Anti-Americanism in Canada, Before and After Iraq

Notes

• This article is based in large part on ongoing research and writing with Arturo Santa Cruz and Peter J. Katzenstein. My sincere thanks to both for their hard work and support in those collaborative efforts, and for encouraging me to publish this part of the work separately. Thanks also for critical advice from my Dalhousie colleagues Denis Stairs and Gilbert Winham, and for helpful feedback from the two anonymous reviewers arranged by ARCS. My appreciation to Brian Nicholson and Andrew Law, for valuable research assistance. I gratefully acknowledge financial support for research and conference travel related to this project provided by the Centre for Foreign Policy Studies at Dalhousie University.
   Google Scholar
• This working definition is based on the much more detailed discussion in the introduction to Peter J. Katzenstein and Robert O. Keohane, eds., Anti-Americanism in World Politics (Ithaca: Cornell University Press, 2007). For a similar definition, developed with specific attention to the Canadian context, see Charles F. Doran and James Patrick Sewell, “Anti-Americanism in Canada?” Annals of the American Academy of Political and Social Science 497 (May 1988): 105–119, pp. 105–107.
   Google Scholar
• It is important to be clear that there is a great deal of variation within each of these two main groupings. Anti-Americanism in Ontario, for example, has tended to have more to do with particular conceptions of the proper relationship between the state and society, while that in the Atlantic provinces has tended to have more to do with national sovereignty and status. The variegation is so great, in fact, that it would be easy to fill a book (or several) in tracing out all of the geographic and other “local varieties.” Moreover, because Canada is a nation of immigrants (with the exception of the Aboriginal peoples), and one which prides itself on practicing multiculturalism rather than being a “melting pot,” many first- and even second-generation Canadians' views of the United States have more to do with the historical experiences and cultural context in their respective countries of origin than with either of the two main Canadian variants.
   Google Scholar
• Quoted in Norman Hillmer, “Are Canadians Anti-American?” Policy Options 27 (July-August 2006): 63–65, p. 63.
   Google Scholar
• S. F. Wise and Robert Craig Brown, Canada Views the United States: Nineteenth-Century Political Attitudes (Seattle: University of Washington Press, 1967), p. 96.
   Google Scholar
• Doran and Sewell, “Anti-Americanism in Canada?” p. 107.
   Google Scholar
• David Haglund, “Does Quebec Have an 'Obsession Américaine'?” Ninth Annual Seagram Lecture, McGill University, Montreal (April 11, 2005), pp. 9–10. Jean-Sébastien Rioux, Two Solitudes: Quebeckers' Attitudes Regarding Canadian Security and Defence Policy (Ottawa: Canadian Defence and Foreign Affairs Institute, 2005), pp. 7–9.
   Google Scholar
• Kim Richard Nossal, “Anti-Americanism in Canada,” Anti-Americanism Working Papers, Central European University, Budapest, 2005, p. 8.
   Google Scholar
• Katzenstein and Keohane, eds., Anti-Americanisms in World Politics.
   Google Scholar
• This is in itself an important feature of the Canadian experience with anti-Americanism, which sets it apart from that in other countries, even relatively similar ones such as those in Western Europe.
   Google Scholar
• Nossal, “Anti-Americanism in Canada,” pp. 11–12. Seymour Martin Lipset, Continental Divide: The Values and Institutions of the United States and Canada (London: Routledge, 1990).
   Google Scholar
• J. L. Granatstein, Yankee Go Home? Canadians and Anti-Americanism (Toronto: Harper Collins, 1996), pp. 12–38.
   Google Scholar
• John Herd Thompson and Stephen J. Randall, Canada and the United States: Ambivalent Allies (Athens, GA University of Georgia Press, 1994), p. 16.
   Google Scholar
• Granatstein, Yankee Go Home? p. 43.
   Google Scholar
• This demilitarization of the US-Canada border, both in terms of military deployments and in terms of threat perceptions, is thoroughly described in Stephane Roussel, The North American Democratic Peace (Montreal/Kingston: McGill-Queen's University Press, 2002).
   Google Scholar
• J. L. Granatstein, “The Importance of Being Less Earnest: Promoting Canada's Interests through Tighter Ties with the US,” CD Howe Institute Benefactors' Lecture (Toronto, October 21, 2003).
   Google Scholar
• Granatstein, Yankee Go Home? pp. 57–46.
   Google Scholar
• Of course, this rejection of formal economic integration did not in any way preclude or interfere with successive Canadian governments' pursuit of de facto economic integration.
   Google Scholar
• The Canadian plan for defense against an American attack—“Defence Scheme No. 1”—was scrapped in 1928. The fear of physical annexation has never gone completely away; it still shows itself during periods when U.S. foreign policy is seen to be especially aggressive or reckless. For example, Richard Rohmer's 1973 novel Ultimatum (Toronto: Clark, Irwin), which ends with an American invasion to capture Canadian oil supplies, was a runaway success, topping the bestseller list for several weeks.
   Google Scholar
• For example, Kari Levitt, Silent Surrender The Multi-National Corporation in Canada (London: Macmillan, 1970).
   Google Scholar
• Denis Stairs, “Confronting Uncle Sam: Cuba and Korea,” in An Independent Foreign Policy for Canada? ed. Stephen Clarkson, 57–68 (Toronto: McClelland and Stewart, 1968). There were a number of important exceptions to this tendency, in which Canada deliberately opposed the United States in order to reinforce its sovereignty, whether territorial (Arctic waters), legal (extraterritoriality), or diplomatic (relations with Cuba).
   Google Scholar
• John English, “Speaking Out on Vietnam,” in Canadian Foreign Policy: Selected Cares, ed. Don Munton and John Kirton, 145–161 (Scarborough: Prentice-Hall, 1992).
   Google Scholar
• Haglund, “Does Quebec Have an ‘Obsession Américaine’?”.
   Google Scholar
• Granatstein, Yankee Go Home? pp. 246–277. See also Denis Stairs, “Non-Economic Implications of a Comprehensive Canada-US Free Trade Agreement,” in Knocking on the Back Door: Canadian Perspectives on Freer Trade with the United States, ed. Allan M. Maslove and Stanley L. Winer, 60–72 (Toronto: Institute for Research on Public Policy, 1987).
   Google Scholar
• Granatstein, Yankee Go Home? pp. 266–270.
   Google Scholar
• James Csipak and Lise Héroux, “NAFTA, Quebecers, and Fear (?) of Americanization: Some Empirical Evidence,” Quebec Studies 29 (Spring/Summer 2002): 25–42.
   Google Scholar
• Granatstein, Yankee Go Home? p. 285.
   Google Scholar
• Nossal, “Anti-Americanism in Canada,” p. 22.
   Google Scholar
• Alan Freeman, “Chrétien's Wisecracks Overheard,” Globe and Mail (July 10, 1997): A1.
   Google Scholar
• The most visible signs were the unguarded comments of a few lower-level officials and parliamentary backbenchers, including Francoise Ducros's reference to George Bush as a “moron” and Caroline Parrish's seething about American “bastards.”.
   Google Scholar
• Robert Kagan, “Power and Weakness,” Policy Review 113 (June/July 2002): 3–28. Denis Stairs, “Myths, Morals and Reality in Canadian Foreign Policy,” International Journal 58:2 (Spring 2003): 239–256.
   Google Scholar
• Claire Tréan, “Le 2 novembre vu de 10 pays: America Yes, Bush No,” Le Monde (October 16, 2004): 17–20, p. 18.
   Google Scholar
• Arthur Weinreb, “Poll: Over 40% of Canadian Teens Think US Is 'Evil,”' Canada Free Press (June 30, 2004): http://www.canadafreepress.com/2004/weinreb063004.htm. Accessed June 2, 2006.
   Google Scholar
• Adams, Fire and Ice: The United States, Canada, and the Myth of Converging Values (Toronto: Penguin Books, 2004).
   Google Scholar
• Pew Global Attitudes Project, “What the World Thinks in 2002,” Washington, D.C.: Pew Research Center for the People and the Press, December 2002.
   Google Scholar
• Tim Harper, “Canadians Believe Bush Is a Threat to Peace: Poll,” Toronto Star (November 3, 2006): A10.
   Google Scholar
• Pew Global Attitudes Project, “American Character Gets Mixed Reviews: US Image Up Slightly, But Still Negative” (June 23, 2005): http://pewglobal.org/reports/pdf/247.pdf. Accessed January 28, 2007.
   Google Scholar
• Pew Global Attitudes Project, “American Character Gets Mixed Reviews.” Seventy percent of respondents to a November 2004 Ipsos-Reid poll reported that they liked Americans but strongly disagreed with their president and his foreign policy. It is striking, though, that 15 percent identified themselves as thoroughly anti-American, particularly given the off-putting wording of the survey question (i.e., “At the heart of it, I am actually anti-American: I don't like anything the United States or its people stand for”). CTV News on-line (November 30, 2004). http://www.ctv.ca/servlet/ArticleNews/story/CTVNews/1101773671621_20/?hub=Canada. Accessed June 30, 2008. Another poll taken that same month found that 37 percent of Canadians between the ages of 18 and 35 agreed with the statement, “It's cool these days to dislike Americans.” Keith Stringer, “‘Cool’ to Dislike Yanks,” Nationa Post (November 15, 2005): A17.
   Google Scholar
• Ingrid Peretz, “Canadians Hurl Abuse at US Hockey Peewees,” Globe and Mail (April 2, 2003): A1.
   Google Scholar
• Pierre Martin, “All Quebec's Fault, Again? Quebec Public Opinion and Canada's Rejection of Missile Defence,” Policy Options 26:4 (May 2005).
   Google Scholar
• Association for Canadian Studies, “Canadian Opinion of the United States, Britain and France,” Environics Research Group poll for Association for Canadian Studies (February 20–26, 2003). Tréan, “Le 2 novembre vu de 10 pays.”.
   Google Scholar
• COMPAS, “Rising Anti-Americanism, Scorn for Bush's Economic Management Skills, and an English-French Divide,” COMPAS/Global Television survey (November 24–27, 2004). Francophones were also more likely than other Canadians to put the blame for the 9/11 terrorist attacks on U.S. foreign policy, rather than on civilizational conflict or other possible causes. Association for Canadian Studies, “Root Causes and Fear of Terrorism after 9–11,” Environics Research Group poll for Association for Canadian Studies (August 18 28, 2002).
   Google Scholar
• Doran and Sewell, “Anti-Americanism in Canada?” p. 107.
   Google Scholar
• “Missile Shield Doesn't Fly in Canada,” Globe and Mail (July 23, 2001): A9.
   Google Scholar
• Haglund, “Does Quebec Have an ‘Obsession Américaine’?” pp. 10–12. See also: James Cowan, “Canadians Open to Missile Plan: Poll,” Nationa Post (February 28, 2005): A1.
   Google Scholar
• David M. Rudd, “Muddling through on Missile Defence: The Politics of Indecision,” Policy Options 26:4 (May 2005): 30–34, p. 30. Opposition to missile defense was not nearly as wide-spread in Canada as opposition to the war in Iraq, as majorities in Alberta supported it, while large majorities in Québec and British Columbia opposed it. Martin's decision to say no to missile defense is thus probably best seen as a “tactical” move, looking to pivotal battlegrounds in the upcoming federal election. Susan Delacourt, “Canadians Divided on US Defence Ties,” Toronto Star (March 28, 2005): A1.
   Google Scholar
• Doug Struck, “Behind in Polls, Canada's Martin Calls Foe ‘Bush's Best Friend,”’ Washington post (January 12, 2006): A18.
   Google Scholar
• Doug Struck, “Anti-US Tack Backfires on Canada's Liberals,” Washington post (January 21, 2006).
   Google Scholar
• Ipsos-Reid, “Public Opinion Survey of Canadians and Americans,” Ipsos-Reid poll, sponsored by Canada Institute at Woodrow Wilson International Center for Scholars and Canada Institute on North American Issues (October 2006). On the other hand, see Pew Global Attitudes Project, “Global Unease with Major World Powers” (June 27, 2007): http://pewglobal.org/reports/display.php?ReportID=256. Accessed September 29, 2007.
   Google Scholar
• An October 2006 poll by Ipsos-Reid, for example, found that 85 percent of Canadian respondents considered the U.S. a friend to Canada, nearly 10 percentage points higher than the year before. “A Public Opinion Survey of Canadians and Americans,” October 3, 2006.
   Google Scholar
• Marcus Gee, “Poll Highlights Unease over US Foreign Policy,” Globe and Mail (December 11, 2007): A4.
   Google Scholar
• Barbara Yaffe, “Why Canada? Canadians Who Opposed the War Feel Betrayed by Liberals,” Montreal Gazette (April 9, 2008): A23. Opposition to Canada's involvement in Afghanistan, and the tendency to see it as driven by an impulse to cozy up with Washington, are most pronounced in Québec: Graeme Hamilton, “Home Front Has More Angst than Usual: Quebec Sends off Soldiers with Burden of History,” National Post (July 16, 2007): A1.
   Google Scholar
• J. L. Granatstein, “The Great Afghan Juggle,” Globe and Mail (January 8, 2008): A15.
   Google Scholar
• For example, Allan Gotlieb, Wendy Dobson, and Michael Hart, “Bed the Elephant,” Maclean's (March 23, 2005): 22–24. Bruce Campbell, “The Case Against Continental Deep Integration,” paper presented to the Centre for Trade Policy and Law conference, “Options for Canada-US Economic Relations in the 21st Century,” Ottawa, November 4, 2005. http://www.carleton.ca/ctpl/conferences/documents/TheCaseAgainstContinentalDeepIntegration-BruceCampbell.pdf. Accessed January 8, 2008.
   Google Scholar
• Alan S. Alexandroff and Don Guy, “What Canadians Have to Say about Relations with the United States,” CD Howe Institute Backgrounder 73 (July 2003). Laura Macdonald, “Free Trade Still Politically Polarized across the Continent,” Embassy (June 13, 2007).
   Google Scholar