![Sample our Politics & International Relations journals, sign in here to start your FREE access for 14 days]({"type":"image" , "src" : "/sda/5947/TOC-Subject-Sample-2021-Politics-International-Relations.jpg"})
Abstract
This paper examines how and why in March 1995 certain elements of the Canadian government decided to take unilateral forceful action against foreign fishing off the Grand Banks and go against a long tradition of cooperation and multilateralism. In particular, it will address to what extent existing models of decision-making (in particular rational and bureaucratic models) adequately explain the process that went on in Ottawa at this time. The findings are that even though the bureaucratic politics model of decision-making can be used in a parliamentary structure like Canada, it is insufficient to explain Canadian decision-making processes during the Turbot War, and thus must be supplemented by a more inclusive cybernetic approach.
Resume
Cet article examinera comment et pourquoi en mars 1995 certains éléments du gouvernement canadien ont décidé de prendre une mesure unilatérale forcée contre la pêche étrangère outre les Grands Bancs, contre une longue tradition de coopération et de multilatéralisme. Il adressera en particulier dans quelle mesure les modèles existants de la prise de décision (surtout les modèles raisonnables et bureaucratiques) expliquent adéquament le processus qui a eu lieu à Ottawa lors de cette période. Les résultats sont que même si un modèle politique bureaucratique de la prise de décision peut être employé dans une structure parlementaire comme le Canada, ce modèle est insuffisant pour expliquer les processus décisionnels du Canada au cours de la guerre du flétan. Donc le modèle doit être complété par une approche cybernétique plus incluse.
Acknowledgements
The authors wish to thank Harald von Riekoff, Eddie Hyland and the Journal's anonymous referees for their comments and suggestions on earlier versions of this paper. They also thank Rodolphe Devillers and Krista Baker for their assistance with the map, and Ewha Womans University and Memorial University of Newfoundland for supporting their research projects.
Notes
1. Harris, Francis (2005) Canada flexes its muscles in dispute over Arctic wastes, The Daily Telegraph, 24 August.
2. Allison, Graham T. (1971) Essence of Decision: Explaining the Cuban Missile Crisis (Boston, MA: Little, Brown and Co.).
3. NAFO serves as a forum for international cooperation in scientific research, management and conservation of fish stocks. Each year its members meet to designate a Total Allowable Catch (TAC) and assign national quotas for each fish type. NAFO's rules are non-binding and members can file an objection at any time and set their own national quota.
4. Cooper, Andrew (1997) Canadian Foreign Policy: Old Habits and New Directions (Scarborough, Ontario: Prentice-Hall Canada), p. 151.
5. Ibid., pp. 146–166.
6. See generally, Mahan, A.T. (1890) Influence of Sea Power on History 1660-1783 (Boston, MA: Little, Brown and Company); Kemp, P. K (Ed.) (1964) The Papers of Admiral Sir John Fisher (London: Navy Records Society); Mackinder, Halford (1944 [1919]) Democratic Ideals and Reality (Pelican: Harmondsworth); and Heske, Henning (1987) Karl Haushofer: his role in German politics and in Nazi politics, Political Geography, 6(2) (April).
7. See generally Kid, Benjamin (1894) Social Evolution (London: Macmillan); von Bernhardi, Friedrich (1914) Germany and the Next War (London: Edward Arnold); von Treitschke, Heinrich (1916) Politics (New York: Macmillan); and Ratzel, Friedrich (1897) Politische Geographie (Munich and Leipzig: R. Oldenbourg).
8. Environment Canada (1992) Canada's National Report: United Nations Conference on Environment and Development, Brazil, June 1992 (Ottawa: Environment Canada).
9. Baybrooke. D. and Lindblom, C. (1969) Types of decision making, in James Rosenau (Ed.), International Politics and Foreign Policy: A Reader in Research and Theory (New York: The Free Press), p. 223.
10. Hilsman, R. (1969) Policy making is politics, in James Rosenau (Ed.), International Politics and Foreign Policy: A Reader in Research and Theory (New York: The Free Press), p. 233.
11. Melakopedes, C. (1998) Pragmatic Idealism: Canadian Foreign Policy 1945–1995 (Montreal: McGill-Queen's University Press).
12. Morgenthau, Hans (1985) Politics Among Nations: The Struggle for Power and Peace, 6th ed. (New York: Knopf). p. 6.
13. Snyder, R. C., Bruck, H. W. and Sapin, B. (Eds) (1962) Foreign Policy Decision Making (New York: The Free Press), p. 52.
14. Allison, Essence of Decision, p. 22.
15. Snyder et al., Foreign Policy Decision Making, p. 41.
16. Ibid., p. 156.
17. Allison, Essence of Decision, p. 67.
18. Ibid.
19. Ibid., p. 146.
20. McGrew, A. and Wilson, M. J. (1982) Decision Making (Manchester: Manchester University Press), p. 217.
21. Halperin, M. H. (1974) Bureaucratic Politics and Foreign Policy (Washington, DC: The Brookings Institution), p. 17.
22. Bueno de Mesquita, Bruce (1981) The War Trap (New Haven, CT: Yale University Press), p. 20.
23. Snyder et al., Foreign Policy Decision Making, p. 8. “Nearly all models of rationality are geared to individual actors—they prescribe or describe the orientations of an individual decision-maker. The unit is, then, the individual.”
24. Morgenthau, Politics Among Nations: The Struggle for Power and Peace, p. 5.
25. Verba, Sidney (1969) Assumptions of rationality and non-rationality in models of the international system, in James Rosenau (Ed.), International Politics and Foreign Policy: A Reader in Research and Theory (New York: The Free Press), pp. 219, 221–222.
26. Allison, Essence of Decision, p. 45.
27. Nossal, Kim Richard (1989) Bureaucratic politics and the Westminster model, in Robert O. Matthews, Arthur G. Rubinoff and Janice Gross Stein (Eds), International Conflict and Conflict Management: Readings in World Politics (Scarborough, Ontario: Prentice Hall of Canada), p. 233. See generally for the rest of this section.
28. Springer, Allen L. (1997) The Canadian turbot war with Spain: unilateral state action in defense of environmental interests, Journal of Environment and Development, 6(1), p. 30.
29. Harris, Michael (1998) Lament for an Ocean (Toronto: McClelland & Stewart), p. 24.
30. This is only the authors' assumption. Donald Barry makes several references to the supportive role that the PMO played in backing Tobin but not what this support entailed.
31. Harris, Lament for an Ocean, p. 2.
32. Ibid., p. 25. Chrétien also ordered the minister of defence to inform the Spanish that if Spanish frigates, sent to protect Spanish fishing vessels uncovered their guns, the Canadian navy would open fire. Chrétien's support for Tobin may have stemmed from the strong standing in the polls, across Canada, which Tobin had obtained during the Turbot War. On several occasions, Tobin threatened to resign when faced with opposition from DFAIT and DND. In all these cases Chrétien sided with Tobin rather than have to explain to cabinet and the nation why its favourite son was now out of a job. Confidential interview with senior DFO official, Ottawa, Canada, 14 December 1998 and Harris, Lament for an Ocean, p. 24.
33. Barry, Donald (1998) The Canada–European Union turbot war: internal politics and transatlantic bargaining, International Journal, 80 (2), p. 281.
34. Confidential interview with senior DFO official, Ottawa, Canada, 14 December 1998.
35. In his memoirs Crosbie describes true cooperation with the provincial government as “rare as snowballs in the tropics, and the federal-provincial component of DFO's mandate caused some of our worst headaches”. Crosbie, John C. (1997) No Holds Barred: My Life in Politics (Toronto: McClelland & Stewart), pp. 374–375.
36. Harris, Lament for an Ocean, p. 35.
37. For more on Clyde Wells, see Simpson, Jeffrey (1993) Faultlines: Struggling for a Canadian Vision (Toronto: Harper Collins), p. 16
38. Harris, Lament for an Ocean, p. 9.
39. In 1970 the Federal government unilaterally enacted the Arctic Waters Pollution Prevention Act establishing a 100-mile jurisdiction zone to prevent international pollution of Canadian coastal waters in the arctic. The Canadian government has also engaged in bilateral wrangling with the United States over pollution and fishing rights on the Pacific Coast, the Great Lakes and the northeast Atlantic.
40. Confidential interview with DFO official, Ottawa, Canada, 14 December 1998.