An Independent Foreign Policy for Canada? ed. by Stephen Clarkson (review)

424 TI4_E CANADIAN I-IISTORICAL REVIEW memorandum by Borden(15 June1918) describing howhe calledSir Arthur Currieto Londonand how the CorpsCommander, clearlystill full of bitter memories of Passchendaele, poured outanindictment of British military leadership . Thereareextracts fromtherecords of theImperial Defence Conference of 1909concerning theparticipation of SirFrederick Borden, andfromthose of the Committee of ImperialDefence in 1912setting outSirRobert Borden's viewof whata "national spirit" woulddemand in futurein thewayof a voice in foreign policy; representation onthecm,hebroadly hinted, wouldhardly meettheneeds. Thereareglimpses of the difficult ddbuts of a "self-governing colony" in diplomacy ,notablythe reports of the "Canadian delegate" (Joseph Pope) fromthe pelagic sealing conference in Washington in 1911.Therearedocuments concerningthemission of theyoungMackenzie Kingto IndiaandChinain 1909.One could goonatlength. Theprofessional historian willhavesome reservations about thebook invarious matters of detail.Notably,thereis absolutely no information, eithergeneral or particular, abouttheprovenance of thedocuments. Oneassumes thattheyareall in the filesof theDepartment of External Affairs, butwe arenottoldeventhis. Sometimes onewouldwelcome moreinformation aboutparticular sources, such asthose oftheimportant footnote onpage309concerning theorigins ofResolution IX of theImperial War Conference, 1917.Although it isstated that"theselection of documents for theseries hasbeenmadeby professional historians working in coniunction with successive Departmental editors," thepeo le concerned arenot P named(the onlynameonthebookis thatof Mr. PaulMartin).Thereisonly gossip to tellonethatthemainspring of theproiect through theearlystages was Mr. G. P. deT. Glazebrook. Surely thisiscarrying ourhonoured British heritage of the anonymity of the civil service a bit far. Muchefforthasclearlybeen devoted to a detailed anduseful "analytical index," butoneregrets thecomparativeexiguousness of thetableof contents. Subdivision by topics could usefully havegone further;thusunder"Boundary Questions" a document onthefunctioning of the International JointCommission stands nextto oneon the Labrador dispute with Newfoundland simplybecause of the accident of date.Thereare fewelisions in documents of moderate length, butwhereelisions havebeenmade andcanbechecked theyareoccasionally difficult toaccount for (a case inpoint isDocument 404onpages 279-81,animportant paper onBorden's naval policy). These arequasi-technical points. ThevitalmatteristhattheHistorical Division oftheDepartment ofExternal Affairs hasembarked ona proiect ofthegreatest significance for Canadian historical scholarship and the intelligent studyof Canadian external policies. Andit isveryessential nowthatthedepartment and thegovernment atlarge should give theproiect much more generous support than it hasenjoyed heretofore, sothatit canmove forward atproper speed. Weneed more volumes ofthissort, andweshould nothave toendure thelapse ofyears beforewe getthem. C. P. STACI•Y University of Toronto An Independent Foreign Policy for Canada? Editedby STEPItEN CLARKSON. Toronto: McClelland andStewart fortheUniversity League forSocial Reform. 1968.Pp.xiv,290.$4.95paper. liftTI-t•]PAST TWO YEAItS thetwosacred clich•s of the Canadian public, the United Nations and theCommonwealth, have shown convincingly their powerless- •EVmWS 425 ness in thelivingrooms of thenation. Thehousewife whowatched thecynical wranglings oftheSecurity Council debates ontheMiddleEastorthefratricidal carnage in Nigeriawaspredictably aghast. The shock valueof these belated realizations cuts twoways. Clearly theUniversity League forSocial Reform looks uponan enlightened publicasthecrucial element for forging anindependent foreign policy for Canada. Thetwenty-five authors of thenineteen chapters are nothing lessthancosmic in theirviewof Canada's futureinfluence in world politics. Buttheunderlying assumption thatthegrubby, distasteful business of compromising interests (whichiswhatpolitics is all about)canstrikea fancy in thegeneral publicis alsonothing short of heroic. Growing familiarity is as likelytobreed contempt asenthusiasm-a contempt notmuch dissimilar fromthe sanctimonious isolationism of theinterwaryears. The coreof thebookisto establish a difference between thequietdiplomacy of affiliation andits opposite, the sometimes squeaky diplomacy of independence, theformerbeingthe preserve of the professional, the latter,sofar, largelythe prerogative of the academicß Whetherthe academic will be ableto carrythe publiconcethe message is out that quietdiplomacy is a secret, pusillanimous boredepends ultimately asmuchonthenatureofthepublicastheintrinsic worth of thepolicies offered by thetmsR. ThusonemusttakeAn Independent Foreign Policyl•orCanada? aslargelya pamphlet de guerre,exhorting the formerand overstating the case for thelatter.Publicaside, since policychoices arelargelya question of present styleandemphasis (andonlyposthumously, ff ever,a matter of empirical proof),whatcounts arethe assumptions aboutthe natureof international society andstatecraft. Thoseof the trLSR arecontrasted sideby sidein Mr Clarkson's conclusion undertheheadings of quietap roachandindependent ß p approachAs formulated, the inde endentapproach wins handsdown-few ß p wouldsubscribe to thedegree of sycophancy towards the UnitedStates implied in the quietapproach-and onewouldcertainly be surprised ff Professors Lyon andyonRiekhoff, the two strongest exponents of quietdiplomacy in the book, agreed withthatformulation of theirviews.It isthusworthbearing in mindthat thepolicies heredubbed independent arenotaltogether foreign totheEastBlock andthatthepolicies described asquietarenotaltogether operationalß The authors dealing with the dangers of the American liaison all agreesome extra-territorial duress is inevitablegivenour geographical beationand close economic links.Those in whomthese factsinduce caution (Professor Lyonand MissJewett)areasrightasthose (Professors...