Alliance and Illusion is the definitive assessment of the domestic and international aspects of Canadian foreign policy in the modern era. Robert Bothwell provides nuanced studies of Canada’s leaders and discusses international currents that drove Canadian external affairs, from American influence over Vietnam and the draft dodgers, to the French case of de Gaulle’s eruption into Quebec in 1967. This definitive recounting and assessment of Canadian foreign policy in the modern era fills a crucial gap in Canadian history and provides invaluable context for understanding Canada’s present-day foreign policy dilemmas.

Jack Granatstein introduces Reid and the forces that shaped his progressive idealism in the 1920s and 1930s. Hector Mackenzie assesses Reid's contribution to the creation of the United Nations in the mid-1940s, while David Haglund and Stéphane Roussel examine Reid's crucial role in the negotiations to establish the North Atlantic Treaty Organization. Greg Donaghy, Bruce Muirhead, and Alyson King write, respectively, about Reid as high commissioner to India, as an important influence on World Bank policy in the early 1960s, and, finally, as founding principal of York University's Glendon College.

When U.S. President Harry Truman asked his allies for military support in the Korean War, Canada's government, led by Prime Minister Louis St-Laurent, was reluctant. St-Laurent's government was forced to change its position however, when the Canadian populace, conditioned to significant degrees by the powerful influence of American media and culture, demanded a more vigorous response. Warming up to the Cold War shows how American cultural influence helped to undermine waning Canadian nationalism. Comparing Canadian and American responses to events such as the atomic bomb, the Gouzenko Affair, the creation of NATO, and the Korean War, Robert Teigrob traces the role that culture and public opinion played in shaping responses to international affairs. With penetrating political and cultural insight, he examines the Cold War consensus between the two countries to reveal the ways that Canada cited "home-grown" rationales to justify its increasing subservience to American strategy and posturing. Full of fascinating insights, Warming up the Cold War is essential reading for anyone interested in the Cold War, the role of culture in politics, and the history of U.S.-Canada relations.

For most of the twentieth century tin was fundamental for both warfare and welfare. The importance of tin is most powerfully represented by the tin can - an invention which created a revolution in food preservation and helped feed both the armies of the great powers and the masses of the new urban society. The trouble with tin was that economically viable deposits of the metal could only be found in a few regions of the world, predominantly in the southern hemisphere, while the main centers of consumption were in the industrialized north. The tin trade was therefore a highly politically charged economy in which states and private enterprise competed and cooperated to assert control over deposits, smelters and markets. Tin provides a particularly telling illustration of how the interactions of business and governments shape the evolution of the global economic trade; the tin industry has experienced extensive state intervention during times of war, encompasses intense competition and cartelization, and has seen industry centers both thrive and fail in the wake of decolonization. The history of the international tin industry reveals the complex interactions and interdependencies between local actors and international networks, decolonization and globalization, as well as government foreign policies and entrepreneurial tactics. By highlighting the global struggles for control and the constantly shifting economic, geographical and political constellations within one specific industry, this collection of essays brings the state back into business history, and the firm into the history of international relations.

Examines the decision-making process leading up to the wars of Afghanistan and Iraq from the point of view the United States' closest allies, in particular Canada, the UK, and Australia.

Focuses on Australia, Britain, Canada, New Zealand, and the United States.

Contrary to popular opinion, this nation has always consciously and consistently utilized military force to further its security, as well as its economic and political well-being. Despite the best of intentions to aid others, the reality is that military force has most often been used to serve the national interest in ways that were not always altruistic but rather to serve practical political purpose. In the final analysis, the Canadian military experience has been integral to creating the advanced, affluent, and vibrant nation that exists today. This collection of essays, written by such noted historians and authors as Douglas Delaney, Stephen J. Harris, Ronald Haycock, Michael Hennessy, Bernd Horn, and Sean Maloney, spans the entirety of the Canadian military experience and underlines the reality that the government has consistently used its armed forces to achieve political purpose. More often than not, the "Canadian way of war" has been a direct reflection of circumstance and political will.

Handbook of Canadian Foreign Policy is the most comprehensive book of its kind, offering an updated examination of Canada's international role some 15 years after the dismantling of the Berlin Wall ushered in a new era in world politics. Tackling recent developments in Canadian foreign policy, the authors of this work spotlight Canadian idiosyncrasies within a global context that are defined by wrenching juxtapositions. The specialists who have contributed their expertise to this book provide sophisticated analysis-conceptual as well as historical-rather than simply impressionistic judgments about contemporary events. Highlighting both well-known and understudied topics, this handbook presents a marriage of the familiar and the underappreciated that enables readers to grasp much of the complexity of current Canadian foreign policy and appreciate the challenges policymakers must meet in the early 21st century.

The current research aims to provide analytical understandings on the costs and benefits of Korean unification from political, social, and economic aspects. Upon the two years of earlier works, we constructed an analytical model encompassing both spatial and temporal dimensions of the unification process, and built comprehensive architecture, ‘the Guiding Type of Unification.’ Based on this model, we have broaden the scope of the research by collecting diverse perspectives from the worldwide experts of the leading countries. We expect to observe the global trends of world governance. Indeed, the increasing importance of Group of Twenty (G‐20) countries in managing global problems reflects both political and social aspects of the changes occurring in global governance. Another reason for this would be South Korea’s diversified international relations in the recent years. Hence, it seems necessary to take a closer look on the international dimensions of Korean unification. In this vein, we requested thirteen experts of the leading countries to express their opinions on Korean unification. In order to collect international perspectives in a coordinated manner, scholars were provided with a guideline to include their perspectives on the expected effects of Korean Unification and the potential roles of their countries during and after the process. Participants were also asked to present candid implications for Korean unification. Argentina, whose food supply is abundant, laid stress on providing assistance in terms of food security during the unification. Australia, who has special concerns in Asian security, suggested a comprehensive support not only as a mediator but also as one of the U.S. alliance. Due to remote distance to Asia, Brazil is relatively less affected by the unification. Brazil, however, expressed that it has a keen interest in transmission of its experience regarding nuclear issues with Argentina. Similar to Brazil’s stance, the effects of the unification influence is indirect to Canada. Nevertheless, Canada could play a role in providing humanitarian assistance, and could be a potential destination for North Korean refugee resettlement. France, one of the most influential members in the European Union and the United Nations, made a suggestion to promote institution building in East Asia that can promote stability in the region. Germany, the only country who had experienced unification, presented its interest in participating actively in the process of Korean unification through public and private sectors. India assumed that the unification of Korea leads to the denuclearization of the peninsula, and would see this as a positive sign for stability of the region, since it would limit or end North Korea’s nuclear weapon transmits with Pakistan. Indonesia could contribute to regional peace and stability through ASEAN and its extensions as South Korea can call upon Indonesia to engage in the peace process. Italy, who especially pointed out the role of European Union as a whole, is well-poised to contribute to economic and social development with North Korea through technical assistance. Mexico can, and expressed its willingness to play an active role in the unification process through international organizations. South Africa, who had been successful in national reconciliation and denuclearization, is very likely to provide its experience and can be a strong voice for the NPT and arms control in the international society. Advocating South Korea’s policy in Korean unification, Turkey explicitly mentioned that it will side with Seoul if there is a possible conflict in the peninsula. The author emphasized that the international community must be well-informed on how Korean unification will take place. Last but not least, the United Kingdom author suggested that Koreans will have to resolve emotional conflicts for reconciliation. Considering how both Koreas have dealt educational matters concerning the division of the peninsula, this may face a major challenge in the future generation. Thirteen countries’ diversely manifested positions on the unifying process are indicative of perceptual change that the issue of Korean unification is no longer a regional issue, but an international one, in which multiple actors have their own stakes within. Upon the previously suggested implications, we categorized the countries into three groups: bystanders, supporters, and interveners. This categorization reflects the assertiveness of each country, or coercive level of each country’s assistance instrumented towards the two Koreas during the unifying process. In the conclusion, based on our final analysis, we provided recommendations for the policy makers. First, diversified diplomacy creates an amicable international environment for unification policies beyond the power politics of the Four Powers. Second, activation of leading countries’ roles is strategically advantageous to activate the meaningful roles of these leading countries to minimize the Four Powers’ concerns. Third, emphasizing the formation of multilateral system would provide leading countries with an additional motivation to actively participate in the unification process. Furthermore, multilateral efforts to achieve Korean unification are also expected to contribute to the furtherance of democratic elements in the dynamics of international relations as a whole. Fourth, it is now high time for us to conduct more public diplomacy by devising new and creative methodologies. The global research project of this kind could be one of the most effective public diplomatic tools. Lastly, the unification between two Koreas can no longer be considered as a regional issue within Northeast Asia since others, including the leading countries, conceive their national interests along the process of unification on the Korean peninsula in diverse ways. Overall, thirteen countries’ recommendations underline the significance of collective efforts in addressing the unification process and suggest South Korea to learn lessons from the experience that they have undergone in the past. Keywords: Argentina, Australia, Brazil, Canada, France, Germany, India, Indonesia, Italy, Mexico, South Africa, Turkey, United Kingdom, Expectation, Role, Effect ------------- CONTENTS ------------- Acknowledgments Abstract Ⅰ. INTRODUCTION Ⅱ. EFFECTS AND ROLES 1. Argentina 2. Australia 3. Brazil 4. Canada 5. France 6. Germany 7. India 8. Indonesia 9. Italy 10. Mexico 11. South Africa 12. Turkey 13. United Kingdom Ⅲ. ANALYSIS AND EVALUATION 1. Expected Effect 2. Potential Roles 3. Classification of Leading Countries Ⅳ. CONCLUSION References Recent Publications