Erika Simpson

NATO and the Bomb Canadian Defenders Confront Critics

Using a new conceptual framework, this study documents and analyses the underlying convictions of influential Canadians, explains why there were such varied degrees of support for NATO, and shows why different leaders either supported or rejected nuclear weapons and the stationing of the Canadian Forces in Europe. Examples taken from previously classified documents illustrate how the underlying convictions of leaders such as Prime Minister John Diefenbaker and Prime Minister Pierre Trudeau significantly shaped defence policy. Behind-the-scenes maneuvering and competing beliefs about nuclear weapons, deterrence strategy, and possible entrapment in a nuclear war led some to defend and others to criticize Canadas approach to both NATO and the bomb. Despite the technological ability and resources to develop its own nuclear weapons - or to acquire them from the United States - Canada ultimately chose not to become a nuclear power. Why did some Canadian leaders defend the nuclear option and urge the deployment of the Canadian Forces in Europe? Why did others condemn the countrys nuclear commitments and call for an end to the arms race? Simpson shows that some leaders rejected prevailing American defence strategy and weapons systems to pursue alternative approaches to managing Canadas complex bilateral and multilateral defence relationships.

A Canadian's Perspective on Disaster Capitalism

Was Nicholas alive, dead, or injured in the earthquake in Nepal? Nicholas DiClemente, an intern working in Nepal for the United Nations, had completed a Master of Arts degree in political science under my supervision in 2012. Since then, we had seldom been in touch—unless he wanted another reference letter. One of my most important tasks is writing references so students can go onto graduate school, obtain internships, or pursue careers. Like Nicholas’, most of the internships are outside Canada, due to the lack of opportunity here. A few days after the April 25 earthquake, Nicholas wrote to me: “I was in fact in the middle of the earthquake and nearly died. It was a surreal experience. I am finally safe now in Malaysia, I haven’t slept in three days. Off to Thailand still. I’ll be back in Kathmandu on Monday.” Later, when he caught up on his sleep, he wrote again: “I will never forget the sounds and images of the two major tremors. The people I’ve met in Nepal have shown me such an incredible capacity for compassion that I couldn’t bear simply leaving. The situation over here however is dire and to be quite frank with you, I think this may become far worse. If it gets to the point where I fear my own safety, I will leave.”

Nuclear Waste Burial in Canada? The Political Controversy over the Proposal to Construct a Deep Geologic Repository

Canada’s newly minted federal minister of the environment, Catherine McKenna, decided on February 18, 2016 to delay the federal government’s decision on a proposal to construct a permanent repository for nuclear waste beneath the Bruce nuclear site, little more than a kilometre from Lake Huron. Officially called a ‘deep geologic repository’, or DGR, the facility is the brainchild of Ontario Power Generation. While it would not store fuel rods from nuclear plants, it would take in all other types of low- and intermediate-level radioactive wastes including concrete, equipment and protective gear from the continued operation and planned refurbishment of all Ontario’s 20 nuclear power reactors. While most of the studies and consultations were done when the Conservative government was in power, Minister McKenna has now delayed the decision pending more information and will seek a further extension for the review from cabinet at a later date. A federal panel appointed by then minister of the environment, Peter Kent, and the Canadian Nuclear Safety Commission gave its overall seal of approval to the controversial proposal in May 2015. The panel’s favourable view overcame a major regulatory hurdle in the construction of the DGR however since the panel released its decision after public hearings, political opposition to this plan has only grown and spread. Critics argue that low-level and intermediate-level waste from all Ontario’s nuclear reactors should not be stored so close to the source of 20 percent of the world’s surface fresh water. The proposal’s scientific and technical merits and demerits are already well documented in various reports and hearings, but more controversy is expected now that the federal minister of the environment has announced another setback to the proposal. We can probably expect more political debate and long delays.

It's time for Canadian Decisions on Lethal Drones

The newly-elected Canadian government of Prime Minister Justin Trudeau is engaged in a defence review process that will result in a new Defence White Paper. There is a strong possibility that Canada acquires more Unmanned Aerial Vehicles (UAVs) for a range of military tasks including disaster relief, surveillance, reconnaissance and the provision of close air support to soldiers in combat. States and sub-state actors can decide to use UAVs or drones to carry out strikes against targets in relatively distant or inaccessible locations. However, this article argues that more consideration, review, transparency and international law regarding drone policy are needed. It suggests Canada take the lead and abide by emerging international law concerning drones as well as become one of the first countries to establish impartisan and unbiased commissions to consider their merits and demerits. Further consideration, monitoring and stringent overview of this relatively new defence technology will be important. It is suggested that Canada’s Department of National Defence declare its intention to take the initiative in the international community in terms of abiding by new and emerging international law, if and when the government decides to acquire significantly more numbers of drones as part of its current defence review process.

Review: International Relations Theory: Came Theory and National SecurityCAME THEORY AND NATIONAL SECURITYBramsSteven J. and KilgourD. MarcNew York: Basil Blackwell [Toronto: Oxford University Press], 1988, xiv, 199pp,

explore the general consequences of this distinction between transfers of resources which render a state inessential to the calculations of other states and transfers which do not in the never-world of perfectly informed rational actors increasing or decreasing in power by transferring an abstract quantity of security. An examination of great-power alliance formations between the Franco-Prussian War and World War I follows. The path from the never-world to nineteenth-century Europe is made of modifications to the thoroughly abstract initial assumptions: states can increase power at differential rates, not at identical rates; states occupy geopolitical places rather than no places at all; statesmen can be constrained by domestic politics. The assumption of perfect information is retained in order to demonstrate that uncertainty of estimates of power capabilities is, as Morgenthau argued, the essence of power politics. This use of an unrealistic assumption to bolster the insights of less formal realist theories is one example of the many fine touches to be found in this book. In short, there is much to be learned here by those who keep to one sort of work on the balance of power.

105.00

Arms races deterrence winding down star wars optimal threats crisis instability verification national security and war, political scientists and mathematicians.