● Introduction
● Political Geography
● From Junior Partner to Middle Power
● Canada's Military Commitments
● Canadian-American Relations
● Overseas Development Programs

Canada's Military Commitments

As Canada's longest—serving Prime Minister, MacKenzie King (in power from 1921-1930, and then from 1935-1948), once said during a

Prime Minister Mackenzie King at a Post-War Conference in Paris, 1946, Presenting Canada's Peacetime Hopes to European Diplomats

parliamentary debate on the military: "The Minister says this expenditure is needed for the defence of Canada—defence against whom? There is no answer." Canada may be indefensible, but it is also practically invulnerable because of its political geography.

The United States could not and would not tolerate a radical change in the country it shares a long, undefended border with. There exists what is referred to as Canada's "involuntary military guarantee": on the one hand, the US would protect Canada in the event of an emergency because, for example, if Canada suffered an invasion, American security would also be threatened. On the other hand, the US might take actions to "save" Canada, even if Canada did not want such assistance—for the sake of argument, it has been pointed out that if Canada had become a socialist country, the US would use force if necessary to overthrow a government it considered "hostile" to its interests.

Chinese President Jiang Zemin met Canadian Prime Minister Jean Chretien

But the very existence of such a guarantee gives Canada a degree of freedom to follow its own independent foreign policy agenda. If the Canadian government chooses to defy the United States on foreign affairs issues, it can, because in the long run, both sides know their security is interdependent. Thus, for example, Canada pushed for the international recognition of the People's Republic of China when the US opposed it in 1969. At the time, Lester Pearson argued that such recognition was not a "reward" for good behaviour—that is, behaviour the US felt was acceptable—but the right of all legitimate states. Canada recognized China in 1969.

Aware that it would be difficult for Canadians to protect themselves militarily, Canadian policy-makers have relied upon contributing to military alliances. The North Atlantic Treaty Organization has been the cornerstone of Canada's security policy. However, compared to its allies, Canada's military spending is very low. In the 1960s, the government decided the country should concentrate its wealth on building up the economy and constructing a welfare state to benefit its citizens. It decided that military spending would divert money away from these projects, and that these things were more important to improving the quality of life of Canadians. For this reason, Canada has often been criticized by its allies for being a "free rider." Although Canada benefits from being a member of NATO, it does not contribute as much as the other members to NATO strength.

On average, the NATO countries spend 3.8 per cent of their gross national product (GNP) on their military commitments; less than two per cent of Canada's GNP, however, goes to military expenditure. There is therefore a big gap between Canada' overseas commitments and its military capabilities, but neither the government nor the population, mind very much when they are criticized for not being very militaristic. For example, although Canada has the ability to develop nuclear weapons, it has always refused to do so. Instead, it is a staunch supporter of arms control efforts and nuclear technology for peaceful civilian uses only.

Previous Page        Next Page