DFAIT logo partnership The logo for the by design elab, an independent research development and production think tank specializing in online forums for policy development, incubated in 1997 at the McLuhan Program at the University of Toronto
DFAIT Home Site Map Help Policies Partners Feedback Netcast Français
 
Welcome
Message from the Minister
Dialogue Paper
Answer Questions
View Answers
Discussion Forum
 

The Three Pillars

Thank you for participating in the Dialogue on Foreign Policy. The interactive web site is now closed. The Minister's report will appear on this web site once it is released.

This Forum is bilingual, and participants post messages in their language of choice.

The irrelevancy of the three pillars

Contributor: pepe

Date: 2003-02-13 22:21:49


RE: Pillar #3: I have to disagree here. Cultural promotion should be the domaine of the department of Canadian Heritage, and quite frankly if we are so insecure as to have such a department in the first place well... that begs another question about the re-org of government overall.

Therefore, I'd suggest DFAIT needs only 2 pillars: 1. Foreign Policy/Aid focused on limited priorities where Canada can make a difference. This is critical in a post 9/11 world and I would hope that Minister Graham looks very closely at where Canada can play a role and where we cannot in contex of overall strategic priorities of the government of Canada. Focus on where we can make a difference (i.e. Aid, ICJ, etc.) and drop the areas where we won't (i.e. cutural promotion?!?)

2. Promotion of globalization. In fact this should probably be the most important pillar of foreign policy as whether you are for or against globalization this a reality in the 21st century. I would argue that in fact having a larger global middle-class and the promotion of fair trade (read rules based where the WTO has accountability to ensure that the US and EU actually follow the rules) is probably the first step towards solving many of the problems that currently exist in the world. When citizens have a stake in the economy and prosperity, this allows for the fostering of stronger democracies and growth. In other words economic policy should be at the centre of foreign policy and not vice-versa.

Reply to this message

Show in topic

The irrelevancy of the three pillars

Contributor: cell

Date: 2003-02-18 16:58:40


Thrre pillars will not hold up a conventional house, not one on my street
or on any street in the western world. I wonder what kind of foreign
policy a nation that models itself on a crumbling Grecian ruin rather than
a strong structure like the Lincoln Memorial can hope to gain any
credence whatsoever on the world stage.
To address these paultry pillars individually would give them credence.
Suffice it to say that structures built of three evoke the idea of pyramids.
This model does not even hold the strength of these structures built to embalb
the dead which had four sides. What kind of blind government could
not have seen the fragility of using a design construct that houses
but memories of long lost eras and democracy destroyed by tyrants, and
Caesars. Using three pillars as a model for Canadian Foreign Policy is
akin to modelling our economic policy on a structure of one plate.

Reply to this message