bout de papier, Vol. 12, No. 4 (1995-1996) — Winter 1995–96 // Hiver 1995-1996, pp. 6–7
Twenty years defining Canadian Foreign Policy through the public record.
To document the evolution of Canadian foreign policy over a 50-year span is, to paraphrase the great French botanist, Buffon, une longue patience. Fortunately, the long process is illuminated by shafts of light and creativity; indeed at times of controversy, which can make things more interesting.
The Carleton University Press documentary series entitled Canadian Foreign Policy now comprises four volumes going back to 1945. The series was launched by Dr. R.A. MacKay, a prominent Maritime academic and author on Canadian foreign affairs, who joined the Department of External Affairs during the Second World War and eventually reached its highest ranks. When he retired, he returned to teaching and spent several years at Carleton University lecturing on international affairs. It was then that he produced the first volume in the series. It covered the years between 1945 and 1954 inclusive.
When his eyesight began to fail, he suggested that I take over the series; I was then Director of the Department’s Historical Division. Both the Department and Carleton University agreed and, since 1974, I have produced the last three books in the series covering the period between 1955 and 1993. The first one (1955-1965) was started while I was in Ottawa and finished while I was on posting at the OAS in Washington, DC. The second (1966-1976) was begun in Washington and largely finished there, although it was published when I was in Tunis. The third one, dealing with events since 1977, was issued by the Carleton University Press during the fall of 1994.
The initial document selection guidelines were laid down by Dr. MacKay and generally I followed them. All documents should stress policy and be in the public domain. With departmental cooperation, I was able to have a number of important documents declassified and I must say here that the Department was extremely supportive of the project over the years. Dr. MacKay also specified that documents should be from official and not private sources, with preference given to statements and speeches by ministers rather than officials. Nevertheless, when I found a particularly good statement of government policy by an official I did not hesitate to use it. After all, most ministerial speeches and documents are drafted by officials and the department has produced some outstanding speech-writers over the years, who perforce have had to remain anonymous. Likewise, I did not hesitate to use important or well-crafted press releases. With the advent of formal government foreign and defence policy reviews, white papers, etc., I decided that they too should be included. I considered that statements and speeches delivered in French should so remain, partly to avoid misinterpretations in translations, but also to reflect the linguistic duality of the country. Whenever possible, I tried to show the evolution of a particular policy or problem from its outset to its resolution.
The most challenging aspect of the work is the sheer volume of paper involved and the resulting amount of reading it implies. It entails not only a careful study of the evolution of Canadian foreign policy during the periods under review of course, but especially the examination of thousands, yes! thousands, of Statements and Speeches, Press Releases, Treaties, Green Papers, White Papers, Defence Reviews, Foreign Policy Reviews, and related documents, which have accompanied the ebb and flow of our foreign policy over the years. With so many documents to review, if ever there was an embarras de richesses, this is it. Months of reading and culling were required to produce volumes intelligible in content, manageable in size, and economically-viable to produce. Economics and money have their influence not only on the evolution of Canadian foreign policy, but also on books about it as well!
In terms of the final product, the ratio of documents photocopied and studied to those finally selected was roughly 10 to one. On certain complex subjects or those covering a long time frame, the ratio was a good deal higher. Because of space considerations, very few documents could be printed intact; careful pruning was thus required, therefore adding to the laboriousness of the task.
One conclusion that I reached early on in my work is that a careful study of public sources, the public record, can provide a very clear picture of the evolution of Canadian foreign policy. Secrecy concerns the negotiations mainly, the personalities at play, the details, the fine points. Indeed, the public record often gives hints, clues, about the various negotiating positions involved. At times, it even states them. This should not be taken to mean that confidentiality is not necessary in diplomacy. To the contrary, but it can be overblown at times. In a democracy, the end product will invariably become public at some point.
Another conclusion concerns the growing volume of paper involved, which has become increasingly heavy over the years, especially since 1980. Indeed, today the flow has become a flood and in terms of days gone by — when Canada’s influence in world affairs was more pronounced than now — one cannot escape the impression that perhaps noise and busy-ness have on occasion replaced creativity and substance in the foreign policy process.
The most interesting parts of the work were the editorial introductions and comments, the links between chapters and subjects, required to make the documentary flow smoother and, hopefully, more intelligible. These were personal and consequently tend to be etched more sharply in my mind
Also, while these books do not lend themselves to merriment, I did try to include humourous anecdotes in the text whenever possible, such as Prime Minister Pearson’s quip about the offensiveness or defensiveness of weapons depending essentially on whether one was in front of them or behind them; or Secretary of State Acheson’s remark that reorganizing the State Department was like performing an appendectomy on a man carrying a piano up a flight of stairs.
It is of course impossible to read so many ministerial speeches without forming some personal impressions, opinions, about the speakers concerned as seen through their statements.
There is one trait that characterizes all of them. Our prime ministers and ministers, when dealing with international affairs, were all circumfluent, circumlocutory, and circumspect. Some were more so than others, but all were careful. Flaming rhetoric is not a feature of Canadian diplomacy.
The late John Bird, an outstanding Canadian newspaperman, was a bird-watcher. Once a year, he would review the performance of the cabinet ministers as if they were a flock of birds and his annual accounts would appear in the press across Canada. Some of his characterizations were not only colourful and witty, but also very apt, e.g., the purple-prose Martin, the Hellyer shrike, the Trudeau kingbird (tyrannus tyrannus)!
The most prolix of our ministers was undeniably Paul Martin; the least were Howard Green and Senator MacEachen. The most didactic were Prime Ministers St. Laurent and Trudeau, also SSEA Barbara McDougall. The most scholarly, particularly on the legal side, was Dr. MacGuigan. Possibly the toughest was C.D. Howe. Perhaps the most emotional was John Diefenbaker, although Howard Green had extremely deep feelings about disarmament. It became a cause and, indeed, in retrospect it is clear that — despite the ridicule he faced at the time — he was a prophet. Some saw the influence of his remarkable wife, a scientist, in his crusade. The ones with the best sense of humour were Prime Ministers Pearson and Clark, also Trade Minister Pépin, who could at times poke fun at themselves: a rare and endearing trait among politicians. The most grave was Donald Fleming and the most dashing, George Hees. The most sincere was Flora MacDonald; and the most approachable, Mitchell Sharp.
On the provincial side, because it is no longer possible to conduct Canadian foreign policy without the provinces since so many subjects under their constitutional jurisdiction are now involved, the provincial input in the books increased over the years. The provinces are not a feature of Dr. MacKay’s volume. However, by the time of my first one, Alberta, British Columbia, Ontario and Quebec had become leading players.
Among the provincial premiers, the shrewdest and possibly toughest was Premier Lougheed of Alberta; the most elegant, Jean Lesage. Possibly the most stubborn was W.A.C. Bennett of British Columbia. Certainly the most passionate was René Levesque and the most sphinx-like, Robert Bourassa. Although not a provincial player as such, the most daring by far was General de Gaulle.
I might conclude by a brief reference to the Department of Foreign Affairs’ impressive series: Documents on Canadian External Relations. This is a massive, remarkable, work of scholarship designed “to constitute the basic published record of the foreign policy and international relations of the Government of Canada … and, also, to provide a comprehensive self-contained record of the major foreign policy decisions taken by the Government, and of the reasons for taking them.” Its purpose and guidelines are therefore somewhat different from those of the Carleton University Press collection, but both are designed — each in a different way — to make Canadian foreign policy better known.
All in all I worked on and off, on my own time, for nearly 10 years on these books. I can say, without any hesitation whatsoever, that I learned far more about certain aspects of Canadian foreign policy than I really cared to know!
View the original scanned pages →
Originally published in bout de papier, Vol. 12, No. 4 (1995-1996) — Winter 1995–96 // Hiver 1995-1996, pp. 6–7. Read the rest of this issue →
