CIIA Toronto - Past Events

Event Summary:

The Implications for Canada of the United States Election:
The Second Bush Mandate
Wednesday, December 1, 2004
Summary by Benita Hansraj
Panelists: Paul Heinbecker, Stephen Clarkson, David Crane and Lou Pauly
Moderated by: Keith Martin, President, CIIA (Toronto)

On December 1, 2004, over sixty people participated in a riveting panel discussion on the Second Bush Mandate provided by political economist Stephen Clarkson, former Ambassador to the United Nations and current Waterloo professor Paul Heinbecker, author and Business Columnist from The Toronto Star, David Crane, and Lou Pauly, Director of the Centre for International Studies at the University of Toronto. Each panelist offered a brief statement that was followed by an animated question and answer period.

Paul Heinbecker emphasized the need to secure a cooperative bilateral relationship with the United States while maintaining the strong multilateralist tradition of Canadian foreign policy. Heinbecker emphasized the need for an independent approach to Canadian international relations. He pointed to the current Iraq War, where Canadian policy makers including himself refused to align themselves with American foreign policy, as an example of Canada choosing its own course and taking a decidedly Canadian stance.

Mr. Clarkson, on the other hand, contended that the Canadian-U.S. relationship presented by Mr. Heinbecker was overly simplistic. He cautioned that the United States, now fully flexing its muscles as a global hegemon, posed a significant challenge to Canada. He expressed a need to avoid pursuing continental alignments for fear that they would lead to monumental political, social and environmental challenges for Canada.

Toronto Star Business Columnist and author of the forthcoming book “Big Canada or Little Canada”, David Crane, presented his vision of Canadian foreign policy. With the rise of numerous strategic challenges for the United States, including Ballistic Missiles Defense, soaring economic deficits, and the costs and complexity of the “War on Terror”, Crane submitted that Canada must pursue an independent stance in foreign affairs so as to not be forced into solutions that reflected U.S. values and interests more than those of Canadians.

Lou Pauly presented an argument that differed significantly from the views of most of the panel. He argued that Canada was best served by building policies based on a united “North American” view. Mr. Pauly suggested that Canadian policy makers should associate themselves more closely with American policy. He submitted that both the United States and Canada, with similar political cultures and foreign policy issues, could be most effective if they coordinated their foreign policy approaches more.

Following the presentations by the panelists, the audience engaged in a stimulating and wide-ranging Q&A, which ultimately led to numerous exchanges between the panelists regarding a range of issues including the Iraq War, political culture in Canada and the United States, and the foundations of Canadian and American foreign policy. Paul Heinbecker and Lou Pauly had a memorable and heated discussion on Canada’s position on the Iraq War, with Mr. Heinbecker suggesting that U.S. policy in Iraq was a serious error and Canada was right to not send troops there, while Mr. Pauly suggested that the United States should be able to count on Canada in the post September 11th environment.

View the event flyer: Flyer.