Historical Traditions and the Inevitability of European Ties

Abstract

The traditional view that Canada's relations with Europe are a significant influence on Canadian life and Canada's international role no longer prevails in Canadian politics. New immigration and multiculturalism encourage other than (West) European inputs; in addition, decisions taken in 1987-88 seem to bring economic and military-strategic tendencies toward continentalism and sover-eignty to their logical conclusion, at the expense of reaffirmation of ties with Europe and Atlanticism. However, Canada's security remains tied to North America and Europe, and Canada's interest in being seen as an involved international actor also implies inevitable ties with Europe, via trade and through investments and collaboration in high-technology ventures. In the past four decades, Ottawa had to bow to the force of the argument that the North Atlantic Alliance might do without a Canadian military contribution but that Canada could not afford to forgo the goodwill of its partners in the inescapable security community. After the end of the divisions that accompanied the Cold War, both Canada and Europe will have to assess the lessons of the 1947-89 epoch. This article attempts to spotlight the main stakes in the developments between Canada, the United States, and NATO Europe.

Get full access to this article

View all access options for this article.

References

1. “Of all the areas of the world, Europe is the only one in which our tangible ties and our sentimental associations are such as to offer the elements of balance and diversification that Canada requires. The sort of relations we can build with Europe will have an important bearing on the fabric of Canadian life and the Canadian role in the world.” J.G.H. Halstead , “Canada and Europe” (Draft memorandum, Department of External Affairs, 26 Mar. 1970).

2. Joel J. Sokolsky , “Canada, the United States and NATO: A Tale of Two Pillars,” in North American Perspectives on European Security, ed. M. K. Hawes and J. J. Sokolsky (Lewiston, ME: Edwin Mellen Press, 1990), p. 225.

3. Canada, Department of National Defence , Rationale for Canadian Defence Forces, July 1967.

4. Roger Epp , “On Justifying the Alliance: Canada, NATO, and World Order,” in North American Perspectives, ed. Hawes and Sokolsky , pp. 103-108.

5. Geir Lundestad , The American “Empire” and Other Studies of U.S. Foreign Policy in a Comparative Perspective (New York: Oxford University Press, 1990).

6. Department of National Defence , Rationale, para. 23.

7. N. A. Robertson to St-Laurent, 21 Apr. 1948, Public Archives Canada, RG 25 A 12, vol. 2097, file AR 69/4.

8. Sokolsky , “Canada,” p. 216.

9. Roy Rempel , “The Canadian Commitment in Germany: Its Evolution and Its Prospects,” in North American Perspectives, ed. Hawes and Sokolsky , p. 276.

10.

10. Ibid.

11.

Cf. Robert Bothwell and J. L. Granatstein , Pirouette: Pierre Trudeau and Canadian Foreign Policy (Toronto: University of Toronto Press, 1990), pp. 167 ff., 253 ff.

12.

12. Escott Reid, Address, Summer 1947, cited in J. L. Granatstein , “The Pinnacle of Bureaucratic Power,” in 20th Century Canada, ed. J. L. Granatstein et al. (Toronto: McGraw-Hill Ryerson, 1983), p. 338.

13.

13. The Mulroney government announced in late February 1992 that troops would be withdrawn, effective 1994.

14.

14. R. D. Cuff and J. L. Granatstein , “Canada and the Perils of `Exceptionalism,' ” Queen's Quarterly 79(4):474 (1972).

15.

15. J. L. Granatstein , The Ottawa Men: The Civil Service Mandarins 1935-1957 (Toronto: Oxford University Press Canada, 1982).

16.

16. J.G.H. Halstead , “Special Task Force on Europe: Draft Working Paper” (Memorandum, Department of External Affairs, 10 July 1968).

17.

17. Gustav Schmidt , “Kanada und NATO-Europa,” in Canada at the Crossroads: The Critical 1960s, ed. Gustav Schmidt and J. L. Granatstein (Bochum, Germany: Brockmeyer Univeritätsverlag, 1994).

18.

18. Ibid.