Examines Canada’s self-image vs. reality on the world stage, the effects of globalization, the dominant Canada-US relationship, and Canada’s engagement internationally through trade, aid, migration, and military participation.
Key Concepts
- Canada’s self-image as a peace-loving, multilateralist nation is largely not matched by international recognition
- The core theoretical divide is soft power/idealism vs. hard power/realism, and nationalism vs. continentalism
- No country is as dependent on trade with a single partner as Canada is on the US
- Canada seeks counterweights to US dominance through multilateralism
- Canada’s military and peacekeeping footprint has shrunk significantly since the Cold War era
- Canada ranks 8th globally on the Commitment to Development Index (2025), but only 34th on environment
Introduction: Canada’s Self-Image vs. Reality
The Positive Self-Image
Canadians tend to believe:
- We are peace-loving and respected abroad
- We stand for multilateralism and support the UN
- Our advice is sought by more powerful countries
The Reality
- Foreigners know very little about Canada
- Canada makes little impact on public opinion in other countries
- Angus Reid 2023: Canadian confidence in their international reputation is declining
| Year | Very Good/Good | Average | Very Poor/Poor |
|---|---|---|---|
| Sep-16 | 79% | 18% | 4% |
| Jul-18 | 84% | 13% | 3% |
| Jun-20 | 71% | 18% | 11% |
| Mar-22 | 62% | 21% | 17% |
| May-23 | 51% | 24% | 25% |
Exam Alert
Canadians’ confidence in their international reputation dropped from 79% “good” in 2016 to 51% in 2023, while “poor” ratings nearly quadrupled.
What Canadians See as Canada’s Most Positive Contribution
Figure 17.1 (1993–2012 trend):
- Peacekeeping was historically dominant (~40% in 1993) but declined sharply to ~20% by 2012
- Foreign aid was second (~19%), also declining
- Other categories (world example, multiculturalism, economic system) much smaller
Updated comparison (2008 vs. 2018):
- Multiculturalism/accepts immigrants: rose from 7% → 25%
- Peacekeeping: fell from 26% → 19%
- Foreign aid: fell from 17% → 8%
- Role model for the world: rose from 4% → 9%
Theoretical Frameworks
Soft Power vs. Hard Power
Soft Power
The influence derived from the attractiveness of a nation’s values, culture, and policies — not military or economic coercion.
Hard Power
Military capacity and economic sanctions used to protect national security and interests.
- Idealist (liberal/constructivist) framework: emphasizes diplomacy, multilateral co-operation, and international governance structures to control and resolve conflict
- Realist framework: stresses hard power — military capacity and economic sanctions are the primary instruments of national interest
Canadians tend to be idealists who believe in soft power.
Nationalism vs. Continentalism
Nationalism
The view that Canada should maintain political sovereignty, cultural distinctiveness, and economic independence, even at the cost of integration with the US.
Continentalism
The view that Canada’s economic and security interests are best protected and promoted through close integration with the United States.
- Between end of WWII and mid-1970s, economic and military integration with the US generated a nationalist backlash
- Nationalists argued it undermined sovereignty, cultural distinctiveness, and economic independence
- Idealists are more likely to be nationalists — wary of too close a tie with the US
- Realists lean toward continentalism as the best way to protect Canada’s interests
Globalization and Its Consequences for Canada
Canada’s Historical Integration
- Canada has always been integrated into global trade patterns
- Economy has always depended on foreign markets for natural resources:
- First major exports: fish, fur, timber, wheat
- In turn, Canada imported people, capital, and finished goods
Policy Responses to Globalization
- National Policy of 1879 (Sir John A. Macdonald): economic nationalism — tariffs to protect Canadian industry
- Until Trump’s election, large majority of Canadians supported free trade with the US and in general
- Today’s debate: not whether globalization can be rolled back, but how and when it should be controlled, and whether economic ties need to be diversified
Institutions of Globalization
Policy-makers have created more open trading environments by lowering protectionist barriers:
- GATT (General Agreement on Tariffs and Trade) → led to creation of the WTO in 1995
- Canada-US Free Trade Agreement and NAFTA (now CUSMA) in North America
- The European Union
Measuring Globalization
The Swiss Federal Institute of Technology (KOF Globalization Index) measures three dimensions:
- Economic globalization
- Social globalization
- Political globalization
Anti-Globalization Backlash
- Meetings of the WTO, OAS, G7/G8, and G20 routinely disrupted by violent protests
- Anti-globalization was historically a left-wing concern but has become a right-wing issue too:
- Populist parties across Europe
- Trump (2016, 2020, 2024): critical of globalization
- Brexit (and possibly “Nexit”?)
Critics of globalization in Canada include:
- Many social science academics
- A significant part of the media elite
- Much of the labour movement leadership
- The NDP
- Many religious, social justice, environmental, and nationalist organizations
Canada’s Relations with the United States
What Is “Canadian” in a Globalized Economy?
- Globalized production/sourcing blurs the question: what is Canadian?
- Products exported from Canadian companies routinely have foreign content; imports may include Canadian-made content
- Example: Some Toyota/Honda models assembled in Ontario have more Canadian content than certain “Big Three” North American car models — but this is kept secret by automakers
The Scale of Canada-US Trade Dependence
Exam Alert
No country is as dependent on trade with a single partner as Canada is with the US.
Key statistics:
- Over 70% of all Canadian exports of goods and services go to the US
- These exports account for approximately 20–25% of Canada’s GDP
- About 50–60% of Canada’s total imports come from the US
- The US is the largest source of foreign direct investment (FDI) in Canada, accounting for about half of all Canadian FDI
Since the FTA took effect in 1989, the real value of Canada-US trade has more than tripled.
This relationship is very important for the US, but it is vital for Canada.
Canadian Leverage
Despite asymmetry, Canada does have some leverage:
- Major source of foreign imports for over 30 of 50 US states
- Destination for over half the value of all US automotive exports
- For many years, single largest foreign supplier of energy to the US
Scenarios illustrating asymmetry:
- Ending Alberta petroleum exports to US → ~4% drop in Canada’s GDP, but only ~8% of US petroleum supply
- US border closed to Canadian automotive parts/vehicles → 10% loss of Ontario’s GDP, but <1% impact on overall US economy
History of Free Trade
- Third Option (1972): Canada’s official policy to reduce reliance on US trade — not effective
- Growing American protectionism in the 1980s added urgency to pro-free trade advocates
- 1989: Canada-US Free Trade Agreement (FTA) takes effect
- 1994: North American Free Trade Agreement (NAFTA) takes effect
- NAFTA created dispute settlement rules, agencies, and monitoring requirements
- After Trump’s 2016 election, NAFTA was reopened → replaced by CUSMA (Canada-United States-Mexico Agreement)
- Major change for Canada: greater American agricultural access to Canadian market in supply management sectors (dairy, poultry, eggs)
The Challenge of Getting Attention
Allan Gotlieb (Canada's Ambassador to the US, 1981–1989)
“In the US political system, a foreign country is just another special interest — but an interest that cannot contribute to election campaigns or deliver votes.”
Canada’s challenge is not earning goodwill in the US, but simply getting Americans’ attention.
Integration and Independence: Finding the Right Balance
Reinforcing Structures of Integration
Canada’s asymmetrical relationship with the US has been deepened by:
- FTA, NAFTA/CUSMA
- Auto Pact
- Canada-US Defence Production Agreement
- Other bilateral agreements
These leave Canada with little room to maneuver.
Strategy: Seeking Counterweights
Most Canadian governments respond by seeking counterweights to US dominance, primarily through multilateralism.
Multilateralism
The resolution of international differences through processes representing many states and giving them all a voice (though not necessarily an equal voice) in decision-making.
Canada actively participates in:
- UN, NATO, World Bank, OECD, WTO, OAS, the Commonwealth, la Francophonie
Common Mistake
Some of these multilateral institutions are arguably dominated by the US, so multilateralism does not necessarily dilute American influence.
Limits to Independence from US Foreign Policy
There are always limits to how far Canada can depart from US foreign policy:
- 2003: Canada refused to support the Iraq War → did not damage US security interests (acceptable divergence)
- 2004: Canada rejected participation in the American-led missile defense system → no noticeable costs
Post-9/11 Constraints
After 9/11, the extent to which Canada could differ from the US narrowed significantly:
- US policy responses transformed border security, air travel, and immigration — all directly affecting Canada
- With ~CAN$3.5 billion/day in trade crossing the border, Canada had little choice but to co-ordinate policies with the US
Engagement in the World: Canada in Comparative Perspective
Commitment to Development Index (2025)
The Center for Global Development ranks wealthy democracies on their “dedication to policies that benefit people living in poorer regions.”
Canada ranked 8th out of 40 countries overall. Breakdown by dimension:
| Dimension | Canada’s Rank | Notes |
|---|---|---|
| Investment | 3rd | Important source of funding in developing countries |
| Technology | 4th | Innovation, R&D, and availability; also 6th for tech availability |
| Migration | 8th | Participation in migration conventions, refugee receptiveness |
| Finance | 12th | Investment in less developed countries |
| Trade | 12th | |
| Security | 16th | Peacekeeping contributions, arms exports to poor/undemocratic countries |
| Health | 17th | Public health measures with development consequences |
| Environment | 34th | Climate change, sustainable fisheries, biodiversity — very poor ranking |
Exam Alert
Canada’s worst ranking is in Environment (34th), reflecting poor performance on climate change, fisheries, and biodiversity policies.
Migration and Openness
- Canada sees itself as very accepting of people from other countries
- During the 2015–17 migration crisis, Canada had just over 90,000 asylum claims
- Germany: ~1.3 million; France: 250,000; Italy: 330,000; Sweden (1/3 Canada’s population): 200,000
- Canada accepted far fewer in absolute and relative terms
- Main immigration sources for past several decades: developing world countries
- Most enter via the points system or temporary student visas (~798,000 as of 2024)
- Canada is among the world’s most open countries toward foreign students, who largely come from less developed countries
- The movement of people is an aspect of soft power — contributes to mutual understanding
Canada’s Military Footprint
Exam Alert
Canada’s military and peacekeeping presence in the world is significantly smaller today than it was during the Cold War era.
- UN peacekeeping: from ~3,000 Canadian peacekeepers at any point during 1960s–1980s → to almost five dozen today
- Most recent military engagements have been through NATO membership:
- 1991 Gulf War
- 1991 former Yugoslavia (Balkans)
- 1999 Serbia and Kosovo (not sanctioned by UN Security Council)
- Afghanistan: Canadian involvement 2001–2014
- 2011 mission against Libya
- US-led coalition against Islamic State in Iraq and Syria → became NATO mission in 2017
Remember
All of these military interventions were sanctioned by the UN Security Council, except the 1999 bombing campaign against Serbia.
The Military Spending Debate
- Some lament Canada’s shrinking military; others argue geopolitics and national security challenges don’t warrant a more robust military
- Arctic sovereignty: Canada claims Arctic territory and waters, but cannot realistically defend them militarily
- Canada’s Arctic claims are challenged to varying degrees by Russia, China, the US, Norway, and Denmark
- Canada has the 14th largest defense budget in the world, but it represents only about 0.02% of the combined budgets of the US and China
The “client state” question:
- In 2017, then Foreign Affairs Minister Chrystia Freeland argued Canada needed to spend more on defense: “to rely solely on the US security umbrella would make us a client state”
- Realistically, Canada has arguably already been a security client state for decades — whether or not Canadians recognize this
- In 2026, Canada achieved the NATO 2% of GDP defense spending benchmark
Exam Alert
The tension between Canada wanting an independent foreign policy and being economically/militarily dependent on the US is the central theme of this chapter. The “client state” problem applies to both trade (CUSMA) and security (NATO/NORAD).
Definitions
Soft Power The influence derived from the attractiveness of a nation’s values, culture, and institutions — not through coercion or military force.
Hard Power The use of military capacity and economic sanctions to protect national security and advance national interests.
Multilateralism The resolution of international differences through processes representing many states and giving them all a voice (though not necessarily equal) in decision-making.
Nationalism (in foreign policy) The view that Canada should prioritize political sovereignty, cultural distinctiveness, and economic independence over integration with the US.
Continentalism The view that Canada’s interests are best served through close economic and security integration with the United States.
CUSMA (Canada-United States-Mexico Agreement) The successor to NAFTA, negotiated after Trump’s 2016 election; key change for Canada was greater American agricultural access to supply management sectors.
KOF Globalization Index An index produced by the Swiss Federal Institute of Technology measuring countries’ economic, social, and political globalization.
Commitment to Development Index An annual index produced by the Center for Global Development measuring wealthy democracies’ dedication to policies benefiting people in poorer regions; Canada ranked 8th in 2025.
Third Option (1972) Canada’s official policy to reduce reliance on US trade and investment — ultimately not effective, contributing to the push for the FTA in 1989.
Foreign Direct Investment (FDI) Investment made by a company or individual in one country into business interests in another country.