Canada–us relations: sovereignty or shared institutions? david carment - Download the entire ebook i
Canada–US
Relations: Sovereignty or Shared Institutions? David Carment
Visit to download the full and correct content document: https://textbookfull.com/product/canada-us-relations-sovereignty-or-shared-institution s-david-carment/
More products digital (pdf, epub, mobi) instant download maybe you interests ...
A Common Table 80 Recipes and Stories from My Shared Cultures First Edition Cynthia Chen Mcternan
Palgrave’s Canada and International Affairs is a timely and rigorous series for showcasing scholarship by Canadian scholars of international affairs and foreign scholars who study Canada’s place in the world. The series will be of interest to students and academics studying and teaching Canadian foreign, security, development and economic policy. By focusing on policy matters, the series will be of use to policy makers in the public and private sectors who want access to rigorous, timely, informed and independent analysis. As the anchor, Canada Among Nations is the series’ most recognisable annual contribution. In addition, the series showcases work by scholars from Canadian universities featuring structured analyses of Canadian foreign policy and international affairs. The series also features work by international scholars and practitioners working in key thematic areas that provides an international context against which Canada’s performance can be compared and understood.
More information about this series at http://www.palgrave.com/gp/series/15905
David Carment · Christopher Sands Editors
Canada–US Relations
Sovereignty or Shared Institutions?
Editors David Carment NPSIA
Carleton University
Ottawa, ON, Canada
Christopher Sands
Paul H. Nitze School of Advanced International Studies
Johns Hopkins University Washington, DC, USA
ISSN 2523-7187 ISSN 2523-7195 (electronic)
Canada and International Affairs
ISBN 978-3-030-05035-1 ISBN 978-3-030-05036-8 (eBook) https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-05036-8
This work is subject to copyright. All rights are solely and exclusively licensed by the Publisher, whether the whole or part of the material is concerned, specifcally the rights of translation, reprinting, reuse of illustrations, recitation, broadcasting, reproduction on microflms or in any other physical way, and transmission or information storage and retrieval, electronic adaptation, computer software, or by similar or dissimilar methodology now known or hereafter developed.
The use of general descriptive names, registered names, trademarks, service marks, etc. in this publication does not imply, even in the absence of a specifc statement, that such names are exempt from the relevant protective laws and regulations and therefore free for general use. The publisher, the authors, and the editors are safe to assume that the advice and information in this book are believed to be true and accurate at the date of publication. Neither the publisher nor the authors or the editors give a warranty, express or implied, with respect to the material contained herein or for any errors or omissions that may have been made. The publisher remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affliations.
This Palgrave Macmillan imprint is published by the registered company Springer Nature Switzerland AG
The registered company address is: Gewerbestrasse 11, 6330 Cham, Switzerland
S erie S P reface
Palgrave’s Canada and International Affairs is a professional and practical series showcasing scholarship by Canadian scholars of international affairs and foreign scholars who study Canada’s place in the world. The purpose of the series is to examine international issues that affect Canada and to provide Canadian perspectives on international affairs focused on current trends, events, and themes of policy interest and relevance. The series will interest students and academics dealing with Canadian foreign policy, national defence, international security, overseas development, and issues of trade and economics, among others. By focusing on policy problems, the series will be of use to policymakers and practitioners in the public and private sectors who want access to timely, rigorous, informed, and independent analysis on the leading issues of the day.
We encourage submissions from interested applicants studying, teaching, or working on:
• Canadian foreign policy or Canadian politics
• Comparative foreign policy or public policy
• International affairs and/or public policy
• Policy management and/or public administration
The Canada and International Affairs series is structured around three types of publications:
1. As the anchor, Canada Among Nations is the series’ most recognisable annual contribution. Canada Among Nations is an established volume produced by the Norman Paterson School of International Affairs (NPSIA), Canada’s oldest, largest, and topranked interdisciplinary graduate school of international affairs and a full and founding member of the Association of Professional Schools of International Affairs (ASPIA) centrally located in Canada’s capital, Ottawa. Canada Among Nations has been in place since 1984 and become part of the international affairs studies landscape, in Canada and abroad, for 30+ years. Canada Among Nations provides thematic reviews of key international policy issues affecting Canada and the world and has been used extensively in university courses at both the graduate and undergraduate levels. Looking ahead, its purpose is to provide a broad-spectrum review of the year in passing and focus on the pressing issues and agendas facing the country and its place in the world. We encourage edited volumes in the range of 50,000–100,000 words.
2. In addition, the series features work by international scholars and practitioners working on key themes or policies. These compilations will consist of comparative multi-country studies against which Canada’s performance can be better understood in its proper context, relative to other similar countries. Examples include subjects like comparative evaluations of foreign aid programs of OECD countries or defence spending by NATO member-states. These studies follow the Pivot Series format. We encourage monographs in the range of 25,000–50,000 words and edited volumes in the range of 50,000–100,000 words.
3. finally, the series showcases work by scholars from Canadian universities and research groups, featuring structured analyses of Canadian foreign policy and international affairs. Manuscripts by individual authors as well as thematically-oriented edited volumes, produced by established professors, emerging scholars, and senior doctoral students are welcome. We encourage monographs in the range of 25,000–50,000 words.
The Canada and International Affairs series is a venue for policyrelevant publications intended for Canadian scholars of international affairs, foreign scholars who study Canada’s place in the world, and students studying Canadian foreign policies and decision-making, including but not limited to defence, security, development, and economic policy. By focusing on policy problems, the series will be of use to policymakers and practitioners in the public and private sectors who want access to timely, rigorous, informed, and independent analysis on the leading issues of the day. The goal is to provide policymakers from within the Canadian government with the beneft of this knowledge and expertise, as well as with opportunities to publish themselves and contribute to this diverse body of scholarship.
The Canada and International Affairs series editors are:
• David Carment, Professor of International Affairs, NPSIA, Carleton University
• Philippe Lagassé, Associate Professor and William and Jeanie Barton Chair in International Affairs, NPSIA, Carleton University
• Meredith Lilly, Associate Professor and Simon Reisman Chair in International Affairs, NPSIA, Carleton University
The Canada and International Affairs editorial advisory board members are:
• Greg Anderson, Professor of Political Science, University of Alberta
• Mel Cappe, Professor of Public Policy, University of Toronto
• Sheryl Lightfoot, Professor of Political Science, Centre for Indigenous Studies, University of British Columbia
• Justin Massie, Professor of Political Science, Université du Québec à Montréal
• Bessma Momani, Centre for International Governance Innovation, Balsillie School of International Affairs, University of Waterloo
• Debora Van Nijnatten, Professor of Political Science, Wilfrid Laurier University
Please forward any submissions or requests for further information to CanIntAff@carleton.ca.
Ottawa, Canada David Carment Philippe Lagassé
Meredith Lilly
a cknowledgement S
The editors of this volume wish to acknowledge the contributions of all the authors in this volume. We are also grateful to the editors of the previous volume in Canada Among Nations series, Norman Hillmer and Philippe Lagassé, for their advice and support. Norman gets special thanks for making the trip to Washington to launch the 2017 volume, Justin Trudeau and Canadian foreign Policy, at a public event where he was interviewed by CTV Washington Correspondent Richard Madan.
We want to publicly thank Uriel Marantz for his research assistance and outstanding efforts to communicate with authors, to coordinate submissions to an online shared drive, and to manage logistics for an authors workshop held at the Johns Hopkins School of Advanced International Studies in Washington, DC. in June 2018. Authors and editors alike benefted from the chance to meet and discuss their early conceptions and themes in Washington. Special thanks are due to Martin Loken, Political Counsellor at the Embassy of Canada in Washington who spoke to our workshop on contemporary challenges in bilateral relations, of which he has frst-hand experience, and to Paul Koring, veteran correspondent for the Globe and Mail and now a contributor to iPolitics.ca who provided a historical perspective on the current period in bilateral relations and stimulated many further conversations among us all.
The consensus highlight of the Washington workshop was a briefng and lively exchange on the NAfTA talks and other headline issues with Ambassador David MacNaughton and senior staff at the Embassy including Katherine Baird, Adam Barratt, Colin Bird, Ron Garson, and
Hani Nasser. It was a candid, off-the-record exchange that few of us will forget. The Washington workshop would not have been possible without the generous support of the Center for Canadian Studies at Johns Hopkins which, most importantly, was manifested by hours of hard work and attention to detail by the Center’s Senior Academic Coordinator Starr Lee and by current graduate student and research assistant in the Center Edward Saull.
We are extremely grateful to the Canadian Embassy in Washington for their support to the scholars who attended the workshop. Special thanks go to Vincent Raiche, Ron Garson, Niall Cronin for their hard work in seeing this project to fruition. We also are grateful to the Barton fund, the Dean’s Offce at the faculty of Public Affairs and the School of International Affairs all at Carleton for their support to the Canada Among Nations project.
This volume and indeed the continuation of Canada Among Nations as the premier annual assessment of Canadian international relations is a credit to our publisher, Palgrave Macmillan, and the editors are very grateful for the support and encouragement of our editor Katelyn Zingg and her colleague Anca Pusca. We know that the readers of this book, from scholars and policymakers to our students past, present and future will share our gratitude that so many people worked together to bring this book together.
n ote S on c ontributor S
Brendan Boyd is an Assistant Professor in political science and economics at MacEwan University in Edmonton, Alberta, Canada. He holds a Ph.D. from the University of Victoria and completed post-doctoral studies at the University of Calgary. Prior to his Ph.D. studies, Brendan worked on climate change issues for the provincial government in Manitoba. Brendan’s research interests include environmental policy, transgovernmental policy learning and public governance. His work has appeared in Publius: The Journal of Federalism, Canadian Journal of Political Science and Canadian Public Administration.
David Carment is Professor of International Affairs at Carleton University and Editor of Canadian Foreign Policy Journal. He is series editor of Palgrave’s Canada and International Affairs.
Jean Daudelin is Associate Professor at Carleton University’s Norman Paterson School of International Affairs, where he teaches on confict, development and property rights. He has recently published Illegal Markets, Violence and Inequality, with José Luiz Ratton (Palgrave Macmillan, 2018) and “Not Killer Methods: A few Things We Get Wrong When Studying Violence in Latin America,” in Violence in Latin America and the Caribbean, Tina Hilgers and Laura Macdonald, eds. (Cambridge University Press, 2017).
Laura Dawson is Director of the Wilson Center’s Canada Institute. Named one of Canada’s Top 100 foreign policy infuencers by the Hill
Times, Dawson is a speaker, writer, and thought leader on Canada–U.S., NAfTA, TPP, and international trade issues. Previously, she served as senior advisor on economic affairs at the United States Embassy in Ottawa and taught international trade and Canada–U.S. relations at Carleton University. Dawson continues to serve as an advisor at Dawson Strategic, which provides advice to business on cross-border trade, market access and regulatory issues. She is a fellow at the MacdonaldLaurier Institute, and the Canadian Global Affairs Institute. Dawson holds a Ph.D. in political science.
Charles F. Doran is the Andrew W. Mellon Professor of International Relations at the Paul H. Nitze School of Advanced International Studies (SAIS), Johns Hopkins University, Washington, DC. There he has long served as both Director of the Global Theory and History Program and Director of the Program of Canadian Studies. He recently developed and is now also Director of SAIS’s innovative Program in International Political Economy. Doran has written widely on trade matters, environmental protection, oil economics and politics, and security. He has provided briefngs and testimony on energy and environmental matters, trade policy, and international security before committees of the U.S. Congress and of the Canadian Parliament, and in formats involving the respective stakeholder communities. An entire issue of the International Political Science Review was devoted to his work on structural change and security in world politics. He is currently working on a book that assesses world order in the twenty-frst century. Doran has received the Governor General’s International Award for Canadian Studies, the highest scholarly award in the feld. The American Political Science Association bestowed on him its Lifetime Achievement Award in Canadian Studies. for his contributions in international relations, the International Studies Association granted him its Distinguished Scholar Award (foreign Policy).
Geoffrey Hale is Professor of Political Science at the University of Lethbridge. He has written widely on Canada’s International and Intergovernmental Policy Relations, Canada–U.S. Relations and North American Integration, including but not limited to trade, energy, investment, border management, and capital markets policies. He is the author of So Near and Yet So: The Public and Hidden Worlds of Canada–U.S. Relations (2012), Uneasy Partnership: The Politics of Business and
Government in Canada (2018), and co-editor of Borders and Bridges: Canada’s Policy Relations in North America (with Monica Gattinger, 2010).
Dr. Todd Hataley (Ph.D., Queen’s) is Adjunct Associate Professor at the Royal Military College of Canada and recently retired from the Royal Canadian Mounted Police. In 2018, he held an Honorary International Visiting fellowship in the Centre of Crime Policy and Research at the flinders University of South Australia. He has authored over 30 scholarly publications, including a monograph entitled Security Complexes and Perimeter Defense in North America: A Critical Assessment (New York: Lynne Rienner Press, 2012). He is an expert on the management of international boundaries, regional security, and transnational crime. During his tenure as a federal police investigator he conducted investigations into smuggling of drugs, weapons and human beings, money laundering, organized crime, national security, and extra-territorial torture.
Philip Jones is a Ph.D. Student at Carleton University’s Norman Paterson School of International Affairs, specializing in the feld of International Confict Management and Resolution. His current area of research pertains to smuggling, violence, informal governance, and borders. Philip holds a M.Sc. from the London School of Economics (Comparative Politics) and a B.A. with first Class Honours from St. francis Xavier University (International Relations).
Christian Leuprecht (Ph.D., Queen’s) is Class of 1965 Professor in Leadership, Department of Political Science, Royal Military College, on leave as Matthew flinders fellow at flinders University in South Australia. He is a recipient of RMC’s Cowan Prize for Excellence in Research and an elected member of the College of New Scholars of the Royal Society of Canada. He is president of the International Sociological Association’s Research Committee 01: Armed forces and Confict Resolution, Munk Senior fellow at the Macdonald-Laurier Institute and cross-appointed to the Department of Political Studies and the School of Policy Studies at Queen’s University where he is also a fellow of the Institute of Intergovernmental Relations and the Queen’s Centre for International and Defence Policy. An expert in security and defense, political demography, and comparative federalism and multilevel governance, he has held visiting positions in North America, Europe, and Australia, and is regularly called as an expert witness to testify before committees of Parliament. He coordinates the security theme
for the Borders in Globalization Partnership Grant, funded by the Social Sciences and Humanities Research Council of Canada: www.biglobalization.org, www.christianleuprecht.com
Laura Macdonald is a Professor in the Department of Political Science and the Institute of Political Economy at Carleton University. She has published numerous articles in journals and edited collections on such issues as The Role of Nongovernmental Organizations in Development, Global Civil Society, Citizenship Struggles in Latin America, Canadian Development Assistance and the Political Impact of the North American Free Trade Agreement (NAFTA). She has edited four books: The Politics of Violence in Latin America and the Caribbean, Cambridge University Press, 2017 (with Tina Hilgers); North American in Question: Regional Integration in an Era of Economic Turbulence, University of Toronto Press, 2012 (with Jeffrey Ayres); Contentious Politics in North America, Palgrave Macmillan, 2009 (with Jeffrey Ayres); and Post-Neoliberalism in the Americas: Beyond the Washington Consensus?, Palgrave Macmillan, 2009 (with Arne Ruckert). She is the co-author of Women, Democracy, and Globalization in North America: A Comparative Study. Palgrave Macmillan, 2006 (with Jane Bayes, Patricia Begne, Laura Gonzalez, Lois Harder, and Mary Hawkesworth), and author of Supporting Civil Society: The Political Impact of NGO Assistance to Central America, Basingstoke, UK and New York City: Macmillan Press and St. Martin’s Press, 1997. Her recent work looks at Canada’s role in Latin America and policies to reduce crime and violence in Mexico City.
Richard Nimijean is Instructor III in the School of Indigenous and Canadian Studies at Carleton University in Ottawa, Canada. His research and publications focus on the politics of branding Canada and the connections between the Canadian national identity and its projection globally, public policy, and domestic politics. He was a fulbright Distinguished Scholar-in-Residence at the Center for the Study of Canada at the State University of New York College at Plattsburgh (April 2013), has twice received a Professional Achievement Award from Carleton University, and received an Erasmus+ Teaching Mobility Certifcate, Alexandra Ioan Cuza University of Iaşi (Romania) (April 2017).
Rodger A. Payne is Professor of Political Science at the University of Louisville. In fall 2018, he was fulbright Canada Research chair at the Norman Paterson School of International Affairs at Carleton University
in Ottawa. Payne is the co-author of Democratizing Global Politics (SUNY 2004) and dozens of journal articles and book chapters. from 1994 to 2011, Payne was the Director of the Grawemeyer Award for Ideas Improving World Order. Payne has previously taught at Northwestern University and was a visiting research fellow at Harvard’s Belfer Center for Science and International Affairs, Stanford’s Center for International Security and Cooperation, and the Program on International Politics, Economics and Security at the University of Chicago. He received a Dissertation fellowship from the International Peace and Security Studies Program co-sponsored by the Social Science Research Council and MacArthur foundation and was a 1983 National Debate Tournament championship team member from the University of Kansas.
Barry Rabe is the Harris family Professor in the Gerald R. ford School of Public Policy at the University of Michigan. He is the director of the Center for Local, State, and Urban Policy at the ford School and is also a nonresident senior fellow at the Brookings Institution. Barry is the author of fve books, including Can We Price Carbon? (MIT Press, 2018). He has received four major research awards from the American Political Science Association, including the 2017 Martha Derthick Award for the Best Book with Enduring Impact for his 2004 book Statehouse and Greenhouse.
Robert I. Rotberg is founding Director of the Harvard Kennedy School’s Program on Intrastate Confict, President Emeritus of the World Peace foundation, and Inaugural fulbright Distinguished Professor at the Paterson and Balsillie Schools of International Affairs. fulbright Distinguished Professor of International Relations, University of Sao Paulo; fellow of the American Academy of Arts and Sciences. His most recent book is The Corruption Cure: How Citizens and Leaders Can Combat Graft (Princeton, 2017). He also edited, with David Carment, Canada’s Corruption: At Home and Abroad (Routledge, 2018).
Christopher Sands is Senior Research Professor and Director of the Center for Canadian Studies at Johns Hopkins University’s Paul H. Nitze School of Advanced International Studies in Washington, DC. from 1995 until 2006 he directed research on Canadian affairs at the Center for Strategic and International Studies (where he is currently a nonresident senior associate) and from 2007 until 2016 he was a senior fellow of the Hudson Institute where he directed the Hudson Initiative
on North American Competitiveness. He is an associate member of Chatham House (UK), a member of the research advisory board of the Macdonald-Laurier Institute, and serves on the executive council of the Canada–United States Law Institute and the Association for Canadian Studies in the United States. Prior to his appointment to the Johns Hopkins University faculty in 2014, Sands held the G. Robert Ross Distinguished Visiting Professorship in Canada–United States Business and Economics at Western Washington University (2012–2017) and was an adjunct professor in the Schools of Public Affairs and International Service at American University. He holds a B.A. in political science from Macalester College, an M.A. in international economics and a Ph.D. in international relations from Johns Hopkins University.
Dr. Peter J. Stoett (Ph.D., Queen’s) is Dean of the faculty of Social Science and Humanities at the University of Ontario Institute of Technology. His main areas of expertise include international relations and law, global environmental politics, Canadian foreign policy, and human rights. He was the Director of the Loyola Sustainability Research Centre at Concordia University in Montreal and has held visiting fellowships at the University of Tasmania; the Woodrow Wilson International Center for Scholars in Washington; the International Institute for Social Studies in The Hague; the University of Reading, UK; and the University for Peace in Costa Rica. Dr. Stoett also works with the United Nations Environmental Programme in Nairobi, Kenya, and is an Expert Commission Member of the International Union for the Conservation of Nature.
Tamara M. Woroby is Senior Adjunct Professor of Canadian Studies at the Johns Hopkins University School of Advanced International Studies (SAIS) and Professor of Economics in the University of Maryland System (Towson University—College of Business and Economics). She holds a Ph.D. in economics from Queen’s University, and is the author of academic publications and monographs on international economic issues. Her recent publications examine the differences in Immigrant Naturalization Rates, and include a commissioned study on Refugee Resettlement Issues for the European Union as Well as Academic Works on North American Migration, published by Brookings Press and Oxford University Press. She has served as a consultant to the World Bank, the International fund for Agriculture and Development, the Migration Policy Institute and the US Department of State.
l i S t of f igure S
fig. 5.1 The 4-I framework
fig. 8.1
fig. 9.1
fig. 9.2
Canada merchandise exports to top 10 trading partners, 2017 (Source Industry Canada, Trade Data Online, http://cms-sgj.cra-arc.gc.ca)
U.S. annual natural gas trade (1975–2017) (Source Mobilla [2018])
U.S. petroleum trade (1950–2017) (Source Breul [2018])
U.S. electricity trade with Canada (2000–2017) (Source Kempkey. “The U.S. Is a Net Energy Importer from Canada” [Washington, DC: U.S. Energy Information Administration, May 23, 2018])
Canada and US emissions trends and projections (To see the full data represented in the above fgure, please visit https://www3.epa.gov/climatechange/ghgemissions/ inventoryexplorer/index.html#allsectors/allgas/gas/all and https://www.canada.ca/en/environment-climatechange/services/environmental-indicators/ greenhouse-gas-emissions.html)
89
152
166
168
172
182
243
l i S t of t able S
Table 5.1 Summary of the 4-I framework applied to four policy dimensions
Table 7.1 Immigrant population by region of origin (percent of total foreign-born)
Table 7.2 2016 foreign-born population by state or province (percent of total population)
Table 9.1 Energy sources for electricity generation: United States
Table 9.2 Canada’s energy trade by resource or product—2015 168
Table 9.4 Electricity trade as percentage of generation, by province: 2012–2016
Table 9.5 Sources of electricity consumption: New England 1990–2016 183
Table 9.6 Electricity consumption by energy source: New England and New York, 2016
Table 11.1 Annual prevalence of use as a percentage of the population aged 15–64 (2015) 223
Table 11.2 Drug overdose deaths in the United States (2017) 224
Table 11.3 Crimes per 100,000 population in Canada and the United States 228
Table 11.4 Drug apprehensions on US borders fY 2017 230
CHAPTER 1
Introduction
David Carment and Christopher Sands
With the results of the North American free Trade Agreement (NAfTA) re-negotiations only now being made public, pundits and academics are asking what lies ahead for the Canada–US relationship. On September 30, 2018 it was revealed that NAfTA would undergo a name change to the United States, Mexico, and Canada Agreement (USMCA) refecting, perhaps, a shift from free trade to managed trade in which the United States would play a primary role. Some observers have argued that President Donald Trump got the better of the deal and yet arranged it so all three countries could declare victory (Ivison 2018). Indeed, the substance of the agreement indicates that both Canada and Mexico made a number of signifcant concessions to the United States. In the words of Larry Kudlow, Trump’s economics adviser: “Canada gave very graciously” (Ivison 2018).
In reality, Trump used the power of tariffs to bring Canada and Mexico in line. Very early on in the negotiations Trump made clear his
D. Carment (*)
NPSIA, Carleton University, Ottawa, ON, Canada
e-mail: david_carment@carleton.ca
C. Sands
Paul H. Nitze School of Advanced International Studies, Johns Hopkins University, Washington, DC, USA
D. Carment and C. Sands (eds.), Canada–US Relations, Canada and International Affairs, https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-05036-8_1
intent to bring investment back to the United States and, in the end, managed to do exactly that. Some may call that behavior bullying, while others may interpret it as part of Donald Trump’s “America frst” strategy. Certainly, with respect to the now all important clause regarding future Canadian trade negotiations with China, it would seem that the United States has imposed on its North American partners a degree of veto power that heretofore never existed. To wit: “entry by any party into a free trade agreement with a non-market country shall allow the other parties to terminate this agreement”. The “America frst” strategy holds.1
for Canada the alternative to accepting these terms was rather bleak; namely no deal at all. That is why it was essential that Canadian negotiators convince their American counterparts to retain NAfTA’s all-important Chapter 19 dispute resolution mechanism. American negotiators pushed Canada to have trade disputes resolved through US courts, an alternative that would be tantamount to surrendering sovereignty to a foreign power. Beyond the increases in dairy imports from the United States, an agreement to coordinate foreign exchange policy, higher wages for auto workers, and caps on auto imports, not much was changed in this agreement relative to the old NAfTA. Certainly, the deal was not what Canada’s negotiators had hoped for. Canada had to fght very hard to maintain the status quo in a very diffcult three-way negotiation. There was limited success, for example, in engaging the United States on Canada’s progressive trade agenda, labor mobility and big pharma. More importantly, Trump’s all-important tariffs on aluminum and steel remain, a bargaining chip the United States holds in reserve for future considerations.
With the frantic and often contentious trade negotiations concluded it might be reasonable to ask if the relationship between the two countries will ever be the same. There are good reasons to be optimistic. To understand why that is so we must consider the depth of the relationship. When we think of the “deep state” we imagine a country run by narrow and private interests outside the realms of accountability and transparency; a state captured by unelected secretive powers whose actions run parallel to and often in contradiction to the public good and
1 According to John Ivison (2018) the creation of a macroeconomic committee with representatives from all three countries to consider exchange rate policy has implications for the Bank of Canada’s independence which are not fully understood.
the policies of democratically elected leaders. few if any would characterize the Canada–US relationship as functioning like a “deep state”; the two countries are not formally integrated into a common political entity like the European Union (EU) and they both sustain distinct foreign, defense, immigration, and security policies.
And yet in so many important ways, the Canada–US relationship is marked by higher levels of institutionalization than is commonly understood. That is because these institutions are not often examined together as a whole but in isolation, as individual pieces of a larger process of increasing interdependence, whether that interdependence exists at the para-diplomacy level through provincial and state relations, through private actor arrangements, or through federal government cooperation.
Shared or bilateral institutions serve an important function in the conduct of Canada–US relations. Each reifes a political agreement to cooperate made by a US president and a Canadian prime minister. As US presidents, and the executive branch they lead, have become more important in the system of United States governance, and as the United States has become a global power with interests around the world, the US chief executive has had to triage engagement in issues in order to focus on urgent priorities. Institutions permit US presidents to “fx it and forget it.” When an issue in the bilateral relationship with Canada becomes urgent; public service professionals then take over day-to-day management of the fle and can develop subject matter expertise and familiarity with Canadian government policy and priorities that facilitate cooperation. for Canadian prime ministers, the US presidential authority embodied in these shared institutions provides a politically valuable imprimatur that ensures the cooperation and engagement of US offcials, whether political appointees or career professionals in US agencies and departments.
Though the mandates of these institutions vary considerably across different policy domains and in terms of their formality, capacities, and capabilities, the scope and pace of institutionalization between the United States and Canada are profound. Some of these institutions have been long-standing arrangements and are highly formalized such as the near century-old International Joint Commission (IJC), North Atlantic Treaty Organisation (NATO), and The North American Aerospace Defense Command (NORAD), while others, more recent, focus on managing the impacts and benefts of more closely integrated economies such as USMCA and the North American Development Bank (NADBank) and the challenges of shared security threats such as the Arctic Council among others.
Several institutional arrangements have generated outcomes that make the Canada–US relationship unique. for example, our energy market remains distinct (and partially protected) from global energy trends because of shared resource exploitation, cross-border investments, and concerns regarding climate change and environmental degradation. At the same time, barriers to trade and investment have all been but removed save for a few “ring-fenced” sectors such as health, agriculture, telecoms, and airlines. In particular, intelligence sharing as it effects defense and security policy, has become highly institutionalized especially with respect to border security and the monitoring of individuals “of interest.”
It is important to note that the United States and Canada have established institutions with varying degrees of formal structure. NORAD and the IJC, for example, are formalized by treaty. Bilateral cooperation in border security management and regulatory practice is conducted under the aegis of executive agreements. And, as Douglas North has observed, there are “soft institutional” understandings emanating from formal agreements like USMCA that assume decision-making by private citizens and frms and can be consequential even when not spelled out: for example, the structuration of continental supply chains is based on the informal understanding that continental production is a goal of USMCA even though the term “supply chain” never appears in the text.
If there is cause for concern regarding the increasingly institutionalized relationship between the two countries, one need look no further than the UK’s convoluted and poorly managed departure from EU membership in which a principal fear among British voters was the lack of accountability and transparency they believed was embedded in EU membership. Simply put, Brexit voters believed decisions affecting the future of UK citizens were being made by unelected technocrats.
Yet in contrast with European institutions, the shared institutions designed by Canada and the United States are intended to remain accountable to sovereign governments, and therefore are, to some degree, democratically accountable. These shared institutions have, thus far, escaped scrutiny over “democratic defcits” and illegitimacy. They do, however, remain vulnerable to political reconsideration or revision by subsequent US administrations and Canadian governments. for example, the USMCA may well portend the future of such political predilections given that it is susceptible to trilateral review in 16 years. In contrast, the more obscure an area of policy, such as human health
standards for safe use of pesticides, the more stable institutionalized cooperation becomes.
for political leaders in both countries, there is the dilemma of supporting such institutions while adapting them based on their own electoral mandates. The asymmetries of mutual signifcance and governmental capability between the United States and Canada place more political pressure on Ottawa to initiate change and to defend past institutions under normal circumstances. Yet the diffculty to securing US engagement and willingness to address an issue bilaterally, and to cement a response in an institution of some kind leads Canadian leaders to be cautious and to employ the formalization of agreement in shared institutions sparingly.
As the old adage goes, the only thing worse than being ignored by the United States is to have the attention of the United States. What makes this period in the Canada–US relationship remarkable is that it is the United States that has called into question the central shared institution in the bilateral relationship: NAfTA. US President Donald Trump was not simply demanding changes to the institutionalized commitment to liberalized trade out of a misunderstanding of the reasons and purposes behind this shared institution. He went so far as to claim that NAfTA institutionalized a relationship between the two economies that was unfair to the United States. Stepping back from this institution, Trump is advancing an agenda that reinforces national sovereignty, the alternative pole in the historical management of the relationship.
Representing the smaller partner, Canadian governments have traditionally asserted Canadian sovereignty in order to resist shared institutions with the United States. The right of Canada to choose, to decide for itself, was claimed against orders from London during imperial times, and is deeply ingrained in Canadian diplomacy. And Canadian sovereignty is expressed not only as the right of independent decision or action. It is also a version of the American idea of popular sovereignty, with public consent held out as the proper means of legitimizing decisions to surrender sovereignty. Thus, Prime Minister Brian Mulroney called an election in 1988 to “let the people decide” whether to enter into the Canada–US free Trade Agreement.
In 2016, Donald Trump campaigned on distrust of the elite consensus that had existed in Washington, DC in support of trade liberalization and military defense of the world order with modest contributions from US allies. Trump’s election exposed signifcant differences between elite,
or establishment policy, views and those of many Americans. Trump offered disillusioned Americans a better deal in a dangerous world and a globalizing economy, promising to renegotiate the terms of trade agreements and military alliances. Trump’s message was that US allies and trading partners had taken advantage of US goodwill and generosity at the cost of American jobs and the lives of American troops, and Trump proposed to address this with international policies that leveraged US political and economic power in ways that put “America frst.” We can call this the new nationalism if you like, but in many ways it is a reaction; reasonable under the conditions of how democratically elected leaders behave—that puts domestic interests ahead of shared interests. It is a choice to place sovereignty ahead of shared institutions, or perhaps to leverage sovereignty against extant shared institutions to remake them. An obvious example is Donald Trump’s “Make America Great Again” slogan with its claims to strengthening the American economy by acting in a self-interested fashion.
Notwithstanding the Canada–Europe trade deal success story and the fact that Canada has proven capable of striking deals with small economies in emerging markets such as Colombia and Honduras, working with the Trump administration has proving to be a more daunting and unanticipated challenges. While Canada is historically dependent on trade with the United States and Europe, Canada’s multicultural population and its well-organized diaspora communities may well hold the key to Canadian prosperity. If Canada’s changing demography portends future policy choice, then surely there is merit in looking beyond North America.
But the demand for change is fuelled by more than these demographic considerations. By mid-century it’s estimated that Asia, led by China, along with Brazil and South Africa, will have a combined gross national product larger than the G8. The brief moment with the United States as the preeminent world power at the turn of the twentieth century, is now a multipolar system, dominated by rising giants that dwarf Canada militarily, economically, and politically.
To add uncertainty to the mix, Prime Minister Justin Trudeau’s ambitious multilateral agenda has been put on hold as his foreign Minister, Chrystia freeland, grappled with the American leader’s trade agenda. Trump who prefers to negotiate bilaterally because it more clearly exploits American leverage over weaker partners has proven to be both disruptive and catalyzing; implicitly cajoling Trudeau and freeland to
reluctantly and hesitantly, embrace change. If there is discomfort in that, it comes largely from the stark choices Canadians must confront in reacting to Trump’s policies.
A case in point is the fooding of the St Lawrence Seaway in 2017, which should have been jointly managed but was interpreted in vastly different ways by representatives from both countries. The net result was confict between leaders on each side of the border, acting on electoral interests with a more narrow mandate (e.g. property loss and commensurate compensation as seen from the American perspective) vs support for Seaway management with a focus on the public good including environmental protection (as interpreted by Canadian bureaucrats). In much the same way we are now witnessing a battle between leaders whose interests they say are democratic (protection of jobs) versus an institution focused on economic growth (with clearly defned sectoral winners and losers) namely USMCA.
A second concern, more so for the Liberal government than the American administration, is the need to uphold global and regional institutional arrangements for fear that in their absence, Canada would be subject to even greater levels of transactional negotiation and linkage politics. In essence, institutions act as a buffer to ensure continuity and heighten expectations for the purposes of creating a more stable and predictable policy environment. Absent such institutions and it becomes clear how the more infuential and powerful can disrupt the global agenda, shift the policy focus and undermine institutional credibility.
In many ways, the need to uphold international institutions is a long-standing Canadian interest. But the dilemma for Canada is that by strengthening and deepening the bilateral relationship Canada’s leaders are trading multilateralism for bilateralism Historically, Canadian foreign policy has balanced multilateralism (e.g., the British Empire, the United Nations, and other fora) against the constricting embrace of bilateral ties to the United States. Indeed Canada has often preferred to offset American infuence through a multilateral agenda with its emphasis on the establishment and enforcement of collective rules guiding state behavior. It is through multilateralism and membership in various organizations that Canada has typically addressed questions of peace and security through the rule of law economic prosperity and competitiveness in trade and investment, as well as national unity and Canadian sovereignty.
And yet, unlike countries such as Norway or Sweden, Canada is not a natural multilateral player. It has had to work very hard to support a
multilateral agenda because of ever-increasing continentalist pulls. Today that commitment to a global multilateral agenda that includes free trade and global peace and security is cast in doubt. for example, when the Trump administration agenda negated the TPP, a deal that would have provided access to 40% of the global economy Canadian leaders were at a loss on how to move on without the United States. Both TPP and CETA were supposed to be the salvation that would rescue Canada from dependence on US markets (Carment and Landry 2017).
But the criticism of both deals has been extensive. from the left, we hear primarily of environmental and labor rights concerns, along with worries over investor-state dispute settlement mechanisms creating undue power for corporations to legally challenge a sovereign nation. from the right (and some on the left), we hear of wage stagnation and the loss of manufacturing and natural resource industry jobs. Both sides worry about the detrimental effects of rising inequality, exacerbated by exporting low-skilled jobs overseas. At the same time, the US obsession with security detracts from our own leaders’ capacity to achieve economic growth through immigration, for example (Carment and Landry 2017).2 finally, we come to the issue of whether the United States is withdrawing from its multilateral role of primus inter pares, abandoning the rules-based liberal international system it established post-WWII. By becoming more inward-looking the United States may be dragging Canada along with it. The pursuit of bilateral free trade arrangements is but one example of a potential weakening in the World Trade Organization (WTO) structure. Other examples include a perceived deterioration of the UN system, including the International Monetary fund (IMf) and World Bank and the United Nations Security Council (UNSC) undermined by constant abuse by regional and global powers.
These points regarding the evolutionary if not revolutionary state of Canada–US relations are at the core of this year’s Canada Among Nations. Contributors to this year’s edition were asked to assess the current status of Canada–US policy cooperation and the implications for both Canadian and US sovereignty in light of policy developments. Authors were asked to identify if and how the Trump agenda has affected the level and kind of coordination between the two states.
2 This section draws from “Claiming the 21st Century?” in Refections of Canada: Illuminating Our Biggest Possibilities and Challenges at 150 Years, edited by P. Tortell and M. Young (Vancouver, BC: Peter Wall Institute for Advanced Studies—UBC Press, 2017).
Authors were also asked to engage in the time-honored debate regarding Canada’s strategic direction. for example, what are the consequences for Canada’s commitment to upholding norms of multilateralist cooperation such as rule of law, institutional liberalism and a stable and a predictable political and economic environment while pursuing deeper integration with the United States? finally, authors were asked to consider whether the United States is actually undergoing the kind of strategic transformation Trump advocates.
The volume is in four sections. In the frst section we asked three experts to evaluate and debate the current state of affairs and present their ideas on where the relationship is headed. Evaluating the Canada–US relationship, Charles Doran argues that economic forces compelled the leaders of the three NAfTA countries to fnalize a free trade agreement, for the simple reason that the alternative of fnding new trading partners is seen as undesirable and less feasible. Doran is therefore correct in his conclusions given the emergence of the USMCA. If current US policy appears to runs counter to this assumption, it is as Doran argues because US grand strategy has the additional task of confronting China over its unfair trading practices. Indeed Doran argues that in the long run, Canada will be caught up in America’s slipstream as the two economic giants grapple with one another over access to markets, intellectual property rights, and manufacturing.
Richard Nimijean provides an alternative explanation for understanding the Canada–US relationship in his chapter “National Identity and the Management of Canada–US Relations: The View from Canada.” Being a smaller and less powerful partner means that the relationship is always interpreted in terms of the potential loss of policy sovereignty. Since 9/11, these fears have deepened, argues Nimijean. American statements that “security trumps trade” challenge Canada as a trading country, dependent on staples, exports and an integrated cross-border manufacturing sector. According to Nimijean. appeals to sovereignty and national identity, once used in the fght against free trade and closer ties with the United States, are now used to promote closer ties with the United States through the articulation of a progressive trade agenda that will protect and promote so-called Canadian values.
In the third and last contribution to our “debates” section in this volume, Rodger Payne presents his ideas on the “America first” policy and its implications for US–Canadian relations. Payne argues that a foreign policy of “America first” appears to pose a signifcant challenge
Another random document with no related content on Scribd:
The Project Gutenberg Literary Archive Foundation is a non-profit 501(c)(3) educational corporation organized under the laws of the state of Mississippi and granted tax exempt status by the Internal Revenue Service. The Foundation’s EIN or federal tax identification number is 64-6221541. Contributions to the Project Gutenberg Literary Archive Foundation are tax deductible to the full extent permitted by U.S. federal laws and your state’s laws.
The Foundation’s business office is located at 809 North 1500 West, Salt Lake City, UT 84116, (801) 596-1887. Email contact links and up to date contact information can be found at the Foundation’s website and official page at www.gutenberg.org/contact
Section 4. Information about Donations to the Project Gutenberg Literary Archive Foundation
Project Gutenberg™ depends upon and cannot survive without widespread public support and donations to carry out its mission of increasing the number of public domain and licensed works that can be freely distributed in machine-readable form accessible by the widest array of equipment including outdated equipment. Many small donations ($1 to $5,000) are particularly important to maintaining tax exempt status with the IRS.
The Foundation is committed to complying with the laws regulating charities and charitable donations in all 50 states of the United States. Compliance requirements are not uniform and it takes a considerable effort, much paperwork and many fees to meet and keep up with these requirements. We do not solicit donations in locations where we have not received written confirmation of compliance. To SEND DONATIONS or determine the status of compliance for any particular state visit www.gutenberg.org/donate.
While we cannot and do not solicit contributions from states where we have not met the solicitation requirements, we know of no
prohibition against accepting unsolicited donations from donors in such states who approach us with offers to donate.
International donations are gratefully accepted, but we cannot make any statements concerning tax treatment of donations received from outside the United States. U.S. laws alone swamp our small staff.
Please check the Project Gutenberg web pages for current donation methods and addresses. Donations are accepted in a number of other ways including checks, online payments and credit card donations. To donate, please visit: www.gutenberg.org/donate.
Section 5. General Information About Project Gutenberg™ electronic works
Professor Michael S. Hart was the originator of the Project Gutenberg™ concept of a library of electronic works that could be freely shared with anyone. For forty years, he produced and distributed Project Gutenberg™ eBooks with only a loose network of volunteer support.
Project Gutenberg™ eBooks are often created from several printed editions, all of which are confirmed as not protected by copyright in the U.S. unless a copyright notice is included. Thus, we do not necessarily keep eBooks in compliance with any particular paper edition.
Most people start at our website which has the main PG search facility: www.gutenberg.org.
This website includes information about Project Gutenberg™, including how to make donations to the Project Gutenberg Literary Archive Foundation, how to help produce our new eBooks, and how to subscribe to our email newsletter to hear about new eBooks.
