Review: An Independent Foreign Policy for Canada? <i>Challenges and Choices for the Future</i>
Notice bibliographique
Résumé
AN INDEPENDENT FOREIGN POLICY FOR CANADA? Challenges Choices for Future Brian Bow Patrick Lennox, editors Toronto: University of Toronto Press, 2008. 248Pp7 $24.95 PaPer ISBN 978-0-8020-9634-0John English's biography of Pierre Trudeau recounts a White House discussion following prime minister's 1971 visit to Washington. We understand Canada has its own right to its destiny, Richard Nixon told his advisors, and Canadian politician could survive without that ideology. The remark came at a moment when relatively easy days of Canada-US relations were a faded dream. Canadian nationalists were alarmed at rising level of American foreign direct investment in Canada's economy. Public opinion towards US, which was in thick ofthe Vietnam War, was similarly negative. Reflecting these sentiments, political scientist Stephen Clarkson published a collection of essays entitled An Independent Foreign Policy for Canada? The contributors - a range of academics former policymakers - reassessed traditional tenets of Canadian explored whether Ottawa had means to conduct a foreign policy that would be both independent from Washington a break from diplomacy that had guided bilateral relations since 1945. Clarkson called for a more robust autonomous approach to conduct of Canadian foreign relations. Forty years later, political scientists Brian Bow Patrick Lennox have assembled a new generation of scholars - all political scientists, save one - to revisit issues that inspired Clarkson's work. The new volume considers question of Canadian foreign policy in an era of unparalleled American power (xvi) .Bow's Lennox's introduction nicely describes context of Clarkson's collection posits that there are numerous parallels between 1968 2008. There are, however, some early factual errors. Did [m]ost Canadians really have no reservations about Canada's dependence on Britain in first half ofthe twentieth century (9)? Such a claim is ignores sentiments of majority of Quebeckers. also overlooks both small but prominent group of isolationists in Department of External Affairs, including O. D. Skelton, as well as nationalist sympathies of some prominent Liberals members of Cooperative Commonwealth Federation. Further, Gordon commission study on Canadian economy appeared in 1958, not 1968, contractual link was not with Europe but rather European Economic Community (9-10). These are important distinctions in a study of Canadian foreign policy. Lastly, claim that the current Conservative government of Stephen Harper seems to have moved away from Chretien-era focus on trade with China is an early indication that this work already risks becoming dated (10).The collection of 10 essays is divided into five thematic parts. In part one, lone historian, Adam Chapnick, provides a vital examination of evolving independence that sparked original volume. He is sharply persuasively critical of a debate that created a binary misleading analytical framework that gives too much attention to Canada's relationship with US. He bemoans fact that this paradigm-especially its simple focus on value of quiet meaning of Canadian foreign policy - has dominated discussion of Canadian foreign policy over last 40 years (36).Part two examines how Ottawa has managed relations with Washington. Brian Bow evaluates suggestion that Canadian foreign policy has shifted closer to that of US out of fear that individual high-level bilateral disputes may elicit American retaliation against an independent Canadian stance. It is striking how little solid [archival] evidence there is of any clearcut retaliation over last sixty years, Bow concludes (67). That said, he suggests that grudge linkages between presidents prime ministers have occasionally affected handling of disputes, citing tense relationship between Diefenbaker Kennedy (74). …
Récupéré en direct depuis OpenAlex et désinversé. Les résumés ne sont pas conservés dans cette base de données : les index inversés représentent 8,6 Go des 9,3 Go de texte de la base, et le serveur dispose de 13 Go libres.
Comment cette classification a été obtenuedéplier
Prédiction machine sur la base complète
Imitation des enseignantsNi prévalence calibrée, ni vérité terrain. Validation humaine à venir. Le volet Gemma est une étiquette directe du modèle pour chaque travail de la base, lue sur la notice réduite au titre. Le volet Codex est un classifieur appris des 10 348 étiquettes directes de Codex et calibré sur les taux pondérés de l'échantillon; les champs sans appui suffisant ne portent aucun appel Codex. Le mode candidate est l'union des deux volets; le consensus est leur intersection. Ces sorties portent le statut machine_predicted_unvalidated et ne sont pas des étiquettes humaines.
Scores du classifieur distillé par catégorie (deux têtes)
| Catégorie | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Métarecherche | 0,006 | 0,023 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens strict) | 0,001 | 0,001 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens large) | 0,003 | 0,001 |
| Bibliométrie | 0,005 | 0,013 |
| Études des sciences et des technologies | 0,003 | 0,004 |
| Communication savante | 0,013 | 0,005 |
| Science ouverte | 0,003 | 0,001 |
| Intégrité de la recherche | 0,006 | 0,005 |
| Charge utile insuffisante (le modèle a refusé de juger) | 0,011 | 0,005 |
Scores machine (provisoires)
Les deux têtes enseignantes du modèle étudiant, lues sur ce travail. Un score ordonne la base pour la relecture; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie, et le statut de validation accompagne chaque rangée tel quel.
Scores de référence d'un modèle non mature (critères de maturité non atteints, 7 itérations). Un score ordonne; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · tel quel depuis la passe de notation : score_only signifie que le nombre peut ordonner les travaux, et qu'aucune étiquette de catégorie n'en découleClassification
machine, non validéePrédiction automatique; un appel candidat d’une seule source (Gemma direct ou Codex distillé), pas un consensus.
Le détail, modèle par modèle et score par score, se trouve en fin de page sous « Comment cette classification a été obtenue ».