logo du MAECI partenariat Logo de byDesign eLab, un centre indépendant de recherche, développement et production en forums électroniques pour l'élaboration des politiques, qui a vu le jour en 1997 dans le cadre du programme McLuhan de l'Université de Toronto
Accueil du MAECI Plan du site Aide Politiques Partenariat Commentaires Netcast English
 
Bienvenue
Message du Ministre
Document de réflexion
Répondre aux questions
Réponses
Forum de discussion
 

Les trois piliers

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.

Ce forum est bilingue, et les participants peuvent rédiger leurs commentaires dans la langue de leur choix.

The irrelevancy of the three pillars

Participant: 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.

Répondre à ce message

Voir en contexte du sujet

The irrelevancy of the three pillars

Participant: 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.

Répondre à ce message