Canada has recently reaffirmed its standing as a Middle Power. By taking an important stance on issues such as peacebuilding and the outlawing of antipersonnel landmines, by promoting a shift human security, and by supporting the setup of the UN-sponsored international criminal court, Canadian foreign policy has asserted its traditional commitment a Middle Power role. (1) And it is prepared go father; in the words of the former Director General of the Planning Secretariat at the Department of Foreign Affairs, While we have been proud of our respected role as middle in the past, today, objectively, we are aiming at a global reach. Therefore we think that `global' middle would fit the bill. (2) This ambitious agenda is supported by arguments that Canada can practice what scholars such as Andrew Cooper and Evan Potter call niche in areas associated with the exercise of soft power (information technology is a telling example of a new niche); this would allow Ottawa to maintain a high profile on the international stage. (3) These hopes are commendable but will need confront the changes brought upon Canadian foreign policy by transformations in the international system that, in our view, tend diminish, not increase, the overall leverage Canada has had (and will continue have) as a Middle Power. In the future, Canada may find it more difficult merely retain its traditional Middle Power status. In this essay, we ask and address the following questions: Has the end of the Cold War ushered in a promising period for Middle Powers seeking greater influence in matters of international security? Or is the new international context likely put them at a disadvantage? Will current conditions enhance the influence of Middle Powers committed multilateralism, and peacekeeping? Do recent changes in the international system mean that Middle Powers will have more or less freedom act? Two these may be advanced in response these questions. first holds that the evolution of the international system would appear create new opportunities for Middle Powers such as Canada. World conditions have changed radically, at least for the moment. Superpowers are more likely welcome middle mediation, suggests one former Canadian diplomat. (4) In this view, the growth of multilateralism and international institutions since 1990 has considerably broadened the scope for action of Middle Powers. reform and enlargement of NATO, the revival of the OAS, the expansion of UN peacekeeping, peacemaking, and peacebuilding missions, as well as the ever more pressing need rethink the role of the UN, represent new opportunities for countries such as Canada assert their views. Due changes in the international situation, a number of key issues promoted by Middle Powers for many years have found a place on the agenda: for example, human rights, environmental protection, human security, preventive diplomacy, and conflict resolution. This new international agenda might suggest that Middle Powers will be called upon play a leading role in all these different areas. (5) Finally, the fact that these are issues of transnational scope would seem indicate that the influence of the Great Powers is diminishing, since the latter are less likely be successful in controlling diplomatic relations between states and in intervening unilaterally when necessary. Seen thus, interdependence could well make traditional middle-power policies influential in shaping coalition diplomacy. A second thesis puts forward a more skeptical view of the possibility that Middle Powers such as Canada can continue play a significant role in the international system. Thus, Kim Richard Nossal argues that The kind of diplomacy conducted by such classic Middle Powers as Canada arose from circumstances which no longer exist. It was the rivalry of the Cold War that prompted the best Middle Power diplomacy. …