A Model Power for a Troubled World?

Abstract

Canada greeted the approach of the with apocryphal visions of global economic breakdown resulting from an electronic glitch-Y2K-and its potential interruption of technologically dependent flows of ideas and commerce. Like environmental degradation and disease epidemics, this was exactly the kind of new threat-transnational, non-territorial, non-political, and indiscriminate-that had been heralded as the primary challenge to international security and stability in a post-Westphalian world. Traditional tools of national security, such as the military apparatus of nation-states and their alliances with one another, were scarcely adequate to address these kinds of problems. The warriors of old would have to be replaced by the Microsoft generation with overlapping identities and identifications, green consciences, and preferences for individual rights over collective obligations.Among its proponents, soft power, non-coercive approaches to leadership-based on mobilizing likeminded networks, empowering civil society, utilizing information technologies, and facilitating the development of international norms-were better suited to meeting the challenges of 21st century security than military posturing. The old debate between values and interests in the conduct of Canadian foreign policy required revision. Human security, championed by Lloyd Axworthy as minister for foreign affairs between 1996 and 2000, served as a template for a perspective on Canada's relations with the outside world that placed the rights, safety, and lives of people first. The Ottawa convention to ban antipersonnel landmines and the Rome statute to establish a permanent international criminal court were considered to be notable successes for Canada's human security agenda.HUMAN SECURITY FOR THE 21ST CENTURY?When Canadians woke to the first dawn of the 21st century, the Y2K threat had failed to materialize. Although the problem was overstated to begin with, the episode demonstrated that threats were not insurmountable given foresight, preventive action, and international cooperation. Other problems and transnational threats were less easily overcome and required collective responses and commitments. An ambitious set of common objectives, or millennium development goals (MDGs), announced by the UN secretary general at the United Nations summit in September 2000, demonstrated some movement in the direction of collective responsibility. Many of the MDGs, such as the halving of extreme poverty by 2015, universal access to primary education, gender equality, combating HIV/AIDs, promoting environmental sustainability, and a global partnership for sustainable development, reflected a distinctly human security perspective on the relationship between security, development, and human rights. But the spirit of optimism generated by the MDGs soon dissipated.After the heyday of human security in Canada under Axworthy's leadership, a changed domestic and international political climate challenged the sustainability of the human security approach to foreign policy. Following the 11 September 2001 terrorist attacks in New York and Washington, public policymaking adapted to a combination of fear and threat that privileged public security, counterterrorism and defence expenditures over human rights, foreign aid, and international development.From the signing of the smart border agreement with the United States in December 2001 to the publication of Canada's first national security policy in April 2004, public security and the defence of North America dominated the governmental agenda. One of the first acts of the Liberal government under Prime Minister Paul Martin was to earmark $690 million in security initiatives that included a national security advisory council, an advisory cross-cultural roundtable on security; a department of public safety and emergency preparedness; a cabinet committee on security, public health, and emergencies; and an integrated threat assessment centre. …