From Pax Britannica to Pax Americana and Beyond

Abstract

Canada's increasingly diversified trade and investment pattern may eventually give the country more maneuverability in its foreign economic policy than it ever enjoyed during the eras of Pax Britannica and Pax Americana. From the conquest of New France until 1914, Canada's economy was firmly within the imperial orbit, dependent upon Britain as a source of capital and as the largest buyer of its exports. The interwar years saw Britain vying with the United States to be Canada's largest trading and investment partner. Although Canadian and imperial preferences attempted to give Britain the edge, the Canadian government shifted policy by entering trade agreements with the United States in 1935 and 1938. By 1939, Canada was clearly within Pax Americana, with the United States now the predominant foreign influence in the Canadian economy. Since the 1960s, however, new factors have emerged to moderate American economic influence in Canada, including the decline of the traditional branch plant; the rapid growth of Canadian exports abroad, including the sale of manufactured goods to the American market; and the rise of Canadian multinational enterprises with extensive influence in the United States.

Get full access to this article

View all access options for this article.

References

Gilbert Winham , Trading with Canada: The Canada-U.S. Free Trade Agreement (New York: Twentieth Century Fund, 1988), p. 3.

2. Lawrence H. Officer and Lawrence B. Smith , “The Canadian-American Reciprocity Treaty of 1855 to 1866,” Journal of Economic History, 28(4):622 (Dec. 1968).

3. Gordon T. Stewart , The American Response to Canada since 1776 (East Lansing: Michigan State University Press, 1992), pp. 64-69.

Michael Bliss , “Canadianizing American Business: The Roots of the Branch Plant,” in Close the 49th Parallel, ed. Ian Lumsden (Toronto: University of Toronto Press, 1970).

5. Marr and Paterson , Canada, p. 268.

idem, “ `Hands across the Water': Canadian Industrial Financiers in the City of London, 1905-20,” Business History, 34(3):69-95 (July 1992).

7. Macmillan , quoted in R. D. Cuff and J. L. Granatstein , American Dollars—Canadian Prosperity: Canadian American Relations, 1945-50 (Toronto: Samuel-Stevens, 1978), p. 1.

8. F. H. Leacy , Historical Statistics of Canada, 2d ed., series G389-414 (Ottawa: Statistics Canada, 1983).

9. Richard N. Kottman , “Herbert Hoover and the Smoot-Hawley Tariff: Canada, a Case Study,” Journal of American History, 62(3):609-635 (Dec. 1975).

10.

10. Ian M. Drummond , British Economic Policy and the Empire, 1919-1939 (London: George Allen & Unwin, 1972), p. 103.

11.

11. Marc T. Boucher , “The Politics of Economic Depression: Canadian-American Relations in the Mid-1930s,” International Journal, 41(1):13 (Winter 1985-86).

12.

12. On the details of the 1938 trade agreement negotiation, see Ian M. Drummond and Norman Hillmer , Negotiating Freer Trade: The United Kingdom, the United States, Canada and the Trade Agreements of 1938 (Waterloo, ON: Wilfrid Laurier University Press, 1989).

13.

13. J. L. Granatstein , How Britain's Weakness Forced Canada into the Arms of the United States (Toronto: University of Toronto Press, 1989).

14.

Robert Bothwell , Canada and the United States: The Politics of Partnership (New York: Twayne, 1992).

15.

15. See B. W. Muirhead , The Development of Postwar Canadian Trade Policy: The Failure of the Anglo-European Option (Montreal: McGill-Queen's University Press, 1992).

16.

J. L. Granatstein and Norman Hillmer , For Better or for Worse: Canada and the United States to the 1990s (Toronto: Copp Clark Pitman, 1991), pp. 252-253.

17.

17. Gregory P. Marchildon , “Canadian Multinationals and International Finance: Past and Present,” Business History, 34(3):1-15 (July 1992).

18.

18. See John F. Keeley , “Cast in Concrete for All Time? The Negotiation of the Auto Pact,” Canadian Journal of Political Science, 16(2):281-298 (June 1983).