Visit our mobile site

The Globe and Mail

Jump to main navigation
Jump to main content

News Search
Search Stock Quotes
Search The Web
Search People at canada411.ca
Search Businesses at yellowpages.ca
Search Jobs at eluta.ca

Sunil Ram

Globe and Mail Update

The myth of Canada as the great peacekeeper is one of the more fanciful delusions under which Canadians live. It's time to let the myth die.

Peacekeeping, for Canadians, is indelibly linked with Lester Pearson, who as secretary of state for external affairs won the 1957 Nobel Peace Prize for his concept of armed peacekeeping - specifically, the United Nations Emergency Force, which was deployed to end the Suez crisis. As Pearsonism permeated the psyche of average Canadians, a national myth was born: Canada as compassionate, middle-power peacekeeper.

On the surface, the myth seems true. According to the Department of National Defence, Canada has been involved in more than 40 UN and non-UN sponsored peacekeeping missions (some sources put the number as high as 90) since 1948. More than 100,000 personnel have been committed to these missions, during which time the Canadian Forces has suffered more than 100 casualties. The cost to the taxpayer has been tens of billions of dollars. Added to these figures is a much-ballyhooed government statement that Canada has been involved in every peacekeeping mission.

According to a 1999 DND survey, 92 per cent of Canadians "believe it is important for the CF to be able to protect human rights in fragile democracies." In fact, even in the glare of the Somalia and Rwanda conflicts, Canadians see Canada's military role as that of a benign peacekeeper rather than a fighter.

But the perception withers when confronted with facts. Early in 2002, Paul Heinbecker, Canada's then-ambassador to the UN, asked members of the Canadian Institute of International Affairs where Canada ranked as a peacekeeper. Most of the audience assumed that Canada was among the top 10 nations. Mr. Heinbecker revealed that Canada was 31st. By March of 2004, Canada had slipped to 38th.

The myth runs counter to the actual history of Canadian military operations since the end of the Cold War: the 1991 Persian Gulf war; the 1993 battle of the Medek pocket in Croatia; the 1999 invasion of Kosovo; and Afghanistan in 2003.

Yet, the myth of Canada as peacekeeper has been reiterated by many of the respondents to the 2003 federal initiative known as the Canadian Foreign Policy Dialogue. Most citizens who took part in the project put a huge emphasis on Canadian peacekeeping. Sean Maloney of the Royal Military College says: "Canadians are ceaselessly inundated with the ideology that Canada doesn't fight wars, that Canadians are peacekeepers ....."

Policy emphasis on peacekeeping, meanwhile, perpetuates the myth that Canada's military mainly does peacekeeping, that we are good at it and that we gain international respect for it.

Are we good at peacekeeping? No, we're not.

Canadian soldiers do a superb job with what limited support they get from Ottawa and DND. But this is rarely co-ordinated. It's the professionalism of the troops rather than a solid, integrated policy that has allowed Canadian governments to maintain the peacekeeping myth.

Canada's rating of 38th in the world in 2004 is based on actual military and civilian police personnel commitments. Critics of this rating argue that it's not the quantity but the quality that counts, but such a perspective is ill-informed. Consider the actual numbers of personnel committed to missions: for most, Canada has commited few personnel. Between 1948 and 2003, there have only been seven UN or non-UN missions to which Canada sent more than 1,000 troops. Canada didn't contribute anyone to another seven missions. For 31 missions, we committed fewer than 100 military and civilian police (many of these missions had fewer than 10 people). Only 19 missions had between 100 and 900 personnel. After the mid-1990s, Ottawa policy dictated that Canada would only commit to specific missions rather than all UN peacekeeping missions.