Consensus and Ambiguities

For the purpose of examining what relations could be between a sovereign Quebec and the United States, we were asked to stay away from considerations on the desirability of Quebec independence, its probability, and the factors that might bring it about. Most contributions to this special issue have observed this rule and offered little perspective on the processes leading to the realization of this hypothetical situation. While I fully agree that it was not at all commendable to politicize our debate, I submit that envisaging a sovereign Quebec without factoring in the elements leading to such an outcome may remain an incomplete exercise. This is why I consider it important to state (or restate), at the outset of my remarks, a few propositions that I regard as fundamental in the Quebec equation. First, as Francois Crepeau has phrased it, Quebeckers would go reluctantly to sovereignty. Had their politicians been wiser, Quebec and Canada would never separate. It is, in fact, obvious that a great majority of Quebeckers much prefer federalism to independence. Public opinion polls have consistently revealed that a reformed federalism is the favorite option among the Quebec population. The most compelling argument in favor of sovereignty is the failure of Canadian federalism to make room for a Quebec people or distinct society. Second, if ever a referendum on sovereignty registers a victory for the Yes, in all likelihood it will be (unless important changes take place) on a question including a desired association, partnership, or union with the rest of Canada. Such a question might well be considered ambiguous and illegitimate by the federal government and by Canadians outside Quebec. But for most people in Quebec, this is the only valid way of approaching sovereignty. For most Quebeckers it is vital to avoid any sign of isolationism and, ironically (given the frequent use of the word separatism), any indication of a unilateral will to separate from Canada and, even, from North America. A successful referendum, therefore, cannot but be followed by negotiations with the federal government of Canada and/or other provincial officials on the terms of a new Canadian union at best or, at worst, the terms of an acceptable secession. This third point rules out any immediate unilateral declaration of independence (UDI) on the part of Quebec. There would most probably be a lengthy period of transition that might even offer the possibility of constitutional reforms instead of formal sovereignty for Quebec, especially in the case of a narrow victory of the Yes. If the United States were to play a role during this period, it would undoubtedly be a crucial one. Obviously, given such a process, the recognition of an eventually sovereign Quebec would be cautiously avoided by the United States and probably by all other countries, including France, until the end of the process. Fourth, in the event of the total failure of these negotiations, there could be a UDI on the part of Quebec. Should Lucien Bouchard still be in charge, given his propensity toward negotiation and compromise, this most probably would not come before two or three years. In such an event, if ever the government of Canada would still want to force Quebec into the federation, the case for UDI might be better defended under international law. If these four propositions make sense, one cannot envisage the problems related to Quebec sovereignty without reading their origins in an eventual transition period between a successful referendum and the declaration of independence. This should affect our understanding of U.S. policies toward Quebec before and after a hypothetical sovereignty. Before taking a look at these policies, I will make a couple of points on Quebec's stance vis-a-vis the United States and briefly review what has been the object of consensus among most of the authors of this study. A Sovereign Quebec and the United States Louis Belanger is right in stressing how ill-prepared Quebec is in facing its giant neighbor as a sovereign actor

Federalism · Law and economics · Political economy · Political science · Politics · Popular sovereignty · Population · Referendum · Sociology · Sovereignty · Canadian Identity and History · Law · Political Systems and Governance · Social Policies and Family

• An independent Quebec

  David T Jones•The Washington Quarterly•1997

  Add to list

• The politics of conflict prevention in Russia and the near abroad

  Gennady I Chufrin, Harold H Saunders•The Washington Quarterly•1997

  Add to list