This information is to accompany Unit Four of the History 30 Curriculum Guide.

Student Information Sheet: Chronology of Significant External Events - 1945 - 1990

1945:	Second World War ends with the defeat of Germany and Japan. U.S. uses atomic bombs to end the war with Japan. The atomic bomb was developed through the work of Canadian, British and American scientists. Following the war, the Americans indicate that they will not share the atomic technology with the Soviet Union.
United Nations:	In May of 1945, the allied nations met in San Francisco and ratified the charter of a new United Nations. Canada was one of the founding members and served as a non-permanent member of the Security Council. The goals of the new organization was to promote peace, and address economic and social problems through international cooperation. The Security Council was given the power to maintain the world peace through the imposition of economic and military sanctions.
1946:	The Soviet Union imposes Communist governments throughout the nations of Eastern Europe. Anti-communist parties are outlawed. Winston Churchill gives his "Iron Curtain" speech which signalled the beginning of the Cold War in which pitted the western democracies against the Soviet Union and the expansion of communism in various regions of the world.
Gouzenko Affair:	Igor Gouzenko, a cipher clerk in the Soviet Embassy in Ottawa defected and revealed that a Soviet spy network had been operating in Canada, Britain and the United States. Canadian public increasingly views the Soviet Union as a "real" threat to North America.
"Red Scare":	During the latter 1940s, both the American and Canadian governments launched intensive public inquires into communist-influence in government, military, and attempted to identify communist sympathizers in the trade union movement, universities, and entertainment industry.
1947 Truman Doctrine:	The Truman Doctrine extended American military protection to western Europe. The goal was to prevent the further extension of Communism into Western Europe. Both France and Italy had large communist parties and there were fears that those parties would win upcoming elections. The policy stated that the United States would intervene in countries where it believed the freedom of the people was threatened. The aim of the policy was to "contain communism."
1948 Marshall Plan:	The United States provided $5 billion for the nations of Europe to recover from the war damage. The economic assistance was given to the nations of western Europe. The nations of Eastern Europe, now under Soviet domination, did not receive assistance under the Marshall Plan. Canada also provided economic assistance to the nations of Western Europe.
1949 N.A.T.O.:	The North Atlantic Treaty Organization (N.A.T.O.) was established as a mutual defence organization. Any attack on one member would be considered an attack on all members. The original members of N.A.T.O. included Canada, the United States, Britain, France and most of the nations of Western Europe. Canadian forces were based in Europe as part of Canada's contribution to N.A.T.O. Soviet Union explodes its own atomic bomb.
1950-53 Korean War:	Communist North Korea invades South Korea. The United Nations send military forces to defend South Korea. The great majority of troops were Americans and the U.N. force was commanded by American generals. Canada provided over 22,000 troops to the U.N. force.
1956 Hungarian Revolution:	Hungarians unsuccessfully revolt against Soviet domination of their nation. Many Hungarians flee to Canada after the revolt. The revolt increased anti-Soviet feelings throughout the western democracies.
Suez Crisis:	The Egyptian Government seized the Suez Canada and removed it from Britain and French Control. In response, Britain and France joined Israel in an attack on Egypt. The Soviet Union threatened to attack Britain and France. Lester Pearson, the Canadian external affairs minister, suggested the creation of an United Nations Emergency Force to keep the peace between the opposing forces until a political settlement could be achieved. Pearson won the 1957 Nobel Pace Prize for his efforts at creating U.N. peacekeeping forces.
1957 N.O.R.A.D.:	The fear of a Soviet nuclear attack against North America led Canada and the United States sign the North American Air Defence Agreement (N.O.R.A.D.) which established a unified air defence system for the continent. The Agreement led to the construction of several lines of radar stations across Canada to detect a possible Soviet air attack. A U.S. general would command N.O.R.A.D. forces,and a Canadian officer would act as Deputy Commander. The Diefenbaker government agreed to have Bomarc-B guided missiles stationed in Canada. The missiles could be armed with nuclear weapons. In 1960, the Diefenbaker government stated that it would allow the weapons to be stationed in Canada but without their nuclear warheads.
1961 Apartheid:	Canada led the move to expel South Africa from the Commonwealth because of its apartheid system. Canada led the international community in instituting sanctions against the apartheid government of South Africa.
1962 Cuban Missile Crisis:	American spy planes observed the construction of missile sites on the island of Cuba. Cuba was ruled by Fidel Castro who was supported by the Soviet Union. The U.S. insisted that the Soviet Union remove its missiles or the U.S. would take military action. The U.S. navy blockaded the island of Cuba. The Soviet's agreed to remove the missiles from Cuba. During the Crisis, the Diefenbaker government refused to place its forces on full alert, and refused to allow American authorities to deploy nuclear weapons on Canadian soil. Those actions strained Canadian-American relations.
1960s Vietnam:	Increasing American military involvement in Vietnam led to large-scale protests in both Canada and the United States. As the war continued, anti-American sentiment increased in Canada and throughout the western democracies. Canadian government officials made several attempts at promoting a peaceful settlement of the Vietnam War. Prime Minister Pearson angered U.S. President Lyndon Johnson, when the former suggested that the U.S. suspend its massive bombing campaign of North Vietnam as a first step towards a negotiated settlement.
1970 White Paper:	The 1970 White Paper on Canadian Foreign Policy stated new goals for Canadian foreign policy. Canada's N.A.T.O. commitment would be reduced, and its nuclear weaponry would be phased out. Trudeau's government wanted to develop a more independent foreign policy in dealing with other nations of the world. the Canadian International Development Agency (CIDA) was created and allocations for foreign aid increased from 15 to 20 percent a year up to 1975.
1979:	Soviet Union places 350 new missiles in eastern Europe. In response, the U.S. announced plant to place Cruise missiles in western Europe.
Afghanistan	The Soviet Union invaded neighbouring Afghanistan. In response, the western democracies, including Canada, boycott the 1980 Moscow Olympic Games.
1980 Reagan:	The election of Ronald Reagan in 1980 led to a new era of tension between the Soviet Union and the United States. Reagan was determined to modernize the American military and increased military spending to modernize its nuclear weapons and launch the Strategic Defense Initiative. The initiative was designed to construct a defensive space shield against a Soviet missile attack. Canadian industries were involved in the development, building and testing of the Cruise missile.
1983	Canada agrees to allow the U.S. to test unarmed Cruise missiles over Canadian soil. There was considerable opposition within the Canadian population to the testing.
1984 Mulroney Government	The Mulroney government was inclined to seek closer military and economic relationship with the United States. In early 1985, Mulroney accepted the U.S. request to overhaul the continent's air defence system. The government also promised to rebuild and re-equip the Canadian miliary.
Gorbachev:	Mikhail Gorbachev, realizing the economic crisis facing the Soviet Union attempted to launch both economic and political reforms in the Soviet Union and in Eastern Europe. He also attempted to conclude arms reduction agreements with the United States.
1989 Berlin Wall:	As part of his reform, Gorbachev announced that the Soviet Union would no longer impose its will on the peoples of Eastern Europe. The communist regimes throughout Eastern Europe collapse. The Berlin Wall, which divided the city of Berlin and symbolized the "iron curtain," was torn down.
1991 End of Soviet Union	In December of 1991, the Soviet Union was dissolved into fifteen smaller states, including Russia, Ukraine, and Georgia. Ethnic strife occurred in many of these new nations.

This information is to accompany Unit Four of the History 30 Curriculum Guide

Student Information Sheet: Chronology of Significant Domestic Events - 1945 - 1990

1943:	Marsh Report sponsored by the federal government called for a national social security system including health insurance and family allowances.
1944:	The Liberal federal government begins to implement social programs partly in response to the rise of the C.C.F. and the popularity of their programs of government intervention. The Mackenzie King government passed the Family Allowance Act and the national Housing Act.
1947:	Saskatchewan Bill of Rights is enacted.
1947:	Japanese Canadians are granted full civil rights as citizens.
1957 Diefenbaker:	John Diefenbaker's Progressive Conservatives ended the Liberal hold on power. The Diefenbaker government launched a number of social reforms including the Agricultural Rehabilitation Act, and the Technical and Vocational Training Act.
1960 Bill of Rights:	The Diefenbaker government passes the federal Bill of rights.
Quiet Revolution:	The Liberal government of Jean Lessage defeats the Union Nationale in Quebec. The Lessage government launches significant reforms in education, social welfare, and health care. The Lessage government demanded that the federal government give Quebec special status.
1961 N.D.P.:	The Canadian Labour Congress and the C.C.F. worked together to create the New Democratic Party. The Party continued the social democratic principles of the C.C.F. which called for activist government.
1965:	National medical care established. The federal government would provide funds to any provincial scheme that was universal, portable, and covered all general and specialist services without using private firms or groups. By 1968, all provinces had entered the program.
1967:	Canada celebrates its centenary as a sovereign nation. Montreal hosts a world fair as part of the celebration.
1967 Watkins Report:	The 1967 Task Force on Foreign Ownership (Watkins Report) warns of the growing influence of the U.S. on Canadian decision making because of the large-scale American ownership of Canadian industry. The Report advocates that the government establish a policy to ensure Canadian sovereignty and restrict the influence of foreign governments and businesses.
1968:	Parti Québécois under the leadership of Rene Levesque is formed. The party's platform combined a program of social reform and Quebec independence.
1969:	The Official Languages Act, passed by the Trudeau government, established a policy of official bilingualism.
1970 October Crisis:	In October of 1970, the F.L.Q., a terrorist group committed to the independence of Quebec, kidnapped a British trade representative and a Quebec cabinet minister Pierre Laporte. In response to appeals from the mayor of Montreal and the Quebec premier, the Trudeau government enacted the War Measures Act. The Act gave the police broad powers of search, seizure and arrest. Nearly 500 people in Quebec were arrested, but only two were convicted for offenses under the Act.
1970 White Paper:	The federal government introduces a White Paper on "Indian" policy which recommends that Aboriginal peoples be assimilated into "Mainstream" Canadian Society. The Paper galvanizes Aboriginal opposition, and promotes the "cause" of Aboriginal self-government.
1974:	The Bourassa government of Quebec passed Bill 22 which made French the official language of the province.
1976:	The Parti Québécois is elected in Quebec. Rene Levesque becomes premier.
1977:	Bill 101 passed by the newly elected Parti Québécois government which limited the use of English in schools and in business in Quebec. The Act angered many in English-speaking Canada.
1980 N.E.P.:	The National Energy Programme (N.E.P.) is launched by the Trudeau government in an attempt to make the nation less energy dependent on foreign markets and establish/maintain a Canadian "presence" in the energy sector. There is large-scale opposition to the N.E.P. in western Canada. Regional tensions increase. The federal Liberals are seen by many western Canadians as catering to the interests of Central Canada.
1980 Referendum:	Parti Québécois referendum on sovereignty association is defeated. The federalist supports promise to repatriate the Constitution and reform the existing division of powers.
1981:	In October, Prime Minister Trudeau outline a policy on multiculturalism within a bilingual nation.
1982 Constitution:	The federal government and nine provinces (except Quebec) agreed to a new patriated constitution with an entrenched Charter of Rights and Freedoms. Although a new constitution had been achieved, the political reconciliation of Quebec with the rest of Canada, remained incomplete.
Charter of Rights and Freedoms:	The Charter of Rights and Freedoms gives all Canadians constitutional protection of many basic civil liberties.
1984:	Brian Mulroney and the Conservatives are elected. The new government is committed to close relations with the United States, and adopts the principles of neo-conservatism which call for a reduction in the role of government and allowing the marketplace to generate economic prosperity.
1985:	Canadian government begins negotiations with the United States for a free trade agreement. The proposal generates a major debate within the Canadian community pitting regions and economic sectors against each other.
1987 Free Trade:	Canada and the United States sign a comprehensive free trade agreement.
1988 Election:	The free trade issue dominates the 1988 federal election. Opposition to the trade agreement is divided between the Liberals and N.D.P. The Conservatives are re-elected despite not receiving a majority of the votes.
1989:	The Free Trade Agreement comes into effect on January 1, 1989.
1994:	North American Free Trade Agreement comes into effect. The Agreement eliminates tariffs and quotas of goods and services in the trade between Mexico, Canada and the United States. The Agreement created the world's largest trading bloc of 360 million people.

Activity One

This activity is intended to accompany Sovereignty of Unit four History 30 curriculum Guide

Incorporating the C.E.L.s

• Critical and Creative Thinking
• Personal & Social Values and Issues
• Independent Learning

Concept Application Lesson for: Foreign Influence, Power, Alliances, Strategic Interests, and Public Opinion.

This activity allows students to gain an understanding of how events associated with, and following, the Second World War, were to influence the relationship between Canada and the United States.

Knowledge Objectives

The student will:

• know that ideological and economic considerations are often a factor/influence in the formulation of Canadian foreign policy;
• know that external forces and actions do influence both the national decision-making processes and economic well-being of the Canadian people; and,
• know that public opinion will influence political decision makers.

Skills Objectives

The student will:

• practise the skill of hypothesizing;
• practise using the critical attributes of concepts and paradigms for the purpose of evaluating and making judgements;
• practise relating events and assumptions to an argument and/or conclusions; and,
• practise synthesizing all the relevant parts into a meaningful whole.

Values Issues

The student will:

• discuss whether it is possible for two nations, of vastly unequal power and resources, to sustain a relationship based on equality;
• discuss whether entering into a military alliance with a larger and more powerful nation, influence the behaviour of the "weaker" nation:
  • its domestic decision making,
  • independent foreign policy choices, and/or
  • allocation and/or use of its military resources?
• discuss the criteria that could be used to determine whether a relationship with another nation was beneficial or harmful to one's own nation:
  • economic factors,
  • political factors,
  • cultural factors, and
  • military factors?
• discuss whether nationalism a more powerful force/influence than internationalism?

Outline of the Activity

Step One

Point out to students that one outcome of the Second World War was a dramatic shift in the power relationship between nations. Two superpowers emerged, the United States and the Soviet Union.

• Discuss how the war changed the balance of power and the relative power of various nations.
• Why did Britain and other pre-war colonial powers, emerge from the war in a "weaker" position, economically, politically, and militarily?
• Why did the United States become such a powerful nation by the end of the war?
• Why did the Soviet Union become such a powerful nation by the end of the war?

Discuss how the war impacted Canada's relationship with Britain and the United States?

Step Two

Focus a class discussion on the relations between the two "new" superpowers following the Second World War.

• Provide the students with the Student Information Sheet: The Cold War.

Discuss the reasons for the "Cold War between the United States and the Soviet Union. Make students aware that relations between the Soviet Union and the western democracies were strained by events both before, during, and following, the Second World War. Those events included:

• Western intervention in the Russian Civil War;
• the political isolation/non-recognition of the Soviet Union by the United States until the 1930s;
• the lack of cooperation between the West and the Soviets in prevent German aggression in the 1930s;
• Western attempts to conceal the secret of the atomic bomb from their Soviet wartime ally;
• ideological tensions between the communist Soviet Union and the capitalist West; and,
• the tension between the West and the Soviets over the fate of Eastern Europe following the war.

What were the ideological reasons for the conflict between the two superpowers?

• Why were the ideologies of communism and democracy not compatible?

What actions did each nation take that "strained" relations between the two nations?

• the installation of communist regimes throughout Eastern Europe;
• the Berlin Blockade;
• the development of the atomic bomb;
• the rise of independence movements throughout Africa and Asia;
• the formation of rival military alliances such as N.A.T.O. and the Warsaw Pact; and,
• North American economic assistance to Western Europe in the form of the Marshall Plan.

Step Three

Have the students prepare a statement that describes the world views of the United States, Soviet Union, and Canada, following the Second World War.

Students should first generate a number of questions/issues that each of the world views would address, such as:

• What nations or forces represented a significant military threat at the end of the war?
• What is the "history" of relations between Canada and the Soviet Union, Canada and the United States, and the Soviet Union and the United States?
• What issues represent points of contention with each of the other two nations?
• What issues or challenges represent opportunities to sustain or improve relations with the other nations?
• What actions are needed to ensure the security of one's own nation?
• What criteria would a nation use to determine whether to enter into an alliance with another nation or nations?

Optional Activities

Have the students discuss how the respective world views of the three nations were to influence events and attitudes following the Second World War.

• Have students compare the actual events and policies of Canada with the world views that they developed.

What were the long-term consequences of the Cold War for Canada and Canadians?

This information is to accompany Activity One of the Unit Four Activity Guide

Student Information Sheet: The Cold War

During the Second World War, the Soviet Union was an ally of the Western democracies, in their struggle against the Axis Powers of Germany, Japan and Italy. As the War neared its conclusion, the future of Eastern Europe became a point of contention between the Soviet Union and its Western allies.

• The Soviet Union had been invaded via Eastern Europe in both the First and Second World Wars. In both conflicts, some of the nations of Eastern Europe had participated in those invasions. Both Wars had devastated the Soviet Union. An estimated twenty-five million Russians were killed during the Second World War. The Soviet Union was determined to install "friendly" regimes throughout Eastern Europe following the War. The strategic goal was to protect its European borders from future invasions.

• Since the Soviet Union was a communist state, the Soviet government preferred to install communist regimes throughout Eastern Europe. The Red Army was liberating the nations of Eastern Europe and therefore, the Soviet Union was in a position to influence the type of governments that would emerge following the War.

• The Soviets believed that they had an agreement with the western democracies that made Eastern Europe a Soviet sphere of influence, i.e. the Soviet Union would have dominant influence in that region. By 1948, pro-Soviet regimes were in power in Poland, Bulgaria, Hungary, Romania, and Czechoslovakia.

The Western democracies, led by the United States, were determined to stop the spread of communism and Soviet power. While not being able to stop the Soviets in Eastern Europe, the U.S. and Britain were determined to prevent communist regimes from achieving power in Western Europe.

• During the Second World War, communists parties throughout Western Europe, had gained popularity in their resistance to Nazi occupation. There was a real possibility the communist parties would be elected in both France and Italy.

• The U.S. and Canada responded to the threat by providing both military and economic aid to the war-devastated nations of western Europe. The Marshall Plan provided financial and economic assistance to the nations of Western Europe. The Truman Doctrine proclaimed that the U.S. would provide support to those nations facing communist aggression.

• As the economies of Western Europe improved, the popularity of communist parties declined.

At the end of the War, Germany was divided into zones of occupation. The Eastern zone was controlled by the Red Army. The Western part of Germany included zones occupied by American, British and French troops. The German capital of Berlin lay well within the Soviet-controlled zone. The city was divided into four zones of occupation.

• In 1948, the Soviet Union attempted to force the Allies out of West Berlin by means of blockading the city. Food and fuel supplies were not allowed to be transported across East Germany. In response, the western powers supplied the city by means of an airlift. The blockade failed but did increase tension between the West and the Soviet Union.

In 1949, Canada played a leading role in convincing the western democracies of the need to form a military and economic alliance. The alliance was composed of Canada, the United States, Britain, Iceland, and most of the nations of Western Europe. The goals of the North Atlantic Treaty Organization were:

• To combine the members' military power to deter Soviet aggression. Aggression against any N.A.T.O. member would constitute aggression against all members.

• To peruse a collective relationship between the West and Communist nations in order to peruse such goals as disarmament and arms control.

• To provide, assist, and encourage cooperation in all fields among the members of the Alliance.

Being a member of the Alliance, Canada committed itself to maintain certain military forces in Europe.

The United States and the Soviet Union were the only two superpowers following the Second World War. The fact that, by the 1950s, each possessed nuclear weapons and the means of delivering such weapons on their enemies, added a dangerous aspect to the Cold War.

• Throughout the 1950s and early 1960s, the public in Canada and the United States, did fear that the Soviet Union would launch a massive air attack against the continent. That fear was translated into the establishment of the North American Air Defence Agreement between Canada and the United States in 1957. Several radar lines were established across northern Canada to detect a possible Soviet attack.

In 1955, the Soviet Union organized the nations of Eastern Europe into a military alliance, the Warsaw Pact to counter N.A.T.O.

A number of incidents and events, during the decades following the Second World War, were to strain relations between the western democracies and the communist regimes. Those events included the Korean War, the Hungarian Revolution of 1956, the Cuban Missile Crisis, the Czech revolution of 1967, and the Soviet invasion of Afghanistan in 1979. Both the western democracies and the communist nations supported opposing sides in a number of civil wars. In the Vietnam War, the U.S. was committed to providing military equipment and latter, troops, to support South Vietnam. North Vietnam received material support from both the Soviet Union and the Peoples' Republic of China.

Activity Two

This activity is intended to accompany United Nations of Unit Four History 30 curriculum Guide

Incorporating the C.E.L.s

• Independent Learning
• Critical & Creative Thinking
• Personal & Social Values & Skills

Concept Development Lesson for: National Sovereignty, Collective Security, Domestic Affairs, Foreign Policy, Decision Making, and Consequences.

This activity provides students with an opportunity to examine the concepts of national sovereignty and collective security, and the tension that can arise between the nation's desire to retain its sovereignty and the need to participate in a global setting.

Knowledge Objectives

The student will:

• know that nations seek to limit the influence of other nations on its national decision making processes;
• know that the protection and enhancement of the national well-being often takes precedence over the well-being of other nations;
• know that nations will seek to secure their respective well-being through the mechanism of collective security such as military alliances; and,
• know that nations will enter into alliances and organizations if those organizations do not threaten its national well-being.

Skills Development

The student will:

• practise using the critical attributes from a concept to analyze data;
• practise using the following analytical skills:
  • defining the main parts,
  • describing cause and effect relationships, and
  • describing how the parts of the whole are related to each other.
• practise developing and applying criteria as a basis for making evaluations;
• practise the skills of dialectical evaluation:
  • defining relevant viewpoints within the information,
  • testing the viewpoints for factual accuracy,
  • testing the viewpoints for their morality,
  • evaluating the factual and moral testing, and
  • forming a conclusion about the issue.
• practise applying the moral tests of:
  • role exchange,
  • universal consequences, and
  • new cases.

Values Issues

The student will:

• discuss whether the concept of collective security arrangements can threaten national sovereignty;
• discuss why national governments reluctant to relinquish any meaningful decision-making powers to an international association of nations:
  • fear of a loss of national decision-making powers,
  • fear, by the leadership, of a loss of domestic support,
  • opposition of significant segments of the domestic populace, or
  • fear of foreign interference in domestic matters?
• discuss whether the principles that apply to the well-being of human beings, transcend the sovereignty of particular nations; and,
• discuss whether there should be a criteria that determines when an international organization, or groups of nation, should intervene in the domestic affairs of another nation?

Outline of the Activity

Step One

Discuss with the students that nations, including Canada, seek to limit the direct influence or interference of other nations in the national decision making processes.

• Nations generally are reluctant to relinquish any national decision making powers to another nation or international organization. For example, some nations would refuse to allow their armed forces to be commanded officers appointed by the United Nations or some other international organization.

Discuss why do nations jealously protect their national sovereignty?

• national governments seek domestic public support in order to maintain political power;
• national governments do not want to "appear" to be unduly influenced by other governments; and,
• concern that other nations have policies and agendas that do not reflect the policies and agendas of the nation.

Discuss how national sovereignty can work against collective action at the international level.

• Note that in the new United Nations, the Great Powers, through the veto, ensured that they could prevent the U.N. from taking any collective action that was not in their respective national interests.

Discuss the rationale for the formation of the United Nations following the Second World War.

• the devastation that occurred in the Second World War;
• perception by some nations that the prewar policy of isolationism only encouraged international aggression;
• the structure, rules and operations of the former League of Nations exposed certain weaknesses in its structure. A new international body could be constructed to avoid such weaknesses; and,
• there was the hope that the cooperation exhibited in the alliance against Hitler could be continued after the war.

Canada, hoped that the new institution would be a form that permitted all nations to participate in formulating policies to ensure world peace and tackle other world issues. All members would be obliged to cooperate.

Point out that the major world powers held a different "vision" of how the United Nations would operate.

• The major powers were more comfortable with achieving agreements to solve/prevent international disputes among themselves rather than involving an international body composed of many nations.
• In their opinion, if there was to be an United Nations, the major powers were determined to have the controlling power within that organization.

Have students investigate the structure of the United Nations and determine which "vision" prevailed.

• Students should note the powers given to the Security Council, the General Assembly, and the Secretary General.
• They should also note the veto powers given to the Permanent Members of the Security Council.

Have the students investigate the use of the "veto" at the United Nations.

• Why did the particular member of the Permanent Member of the Security Council use their "veto" power?

Step Two

Have students identify recent international issues/disputes/conflicts. Did the desire of a nation to protect its sovereignty play a role in the dispute? Did national sovereignty impede resolution of the particular conflict?

Possible disputes/conflicts:

• denial of human rights in particular nations such as China or Cuba;
• environmental practices of a particular nation that endangers the well-being of other peoples and nations; and,
• famines and social distress within specific nations.

Have the students engage in a dialectical exercise that focuses on the issues regarding sovereignty and collective action at the international level.

• Should the well-being of one's nation take precedence over the well-being of the large global community?
• Should a nation be accountable to the larger world community for its domestic behaviour and policies?
• Should other nations intervene/interfere in the domestic affairs of another nation?

This information is to accompany the Unit Four History 30 Curriculum Guide

Student Information Sheet: Overview of Canada's External Affairs and Policies

On July 1st, 1867, Canada was created by the union of Upper Canada and Lower Canada, Nova Scotia, and New Brunswick. The union gave Canada dominion status, while remaining a colony of the British Empire. While the British North America Act gave the federal government broad powers to deal with matters within the nation's boundaries. However, Britain had responsibility for such matters as relations and the negotiating of treaties with other nations.

The continuing influence of Britain over Canada's external policies were to "cause" domestic strife during the early years of the twentieth century. Repeated British expectations for Canadian assistance and support on particular international incidents/conflicts, such as the Boer War, were to divide English and French Canada. Whereas many in English Canada believed that Canada should actively support and assist the British "motherland", most of French Canada felt otherwise. French Canadians had no emotional, linguistic or cultural attachment to Great Britain. They felt that the Canadian nation had to end its dependence on Britain and assume full responsibility as a sovereign and independent nation. Canadians should not be automatically expected to support Britain on every occasion.

Canada's involvement in the First World War was to demonstrate how external policies and actions could threaten the unity and well-being of the Canadian nation. At the onset of the War, there existed widespread support for the war effort in both English and French Canada. However, the issue of conscription was to divide the nation.

The conscription "crisis" was to convinced many Canadian policy makers that becoming involved in foreign "adventures" could seriously endanger the Canadian nation. Many believed that it was perhaps best to focus Canada's external affairs on trade, and limit other aspects of foreign relations such as entering into defence and military alliances.

By the 1920s, the Canadian nation was increasingly prepared to assume full responsibility for the conduct of its own foreign relations. At the 1926 Imperial Conference, it was agreed that the Dominions of Canada, Australia, New Zealand, and South Africa, needed a new relationship with Britain. A committee headed by Lord Balfour was established to define that new relationship. The Balfour Report was to become the basis for the establishment of a "British Commonwealth of Nations." In referring to those Dominions, the Report stated that "they are autonomous Communities within the British Empire, equal in status, in no way subordinate one to another in any respect of their domestic or external affairs, though united by a common allegiance to the Crown, and freely associated as members of the British Commonwealth of Nations." Each of the nations was now "master of its destiny." The Balfour Report became the basis of the Statute of Westminster which gave constitutional recognition to what had become practice over the years.

The Great Depression and the rise of aggression on the totalitarian regimes, characterized the 1930s. The Canadian government and populace concerns focused on responding to the social and economic impact of the Depression." There was little concern over affairs and incidents in distant lands. Indeed, many Canadians remembered Canada's involvement in the First World War, the conscription crisis, the threat to national unity, and the 60,000 Canadian killed in that "war to end wars." They did not want to repeat those events.

The Canadian desire to "isolate" itself from foreign commitments was demonstrated at the League of Nations. In 1931, Japan invaded the Chinese province of Manchuria. The League, with Canadian support, did nothing to stop the aggression and penalize Japan. When Italy invaded Ethiopia, in 1935, the League attempted to respond to the aggression more forcibly. It instituted economic sanctions which prevented League members from trading with Italy in certain goods. However, coal, steel and oil were not on the list of banned goods, and Italy's invasion would have collapsed without oil. The Prime Minister, Mackenzie King stated that Canada did not intend to "regulate a European War."

The Canadian response to Hitler and his demands in the late 1930s, again reflected the desire of Canadians not to become involved in another "European" war. Canada, along with Britain and France believed that the best way to deal with Germany was to make concession to avoid an open conflict with him. When Hitler reoccupied the Rhineland, which had been lost to Germany after the First World War, the world did nothing. The European democracies did nothing when Hitler annexed Austria. In the Munich agreement of September 1938, Britain, France, and Italy agreed that Hitler was entitled to the Sudetenland region of Czechoslovakia since the region was populated by many ethnic Germans. Canada was very supportive of the Munich agreement.

When Hitler occupied the rest of Czechoslovakia in March 1939, Britain and France offered to guarantee the sovereignty of the other German neighbours, including Poland. In September 1919, Germany invaded Poland which started the Second World War. The Canadian Parliament was called into session and a declaration of war was passed. Canada, a sovereign nation, was now at war with Germany.

Fearing another conscription crisis that nearly tore the nation apart during the First World War, Prime Minister King announced that there would be no conscription of soldiers to fight overseas. However, the Premier of Quebec, Maurice Duplessis, called a provincial election, claimed that the federal government was using the war as an excuse to "steal" power away from Quebec. The challenge to the wartime authority of the federal government became the central issue of that provincial election campaign. French Canada federal cabinet ministers actively campaigned in the election, promising that there would be no overseas conscription. Duplessis was defeated. However, the conscription issue remained.

By 1942, the need for more fighting men forced King to call for a national vote asking the people of Canada to release him and his government from their repeated promises not to bring in full conscription. In the plebescite, English Canada overwhelmingly supported conscription. Less that a third of Quebeckers were in favour. King was able to avoid the issue until 1944 when losses in Europe made it imperative that conscripts be sent. The Prime Minister ordered overseas 16,000 men who had been conscripted for duty in Canada only. The emotional outcry to government's action was considerably less than occurred in the First World War.

The policy of appeasement and the Second World War were to influence Canadian foreign policy makers. They realized that no nation could "isolate" itself from the actions of other nations. There emerged a growing belief that collective action, at the international level, was the only way to stabilize international relations. reduce the possibility of future major wars, and solve global issues and concerns. Following the Second World War, Canada was to play a significant role in the establishment of the United Nations, and became a principal member in U.N. agencies such as the World Food Board and the Atomic Energy Commission.

The ideological contest between the two super-powers, the Soviet Union and the United States, was to dominate international affairs in the decades following 1945. Canada played a leading role in the formation of the North Atlantic Treaty Organization (N.A.T.O.). The members of N.A.T.O., which included Canada, United States and most of the nations of Western Europe, pledged to come to the defence of the others if they were attacked. The actions of the Soviet Union in Eastern Europe, particularly the installing of Communist regimes throughout Eastern Europe, offered "proof" of the dangers of Communist expansion. The perceived Soviet "menace" was to cement ties between Canada and the United States.

There were a number of factors that "tied" Canada to the United States. They were geographic neighbours. The United States was increasingly the largest market for Canadian exports. The two nations were wartime allies. The two nations shared democratic values. The U.S. was the leader of the "free world" which was engaged in an ideological struggle against the spread of Communism. The Canadian public saw the United States in a favourable light.

While forming a close alliance with the United States, the Canadian government attempted to make it clear that Canada's interests were not identical to American interests. At the United Nations, Canada often pursued responses to issues that differed from the United Sates. The Canadian goal was to make the U.N. an effective mediator of international disputes.

In 1956, Britain and France attacked and seized the Suez Canal which Egypt had nationalized. The Soviet Union threatened to attack Britain and France if they did not evacuate the Canal. Canada sought a way to end the conflict peacefully through the United Nations. External Affairs Minister, Lester Pearson introduced a resolution calling for a U.N. Emergency Force to go to Egypt to supervise a cease fire. The force, with Canadian representation, was sent and the British, French and Israelis withdrew. In 1957, Lester Pearson was awarded the Nobel Peace Prize for his work in the Suez Crisis.

Canada became an active leader in the expanding Commonwealth. In 1959, the issue of South Africa's racist apartheid laws dominated Commonwealth politics. The South African government had enacted laws which relegated non-whites to low-paying jobs, overcrowded and inadequate housing, and poor education. None-white South Africans were denied the right to vote in elections, not even marry outside of their racial group.

The Canadian Prime Minister, John Diefenbaker, led the condemnation of apartheid at the Commonwealth Conference in 1961. The condemnation led to South Africa leaving the Commonwealth. In the years following, the Canadian government maintain pressure, working through the Commonwealth, on the South African government. It became a leader in applying economic sanctions on the apartheid regime. Throughout the 1950s and 1960s, Canada became a significant contributor of aid to the developing countries. The Colombo Plan of 1950, in which Canada was a full participant, directed technical and other aid to Asian members of the Commonwealth.

During the 1960s, Canada's relations with the United States, become somewhat strained. Despite American opposition, Canada maintained its diplomatic and commercial relations with Cuba after Fidel Castro came to power. Canada sold considerable amounts of wheat to China, which the U.S. also opposed. The American involvement in Vietnam proved to be another point of disagreement between the two nations. Canadian attempts to seek a peaceful resolution to the conflict were not appreciated by the American government. Canada allowed thousands of U.S. "draft dodgers" to enter Canada. Many Canadians actively demonstrated their opposition to the U.S. involvement in Vietnam.

Despite disagreements over foreign policy actions, the two nations continued their close economic ties. The economies of the two nations became increasingly interconnected. The 1965, the Auto Pact established free trade in cars and car parts between the two nations. One result of the Pact was that large numbers of cars made in Canada were sold in the U.S. That provided many high-paying jobs for Canadians.

Pierre Trudeau succeeded Lester Pearson in 1968, as Prime Minister. Trudeau launched a review of Canadian foreign policy. In 1970, the goals of the new foreign policy were enunciated. They were to foster economic growth, safeguard sovereignty and independence, work for international peace and security, promote social justice, enhance the quality of life, and protection of the environment.

The Trudeau government was not always in agreement with the United States. The Trudeau government policies increasingly reflected a concern that American interests had too much control of Canada's economy. The Foreign Investment Review Agency (F.I.R.A.) and the National Energy Programme (N.E.P.) were established to address that concern. Both were unpopular in the United Sates, as well as in parts of Canada.

Foreign relations and trade are interconnected. The Canadian economy's well-being is greatly related to the availability of world markets for Canadian exports. Therefore, considerable effort has been paid by Canadian government in creating better trading relations among the nations of the world. Through such groups as the General Agreement on Trade and Tariffs, there have been efforts to reduce trade barriers and work towards international free trade. Realizing the importance of the American market to Canada's well-being, the Canadian government negotiated a Free Trade Agreement with the U.S. The Agreement came into effect on January 1, 1989.

The F.T.A. reflected the closer relationship with the United Sates that developed after Brain Mulroney became prince minister in 1984. The Mulroney government relaxed rules concerning foreign investment particularly in the energy industry. The Agreement was extended to include Mexico to create the North American Free Trade Agreement.

Activity Three

This activity is to accompany Nationalism of Unit Four History 30 Curriculum Guide

Incorporating the C.E.L.s

• Independent Learning
• Critical and Creative Thinking
• Personal & Social Values & Issues
• Numeracy

Concept Application Activity for: Foreign Investment, Multinational Corporations, External Influence, Decision Making, Sovereignty, Nationalism, and Consequences.

This activity allows students to explore the issue of foreign investment, foreign influence, and the consequences of the high degree of foreign ownership, within specific sectors of the Canadian economy. Student have an opportunity to engage in the debate over the positive and negative consequences of foreign ownership in Canada.

Knowledge Objectives

The student will:

• know that external forces and actions do influence Canadian decision-making processes and influenced the economic well-being of the Canadian people;
• know that there exists a debate within the Canadian community as to the consequences of foreign investment and ownership within the Canadian economy;
• know that nationalists argue that extensive foreign ownership/control of the Canadian economy threatens Canadian sovereignty over Canadian decision making;
• know that are Canadian who believe that foreign investment and capital has generated employment opportunities for Canadians;
• know that Canadian governments have instituted policies and actions in response to foreign investment, capital and ownership, within the Canadian economy; and,
• know that Canadian government policies regarding foreign investment and ownership, have been influenced by both the forces of nationalism, and continentalism.

Skills Development

The student will:

• practise using the following analytical skills:
  • defining the main parts,
  • describing cause and effect relationships, and
  • describing how the parts of the whole are related to each other.
• practise synthesizing all the relevant parts into a meaningful whole;
• practise the skill of hypothesizing;
• practise using facts, good argumentation; sound reasoning to support your opinions;
• practise considering and using consequences as a test for evaluating logical arguments; and,
• practise the skills of dialectical thinking by:
  • making a value claim concerning the issue,
  • providing support for the value claim,
  • setting out counter-arguments to the first value claim, and
  • coming to a dialectical conclusion.

Values Issues

The student will:

• discuss whether the involvement of foreign investment, capital and ownership is a necessary requirement to sustain the economic well-being of Canadians;
• discuss a criteria that could evaluate the consequences of foreign investment for the Canadian people;
• discuss whether government has a role to play in determining the form and degree of foreign investment in Canada; and,
• discuss whether Canadian national sovereignty is endangered by extensive foreign ownership/control in key sectors of the Canadian economy.

Outline of the Activity

Step One

Discuss with the students the relationship between ownership and decision making. Use several everyday situations as examples.

• A factory owner decides to increase production of particular products. The division that produces those products will therefore have to increase production. It is the owner of the factory who decides what products to produce, and the amount of production.
• A parent lends the family care to a son or daughter. However, the stipulation is that the son or daughter had to supply the gasoline while using the car. The owner of the car can set the terms of lending the car to others.

Discuss the recent trend towards global free trade. Note the importance of international trade to the Canadian economy.

• Note that not only goods and products are affected by global free trade. Note that many large companies have established operations in many countries.

Discuss how a general reduction in trade barriers between nations can benefit companies that trade and do business, on the international stage.

• How does a reduction in trade barriers impact the costs of production, transportation, access to markets?
• How does a reduction in trade barriers impact the ability of companies to locate plants and operations in various nations?
• What is the impact on workers in those plants in terms of wages and in negotiating over working conditions?

Indicate that the owners of many companies in Canadian are not residents of Canada. Discuss the concept of branch plants.

Step Two

Provide students with the definition of multinational corporations and a number of contemporary examples of multinationals.

• Know that multinational corporations are companies which operate in many countries at the same time.
• Some well known multinational corporations include General Motors, Exxon, and Sears. Note that many multinationals are American.
• Note that there are a number of Canadian multinationals, such as Bata Shoes and the Bank of Nova Scotia, that operate in many nations.

Discuss the reasons/motivations for companies to acquire and/or establish plants in another country.

• Note factors such as political stability, access to needed resources and consumer markets, favourable taxation levels, educated workforce, and costs of production.
• Why would Canada be an attractive nation in which to establish a business?
• Are there factors or conditions, within Canada, that would lead investors and foreign corporations, to be reluctant to invest in Canada?

Step Three

Note that the issue of foreign investment has generated controversy within the Canadian community for many decades.

Provide the students with the Student Information Sheets: Percentage of Foreign Ownership by Sector, 1992; and Student Information Sheet: The Debate Over Foreign Ownership.

• Have the students hold a class discussion on the information contained in the S.I.S.'s. Have the class generate a number of questions/issues that arise from the issue of foreign ownership and investment.

Discuss with the class the arguments in support of multinational corporations operating in Canada.

• Because of their size and production volumes, Multinationals are able to produce goods and services efficiently. They are therefore able to provide vital goods and services to Canadians very cheaply. Smaller Canadian companies could not produce such goods and services as cheaply.
• Foreign-owned companies provide millions of dollars of capital investment which Canada needs to develop mines, factories, energy resources, and other businesses. Canada lacks the capital to develop such resources.
• The foreign investment brought by such companies helps to produce employment opportunities for Canadians.
• Foreign-owned companies bring the latest inventions and technical developments to Canada. Canadian industries often cannot afford to do their own research in such costly fields as the electronics and chemicals.
• The free enterprise system has brought the people of Canada, the United States, Western Europe and Japan, an unprecedented high standard of living. The system is based on competition between companies. To oppose multinationals would be to oppose a basic element of the free enterprise system.

Discuss with the class the arguments against foreign-owned multinational corporations operating in Canada.

• Because many of the multinationals are owned and controlled outside of Canada, the companies do not necessarily operate in Canada's best interests. Their interests generally favour their home country first. Therefore, an American multinational would be more concerned with American laws and American interests over Canadian interests.
• Foreign-owned companies take millions of dollars of profit out of Canada. These profits should stay in Canada to be reinvested here.
• New jobs will be only created in Canada when it suits the foreign-controlled companies. If such a company has to choose between closing a factory in its home country and closing one here, Canada and Canadian workers will end up the losers.
• Many multinationals are only interested in Canada as a source of raw resources to be exported to the home country to be processes. Therefore, Canadians lose the jobs that would be created if those resources were processed into finished goods in Canada.
• Foreign-owned corporations do little research and development of new products and methods in Canada. New technical development are brought to Canada from the company's home country. This policy keeps Canada from receiving the benefits of doing more research here, such as jobs for scientists.

Step Four

Provide the students with the Student Information Sheet: The Recording Industry in Canada.

Have the students discuss a number of steps that Canadian governments could do to help the Canadian recording industry.

Some measures could include:

• Require at least 51% Canadian ownership of all record companies. That would mean that important decisions about Canada's culture would be made in Canada.
• Restrict imports of foreign master compact discs from which cassette tapes and CDs are made. That would permit the Canadian independent producers an opportunity to grow large enough to compete with the multinationals.
• Require a higher number of Canadian-produced releases to be play on Canadian radio stations.
• Encourage investment in independent recording companies by allowing large income tax deductions for the money invested. These deductions are already allowed for investments in Canadian movies.

Have student groups develop a strategy that promotes the development of independent Canadian record production.

• Note that there are three general policy directions open to the student groups:
  • Using the government to regulate and restrict the operation of multinationals,
  • Allowing the present situation to continue, or
  • Attempting to increase the "Canadian" content and involvement in the recording industry.

Each group will have to develop a rationale for their approach and present their strategy to the class for discussion.

Have the class discuss other industries or sectors of Canada's economy, that seem to have a high degree of foreign-ownership and/or foreign-controlled.

• Discuss if the operations of multinationals threaten the ability of Canadians to develop policies and make decisions that affect their individual and collective well-being.

The students could engage in a dialectical exercise focusing on the issue:

• Extensive foreign investment and control of the Canadian economy threatens the ability of Canadians to control their own economic, social and political decision making.

This information is to accompany Activity Three of the Unit Four Activity Guide

Student Information Sheet: Percentage of Foreign Ownership by Sector, 1992

This information is to accompany Activity Three of the Unit Four Activity Guide

Student Information Sheet: The Debate Over Foreign Ownership

Arguments Favouring Foreign Investment:

• If Canadians wish to have their nation be more than just a supplier of raw resources, the nation has to develop an industrial and manufacturing sectors. Foreign capital has provided part of the money needed for the development of the manufacturing sector.
• Foreign investors are more inclined to take risks by investing in other nations. The enterprise of foreign investors has enabled our standard of living to continually improve, and have produced employment opportunities that would otherwise not have occurred.
• Foreign companies have brought new scientific and technical knowledge and products to Canada. That has improved the quality of life for Canadians.
• Foreign-owned industries are more efficient than smaller Canadian firms. They can compete on the world market and thereby employ more Canadians.
• Foreign companies bring needed currency into Canada. That permits Canadians to buy more imported goods. Considerable amounts of the company profits are reinvested in Canada and that stimulates the domestic economy and increases employment opportunities.
• Foreign companies are "good citizens." They pay taxes, obey Canadian laws, and employ Canadians.
• Foreign capital and companies have helped to develop resources more quickly than if Canadians relied on Canadian investment.

Arguments in Opposition to Foreign Investment:

• Canadians should use their capital to invest in Canadian companies and the Canadian economy. That would reduce the levels of foreign ownership.
• Our governments offer too many tax breaks and other incentives to attract foreign investors and companies. The government should provide such incentives to Canadian investors and businesses to invest in Canada.
• Foreign branch plants are more likely to reduce their workforces that the parent company in the parent nation. Foreign companies are more concerned about the well-being of their parent nation than in other nations were they are located.
• Our dependence on foreign companies for research and development has weakened the level of research and development conducted by Canadians. The nation is lagging behind other industrialized nations in research and development. Research and development is essential to produce new products, new knowledge, and new jobs.
• Foreign-owned companies take money out of the nation. That would not occur if the companies were Canadian-owned. That capital could be "better" spent in Canada to strength and enlarge the Canadian economy.

The major argument against extensive foreign ownership of key sectors of the Canadian economy is that the extensive foreign ownership allows foreign companies to significantly influence Canadian decision making. The well-being of the Canadian economy would be dependent on the actions of foreign-owned companies. The agendas and objectives of foreign companies may not be in alignment with the well-being of Canadians. Large multinational companies can demand that national/provincial governments institute policies that favour the companies. For example, if you are an American corporation head, you may suggest to the provincial government of province X that the province pass laws that exempt your company from some environmental regulations. If your province is unwilling, the corporation may decide to establish its plants and jobs in another province or even nation.

With the global movement towards free trade and the reduction of trade barriers, it is increasingly possible for companies to establish plants/operations in nations that offer the best conditions in terms of production costs, and still trade with most other nations.

This information is to accompany Activity Three of the Unit Four Activity Guide

Student Information Sheet; The Recording Industry in Canada

The recording industry is a significant contributor to the Canadian economy. In 1991, sales were over $509 million. The actual economic value is higher because of the multiplier effect. When money is spent to buy a cassette tape or compact disc, there are benefits for related industries responsible for such things as design, printing, advertising, and concert tours.

There are over 100 recording companies in Canada. Twelve foreign-owned companies do 90% of the total business. The 47 smallest companies do less than 1% of the total business. These companies are all Canadian-owned.

Canadian companies cannot compete against the multi-nationals for several reasons:

• The MNCs can share many costs of production with their American parent companies. The independent Canadian companies have to pay all the costs of production.
• The MNCs use many foreign talent. Less than 10% of their releases have Canadian content. The independent Canadian companies discover and develop Canadian talent. Their releases have almost 60% Canadian content. Since they often use unknown talent, the Canadian companies tend to be in a high-risk business. Less than one in ten albums makes money.

Some argue that more independent production in Canada would be beneficial. Such production could reduce imports and increase exports. Canada could make a great deal of money through such exports. For example, in the late 1970s, more money flowed into Sweden because of the international success of the pop group ABBA, than because of Volvo exports.

An increase in independent production would mean that cultural decisions would be many in Canada by Canadians. More Canadian talent would be developed and recorded. That would make the industry more vibrant and a greater contributor to the Canadian economy.

Activity Four

This activity is intended to accompany Nuclear Proliferation of Unit Four History 30 Curriculum Guide

Incorporating the C.E.L.s

• Independent Learning
• Critical & Creative Thinking
• Personal & Social Values & Skills

Concept Application Lesson for: Human Rights, Foreign Policy, Sanctions, Dialectical Evaluation, Criteria, and Consequences.

This concept application activity provides students with an opportunity to identify the link between foreign policy and the well-being of Canadians. The activity focuses on the issue of applying a nation's human rights record as part of a criteria to determine Canada's relationship with that nation.

Knowledge Objectives

The student will:

• know that successive Canadian governments have fashioned Canadian foreign policy towards a particular nation on the basis of their human rights practices towards their citizenry;
• know that the application of trade sanctions and restrictions on a nation can have negative domestic consequences;
• knows that the well-being of the Canadian economy is greatly influenced by the availability of foreign markets for Canadian resources, goods and services; and,
• know that a nation can apply a variety of sanctions on relations with another nation as a means of demonstrating its displeasure towards that nation.

Skills Development

The student will:

• practise developing and applying criteria as a basis for making judgments;
• practise making hypotheses based on reasonable assumptions and inferences;
• practise using consequences as a means of evaluating information and options; and,
• practise using an analytical grid to categorize and classify information so that it can be analyzed.
• practise the following analytical skills:
  • defining the main parts,
  • describing cause and effect relationships, and
  • describing how the parts of the whole are related to each other.

Values Issues

The student will:

• discuss whether concern for human rights be considered a guiding principle of Canadian foreign policy?
• discuss whether the principle of national sovereignty should take precedence over the "intrusion" of other nations in the name of protecting human rights?
• discuss whether concern for human rights, in other nations, should take precedence over the economic well-being of Canadians?
• discuss who Canadians should react to governments that institute repressive measures against their own populace:
  • direct armed intervention?
  • providing military assistance to those resisting the repressive regime?
  • support international agencies that expose such human right violations?
  • reduce or minimize relations with governments committing gross violations of basic rights?

Outline of the Activity

Step One

Review some of Canada's international actions that have demonstrated its concern for human rights.

• Examples could include Canada's policies towards the apartheid regime in South Africa, the acceptance of political refugees following the Hungarian Revolt of 1956 and the Czechoslovakian Revolution of 1967.

Discuss the issue of human rights as it applies to foreign policy. The following questions could facilitate the discussion:

• When a regime systematically mistreats, and/or abuses populations because of their gender, race, religion or ethnic background, how should we react?
• When a government allows its police to torture prisoners, how should we react?

Have the students identify possible options that are available to the world community and individual nations. Provide historical and contemporary examples of application of the various policy options.

• direct armed intervention to remove a government that is actively persecuting its population;
• providing military assistance to those organizations and groups who are actively resisting an oppressive regime and are committed to basic human rights;
• direct assistance to a government to support a change in political behaviour such as providing specialized training for police, and assist electoral commissions;
• support international structures that expose severe abrogations of basic rights and place international pressure on oppressive regimes;
• acknowledge the legitimacy of revolutionary struggles that are committed to basic human rights and seek to remove oppressive governments;
• working with other nations, seek to correct those features of the international economic system that contribute to severe economic inequalities; and,
• reduce or minimize relations with governments committing gross violations of basic rights;
• avoid actions that undermine basic rights anywhere else in the world.

Step Two

Note that when the Canadian government selects a policy response to oppressive regimes, there are consequences for Canadians.

• Note the application of trade restrictions can "injure" Canadian economic sectors and employment in those sectors.
• Are Canadians prepared to end its lucrative wheat trade with China in order to pressure that government into respecting the human rights of its people?

Discuss with the class contemporary situations in which oppressive regimes are depriving its population of basic rights.

• Note recent international responses to oppressive regimes.

Discuss the range of policy options open to a nation. Note that some of the options seem to be more forceful than other options.

• The equipping of groups who are actively resisting a totalitarian regime is a more forceful action that simply verbally criticizing the regime.

Note that most nations will not necessarily employ the military interventionist option in their initial reaction towards a repressive regime.

• Most nations seek to resolve conflicts through diplomatic solutions rather than armed conflict.
• The military option is usually implemented in response to aggression against another state by the repressive regime.
• Issues focusing on the domestic actions of repressive regimes do not generally bring about foreign military intervention.

Have student groups select one of the possible policy options towards a repressive regime, and attempt to determine what the consequences for Canadians would be, if that option was pursued by Canada.

The responsibilities of each group includes:

• will suggest an "order" of the options that Canada could employ;
• indicating the "target" groups or populations of the proposed sanctions;
• probable reaction of the nation on which the sanctions are imposed;
• probable reaction of other nations such as level of support for Canada's actions; and,
• indicating the possible short-term and long-term consequences for Canadians.

The class could construct an analytical grid that lists the options and the short-term and long-terms consequences for Canadians if the particular options were implemented.

• Students may generate other possible policy options that could be considered.

The Student Worksheet: The Consequences of Implementing International Sanctions, provides a possible grid is provided for the students.

Each group will use the Worksheet to fulfil their group tasks.

The class could attempt to reach a consensus on the "order" of sanctions/actions that Canada should follow in response to the actions and behaviour of a repressive regime.

Step Three (Optional)

Point out that the policy option that Canada is going to implement against another government is influenced by many factors.

For example, reality makes the military sanction not an option that Canada could apply against the United States. However, that sanction could be considered against a less-powerful nation.

Possible factors that would influence the selection of policy option to be used against another nation, could include:

• the military, political and diplomatic power of the "offending" nation;
• the ability of the "offending" nation to retaliate against Canada;
• international support for the "offending" nation;
• probable international support for the Canadian implementation of specific policy sanctions;
• probability of achieving the objectives of the sanctions;
• the impact of the proposed sanctions on the populace of the "offending" nation;
• history of relations with the "offending" nation; and,
• economic costs of restricting relations with the "offending" nation.

The class could generate other factors that may influence the policy option a nation uses against another nation.

Step Four (Optional)

Students could engage in a dialectical exercise focusing on the merits of using military force to change the "behaviour" of repressive regimes as opposed to the use of non-military options.

This information is to accompany Activity Four of the Unit Four History 30 Activity Guide

Student Worksheet: The Consequences of Implementing International Sanctions

Policy Option	Order of Policy Implementation	Short-term Consequences for Canadians	Long-term Consequences for Canadians
direct armed intervention to remove a repressive regime
providing military assistance to those groups who are committed to human rights and are actively resisting the oppressive regime
direct assistance, such as the training of police, to a regime that is attempting to bring about a greater respect for human rights
support international structures that expose severe abrogations of basic rights and place international pressure on oppressive regimes
acknowledge the legitimacy of revolutionary struggles that are committed to basic human rights and seek to remove oppressive governments
work with other nations to correct those features of the international economic system that contribute to severe economic inequalities
reduce or minimize relations with governments committing gross violations of basic rights
avoid actions that undermine basic rights anywhere else in the world

Activity Five

This activity is intended to accompany Nuclear Proliferation of Unit Four History 30 Curriculum Guide

Incorporating the C.E.L.s

• Independent Learning
• Critical & Creative Thinking
• Personal & Social Values & Skills

Concept Application Activity for: Human Rights, Dialectical Evaluation, Criteria, Policy, Trade, and Consequences.

This concept development activity provides students with an opportunity to engage in a dialectical activity focusing on the role ethics and human rights play in the formulation of Canadian foreign and trade policies. Students are given the opportunity to discuss the consequences of applying certain "standards" in the formation and implementation of trade and economic policies.

Knowledge Objectives

The student will:

• know that the a nation's external policies and behaviour will seek to secure the nation's economic well-being;
• know that not all national governments operate on the democratic principles that secure human rights for their citizenry;
• know that there exists competition for resources and markets among nations; and,
• know that the criteria a nation develops to govern its external actions will have domestic consequences.

Skills Development

The student will:

• practise making hypotheses based on reasonable assumptions and inferences;
• practise developing criteria that can be used as a base for decision making;
• practise using consequences as a test for evaluating logical arguments;
• practise using the following analytical skills:
  • defining the main parts,
  • describing cause and effect relationships, and
  • describing how the parts are related to each other.
• practise the skills of dialectical evaluation by:
  • gathering information,
  • defining the issues within the information,
  • defining the relevant viewpoints (value claims) for each issue,
  • testing the viewpoints for factual accuracy;
  • synthesizing tentative judgments,
  • evaluation of the tentative judgments by means of factual and/or moral testing, and
  • forming a judgment about the issue.
• practise developing and applying criteria that can be used to evaluate, and to development judgements concerning issues.

Values Issues

The student will:

• discuss whether the interests of the citizenry of the nation take precedence over the interests of the citizenry of another nation?
• discuss whether the economic well-being of Canadians should take precedence over foreign policies that promote human rights in other nations?
• discuss whether the principle of national sovereignty take precedence over the "intrusion" of other nations in the domestic affairs of a nation?
• discuss whether one nation should attempt to impose its values and beliefs on the people of another nation?
• discuss whether one nation has the responsibility to secure the human rights of people in other nations?

Outline of the Activity

Step One

Discuss with the students factors that would influence your decision as to whether to enter a business agreement with a person or group.

• Does the character and reputation of the individual or group make any difference?
• What would make you feel comfortable with the person or group?
• What are some characteristics you would feel are essential in developing a relationship with a person or group?

Point out that not all nations operate on the same democratic principles that are present in Canada's democracy.

• Provide several historical and contemporary examples of totalitarian regimes that paid little attention to human rights.

Note that democracy has not always been the most common form of regime in the world. Note that Canada has had a history of developing economic and diplomatic relationships with non-democratic regimes.

• Canada was the first western democracy to enter into trade relations with Communist China. Why?
• Canada sold vast amount of grains to the former-Soviet Union. Why?

Discuss the consequences of Canada not trading or selling products to non-democratic regimes.

• What would be consequences on the Canadian economy?
• What would be the consequences on Canada's trade balance?
• How would other trading nations react to Canada's policy?
• Would such a policy have any affect on the particular non-democratic regime and nation?

Note that on occasions, Canada has participated in international trade sanctions against certain repressive regimes.

• Rhodesia in the early 1960s;
• Iraq following the Gulf War in the early 1990s; and,
• South Africa during the period of Apartheid.

Why would they participate on those occasions and not against certain countries on other occasions?

• Note the role of the United Nations, Commonwealth, and other international organizations, participating/initiating boycotts.

Step Two

Have the students debate whether Canadians should apply a criteria based on ethics and human rights, in the following trade-related situations:

1. Canada's tobacco farmers have suffered financial losses in recent years as more and more Canadians quite smoking. At the same time, demand for tobacco products is increasing in the developing countries. Should the Canadian government promote the sale of Canadian tobacco in those countries?

2. Should human rights and trade be linked?

   The governments of many countries violate the human rights of their citizens. It has been suggested that Canada should discourage such abuses by relating its trade agreements to the correction of these violations.

For example, trade would cease if the trading partner were to hold political prisoners without trial. In what ways could Canada "encourage" violators to stop the abuses? Do you believe that such methods would be successful?

Provide the students with the Student Information Sheet: Human Rights and Trade, Student Information Sheet: Linking Human Rights with Foreign Relations, and Student Information Sheet: The Limits of Linking Trade and Human Rights. These Information Sheets will provide students with many of the rationales used by proponents and opponents of the use of international sanctions as a means of changing the behaviour of nations that violate the human rights of their citizens.

The students could engage in a debate concerning one or both of the above cases.

Step Three

Inform the students that they will be engaged in a dialectical evaluation of the issue of connecting human rights with foreign policy. The dialectical issue will focus on the issue of whether the Canadian nation should have economic and other links with nations that infringe on the human rights of their citizenry.

Provide students with the Student Information Sheet: Dialectical Evaluation Model, and the Student Worksheet: Dialectical Evaluation Model. The students can use the models as a guide for their dialectical evaluation.

1. Have the students articulate a clear and concise statement of the issue being evaluated.
   e.g., Should Canada consider a nation's record of protecting the human rights of its citizenry, to evaluate whether to have economic and other links with that nation?

2. Have the class generate questions and issues that surround the linking of human rights and foreign policy.

   Basic questions/issues surrounding the issue of human rights and foreign policy could include:

   • Should the economic benefits of trade be risked by insisting that those nations we trade with, end human rights violations and enhance human rights of their citizens?
   • Should the principle of national sovereignty be superseded by the perceived "need" to intervene in the internal affairs of another nation, to promote human rights within that nation?
   • Should all nations be expected to adopt the assumptions and practices of western democracies, surrounding the issue of human rights?
   • Are sanctions, including economic sanctions, effective in causing another nation to institute measures to end human rights violations within their nation?
   • Are there some "moral principles" that should guide the actions and policies of all nations?
   • Should the protection or extension of human rights be one part of a criteria that would determine whether one's nation should become involved in the internal affairs of another nation?

3. Have the students select a number of key issues/questions that could be used in the dialectical evaluation.

   For the purpose of comparison, the class should construct a set of questions/issues that each viewpoint has to address.

   • What are the assumptions that underlie the claim of each viewpoint?
   • Are there examples in reality that support the particular sub-issue or claim?
   • Are economic sanctions effective instruments in causing governments to change their policies?

4. Students will construct two opposing viewpoints surrounding the issue of whether a nation's record on human rights should be a criteria to determine whether Canada should conduct trade and other relations with that nation.
   • Viewpoint A
     Canada should place trade sanctions and other restrictions on relations on those nations that have a record of human rights abuses.
   • Viewpoint B
     Trade embargoes and other restrictions are not an effective method to force foreign governments to institute policies that protect and enhance the human rights of their citizenry.

5. Students now can proceed to state their tentative judgement for the particular viewpoint (value claim).
   • Remember, the statement should be a synthesis of the viewpoint's response to the sub-issues.

6. It is necessary to establish a criteria that tests the evidence and claims that each viewpoint uses to support its premise.
   • Have the class establish a criteria that can be applied to both viewpoints on this issue.

   That criteria could include:

   • evidence of the consequences of the particular claim being realized;
   • evidence in reality that supports or refutes that particular claim;
   • Does each of the viewpoints respond directly to the particular sub-issue?
   • statistical evidence that support or refute the particular sub-issue (question);
   • Are the hypotheses and claims used by each of the viewpoints based on reasonable assumptions and inferences?
   • Is the supporting evidence and arguments, consistent with assumptions that underlie the particular viewpoint.

7. Students may wish to apply the moral tests to evaluate the merits of their tentative judgements for each of the two viewpoints.

   Students could develop a criteria to evaluate each of the viewpoints.

This information is to accompany Activity Five of Unit Four History 30 Activity Guide

Student Information Sheet: Human Rights and Trade

In the spring of 1989, the world saw the communist government of China unleash its military forces to brutally suppress student demonstrators in Beijing's Tiananmen Square. Chines troops fired indiscriminately on thousands of unarmed student demonstrators. Hundreds were killed and thousands were arrested. There were reports that some of the leaders of the demonstrators were summarily executed, while others were imprisoned. The brutality of the crackdown angered the world. Western governments, including Canada. Many throughout the western democracies, called for their governments to make their anger know to the Chinese government. There were calls to curtail trade and cultural relationships with the Chinese as a means of demonstrating the West's anger. In response the Canadian government imposed a limited range of economic sanctions. The sanctions were limited and China remained Canada's third largest recipient of Canadian development assistance in 1989-90. Indeed, the 1991, anxious to continue selling grain to China, the Canadian Agriculture Minister visited China and held high-level trade discussions with the Chinese government.

The Chinese government countered world criticism claiming that no nation had the right to interfere in the domestic affairs of another nation. China's domestic affairs were China's concern, not the world's. Chines government officials claimed that there existed no universal definition of human rights. Each nation evolves its own concept of human rights and that concept is dependent upon the nation's ideological and social history. While capitalist states place the emphasis on individual rights and the protection of private property, many Third World and socialist states give priority to collective rights and the protection of public ownership. Therefore, attempts to impose one nation's understanding of human rights on another state is a type of moral imperialist that does not respect cultural and historical diversity.

The Chinese government also insisted that international documents on human rights do no supersede the laws of any country. The international system is based on the principle of sovereignty, which in turn implies nonintervention in the internal affairs of other states. While international human rights documents are useful in setting out certain principles and goals, it is up to the individual state to determine how to realize those principles and goals.

This information is to accompany Activity Five of Unit Four History 30 Activity Guide

Student Information Sheet: Linking Human Rights with Foreign Relations

This article attempts to make the case that governments should try to influence those regimes that engage in gross, and persistent abuse of human rights of their citizens. The issue is what Canada is doing and should do to influence other states to respect and enhance basic human rights? Should Canada risk the economic gains of trading with another nation, in order to promote human rights in that other nation?

Those who believe that the promotion of human rights should be an essential component of Canada's foreign policy, do not necessarily dismiss the concept of national sovereignty. Most would agree that it is not desirable for one nation to interfere in the internal affairs of another nation. Indeed, most Canadians would resent another nation becoming involved in domestic disputes within the Canadian community. How would you react if an European state actively supported the separatist cause in Quebec?

Many human right supporters believe that while it is important to recognizing and respective the sovereignty of nations, that respect cannot be elevated to the status of an absolute moral principle. There are circumstances that demand that states intervene in the internal affairs of other nations. The issue is what are those circumstances? Human rights advocates claim that there are situations that require the "overriding" of the principle of national sovereignty.

There are certain principles of conduct that the world community expects of each state. All nations have the obligation to prevent the suffering caused by torture, detentions, extra-judicial executions and starvation. We have a "moral" obligation to prevent repressive regimes to continue to institute gross human rights violations, without world-wide recognition of such violations. Failure to respond to such violations may be seen by the offending regime as either grudging acceptance or lack of concern over the policies of the regime.

The promotion of human rights has to be the responsibility of all the western democracies including Canada. Only by unified action, on the part of many nations, will convince those repressive regimes, that the world community will no longer accept their actions and that there will be consequences if the human rights violations are continued. Unified action will also make the people of those nations aware that the world community does care about their rights and will is taking action to promote their well-being.

Intervention is necessary when a nation is ill-prepared to ill-equipped to handle human disasters such as famine or disease epidemics. It is necessary for the more prosperous nations to respond to wide-spread human tragedies. Such intervention is based on the belief that all human beings have the right to the essentials of life including food and good healthcare.

It is also in the self-interest of western democracies to place great importance on the promotion of human rights throughout all nations. Conflicts among populations in one nation can cross borders and result in "terrorist" actions in distant lands. Political and religious feuds are no longer contained by national boundaries. The conflict between Palestinians and Israelis has often resulted in bombings and assassinations throughout many European states. France has been the target by Algerian extremists because they perceive the French government has favouring their Algerian political opponents. In the case of the Palestinian-Israeli conflict, the intervention of western democracies have contributed to a lessening of tension, and promoted the prospect of a settlement of issues between the two people.

There are occasions were direct intervention is justified such as extending military aid to a country that is invaded or to one that is facing a foreign-aided insurrection. It is particularly justified when the country being invaded is facing a threat from a nation or insurrection that would endanger the human rights of its population. Therefore, it would be justified to intervene to help a democratic state protect itself against an invasion from a totalitarian regime or when facing a threat from an insurrection sponsored by non-democratic forces.

Intervention may be necessary in order to "contain" a regional or national conflict. While it may be unwise to actively intervene is a civil war between two groups, perhaps ethnic groups, it may be in the self interest of the larger world community, to ensure that the conflict not extend itself beyond the present territory involved in the conflict. The larger the conflict, the more parties involved in the conflict, the more difficult it is to contain the conflict, and seek resolution of the conflict.

There are actions that are available for a state, such as Canada, to influence the policies and actions of another state with the goal of improving the human rights situation in that state.

• Canada could avoid actions that undermine basic rights anywhere else in the world and ensure that Canadians citizens also avoid such actions. Such a policy would rule out direct acts of oppression, the arming and training of the military in oppressive regimes, and the sustaining of such regimes economically.

• Canada could minimize economic, political, military and cultural links with oppressive regimes. Such action would remove any advantages for the offending regime produced by such links, promote an international pressure on such regimes, and clearly demonstrate Canada's and the Canadian government's commitment to human rights.

• In co-operation with the other western democracies, Canada should work to correct those conditions that contribute to the perpetuation of severe international economic inequalities. Although poverty and despair do not characterize all repressive regimes, they do contribute to the emergence of oppression and brutality.

• Canada and other nations should support international organizations and institutions that expose severe violations of human rights and place pressure on oppressive regimes. Support could be extended to organizations such as Amnesty International and the U.N. Commission on Human Rights.

• Governments could acknowledge the legitimacy of revolutionary struggles and regimes committed to the extending and protection of human rights. The ending of a repressive regime is no guarantee that another repressive regime will appear later. Many of those movements and governments committed to human rights, still face active and persistent opposition within their countries. Not all forces are forces promoting human rights. The ruling elites are often reluctant to give up political and economic power without a sustained struggle.

• The wealthier nations like Canada, with a long history of democracy, should provide assistance to those regimes committed to human rights, in the development of a culture of democracy and respect for human rights. A revolution that ends a repressive regime, does not mean that the society is prepared or "equipped" to handle a western-styled democracy. The institutions and practices necessary for a democracy have to be established and accepted.

  For example, the Haitian police and military have had a long history of terrorizing the Haitian population and supporting repression. Canada has taken responsibility for the training the police with the goals of making the police the protector, not violator, of human rights. A democracy evolves and is not imposed upon a society. The society has to learn and practice the principles of human and political rights.

• Canada could make it evident that it regards, with special favour, those states that are striving to improve their human rights policies and record. This can be demonstrated by making such states favoured recipients of development assistance and cultural exchanges.

• In some circumstance, Canada could provide material support to organized resistance groups fighting an oppressive regime. That assistance could be in the form of vocal support on the international stage, protected environment for the leadership of the resistance group, financial support for non-military activities such as organizational costs, and provide technical and communication services.

This information is to accompany Activity Five of Unit Four History 30 Activity Guide

Student Information Sheet: The Limits of Linking Trade and Human Rights

It is important to note that those who do not favour Canadian foreign policy making respect for human rights a necessary condition for economic and cultural relationships with other nations, do not dismiss the importance of promoting human rights. Few Canadians support the actions of totalitarian and repressive regimes. Few Canadians would want repressive regimes to directly benefit from trade and other relationships with Canada and Canadians.

There are many who believe that through trade, cultural and scientific relationships, Canada and the other democracies, can influence the behaviour of totalitarian and repressive regimes. They feel that be integrating those governments into the world community, the global marketplace, the values of individual rights, property and political rights, will gradually influence those regimes. Economic reforms will lead to political reforms. They suggest that the implementation of trade embargoes or other sanctions will only isolate those repressive regimes and make them less likely to modify their human rights behaviour. They also suggest that it is unreasonable to expect that all nations, cultures and societies, should be expected to adopt the western ideals concerning democracy and human rights.

There are a number of reasons why states should not interfere in the internal affairs of other nations.

• The principle of the sovereignty of nations is essential to international stability. As members of the United Nations, all states have accepted the treaty obligation not to intervene in the internal affairs of other states. That principle is essential to the preservation of peace. It is particularly important as restraint on the intervention of strong states in the internal affairs of other, less powerful countries.

• Even though there may appear to be a "moral" justification for the interference, such as stopping genocide or a brutal subjugation of a population, such interventions can provide justification for future interventions that are motivated by less well-intentioned motives.

• States are not very reliable judges of the internal policies of other nations. They are likely to act on the basis of inadequate or misleading information. Indeed, foreign governments may no understand the "root: causes of the internal violence among groups. Many conflicts have their origin in events of the distant past. Grievances and animosities, that have lasted centuries, are often nor "solved" by the intervention of an outside party. Such conflicts may require that the conflicting parties becoming committed to reconciling their differences.

  Indeed, the histories of many societies differs greatly from the historical development of Western Europe and North America. Is the imposition of "Western" values concerning human rights, political rights, and individual rights, on non-western societies, always the right answer? Societies will evolve institutions and practices that reflect their unique history, their culture, religion and world view. It may appear to be a form of cultural "imperialism" to expect that all nations should conform to western ideals concerning human and political rights.

• Intervention is often motivated by reasons other than an alleged concern for human rights. The "real" reasons for the intervention may be to ensure the well-being of the intervening nation rather than the well-being of the population of the other nation. The protection of human rights often serves as an excuse for intervention, when motivations such as economic factors, territorial acquisition, or national self-interests, are the real reason for the intervention.

  The response of Western Nations to Iraq's invasion of Kuwait, in the late 1980s, perhaps had more to do with ensuring that the region's oil supply would continue to be available to the Western nations and economies, than in restoring the legitimate government and human rights to the people of Kuwait. The restoration of the sovereignty of Kuwait did not lead to the establishment of more democratic state or increased political rights for most of the population of Kuwait.

• There is no certainty the goals of the intervention will be achieved. Such intervention may produce consequences that endangers the well-being of both the intervening state and the targeted state. When the U.S. intervened in Vietnam in the mid-1950s, few American policy makers envisaged that the intervention was to result in the death of over 50,000 U.S. military personnel, divide the U.S. population, and a war that was to last for over 15 years.

• Intervention to help those resisting an oppressive regime will not always result in success in overthrowing that repressive regime. The assistance may only prolong the violence, and increase suffering without producing the desired goal.

  For example, various states have supported rival political and religious groups in the ongoing conflict in Afghanistan. Many of these groups have been greatly dependent on foreign assistance in order to continue to wage war against other groups in Afghanistan. As the civil war continues, more civilians and combatants are killed and wounded, and the nation's economic and social infrastructure in further destroyed.

• Intervention may also result in an internal struggle, within one country, expanding to involve other nations and peoples. Generally, the more parties involved in a struggle, the greater the is loss of life. Many internal disputes are complex and involving many opposing groups. Those groups may be divided along ideological, religious, or ethnic lines. When one state intervenes to help one group which it "identifies" with, other nations may intervene to protect the groups they identify with. A struggle in the one nation may expand to involve intervening nations supporting opposing groups.

• One of the major arguments against the imposition of trade and economic sanctions as a means of making a repressive regime "change" its behaviour towards its national population, is that such sanctions end up hurting the wrong people.

  Many advocates of imposing economic and trade sanctions on repressive regimes claim that such sanctions are non-violent and preferable to war, the impact of those sanctions on the people living under the repressive regime, can still be devastating. It is true that economic sanctions do not kill people like a war kills people. However, it should be remembered that the purpose of economic sanctions is to disrupt, to the greatest possible extent, the economic life of a society. Warfare also disrupted the economic life of a society. The disruption to the economy are designed to hurt a target society, and to hurt it enough to produce political change such as having the human rights abusers will then be forced to change their behaviour, or by prompting their overthrow by a regime committed to promoting and protecting human rights.

  The goal of such sanctions is not to punish all the people of the targeted state. Such sanctions are intended to cause those who are guilty of human rights violations to change their behaviour. However, economic sanctions attack the entire economy and entire population of the nation. The mass of the people who are already suffering from living under a repressive regime that denies them their basic human and political rights, are then additionally harmed by economic sanctions. The vary Sanctions can have a devastating effect on economies, and particular on the economies of the poorer nations. Sanctions can result in shortages of essential goods and services, increased unemployment and poverty, and inflation. Essential services such as medical and educational services can be disrupted. The economic and social infrastructure of the nation can be greatly harmed. The general public can no longer afford essential foods, medicines, and goods, even if such goods are available.

  Those who are responsible for the violation of human rights, the political elites, the police and the armed forces, are rarely hurt by such sanctions. They generally have control of the nation's wealth and have the funds to continue to enjoy the "good" life. The broad mass of the people are "doubly punished" by sanctions. Not only do they continue to be deprived of their human rights, they are also now suffering the hardships caused by the sanctions. The sanctions can end up hurting those who they are intended to help!

• The imposition of sanctions have rarely worked in ending human rights abuses. The theory of imposing sanctions is that the costs imposed by disrupting economic links will produce political change in the target state, and in particular, improve the "state" of human rights in that nation. Two possible situations could result from sanction: the offending regime will calculate that the economic costs outweigh the political or other benefits of the rights violations, or that the economic disruption will cause unrest within the populace. Some of the populace will calculate that the benefits of overthrowing the repressive regime outweigh the costs of continuing to support that regime. The regime will then be overthrown and replaced by one that is more committed to human rights.

  Sanctions imposed on regimes such as the former Soviet Union and China have not produced the political changes desired. Neither regimes responded to sanctions by improving the state of human rights among their citizenry. Vietnam, Cuba, and North Korea have been sanctioned for over three decades, without noticeable change in their human rights behaviour, nor have the sanctions led to the populace of those states rising up to overthrow the repressive governments.

• The imposition of sanctions by world organizations such as the United Nations are rarely "leakproof." There will always be somebody, some nations, that will break the sanctions for political or economic self interest.

• The imposition of sanctions can actually produce the a reverse effect. The regimes of the targeted countries can often rally the populace against "foreign" interference, and in some causes, result in increased support for the repressive regime. The regime can portray itself as the protector of the nation, and the nation's sovereignty. Fidel Castro has consistently used the threat of an American invasion and the "consequences" produced by the American economic embargo, as a means of securing continued support among the Cuban populace.

• Repressive governments curtail or limit the human rights of their citizens are rarely motivated to do so because of economic reasons. They are more likely to institute a regime that reflects ideological or religious or cultural biases. Economic and cultural sanctions are not likely to change the basic political motivations of the leadership.

• The imposition of sanctions, particularly against a major trading state, can have negative consequences for the state imposing the sanctions. A cancellation of grain sales to China, in response to its human rights violations, will produce significant negative consequences for Canadians, particularly Western Canadians. Such an action would have the certainty of "hurting" the Canadian economy. However, there would be no certainty that the imposition of such a sanction would cause the Chinese leadership to institute a greater respect for human rights in China.

• There are few nations in the world that do not have a history of human rights violations. It may appear to be hypocritical for nation A to impose sanctions against nation B, claiming that nation B is guilty of human rights violations, when its own human rights record is debatable.

• There are those who suggest that by continuing, and even expanding trade and cultural links with other nations, is a means of influencing the policies and actions of those nations. Closer economic ties will result in eventual political reforms. The evolution of a market economy in totalitarian regimes will lead to the adoption of the values of individualism and property rights. People in those states will see the economic well-being and political freedoms are complementary and both necessary.

Activity Six

This activity is intended to accompany Diversity of Unit Four History 30 Curriculum Guide

Incorporating the C.E.L.s

• Independent Learning
• Critical & Creative Thinking
• Personal & Social Values & Skills

Concept Development Lesson for: Ethnic nationalism, Identity, Paradigm, Annihilation, Segregation, Assimilation, and Accommodation.

This concept attainment activity focuses on the relationship and factors that influence relationships between populations. Students will gain an appreciation that a group's historical experiences will influence its contemporary assumptions and practices towards other groups.

Knowledge Objectives

The student will:

• know that the common characteristics associated with ethnic nationalist groups;
• know that stability in a relationship between two distinct groups will be influenced by the historical interactions and events between the two groups;
• know that a distinct group's commitment towards the larger state can be in competition with the group's commitment towards its own well-being; and,
• know that the social and political stability of a heterogenous society will be influenced by whether the different groups perceive that their respective agendas and well-being, are being secured.

Skills Development

The student will:

• practise defining the critical attributes of concepts and paradigms;
• practise making hypotheses based on reasonable assumptions and inferences;
• practise developing criteria that can be used as a base for decision making;
• practise using consequences as a test for evaluating logical arguments;
• practise using the following analytical skills:
  • defining the main parts,
  • describing cause and effect relationships, and,
  • describing how the parts are related to each other.
• practice apply criteria to a means of evaluating and analyzing contemporary effects and issues.

Values Issues

The student will:

• discuss whether the promotion of ethnic nationalism influences a group's opinion and relationship with other ethnic groups;
• discuss that criteria that could be used to evaluate the consequences of a particular relationship between groups of people within a society:
  • the well-being of the majority group?
  • the well-being of the minority group?
  • the well-being of the collective society?
• discuss whether the state should play a significant role in fostering acceptable relationships among groups within the society;
• discuss whether it is possible for ethnic minorities within a society to secure their cultural identity and well-being without the "need" for securing political sovereignty for the group;
• discuss the influences and actions that can influence a group's perception of whether its collective well-being is secure within a society:
  • economic well-being?
  • influence on societal decision making?
  • linguistic and cultural preservation?
  • constitutional/legal protection of linguistic and cultural identity?
• discuss whether legislative measures can substantially influence the attitudes of people towards members of other groups within the society.

Outline of the Activity

Step One

Discuss with the students factors and experiences that contribute to a specific group of people developing a "perceived" collective identity.

• What commonalities do people have to share that contribute to a sense of being a distinct people?
• Note such factors as religion, language, territorial occupancy, tradition, culture, customs, and common historical experiences.

Provide students with the following attributes of ethnic nationalism:

Know that common characteristics of ethnic nationalist groups include:

• The group's commitment to the larger state is in competition with the group's commitment towards its own well-being.
• These ethnic groups often develop organizations such as political parties, nationalist organizations, and in some cases, paramilitary and/or terrorist groups intending to fundamentally change the nature of their political relationship with the other populations in the larger state.
• The distinctiveness, the separateness of the group, the linguistic and cultural characteristics which define the group, are often outcomes of historic process which precede the formation of the existing larger state.
• The group perceives themselves as being unique from other population groups in the larger state and that they need some form of "special" status or rights to protect their unique identity.

Discuss how the historical relationship between two populations can shape a populations sense of identity.

• Provide students with some historical examples such as:
  • the history of relations between the Armenian population and the state of Turkey,
  • the historic experiences of the Jewish population in Eastern Europe,
  • the historic relationship between the Aboriginal populations of Australia or South Africa and the European settlers,
  • the historic relationship between Ireland and Britain, and
  • the historic relationship between Palestinian Arabs and Jewish populations.

Step Two

Have the students investigate one of the historic relationships between two peoples.

• They should identify forces or conditions that are promoting the sense of collective identity of the particular populations.
• They should identify the consequences of the relationship for both populations.

Note that in some instances, groups within a state feel that their cultural identity and existence as a distinct group, depends on changing the political relationship the group has with other groups within the state.

• They may feel that political independence/ political sovereignty is essential to secure their identity and collective well-being.
• They may utilize a number of tactics to achieve that goal.

Step Three

Have the students examine the possible presence of ethnic nationalist within the Canadian community.

• Groups could select one of the following populations: a particular Aboriginal people, francophone Quebecers, or Anglophone Quebecers;

Have the student groups apply the characteristics of ethnic nationalism to the group they are investigating. Each group should:

• identify attributes such as language or religion that contribute to the group's collective identity;
• should indicate the historical experiences that contribute to the group's collective identity;
• indicate how the group "perceives" its relationship with other groups within the state;
• identify contemporary manifestations of ethnic nationalism within the group;
• identify the political, social, cultural, and/or economic agendas of the particular group; and,
• identify possible consequences of the group fulfilling its agenda and the possible consequences of the group's agenda not being realized.

The groups should present their reports to the class for discussion.

Activity Seven

This activity is intended to accompany Nationalists of Unit Four History 30 Curriculum Guide

Incorporating the C.E.L.s

• Independent Learning
• Critical & Creative Thinking
• Personal & Social Values & Skills

Concept Application Lesson for: Ethnic Nationalism, Acculturation, Segregation, Accommodation, Assimilation, Sovereignty, Collective Rights, and Individual Rights.

This activity focuses on the issue of minority rights and the collective well-being, and whether the two concepts are compatible. Students will investigate the assumptions and actions that are governing relations among the different cultural and linguistic populations of the province of Quebec.

Knowledge Objectives

The student will:

• know that the goals of seeking societal stability and cohesion, are often in conflict with the goal of groups to maintain cultural distinctiveness;
• know that social, economic, and political changes that occurred in Quebec, in the 1950s and 1960s, contributed to an increased awareness and concern, within the francophone community, of its collective identity;
• know that there exists controversy within francophone Quebec over the "best" means to secure the continuance and well-being of francophone culture and the French language;
• know that there is a debate between francophones who support federalism and the continuance of Quebec within Confederation, and those francophones who advocate an independent Quebec;
• know that there exists a large non-francophone population within Quebec;
• know that the state can be used as a means to insure compliance to established societal values and goals;
• know that successive francophone-controlled governments of Quebec, since the 1960s, have instituted legislation to protect and enhance the use of the French language;

Skills Development

The student will:

• practise defining the critical attributes of concepts and paradigms;
• practise using the following analytical skills:
  • defining the main parts,
  • describing cause and effect relationships, and
  • describing how the parts of the whole are related to each other.
• practise making hypotheses based on reasonable assumptions and inferences;
• practise predicting consequences of applying policies for the purpose of evaluating options;
• practise developing and applying criteria as a basis for coming to conclusions; and,
• practise the skills associated with cooperative activities.

Values Issues

The student will:

• discuss whether the restrictions on minorities expressing their cultural or linguistic distinctiveness, strengthen the cultural identity of the majority culture;
• discuss whether the state should be engaged in a proactive program of securing the cultural well-being of a particular population within a society;
• discuss the possible consequences of instituting legislative measures that promote one particular cultural group:
  • on other minorities within the society?
  • on the "perception" of t