...
首页> 外文期刊>Journal of Military and Strategic Studies >‘Defence Against Help’ Revisiting a Primary Justification for Canadian Participation in Continental Defence with the United States
【24h】

‘Defence Against Help’ Revisiting a Primary Justification for Canadian Participation in Continental Defence with the United States

机译:“防御帮助”重新审视加拿大与美国大陆防务的主要理由

获取原文
           

摘要

Any conceptual framework for Canadian policy had to recognize the interdependent nature of North American security, whereby the United States’ safety was dependent on Canadian territory and airspace. In its classic incarnation, the concept of defence against help thus represents a trilateral equation, consisting of an external threat (or threatening context), a smaller state (the security of which is inextricably linked to the perceived security of a larger neighbour), and the neighbouring larger power itself. The equation incorporates how the threat relates to the larger state, and how the smaller state plays (or does not play) an intermediary role in the threat relationship between the threatening context and the larger state. Canada’s alignment to the United States did not detract from the value of the concept to its decision-making; it bolstered it. A smaller state can invoke the strategy of defence against help in two ways: unilaterally (with or without coordination with the larger state), or conjointly with the larger state.Does defence against help continue to represent a workable, basic decision-making strategy for Canada to ensure continental defence in the 21st century? Building upon observations that I initially drew in a 2000 working paper, I maintain that the concept no longer represents an attractive or viable justification for core Canadian strategic decision-making. Rather than conceptualizing United States continental defence priorities as a threat to Canada’s sovereignty (as it is conventionally defined in military and diplomatic circles) owing to potential territorial encroachment to protect the American heartland, cost-benefit analysis of Canadian options should focus on the benefits that Canada derives from its bilateral and binational defence partnership. Instead (and in contrast to some recent commentators), I suggest that the driving strategic consideration since the late 1980s has been less about defence against help than about the need for Canada to contribute meaningfully to bilateral defence in order to stay in the game and secure a piece of the action.
机译:加拿大政策的任何概念框架都必须认识到北美安全的相互依存性,美国的安全依赖加拿大领土和空域。在其经典的化身中,防御概念反对帮助因此代表一个三边方程,由外部威胁(或威胁上下文)组成,较小的状态(其安全性与较大邻居的感知安全性有不可分割的安全性),以及邻近的较大的权力本身。该等式包含威胁如何与较大状态有关,以及较小的状态如何播放(或不播放)威胁语境和较大状态之间的威胁关系中的中间角色。加拿大对美国的一致性并没有减损概念的价值;它加强了它。较小的状态可以通过两种方式调用防御策略:单方面(有或没有与较大状态的协调),或者与较大的状态合并。在帮助方面的防御继续代表一个可行的基本决策策略加拿大确保21世纪的大陆防务?在观察中建立我最初在2000份工作文件中吸引,我认为该概念不再代表核心加拿大战略决策有吸引力或可行的理由。由于潜在的领土侵占以保护美国地区的领土侵犯,加拿大选项的成本效益分析,而不是将美国大陆防范优先考虑为加拿大主权的威胁加拿大源于其双边和融合伙伴关系。相反(与最近的一些评论者相比),我建议自20世纪80年代后期以来的驾驶战略考虑因对帮助而不是关于加拿大的需求,而不是对双边防御有意义的贡献,以便留在游戏和安全一块行动。

著录项

相似文献

  • 外文文献
  • 中文文献
  • 专利
获取原文

客服邮箱:kefu@zhangqiaokeyan.com

京公网安备:11010802029741号 ICP备案号:京ICP备15016152号-6 六维联合信息科技 (北京) 有限公司©版权所有
  • 客服微信

  • 服务号