Stéphane Roussel

The North American democratic peace : absence of war and security institution-building in Canada-US relations, 1867-1958

That democratic societies do not fight one another is well documented, but the mechanisms that produce and maintain this situation remain vague. Stephane Roussel argues that Canadian-U.S. security relations provide a case study that allows us to better understand this process. He shows that the structure of Canada-U.S. relations can be explained by the fact that in their mutual relations both governments have applied the norms and rules they use at the domestic level, such as banishing the use of violence and establishing equal representation. This book describes how the democratic-liberal values and norms shared by both states shaped the evolution of Canadian-American practices and institutions in the realm of security from 1867 to the formal creation of NORAD in 1958. It also challenges the common perception of Canada as a satellite of the U.S. and explains why Canadians and Americans take the peace between them for granted.

The Russian Arctic hegemon: Foreign policy implications for Canada

This article explores the Arctic policies of three of the littoral states of the Arctic Ocean (Russia, the United States and Canada), with special attention to that of the Russian Federation to confirm its status as the Arctic regional power. The fact that Russia - not the US - is the hegemon suggests particular courses of action. Using structural theory as the lens, Canada has two choices: it can either bandwagon with the US against a (supposedly) aggressive Russia or balance with a group of periphery states against Russia. Neither is the preferred choice for various reasons, including a reluctant US Arctic player and the special relationship Canada has with the US. Rather, a Canadian Arctic policy grounded in liberal realism would continue to ensure that Canada had the capabilities to monitor the Arctic and provide search and rescue support in cooperation with its Arctic allies (at the very least to share costs), while recognizing that Russia, by virtue of economic imperative, will try to dominate Arctic discussions. Canadas goal, therefore, must be to maximize Canadian interests, accommodate Russia and the US (when it is in its interest to do so) and keep political attention fixed on the Arctic.

Charting Quebec’s Engagement with the International Community

An exceptionally warm spring in 2012 brought forth an unanticipated blossom to Quebec. The streets of Montreal, Quebec City, and elsewhere were filled with people —sometimes in the hundreds of thousands—marching in protest of the Quebec government’s plans to raise university tuition. A student strike had begun in February, arising in a global context of contestation; Montreal had been caught up in the Occupy phenomenon, with protestors in Victoria Square—unofficially re-christened the Place du Peuple—adding their voices to a transnational outcry against economic inequality that the 2008 financial crisis and its consequences had highlighted. The year preceding the student strike had also witnessed the Arab world gripped by social and political convulsion, so that it was not long before the expression printemps arabe—Arab Spring—found its echo in the printemps érable—Maple Spring—at once a whimsical play on words and a deliberate effort to associate events in Quebec with a global wave of grassroots-organized and social media–driven protest. What began as a conflict over a tuition hike took on dramatic proportions, so that by May there were growing links with student movements from Chile to the United Kingdom. Even more significant, the protest movement had spread beyond Quebec’s student population. By the time that the Liberal government of Jean Charest moved to pass legislation—Bill 78 —to curtail the multiple daily protests and help bring an end to the strike, Quebec society was increasingly polarized. This was reflected in the estimated 500,000 who on May 22 marched through Montreal protesting Bill 78 in what was dubbed the “largest act of civil disobedience in Canadian history” (Schonbek 2012). Little surprise, then, that the eyes of the international media were on Quebec; the student strike made the front page of French dailies, newspapers from Britain and the United States sent correspondents to report on events, and viewers of Al Jazeera and CNN were treated to images of confrontations between police and protestors. They also saw entire neighborhoods, taking inspiration from the Latin American tradition of cacerolazo, descend into the street to bang pots to protest the apparent affront to civil liberties. These were not the images that Quebec’s government wished to project onto the world stage. By coincidence, the wave of contestation that gripped Quebec occurred amid the 50th anniversary of the opening of Quebec’s delegation-generale—a quasiembassy—in Paris, recalled in the historical memory as the moment when Quebec strode onto the world stage, ushering in what much of the scholarly literature characterizes as the modern period of Québec’s international engagement. The dramatic AMERICAN REVIEW OF CANADIAN STUDIES, 2016 VOL. 46, NO. 2, 135–148 http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/02722011.2016.1185598

It's a Long Road from Fort Greely to Chicoutimi: Québec Sovereignty and the Issue of Missile Defense

Alone among Americas Western allies, Canada seems to have had the most difficulty adjusting to the idea that America was deploying a limited missile defense system in North America. Within Canada, one province in particular has seen a near-consensus develop against missile defense. That province is Québec, where the system has been routinely criticized as being fraught with unspecified peril for Québec and Canadian interests. Yet within the ranks of Québec sovereigntists who have been most critical of missile defense, there are many who insist that an independent Québec would play a part in the Western worlds current alliance and other security structures, NATO and NORAD in particular. Joining the latter, however, would pose a major contradiction for sovereigntists, given NORADs role in missile defense. This article describes and analyzes this instance of “strategic doublethink.”

Honey, Are You Still Mad at Me? I've Changed, You Know.: Canada-US Relations in a Post-Saddam/post-Chretien Era

AMONG THE TROUBLESOME ISSUES Paul Martin will inherit upon settling in at 24 Sussex Drive will be relations with Washington. Indeed, these relations have been steadily going downhill since the autumn of 2000: political leaders limit themselves to trading cutting remarks; the disputes pile up; and the governments--if not the people themselves--seem to adhere to opposing philosophies and political values. To evoke personages dear to the hearts of 19th-century caricaturists, there are cracks in the warm and close friendship that united Uncle Sam and Miss Canada not so very long ago.Is it possible to restore the situation? Probably, and many commentators expect a great deal from the regime change in Ottawa(1)--and perhaps, even in Washington-- that should help clear the air. In theory, they are right. History tells us that the relations between the two countries can evolve very rapidly, given the climate of understanding between the political leaders.(2)Will this be the case once again? Will the discontent that has taken hold, as much in Washington as in Ottawa, dissipate as soon as Paul Martin takes over? What does the new prime minister intend to do to improve relations with the United States? Is this a sound strategy? In short, will Miss Canada be forgiven for her absence, when Uncle Sam straightened out Uncle Saddam?This article is divided into five sections. The first two serve to determine if the problems observed in the relations between the two governments are attributable to the personalities of the individuals or to unfortunate circumstances--thus isolated and short-lived--or if they are symptomatic of a basic problem, of a structural nature. The answer to this question is important since it enables us to evaluate the new prime ministers ability to effectively improve things. As wel shall see, there are signs that the causes are not limited to a clash of personalities, and that the wiggle room allotted to Paul Martin may be smaller than we believe. Expectations will have to be tempered.In the third section, Paul Martins projects concerning relations with the United States are examined, while the fourth section is aimed at deciphering the strategy he intends to use in order to reach his objectives. Clearly aware of the enormous economic stakes involved in these relations, the new prime minister appears determined to turn the page and to improve his governments relations with the American administration. The final section is a critical examination of the strategy he will use, a main element that involves linking co-operation on security with trade matters. Such a strategy is not only risky, but may also prove ineffective. To conclude, this article will examine an alternative presently available to the new prime minister--simply to wait...SKIRMISHING ALONG THE 49TH PARALLELSince the autumn of 2000 (i.e., since the presidential campaign in the United States) relations between Ottawa and Washington seem to have gone from bad to worse. Or this is, at least, the perception of most observers and of public opinion.(3) Although this perception is probably correct, it is harder to accurately describe this situation and how relations ended up in this state.If the degradation in Canada-US relations is merely due to personality conflicts between the heads of the executive branches, differences in style, or again manoeuvring by a group dissatisfied with the political clientele of the leaders in power, then these are merely random events that might be forgotten in a changing of the guard in Ottawa and/or Washington. On the other hand, if the tension is due to structural transformations, then the situation would, in large measure, lie beyond the control and will of the political leaders, and could be more difficult to manage.To undertake this analysis, we must take certain things into consideration and distinguish problems of substance from those of form, localized problems from those that are structural. …