Canada in a Unipolar World(?): New Directions in Canadian Foreign Policy

Click to increase image sizeClick to decrease image size

Notes

* This project was made possible through the financial and administrative support of Fulbright Canada, the Killam Fellowships Program, the State University of New York College at Plattsburgh, the Government of Canada, and the Canadian Foreign Policy Journal. In particular, we would like to thank David Carment and Kevin Arthur at the Journal, whose ongoing participation in this project reflected their role as full partners, and whose patience, good humour, and timely advice reflected a level of professionalism that is much appreciated. We would also like to thank Jean Labrie at DFAIT, Dan Abele at the Canadian Embassy in the United States, and Marta Moszczenka and Dan Kolundzic from the Canadian Consulate in Buffalo. We were very ably supported by Amy Sotherden at the Center for the Study of Canada and by Ava Kovats and Graeme Cunningham at Fulbright Canada. To be honest, they did much of the heavy lifting and deserve more credit than they get. And, most importantly, we are indebted to our various contributors, and not just the ones that made it into this volume. It is their ideas, their passion for their work, and their commitment to advance our understanding of Canadian foreign policy that makes all of this worthwhile.

Not all students of international politics agree on this point. For compelling arguments in favour of the stability of bipolarity, see Kenneth N. Waltz, “The stability of a bipolar world,” Daedalus, Volume 93, Summer 1964 and William Wohlforth, “The stability of a unipolar world,” International Security, Volume 24, Issue 2, 1999, pp. 5–41.

Much of the discussion of the concept of unipolarity can be traced to Charles Krauthammer's thought- provoking article in Foreign Affairs. See: Charles Krauthammer, “The unipolar moment”, Foreign Affairs, Volume 70, Number 1, America and the World 1990/91, 1990/1991, pp. 23–33.

There is a fairly strong argument to be made, especially on the economic front, that the rise of China is evidence that the unipolar moment is slipping away. There is also a more complicated, though inherently more interesting argument that ‘world public opinion’ constitutes a kind of second order superpower in that it has the capacity to offset or balance the relative influence of the United States.

See Kenneth N. Waltz, Theory of International Politics (New York: Random House, 1979) p. 131. The most important contribution to the theoretical and empirical consequences of unipolarity on foreign policy is a dedicated special issue of World Politics, Volume 61 No.1 January 2009.

Additional information

Notes on contributors

Michael Hawes

Michael Hawes is CEO of the Foundation for Educational Exchange between Canada and the United States of America, Executive Director of the Canada – US Fulbright Program, and Executive Director of the Killam Fellowships Program. He is a member of the Department of Political Studies (on leave) at Queen's University and an adjunct professor in the Queen's School of Business.

Christopher Kirkey

Christopher Kirkey is Director of the Center for the Study of Canada at State University of New York College at Plattsburgh, where he holds a concurrent position as full professor of political science. He holds an appointment as Adjunct Associate Professor at the School of International and Public Affairs, Columbia University.