A Middle-Power Military in Alliance
Canada and Norad
Bibliographic Data
| ID | 3917736 |
|---|---|
| Authors | Ann Denholm Crosby (York University, corresponding author) |
| Year | 1997 |
| Volume | 34 |
| Issue | 1 |
| Pages | 37-52 |
| Publication date | 1997-02-01 |
| Peer Reviewed | Yes |
| Open Access | Yes |
| Type | ARTICLE |
| Venue | Journal of Peace Research (JOURNAL) |
| Journal identifiers | ISSN: 0022-3433 • E-ISSN: 1460-3578 |
| Publisher | SAGE Publications Inc (PUBLISHER) |
| DOI | 10.1177/0022343397034001004 |
| OpenAlex | W2121326818 |
| Language | EN |
| Citations received | 6 |
| References cited | 18 |
In agreeing to accept US nuclear weapons in 1959, and to conditions which paved the way for its participation in US missile defence programmes in 1981, Canada reversed two of its firmly held defence policy positions. Both of these reversals were intimately linked to the dynamics of the North American Air, later Aerospace, Defence Agreement (NORAD) signed by Canada and the United States in 1958 to institutionalize the joint air defence of the continent. Traditional analyses of Canadian defence policy decision-making suggest that the policy reversals were the inevitable capitulations of a middle power to its alliance commitments and the exigencies of the international security environment. Reflecting a social construction understanding of power relations, this article argues that the `inevitability' of the capitulations resided instead in three specific dynamics; the nature of the political/military relationship in Canada, the phenomenon of Canadian military professionalism, and the transnational/transgovernmental nature of the Canadian/US cooperative military relationship. These three dynamics interacted to create a divergence of understandings between the Canadian political decision-makers and the military as to how best to pursue Canadian security interests, as well as the reasons and the means for the Canadian military to significantly shape Canadian defence policy. In essence, the three interacting dynamics were/are largely responsible for introducing an element of `unanticipated militarism' to the Canadian political decision-making environment
Alliance · Divergence (linguistics) · Foreign policy · International relations · International security · Middle power · Militarism · National security · Nuclear weapon · Political economy · Political science · Politics · Power (physics) · Sociology · Defense, Military, and Policy Studies · International Relations and Foreign Policy · Law · Military and Defense Studies
The South as a “Threat”? [Re]Assessing the Worth-South Dimensions of Canadian National Security
Another Mars–Venus divide? Why Australia said ‘yes’ and Canada said ‘non’ to involvement in the 2003 Iraq War
Canada's (In)dependence in the North American Security Community
Planning without guidance
Canada in the United Nations General Assembly from Trudeau to Trudeau
Macrosecuritization and the securitization dilemma in the Canadian Arctic
The politics of Canadian foreign policy
The Soldier and the State
Essence of Decision
Production, power and world order
Política entre las naciones
The Culture of Contentment
Canada and the United States
The Man on Horseback. The Role of the Military in Politics
The Joint Organizations of Canada and the United States
Changing the Guard
The Joint Organizations of Canada and the United States
An Analytical Assessment of the United States-Canadian Defense Issue Area
Anarchy is what states make of it
Bilateral Institutions and Transgovernmental Relations Between Canada and the United States
Introduction
Canada and the United States
| Unique citing works | 6 |
|---|---|
| Citations per year | 0,21 |
| Citation span | 1998 - 2020 (23) |
| Citation velocity | historical |
| Highly cited | No |
| Citation types | Neutral: 5 |