Skip navigation

Part II

The foreign policy myth

MICHAEL VALPY

From Monday's Globe and Mail

Latest comment posted at 5:11 PM EST 30/06/08

Our image of Canada as a positive force for good dies hard. ...Read the full article

This conversation is closed

  1. Mikey Gault from Licking Angelina Jolie's Boots, Canada writes: I must be dumb because I don't understand this article. What was the author's thesis? Help me out fellow posters.

    All I know is that once upon a time Canadian stormed a beach at Normandy and kicked German butt. They then advanced to the Netherlands where they kept up the butt kicking.

    Nowadays, Canada isn't storming any beaches. Our enlightened liberal overseers go to conferences and talk and pat themselves on the back for making a difference.
  2. Robin Adams from Ottawa, Canada writes: I have to agree with Valpy about Canadians holding on to their quaint notions about Canada's role in the world. That image is taught in schools at all levels continued during advanced studies. I remember in my foreign policy courses reading 'Canada as a PRinciple Power', among others that keeps trying promote the Canadian as boy scout myth. Its a complete misrepresentation of Canadian foreign policy and history in general. Our country is blessed with having both a very strong aural and legal traditions. Combined with our infatuation for Federal-Provincial relations, at the core of this is essentially a legal discussion. This is all good. This culture encourages us to resolve our differences amicably and within the boundaries of legal frameworks. Its a great way to organize our society and it works for us. Regrettably, the rest of the world is not that way. Where I think most authors fail is that they misinterpret the nature of the world in which we live. The study of western history is really the study of Imperialism and empires. We are the progeny of an empire that fought and then allied with the progeny of another empire. The history of the colonization of this continent is an imperial history and our next door neighbour is an imperial power. Understanding US imperial history is key to understanding the present world. All our current foreign policies gravitate around this notion and make sense when you analyze it this way. Here's a seminar given by Noam Chomsky about US imperial history. Canada is firmly an appendage to this and we exist to serve their interests. http://www.bu.edu/phpbin/buniverse/videos/view/?id=224
  3. Nathan Cool from Vancouver, Canada writes: We have 80 peace keepers deployed worldwide. Yes, 80.
  4. Bill Thompson from Calgary, Canada writes: Thank you Mr. Valpy. Finally someone to back up what I have been saying for a long time. The remarks of the first poster are indicative of the lack and blindness Canadians have when groping around in international affairs, economics, policy, justice, UN governance, global warming, etc. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>The very latest example is the attack upon our tar sands with people screaming that we shut them down. Wake up folks, the only ones to benefit from that are going to be the Saudis. Yet here we are today with purely naive opposition leading the charge against whom? Why ourselves of course. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>Why in the heck should we commit economic suicide and for what? The environment? Hardly! Our shutting down the country would not make a dent in global warming or cooling or whatever the current fad is. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>We need to get a good dose of real-politick in our education system. The first poster is a perfect example why as our educational system over the past forty years has let failed him and us down. He doesn’t understand and he is not alone. People in this country do not understand that most of the worlds does not like us…if they think of us at all they do not give a hoot…and if they think some more they see a land of suckers ripe for the plucking. Wake up Canada. Good article; well-said Mr. Valpy.
  5. Kevin Wells from United States writes:

    WTF?

    Where are the first 30 comments?
  6. Vern Johnson from Prince George, Canada writes: Why limit such comments to 2000 charcaters when there is so much to say about why Canada is not a sovereign nation.?
  7. Brendan B from VancouverCambridge UK, Canada writes: I feel much the same way.

    If anybody feels like reading my frustrations about our country's lost direction and beautiful potential, it can be found here:

    www.3bucksforbrendan.com/CanadianAbroad-Baker.pdf

    Valpy is dead on.

    B
  8. Old Sam Dark and Dirty from Republic of Newfoundland, Canada writes: Nathan Cool from Vancouver, Canada writes: We have 80 peace keepers deployed worldwide. Yes, 80.........

    Nathan if you look at our contribution to peacekeeping over the last 15 years you would realize that 80 is more than enough to do the job.

    Canadians belief that were were active in peacekeeping during the Cretien years would be surprised what constitutes peacekeeping mission.....

    1 diplomat
    1 over seeer
    2 unarmed soldiers
    3 soldiers
    1 platoon (unarmed)

    That is the type of peacekeeping we have been doing, not the glamerous bringing peace to the people with blue helmets that Canadians beleive we do
  9. nigel martin from Canada writes: As someone who travels the world constantly and has done so over the past 35 years, please be assured that this myth is dead and buried everywhere, except in Canada itself. Where once Candians were treated with special respect and care, because of our profound and prescient internationalism, we are now seen as just another self-interested, money grubbing consort of the USA...even when it is not true. The article and some of the responses allude to the growing notion that we possess unique Canadian values and that our duty is to foster them elsewhere. Rubbish. The democratic values we cherish, while relatively well legalized and institutionalized here, are universal values, shared by peoples of all nations, even, or perhaps especially, by those who live under oppressive regimes. Nor are these values evenly spread throughout our country. These G&M postings regularly demonstrate intolerance, bigotry and blinding insularity. If more Canadians knew how tarnished our image is abroad, many would be outrightly embarassed. Increasingly, I am put on the defensive by the growing puzzlement and occasional outright scorn and anger about who we have become as a people. Valpy is dead wrong about the evolution of a missionary approach. For years we were respected precisely because we didn't arrive with pat solutions for local problems, as did, and still do, some of the world powers. As Canadians we had lived a colonial existance, and in some ways a neo-colonial existance with our southern neighbour. We could empathise with the quest for freedom from that oppressive heritage. It is only in recent years that we have increasingly become missionaries, talking about exporting Canadian values as if we have some kind of special access to wisdom. We are a special and fortunate country, even with our increasingly myopic world view. It is possible that one day soon we will wake up to find that the world beyond our borders has left us behind.
  10. Alan Pater from Vancouver, Canada writes: The media does not keep citizens up-to-date on the corruption of Canadian government.

    The politicians talk about democracy, human rights, the environment. They then enact policies against those things, by order of the corporate masters. The media - also owned and controlled by corporate capital - repeat the lies. Not surprising, is it?
  11. globefan Eh from Canada writes: Great Diary, thankyou. The power of myth..
  12. Hairy Wrangellian from Saltspring Island, Canada writes: Well said Nigel. It's true, most people outside of Canada - if they know anything about Canada at all - consider us to be a docile satellite of the United States.

    Too bad; I miss the old Canada and wish we could return to the role of peacemaker.
  13. Al Bore from OTTAWA, Canada writes:

    Canadians have an over inflated view of themselves as it is. Please don't add fuel to the fire by telling us how great we once were as the leading World Peace keeper. Rubbish.

    Now go wave your Canadian flag on July 1st on Parliament Hill and shout we're number one!!!! It brings smiles to the zombies.
  14. Edmond Dusablon from United States writes: What's the world coming to when a bunch of self-righteous, finger-pointing, chip-on-the-shoulder Canadians no longer give the US a gratuitous kick to the shins.

    I feel your pain.
  15. Alison Dennis from Edmonton, Canada writes: I highly recommend Mel Hurtig's latest book 'The Truth about Canada'. From this book, and articles I have read in the Globe and Mail recently about the dreadful NAFTA agreement that sees 60% of Canada's natural gas going to the U.S. when we only have 9 years supply left and 50% of Canadians heat their homes in winter with natural gas...I can only conclude that our Canadian government consists of a bunch of despots who are selling off our natural resources and businesses, enabling the rich to get richer and the peons to suffer (what normally happens in a corrupt 3rd world government). Hurtig makes the point that Canadian banks finance foreign takeovers, the interest from such loans are tax deductible, profits are taken out of the country, and Canadian auxillary services that supported the businesses when they were Canadian owned, are dismissed. Hurtig also makes the point that Sweden, a country with half the population of Canada, has its own home-grown auto industry. What's wrong with us?? Our government spends little on R&D so that much of our livelihood is based on natural resource exports. Even some Americans have stated that they can't understand why we keep agreeing to the agreement about natural gas in NAFTA! They must think (and rightly so) that we are completely oblivious to what our government has done and is doing. Please - read this book, and go see your MP, MLA, and write letters or we'll be freezing in the dark 9 years from now. Politicians need to be accountable NOW, for what will be done about this horrendous situation!
  16. Piltdown Man from Canada writes: If foreign policy is a myth then why do the big guys on the block - CIDA, DND and DFAIT have access to large amounts of discretionary operational spending in the billions - perhaps the largest in our history? Mr Valpy confuses four things. First - there is the pining for the fjords argument you know, 'Lament for a Nation' type stuff - 'son in my day things were much tougher but better when a few elites ran the show.' Axworthy talked a great line but actually the budgets for his visions were always dampened by regional crises and conflict in need of immediate attention. Second is the continued lack of critical, coherent and independent voices on foreign policy. The CIC said it would fulfill the task of being a Council on Foreign Relations- north but it is likely to end up in bed with the government. Same old, same old. In an era where every tax dollar is accounted for - someone needs to ask tough questions about the impact we are having on the world and how it impacts us. We just don't know how much or where. Third, Valpy replaces one myth with one another. His lament for the .7% ODA threshold is based on a mythical benchmark meaningless in an era when diaspora remittances outstrip ODA by huge margins on a global basis. What we need are empirical benchmarks on how we are doing that Canadians can understand. Foreign policy is more than just state to state relations - Canada is engaged. Finally, there is the lack of a clearly articulated strategic vision. This seems to be at the core of Mr Valpy's piece but is unstated . Some choices and priorities have begun to emerge with respect to our focus on Latin America and Afghanistan but our allies and partners need to be part of this dialog specifically in regards to what to do about failed and fragile states, the weak international security architecture and more specifically whether we should hitch our wagon to North America or shift priorities to emerging powers.
  17. Templeton Jones from Windsor, Canada writes:

    Liberals have fed the Canadian glowing remarks about our pious behavior. This was quite apparent during the never ending liberal leadership race, when Hedy Fry and others were stroking one another's back with the mythology brush. I was almost expecting them to say at any moment that the Canadian can quench his/her thirst by drinking his/her own void.

    The fact of the matter is that strength, not hippie socialistic strength, but strength coupled with reason, principles, a willingness to act and a willingness to sacrifice command respect.
  18. Piltdown Man from Canada writes: For those of you who cling to the Canada as peacekeeper mantra - we have not done UN peacekeeping since we enagaged in Bosnia in the early 1990s - its been all NATO since then and a generation of military and diplomatic staff have been trained to work in failed and fragile states where UN missions - in open conflict don't cut it.

    If any of the myths about Canada as honest broker, mediator or peacekeeper have been sustained its because our leaders of the 1990s were either unable or unwilling to face some harsh realities of the post Cold War world.

    It wasn't until we got Paul Martin's International Policy Statement that the turnaround began - that document though it was never implemented is the basis for our foreign policy today.

    Don't be fooled we are engaged and focused more than ever before in ways that Pearson and the elite diplomats of the 60s and 70s working in a less complex and less competitive environment would be unable to comprehend.

    The G and M has never really cottoned on to that fact except for maybe Mr Valpy who seems to understand most of the problems we face and the opportunities and challenges ahead of us.
  19. Alan Pater from Vancouver, Canada writes: The real myth is any democratic control of the government. Canadian citizens want us to be peacekeepers and to be world leaders in foriegn aid.

    The people who attend $$$ fundraising dinners for politicians don't want these things, so the government says one thing and does another.
  20. Dana Cruickshank from Canada writes: What the author is saying is rather truthful. Canada has done some good work around the world, but I think that our citizens have been seduced by politicians into believing that we are somehow more morally good than the americans or another country. Has Canada done peacekeeping? Yes, but again what is peacekeeping? It is just keeping two groups from fighting until it is no longer useful for them to be at peace. Almost all of Canada's peacekeeping missions, and especially the most famous ones like Cyprus and Egypt, were in direct response to threats to Canada (fighting amongst NATO members).

    The sad truth is that Canada holds almost no say in the world, but we still continue to think that on the international stage we somehow punch above our weight class.

    Every country has their myths, but the ones like peacekeeping and the others that were mentioned are especially useless because they don't actually force us to try to be more important on the international stage.

    A much more useful myth is something like the Alamo for americans, or for Canadians Vimy Ridge.
  21. Hairy Wrangellian from Saltspring Island, Canada writes: Templeton Jones: 'not hippie socialist strength, but strength coupled with...' So what kind of strength are you talking about, military strength?
  22. Mark Dip from Canada writes: As a diplomatic spouse, I can say that we are still experiencing the days when “a brilliant group of a dozen or so young Canadians were recruited into the foreign service.” The problem is that such valuable resources are also smart enough to get out as soon as they can. DFAIT’s ability to fulfill its mandate has long been in a downward death spiral as it hemorrhages its best and brightest through attrition. There are no true leaders, anymore; no one that staff could easily identify as the Canadian Foreign Service’s “General Hillier” who is willing to take the political risks that are needed in order to inspire excellence from the troops while safeguarding their welfare. All that’s left is a flotsam and jetsam of risk-averse bureaucrats and lethargic administrators that have transformed DFAIT into what The Hill Times recently described as nothing better than a “travel and property management agency”. To find out why this has happened, one need only Google the Auditor General (OAG) 2007 report on the dismal state of DFAIT human resources, the 2005 Carleton University NPSIA Occasional Papers report on DFAIT employee retention, or the grandmother of them all: the 1981 MacDougal Royal Commission on Conditions of Foreign Service report. Our diplomats are bailing out in droves in order to evade the long-unresolved spousal employment and family financial/taxation hardship inequities that get inflicted upon them overseas. While Canadian society has evolved to embody such things as dual-income couples, DFAIT Management’s family values still desperately cling to those of the Pearson Era. Soon, all that may be left is the DFAIT Emergency Hotline (“If you have been arrested and are being tortured, press 4”). While they cower in some hell-hole, on hold listening to “Girl from Ipanema”, Canadians in distress can at least rest assured that they’re getting what they paid for in consular services. In the meantime, we’ll be back in Canada, working (finally) and paying our taxes.
  23. Miss Lady from Alberta, Canada writes: As a person who has lived and travelled elsewhere let me say this: Canada's image is just fine. Not the best, brightest, most shiniest and wonderfullest place in the world, not active in changing the lives of people everywhere (is that the myth, the thing that people were thinking?), but a country that could choose the path of aggression (nuclear weapons and joining in wars of aggression over oil) but so far, has not.
    A somewhat tamer version of the myth, mayber, but not a target for hatred, too much, anyway.
  24. Kevin Chew from Germany writes: 'we are now seen as just another self-interested, money grubbing consort of the USA'

    Haven't encountered this attitude once in over 5 years of living in Germany. People have an overwhelmingly positive attitude towards Canada. Not to say that this positive attitude is deserved or based on any concrete knowledge of Canadian policies or actions on the foreign stage, but at least it indicates that we still have some capital. Better take advantage of it before it dwindles away ...
  25. bj sutherland from Victoria, Canada writes: I was just starting to read the comments and now many early ones have disappeared including some recommended websites. What is going on? I agree with much in the article and have been saddened over the last couple of decades that many of our international priorities which made me proud have gone by the wayside. It's interesting that Valpy names Canadians coming out of the social gospel traditions as being so influencial, why has a religious background of politicians coming out of the evangelical movement(Reformers) not also had a similar beneficial effect on our international impact?
  26. Jack Mitchell from Canada writes: Man, we don't even campaign to get on the Security Council, that's how incredibly provincial we've become. We have about as much influence as Ireland, which has a tenth our population.
  27. Alberto Bayo from Canada writes: As long as our Foreign policy is in Canada's interests and to our advantage...that's all that matters.
  28. Robin Adams from Ottawa, Canada writes: I agree with you 100% Alan Pater. Another huge myth is that the public of our country has control over our politicians... the British Parliamentary model is hardly democratic and there is a huge democracy deficit here. There is quite a gulf between the rulers and the ruled here.

    It makes me chuckle when any author invokes the 'we' thing... Who does he mean?? You and me?? Canadian foreign policy is driven by the PMO. Backbenchers have little to know say and parliament isn't required to ratify treaties. 'Our' foreign policy is complete nonsense. Try rephrasing that into a meaningful construct... Chretien's foreign policy, Martin's foreign policy, Harper's foreign policy.... you get the picture.
  29. Brenton Walters from vancouver, Canada writes: Did I miss a significant part of this article, i.e Part I? I expected another few pages that would go on to explore how Canada has pulled out of various peacekeeping missions (e.g. Cyprus), cut its foreign aid budget, stopped contributing to foreign disaster relief, and so on, but there was nothing to back up the author's claims.

    There's a myth. sure. How accurate is it? I have no idea, because there is nothing in the article to indicate just how Canada is acting in the international realm.
  30. steve allan from Welland, Ontario, Canada writes: I hate to tell you this Mr. Valpy, but Canada has never had an independent foreign policy. Before World War II we were a vassal of the British crown, and since then we have become so Americanized that we can justifiably be called America's retarded little brother.

    We're regarded as nothing by foreigners because we have chosen to be someone else's colonial. Can someone tell me why we still don't have a Canadian head of state......after all these years????
  31. Alistair McLaughlin from Canada writes: And we should care what people think of us why? Most beliefs around the world are still driven by primitive, petty tribalism and ancient superstitions. Who cares what anyone thinks of us? We need to do what we think is right, and that's all.
  32. Ryan Ginger from Canada writes: One thing you forget about myth, Mr. Valpy, is that they are not simply about the past but also help us structure the future. If Canadians recognize--or misrecognize, according to your article--themselves as altruistic peacemakers, perhaps this is how they want to see themselves down the road. So perhaps this story is not yet complete...

    Nonetheless, your point is well made. But you forgot to mention that even Lester Pearson famously said that 'Canada punched above her weight class' in its foreign policy in the 1950s--its so-called golden years. The world changed since those Post WWII days. By the early 1960s, the breadlines in Britain disappeared, South American countries rapidly modernized, Africa went through a de-colonial period, Japan was back on its legs, and Europe began its steady march towards integration. Canada can no longer punch above her class--not because we're wimpier, but because other countries have strengthened.
  33. Dean Bensics from Toronto, Canada writes: The glory years of Canadian internationalism were roughly the twenty years, 1945-65.

    After that, the internal pressures of Quebec nationalism, economic stagflation, Constitutional repatriation, and fiscal crises, focused our attention inwards -- relentlessly, and shall I say, neurotically.

    For the past forty years, we've been consumed by a survival complex. The constant weight of worrying whether the country can withstand Quebec separatism, financial pressures, free trade, etc., have left little room to focus outward in any meaningful way.

    And, so we don't.
  34. W W from Canada writes: "John Diefenbaker pushed racist South Africa out of the Commonwealth" ... and Jean Chrétien kept Zimbabwe in the Commonwealth with his Canadian Compromise in 2002.
  35. sherry smith from Canada writes: Wishful thinking for those of us who were around in the Lester B era and are clinging to that position of what we would like to be seen as in the World . Perhaps we can change our direction if enough people really cared. I for one would like to see Governments in Canada stop signing Trade and Security Pacts which just align us closer with American Foreign Policy all the time, without any public input. This is a mistake and I believe years from now we will be sorry. I believe the seeds of change are still here. George Carlin once said " the public gets the leaders they deserve" Probably true with all the name calling biggotry, one sided viewpoints and intolerance I have seen on these sites lately? Instead of calling down right or left, perhaps the globe could come up with a site for suggesting things we could do and influences we could persue to make the world a better place. I read in the NYT today how a group of people including Henry Kissinger (shock, shock, the old war monger) thinks the U.S. should spearhead a movement to influence the World to rid itself of nuclear weapons. Now that is something I would support and work tirelessly towards. Also suggestions for each of us to reduce our carbon footprints and work towards new ways to use fuels and new fuels for that matter. We should work towards moving in the direction of that hard to let go of "myth" we keep talking about. Happy Canada Day Folks. I will try to curb my ranting and passion as well.
  36. David Smith from Canada writes: Mr. Valpy correctly credits the rise of the young Pearson, Ritchie, etc. as the leading edge of the foreign policy that he now claims to be a myth. Perhaps so, but Canadians are quite confused about our actual role in Afghanistan, the one element of our foreign policy which trumps our other international concerns. Are we nation-building there or just killing the bad guys? Apparently we're taking a shot at both so it's no surprise that Canadians think we are still good guys out in the big bad world. Perhaps this Afghan dichotomy is fuelling the great Canadian myth.... only nice guys build nations, while fending off the "scumbags" that seem underfoot, don't they?!
  37. Maurice Caissy-Cyr from Canada writes: For me, tomorrow is moving day in Quebec. Always been and is two solitude in Canada. Two historic books, two main religion, and was two main language.

    One way to see Canada is reading Globe and mail, the other is reading Journal de Montreal or Journal de Quebec.

    Two real different CBC and RadioCanada, two big different loving Trudeau or Levesque.

    But for July 1 and 4 and 14, I wish all good celebrating day. I have to go moving tomorrow.
  38. Ryan Ginger from Canada writes: Dean Bensics writes: The glory years of Canadian internationalism were roughly the twenty years, 1945-65. After that, the internal pressures of Quebec nationalism, economic stagflation, Constitutional repatriation, and fiscal crises, focused our attention inwards -- relentlessly, and shall I say, neurotically."

    All very good points, Dean. I don't know if you would agree, but do you think the ongoing "threat" of Quebec separation effectively paralyzed our political leader's abilities to articulate a clear, long-term vision for Canada in the world? The "glory days" to which you refer actually began in 1947, when Louis St. Laurent spelled out Canada's new internationalism in his famous "Gray Lecture".
  39. Maurice Caissy-Cyr from Canada writes: At my age, 60, world war was before born, and in historybooks, Pearson in history books, peace keeper and glory in late 60 and ending. What else to say.

    From then to now, what could be glory for me, or in the last 15 years what could had me change my option? Gomery, war act, referendum act, even ever think to be in Irak, roll in killing Afgan, corruption in governement, our poor health system crombling, environnement and water and fish going the drain over Canada, our great nation?
  40. Piltdown Man from Canada writes: Sherry smith writes: We should work towards moving in the direction of that hard to let go of "myth" we keep talking about. We are and have been: they are called Bosnia, Kosvo and Afghanistan. Dave Smith wants to know what's going in Afghanistan - precisely my first point above. We need empirics - are we having an effect? Are we nation building? Until then we and by that I mean the Canadian public is groping in the dark. Yes the WE matters because its our tax dollars that fund CIDA, DND and DFAIT and they have huge discretion on how to spend that money largely because Canadians aren't asking critical questions of them. You know its always easier to take the liberal/axworthy/chetien approach which is to spend a little bit of money, find a lowest common denominator issue that no self righteous Canadian would disagree with (eg child soldiers) and go full bore on that issue - no one gets hurt, everyone's happy and our tax dollars are safe - problem is: zero impact its much tougher to show leadership when bodybags are the measure of success, arm chair quarterbacks are breathing down your neck and the accountants are telling how to spend your money few Canadians I think realise what the price of freedom really is. Certainly the Liberals of the 1990s did not help us understand that fundamental bottom line.
  41. Michael Crowell from Halifax, Canada writes: You lost me at Michael Valpy, Stephen Lewis, Maude Barlow, Lyold Axeworthless and Lieutenant-General Roméo Dallaire. The myth of greatness lives on in the minds of these left wing, all talk no substance individuals.
  42. S Lucht from Canada writes: Too many Canadians are unable to think beyond hockey, SUVs, and "free" health care. Their extent of their contemplation of Canada's place in the world is wholly encompassed by the phrase "Canada rocks!".
  43. Thursday Afternoon from Canada writes: As long as we're talking about myths that are way too long in the tooth, let's include the Avro Arrow and Henderson's goal with that list. Yes, both happened, but they're done and over with, a long, long time ago. Let's collectively forget them, or at least shut up about them.
  44. Maurice Caissy-Cyr from Canada writes: Thursday Afternoon from Canada writes: Let's collectively forget them, or at least shut up about them.---

    No, they are collective hystoric memory, for some, something to forget, for other something to remember, as, 1916 war, Canada for it, Quebec again it. 1945 war, Canada for it, Quebec again it. War act, Canada for having our soldier prepare to kill in Quebec.

    For all that, Quebec is in the path of Canada will. Like when we disagree with US to go to Irak, US dont mind to go anyway.

    Some will like Quebec to be like Canada for Afgan, US go, we go.

    My family came here in 1642, this is my only place. Some will say, go back to France. Like saying American go back to Britain. They are not anymore for a long time Britain, They are American. I am maybe not a full Canadian, but I am certainly not a french from france, more like a quebecois. That is also a myth.
  45. ImaCANADIAN ! from Canada writes: Alan Pater from Vancouver has the best comment here of the ones I've read: *"The real myth is any democratic control of the government. Canadian citizens want us to be peacekeepers and to be world leaders in foreign aid."* That is bang on, and what is in Michael Valpy's article basically follows from this, and is but one symptom of the myth that we have democracy. Jan. 2008 Strategic Counsel poll: The overwhelming majority 78% of Canadians think the combat role should end. Only a small minority 17% think the combat role should continue. The plurality 47% of Canadians think the troops should return as soon as possible. The majority 56% of Canadians oppose the mission, only a minority 39% support it. http://www.thestrategiccounsel.com/our%5Fnews/polls/2008-01-14%20GMCTV%20Jan%2010-131.pdf March 2008 Angus Reid poll: The majority 58% of Canadians disagree with the extension to the end of 2011. The plurality 42% strongly disagree with the extension. Only a minority 37% agree with the extension. The vast 75% majority think Canada continues to shoulder too much of the burden. http://www.angus-reid.com/uppdf/2008.03.26%5FAfghan.pdf The real myth in Canada is any democratic control of the government.
  46. Piltdown Man from Canada writes: Sherry smith writes: We should work towards moving in the direction of that hard to let go of "myth" we keep talking about. _____________________ We are and have been: they are called Bosnia, Kosvo and Afghanistan. ______________________________ Dave Smith wants to know what's going on in Afghanistan - precisely my first point above. __________________________________ We need empirics - are we having an effect? Are we nation building? Until then we and by that I mean the Canadian public is groping in the dark. ________________________________ Yes the WE matters because its our tax dollars that fund CIDA, DND and DFAIT and they have huge discretion on how to spend that money largely because Canadians aren't asking critical questions of them. __________________________________ You know its always easier to take the liberal/axworthy/chretien approach which is to spend a little bit of money, find a lowest common denominator issue that no self righteous Canadian would disagree with (eg child soldiers) and go full bore on that issue - no one gets hurt, everyone's happy and our tax dollars are safe. __________________________________ Problem is: zero impact. ______________________________________ Its much tougher to show leadership when bodybags are the measure of success, arm chair quarterbacks are breathing down your neck and the accountants are telling you how to spend your money. ___________________________ Few Canadians I think realise what the price of freedom really is. Certainly the Liberals of the 1990s did not help us understand that fundamental bottom line.
  47. D. B. from Greater Sask., Canada writes: Perhaps Mr. Valpy was trying to say that our government's actions are at odds with what the people want. If only he had fleshed it out a bit. We had a few adventures in Gulf War I, we were involved in the Balkans, and we are involved in a limited but deadly fight in Afghanistan. Is there more to come? Does Mr. Valpy want to prepare us for whatever is to come? In any event, I would never call the wishes of the people a myth.
  48. Puk Natcha from Canada writes: Which explains why Harper felt ok about putting a buffoon in charge of DFAIT...
  49. Craig Cooper from Toronto, writes: Next you'll tell me there's no Snata Claus living at North Pole, Canada H0H 0H0.
  50. Templeton Jones from Windsor, Canada writes:

    Canadians have spent a long time observing the world with a big bowl of potato chips while drinking a six pack. With our security and prosperity never in question the entire Canadian nation found its way to the top of Mount Pious where we could be scathingly critical of the Great Satin. But times are changing and slowly but surely a great number of us are falling to the ground-beginning with Buzz Hargrove and the CAW.
  51. L. W. from Somewhere in BC, Canada writes: Alison Dennis from Edmonton, Canada writes: I highly recommend Mel Hurtig's latest book 'The Truth about Canada'. From this book, and articles I have read in the Globe and Mail recently about the dreadful NAFTA agreement that sees 60% of Canada's natural gas going to the U.S...

    I agree with you Alison. The people in government we have now are basically traitors. Mel Hurtig is what I call a true Canadian. We need more people like him to expose these quislings in Ottawa for what they are. Their is a dirty word for them 'Vichy Canadian'. no different from Vichy France in the second world war. Same kind of people. I do not consider myself colonized by that tyrannical government in the U.S. as most Canadians don't. People in this country have to make their voice heard and stop being brainwashed into being sheep. People in Canada have to realize that the U.S. will stop at nothing to get our resources.
  52. Glenn F from Winnipeg, Canada writes: The CONservatives have ruined our international standing - now we're just seen as a little cousin to Big Brother Yanks down south. Oh, to be governed by Liberals again... and mean something in the world.
  53. Let me tell You How It Effing Is from United States writes: Glad Canadians have finally woken up from their 40 year delusion of their own self importance being "peace-keepers". Guess what dreamers? Everyone in the world thinks Canada is some appendage of the US in terms of business, culture, economics, foreign policy.
    You've been selfish and self absorbed with Quebec.
    Go back to wringing your hands and dithering about whether Quebec will stay in Canada and whether Canada has a good standing on the "international stage" whatever that is.
    Go back to sleep and dream while other countries are decisive and act.
  54. Proud Thirdworlder from Concord, Canada writes: Mr. Valpy’s views are certainly laudable … at least some common sense and wish to be a “free” nation so that when a Canadian goes overseas, he or she does not have to say “ we in North America, …”. However, I doubt there is any political will to back up Mr. Valpy’s view. In the meantime, for me, Canada is as illustrated by a recent event in a Peel District Board school program in Mississauga. Some kind of ceremony was taking place at the behest of Mr. Peter Fonseca … they announced that they were playing the Canadian national anthem, and everybody should rise. I rose, but two of the guys close by did not. Mr. Fonseca send a couple of people to ask them to rise since they were playing the national anthem. They did not budge … there was a lot of commotion …. Some of Mr. Fonseca’s clowns were saying “ I can’t believe this, I can’t believe this”. Mr. Fonseca himself came and asked them to rise. Those guys by then probably had reached their limit of patience and left the room, but did not rise to the anthem. …. Two out of maybe a hundred or two hundred people …. Well, that’s one or two percent, but the thing is it does not take long to reach 10 percent or more …. Happy Canada day everyone!
  55. J Albert from Toronto, Canada writes: Glenn F - just sad! Maybe there's a 1-900 number you can call.

    Our international standing - by any measure has been falling for decades. The turning point was Trudeau's almost backing out of NATO commitments.

    What is foreign policy? Is it just showing up at meetings and playing dillentante - or parking a few peacekeepers on a mid-sized Mediterarean island for a few decades. How about sigiing an international agreement (without understanding it) and then doing nothing for a decade to meet its obligations. (That would be LPC foreign policy.)

    The only people I hear complaining about Canada's standing are the LPC and fellow travellers here in Canada.
  56. siren call from Canada writes: bj sutherland from Victoria, Canada writes: It's interesting that Valpy names Canadians coming out of the social gospel traditions as being so influencial, why has a religious background of politicians coming out of the evangelical movement(Reformers) not also had a similar beneficial effect on our international impact? .......................................... bj, the Christianity most informing the majority of Conservative Reform Alliance politics was many things -- but never the Social Gospel. Social Gospel adherents were interested in the downtrodden, working to stem poverty in this country and globally, inequalities in access to health, helping to raise the benefits of the working people. An outstanding person here would be Tommy Douglas. The evangelicals to whom you are looking are the antithesis of this movement. Evangelicals come in many forms and perhaps the direct opposition should be referred to as Dominionists. They work against community and society seeking an isolate path seemingly to Christ but mainly to the takeover of secular state power by the religious faithful. Dominionist would rather kill Douglas than break bread with him. The movement is worldwide. These forces were at the heart of the conflict in the selection of the recent pope. Social Gospel is fighting for ascendancy in many S. American countries and in Mexico. The Dominionist adherents are those that helped George Bush get elected in the US and people like Charles McVety helped Harper here in Canada.
  57. siren call from Canada writes: You (siren call, from Canada) wrote: bj sutherland from Victoria, Canada writes: It's interesting that Valpy names Canadians coming out of the social gospel traditions as being so influencial, why has a religious background of politicians coming out of the evangelical movement(Reformers) not also had a similar beneficial effect on our international impact? .......................................... bj, the Christianity most informing the majority of Conservative Reform Alliance politics was many things -- but never the Social Gospel. Social Gospel adherents were interested in the downtrodden, working to stem poverty in this country and globally, inequalities in access to health, helping to raise the benefits of the working people. An outstanding person here would be Tommy Douglas. The evangelicals to whom you are looking are the antithesis of this movement. Evangelicals come in many forms and perhaps the direct opposition should be referred to as Dominionists. They work against community and society seeking an isolate path seemingly to Christ but mainly to the takeover of secular state power by the religious faithful. Dominionist would rather kill Douglas than break bread with him. The movement is worldwide. These forces were at the heart of the conflict in the selection of the recent pope. Social Gospel is fighting for ascendancy in many S. American countries and in Mexico. The Dominionist adherents are those that helped George Bush get elected in the US and people like Charles McVety helped Harper here in Canada.
  58. siren call from Canada writes:
    sorry, tried twice but couldn't get paragraph breaks to remain
  59. Hap Stokes from Canada writes: Really Canada did not become a TRUE nation in Charlottetown on 1st July 1867. Instead Canadians became bonded together and became a real country (only weeks after) 9th April 1917 with our victory over the mighty German Army at Vimy Ridge.

    The pride of that victory made us a country, and what we do with it is up to all, including generations not yet born.

    Have your Beaumont Hamel Day Memorial tomorrow Newfoundlanders. And congratulations to Danny Boy for bringing the Stanley Cup home.
    Now go party hardy.
  60. Steven Staples from Ottawa, Canada writes: In his excellent series on Canadian identity, Michael Valpy says Canadians’ persistent belief in peacekeeping and soft power infuriates foreign policy scholars, driving them “nuts.” It may not be surprising that these academics, who receive substantial government funding through the Department of National Defence, and increasingly big business, hold much more hawkish views than the public. See: http://www.theglobeandmail.com/servlet/story/LAC.20080516.MILITARY16/TPStory/?query=conference of defence associations Canada’s foreign policy and business establishments have predictably argued that Canadians must trade in their values of diplomacy and UN peacemaking for more U.S.-friendly approach to the world. For instance, we all remember the calls from the universities and boardrooms (and newsrooms) banging the war drums for Canada to join the U.S. invasion of Iraq, warning harsh economic punishment if Canada refused. But as the Globe and Mail’s poll this week showed, most Americans believe our decision to avoid the disastrous invasion of Iraq was the right one. See: http://www.theglobeandmail.com/servlet/story/RTGAM.20080629.wpoll30/BNStory/National/home I am relieved that the Canadian government doesn’t always take the advice of the foreign policy scholars. Sometimes foreign policy is too important to be left to the experts.
  61. Catherine Medernach from Winnipeg, Canada writes: While many Canadians are quick to party on Canada Day, a much smaller number invest time and energy in considering the important issues facing our country at this point in time. Highly recommend the book 'Whose War is it?' by Granatstein which goes far beyond the issue of the War in Afghanistan and provides material to promote discussion on the many areas that Canadians need to consider in terms of being Canadian and our best interests as a country . .......................................................................................................... The main problem in Canada is that we don't do much except complain. Consider the average voter turnout in elections. People want to make the government accountable without having to invest any time and energy to learn enough about anything to hold the government accountable. A large number of Canadians are lazy, apathetic and self absorbed and make no effort to become involved in the political process. We get the government we deserve. We leave politics to politicians and complain about the results. We cling to the myth of 'peacekeeping' because it is easier than becoming educated. If it isn't in the media or online at least, we don't bother searching for information - we just stick to our preconceived ideas. We don't take time to learn about the world from the people who move here from corners far and wide and could provide a more accurrate picture than we get from the media. How about making a Canada Day resolution to become more knowledgeable and involved in the governing of our country - perhaps by next Canada Day we will have a better understanding of what it means to be part of this great country.
  62. Grateful To Be Where I am from Toronto, Canada writes: Miss Lady from Alberta... your comments are quite funny and quite true!
  63. Hairy Wrangellian from Saltspring Island, Canada writes: Catherine: More people would become involved in the governing of our country if we had electoral reform. A lot of people want to vote for - and get involved in - a political party other than the Liberals or the Conservatives, but if they do, they feel like they are throwing their vote away.

    Unfortunately, we're not likely to get electoral reform any time soon; neither the Liberals nor the Conservatives want it, so it isn't going to happen.

Comments are closed

Thanks for your interest in commenting on this article, however we are no longer accepting submissions. If you would like, you may send a letter to the editor.

Report an abusive comment to our editorial staff

close

Alert us about this comment

Please let us know if this reader’s comment breaks the editor's rules and is obscene, abusive, threatening, unlawful, harassing, defamatory, profane or racially offensive by selecting the appropriate option to describe the problem.

Do not use this to complain about comments that don’t break the rules, for example those comments that you disagree with or contain spelling errors or multiple postings.

Back to top