| Srl | Item |
| 1 |
ID:
178191
|
|
|
|
|
| Summary/Abstract |
Three colleagues pay tribute to Greg Donaghy, who at the time of his death on 1 July 2020 was the co-editor of International Journal and Director of the Bill Graham Centre for Contemporary International History at the University of Toronto. Dr Donaghy’s imaginative international history expanded the canvas of Canadian foreign policy beyond the traditional limits of the North Atlantic Triangle. As an author, editor, and mentor, he redefined the way that Canada’s world looks to its scholars.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| 2 |
ID:
150080
|
|
|
|
|
| Summary/Abstract |
This analysis examines the disharmony in American–Canadian relations in the period from 2001 to 2005. Canada and the United States co-operated in the early days after the 11 September 2001 terrorist attacks on New York and Washington, managing their mutual border and fighting the war in Afghanistan. Yet they soon came into conflict over American plans to invade Iraq and create a ballistic missile defence [BMD] system for North America. President George W. Bush and Paul Cellucci, his ambassador in Ottawa, were insensitive to Canadian concerns. Canadian leaders sent mixed messages to Washington, hinting that they would support a war in Iraq and participate in the BMD system, but ultimately deciding against each. The article examines the limitations of the tolerant ally interpretation of the Canadian–American relationship and illuminates the role of leadership in the rupture that took place between the two countries.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| 3 |
ID:
146499
|
|
|
|
|
| Summary/Abstract |
Debates about Parliament’s role in deciding military deployments are clouded by misunderstandings of the relative legal authorities of the executive and the legislature, and the mixture of political objectives and democratic obligation that inform these discussions. Much has been written about the legal aspects of this question. This article considers instead the issues of politics and principle, which we argue are consistently interwoven: while governments have elevated Parliament’s role in military deployments for political purposes, the choice to involve the legislature also reflects the idea that it is the “right thing to do” in a democracy.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| 4 |
ID:
065243
|
|
|