Canada is America's neighbour in a world where global power is shifting.

Future Directions

Deciding how best to proceed is not simply about finding the technically correct solution. Decision-making in democracies is far more complex, involving beliefs, values, and assumptions. This section presents three broad, value-based approaches to the Rising Powers issue as a starting point - food for thought. In addition to a brief overview of each approach, some arguments for and against the approaches are sketched out to help show different perspectives.

These approaches are not comprehensive, definitive, or mutually exclusive. They are meant to stimulate your thinking - they are window frames that reveal a few perspectives held by different elements of Canadian society. You are not being asked to pick one approach, nor should you limit your thinking to what's on the page.

Approach One

Strengthen Canada's relationship with the United States. 

This approach would have Canada strengthen its existing economic and political relationship with the United States. Canada would work closely with the United States to enhance its North American integrated security alliance. Canada would consolidate its role as the most trusted ally of the US. Under this approach, Canada-US cooperation on trade issues, international policy, and the promotion of democratic norms takes a front seat. Relations with Asian countries would not be ignored, but would not take centre stage in our international policy agenda.

Key actions would include: address trade irritants under the North American Free Trade Agreement (NAFTA) so as to pursue deeper economic integration: renew Canada's commitment to military cooperation endeavours, such as anti-ballistic missile defence, a North American security perimeter, NORAD, and the US's engagements abroad; and increase Canadian trade and diplomatic presence in key US urban centres. Canadian economic and political relations with the rest of the world would be assessed in light of their impact on our relationship with the United States.

Arguments in favour

√ Canada's relationship with the United States has deep roots. We understand each other and share relatively similar cultures, norms, and values, and increasingly our populations move back and forth for education and work. It is only natural that our neighbour, with whom we share an unprotected border and so much more, would also be our most important partner. Canada does not share as much with other rising powers, such as China, India, and Russia.

√ Canada can employ its relationship with the United States to better leverage its assets in the international community, using our strong alliance with the world's remaining superpower as a point of influence in multilateral and bilateral settings. At home on the North American continent, this relationship would also help protect Canadians against terrorist and other security threats.

√ Emphasizing strengthened relations with the US is not just good politics, it is also good economics. To do otherwise might alienate our southern neighbour and possibly jeopardize our large, mutually-beneficial economic relationship. A North American economic bloc would help protect Canada against unfair imports from developing economies while leveraging its strengths internationally.

Arguments against

× Canada's economy is too concentrated on the US. With over 80% of our exports going to the US, we are left too vulnerable to downturns in the American economy and unpredictable US trade policy. A potential US recession, more talk of protectionism in the US, and ongoing border restrictions pose serious threats to our economy.

× The Canada-US relationship is highly unequal - the US is in a much stronger political and economic position. Our stance on international and military issues is more aligned with like-minded countries in Western Europe. Without abandoning our economic interests with the US, we should separate our political interests and values from our economic needs. As a sovereign country, we need to protect our ability to chart our own course on international affairs.

× Canada may miss out on economic, cultural, and political opportunities with rising powers, particularly China, if it allies itself too closely with the US. Under such circumstances, Canada will likely not be seen as impartial by the international community, and rising powers such as China and Russia may be reticent to cooperate with Canada on trade or security issues.

Questions

1. What role, if any, could Canada play in helping the United States to gain greater perspective on how to balance economic and political interests in a changing world?

2. What are some possible consequences (positive and negative) of closer alignment with the United States?

3. How can Canada best position itself in an integrating, globalizing world while remaining focused on North America (or can it)?

Approach Two

Emphasize multilateralism while moving carefully to diversify Canada's trade.

Canada would focus on its work with multilateral institutions and partnerships to advance its political and economic interests. This approach emphasizes Canada's position as a Middle Power that has moral authority. Canada would maximize its international "punch" by cooperating with states that share similar interests. By pursuing progressive domestic policies at home and leading and supporting international initiatives that emphasize sustainable development, human security, democratization, and economic and political liberalization abroad, Canada would set an example for the world. While maintaining cordial relations with the US, Canada would deepen and broaden relations rising powers, and encourage them to follow international norms and cooperate on democratic development issues.

Key actions would include: establish stronger diplomatic links and economic relations with states or blocs of states such as the EU, India, Japan, South Korea, and Taiwan while taking care to not ignore or neglect its relations with the US; pursue trade, investment, and political cooperation with countries such as China, North Korea, and Myanmar primarily through multilateral institutions with a view of promoting political liberalization in these countries. Canadian policy on foreign investment would prevent the sale and control of key Canadian assets to investors funded or controlled by interests that flout democratic values and do not respect human rights and the rule of law.

Arguments in favour

√ This approach does not focus exclusively on North America, and would mean that Canada would have greater freedom to act in congruence with the expressed interests of Canadian citizens when the interests of the US and Canada diverge.

√ Canada's good track record on international multilateral initiatives that promote democratic values (the Ottawa Treaty, peacekeeping operations, R2P, and NATO) positions it well. Canada can leverage its assets and expertise to diversify its trade and help spread democracy, the rule of law, and global markets.

√ Without an abrupt change in policy, Canada can carefully diversify its trade and investments portfolio through increasing interactions with other democratic states and non-democratic states such as China. This course would reduce US backlash and fallout.

Arguments against

× Such an expansion of the scope of our international policy would be costly, and is unlikely to produce tangible benefits to Canadians. We tried it before under Trudeau and did not succeed.

× Canada may miss out on economic, cultural, and political opportunities with non-democratic states, such as Russia and China, because it has focused on democracies. This may in turn prevent otherwise mutually-beneficial relationships from developing and stunt Canada's impact in non-democratic countries.

× Canada may find itself less able to play a lead role in a post-9/11 international community where the traditional avenues of multilateralism are changing or in need of reform.

Questions

1. Is Canada actually a Middle Power, and what does "Middle Power" mean in the 21st century? Is the concept of a Middle Power still relevant in the 21st century?

2. What does a values-based international policy mean - is it realistic? How will it protect Canadian economic interests?

3. Using Approach 2, how can Canada best position itself in a globalizing, decentralizing world, and remain economically competitive?

4. To what extent should Canada continue to support multilateral institutions such as the UN? Should Canada now be proposing alternatives or reforms?

Approach Three

Emphasize stronger economic and political relationships with China and other emerging powers.

This approach places the greatest emphasis on strengthening Canada's economic security and political interests and reducing dependence on a single market. Canada would strategically manage its assets - through the private sector and/or government - so that future economic relationships best benefit Canadians and lessen Canada's economic reliance on US markets. This approach means that Canada would not take the lead role in forging political partnerships with specific sets of countries but rather would emphasize international policies that maximize economic gain. This approach sees Canada playing a potential role as a resource "superpower" in a world badly in need of our assets.

Key actions would include: actively pursuing trade agreements with Asian countries, in particular China and India, and other rising powers (e.g. Brazil, Russia); supporting their participation in international organizations and agreements without imposing difficult conditions; and increasing Canada's diplomatic presence in Asian countries. Canada would work through backchannels, rather than through public arenas, to influence change on human rights transgressions.

Arguments in favour

√ The world is changing: US economic and political power is on the wane. Canada needs to protect itself and reduce its vulnerability. Realigning at least some of our assets and interests with the new rising powers only makes good economic sense. Even small slowdowns in Canadian goods processing at the US border - where some 80% of our exports go - could create major downturns in our economy.

√ Canada is not a major player in international policy and its foreign policy stances have limited effect. Our greatest assets are economic, especially given the energy-hungry globe. Canada is best placed to play to this strength, and can use its economic influence to promote market liberalization abroad, take an indirect approach to democratic development, and also serve its own economic interests at home.

√ Increasing economic and diplomatic relations with Asian countries like China and India is an effective way to encourage political liberalization and gradual democratization. Greater exposure to democratic societies and growing social and economic ties can do more to change the mindset of a people than does public criticism of human rights abuses. Greater trade with China and developing democracies will provide opportunities for Canadian businesses and individuals to influence change through non-political channels.

Arguments against

× Increasing economic ties with non-democratic states while ignoring their human rights records offers poor prospects for real change in those countries. The West has been ramping up economic relations with China for decades now and democracy is no closer.

× By pursuing a more economically-driven approach to international affairs and trade, Canada might alienate the US and lose trade. Moreover, we would be risking our relationship with our closest ally, with whom we share history, democratic values, geography, and an important defence relationship.

× How can Canada hope to play an effective role in determining international law and norms, developing international institutions, and proposing rule-based treaties that reflect respect for human rights while at the same time making economics our first priority? Canada could lose stature and credibility on the world stage and this would hurt our long-term interests.

Questions

1. In what ways is Canada's relationship with the United States an asset? A vulnerability? Both?

2. What opportunity does Canada have to use its resource riches to strengthen its relationship with the United States?

3. Where does Canada's responsibility for climate change fit into trade and investment policy?

4. What impact would Canada assuming the role of a "resource superpower" have on Canada's soft-power or Middle Power international profile?

5. What are the potential costs of cooling relations with the US and what are the potential gains of warming relations with China?

Conclusion

2008 is a good time to reexamine Canada's relations with the United States and rising powers. The results of the US presidential election may bring a major shift in US international policy, particularly towards Asia. And the Beijing Olympic Games will certainly put China - already in the spotlight - under even closer scrutiny. Continuing debate around Canada's mission in southern Afghanistan, slated to end in 2009, will also give Canadians further reason to consider their future international obligations.

Canadians - that's you. What do you think? The approaches provided above offer some different perspectives, but are by no means exhaustive. They're a starting point - a point from which you can ask questions, consider options, and develop your own views. How should Canada position itself in a decentralizing world? How is it already?

This issue, like any international policy issue, is complex. The variables and considerations are numerous and continuously changing. And key issues bring up many questions: Should Canada focus much more on rising powers in Asia and elsewhere - expanding gateways and immigration, and adapting international institutions and agreements to make way for more influential Asian powers? Can Canada join a new Asian institutional architecture from its current position? Should we instead refocus on North America, protect continental industries, and promote our values abroad from a secure North America and strong Canada-US relationship, or should Canada look to Europe and perhaps an Euro-Indian alliance?

Navigating the best course for Canada, even with the tools we have, involves imperfect knowledge of the waters ahead. What citizens are being asked to think about in our discussion is the mix of values, interests, and assets that you think Canada and Canadians should use to help us chart the course ahead. As a thought experiment, imagine that you are the Prime Minister or the Minister of Foreign Affairs. What ideas, insights, questions, and options would help guide your decision making?

Are you proud of Canada's role in relation to the rising powers? Concerned? Share your thoughts with us in our discussion forums.