parties and foreign policy
in Canada, but most of it takes the form of a passing reference here or there,
never really explained or supported. We still do not yet have any sustained
efforts to think about the question theoretically, or to try to answer the
question systematically (as opposed to anecdotally). This is particularly
striking in the textbooks on Canadian foreign policy. Most of them have paid
at least some attention to the role of parliament—or, in most accounts, the
non-role of parliament—in foreign policymaking. But their concern is with
the relationship betweenthe prime minister and parliament as an institution,
or between the cabinet and parliament in general terms, and they refer to
parties and partisanship only incidentally.1Kim Richard Nossal’s landmark
The Politics of Canadian Foreign Policy
—which, as the title suggests, is
specifically concerned withthe political institutions and processes that bring
about foreign policy decisions—covers political partiesin about three pages.2
Nossal concludes that parties generally have not been important, mostly
because of the broad consensus between the two major parties on foreign
policy issues during the Cold War.3This is probably correct, and might still
1 In addition to the Nossal and Kirton textbooks cited below, other general books that
aspire to a higher level of completeness in their treatment of Canadian foreign policy,
but that pay no attenti on (or virtually no attention) to t he question of parties and
partisanship per se, include James E ayrs,
The Art of the Possible: Government a nd
Foreign Policyin Canada
(Toronto:University of TorontoPress, 1961); John W. Holmes,
The Better Part of Valour: Essays on Canadian Diplomacy
(Toronto: McClelland and
Stewart, 1970); Michael Tucker,
Canadian Foreign Policy: Contemporary Is sues and
Themes
(Toronto: McGraw-Hill, 1980); A ndrew Fenton Cooper,
Canadian Foreign
Policy: Old Habits and New Directions
(Scarborough: Pre ntice-Hall, 1997); Patrick
James et al.,
Handbook of Canadian Foreign Policy
(Lanham, MD: Lexington, 2006);
Steven Kendall Holloway,
Canadian Foreign Policy: Defining the National Interest
(Peterborough: BroadviewPress, 2006); Duane Bratt and Christopher J. Kukucha, eds.,
Readings in Canadian Foreign Policy: Classic Debates and New Ideas
(Don Mills:
Oxford University P ress, 2007); Brian Tomlin, Fen Osler Hampson, and Nor man
Hillmer,
Canada’s International Policies
(Toronto: Oxford University Press, 2008).
2
The Politicsof Canadian ForeignPolicy
(Scarborough,ON: Prentice Hall, 1997),281-4.
3 Like other textbook a uthors, Nossal frequently ref ers to the Liberals or the
Conservatives having made a particular choice, as if it mattered that it was the Liberals
or the Conservatives mak ing the choice. But he doesn’t actu ally connect these
references up with his general discussion of the role of parties, nor does he draw out
any patterns running across these references.
To continue reading
Request your trial