FRINK Linked Data Fragments server

Matches in SemOpenAlex for { <https://semopenalex.org/work/W1161936398> ?p ?o ?g. }

• W1161936398 abstract "On face of it, defence and security would seem to be aspects of Canadian foreign to which parties and partisanship would matter least of all. Policymakers may play game of party when it comes to trade or environment, but in realm of high politics - where survival of state is at stake - we expect them to set politicking aside and take their cues from clashing of forces out in wider world. And since in this anarchic realm, as Thucydides said, the strong get what they can, and weak accept what they must, we expect policymakers in a comparatively small state like Canada to have few real choices to make, at least on issues that are important to major powers. This global-scale structural constraint is reinforced, moreover, by Canada's profound dependence on United States, both for its security and its prosperity. Yet while Canadian policymakers are tightly hemmed in by external constraints, they face few obstacles at home. The virtual absence of direct threats to Canada means that public generally pays little attention to defence issues, and parliamentary system means that governing party is usually in a position to push through with its agenda without worrying too much about domestic political opposition.This juxtaposition of external constraint and domestic permissiveness helps to explain why party differences seem to have little effect on outcomes when it comes to long-term priority-setting (as reflected, for example, in patterns of defence spending), or where direct, tangible security considerations are clearly at stake, but do seem to make a difference where in question is important primarily in terms of symbolic cues for domestic audiences.The argument here is that party differences cannot be reliably used to predict direction of Canadian defence policy, but there are ways in which they may help us to understand outcomes in particular episodes. Some aspects of Canada's defence and security policies are essentially carved in stone by country's place in world (both geographically and politically), and there are therefore some important continuities that run through policies of both Liberal and Conservative governments. Other aspects of defence and security ha ve changed over time, and in some cases these changes have coincided with changes in government. But these changes tend to be smaller than we might think, or, where there have been genuinely significant changes, those changes are usually better explained by altered political circumstances, either in international context or in domestic political arena.In looking at specific defence decisions, there are two kinds of cases in which party seems to matter. There are cases where party in power seems to make a direct and relatively clear-cut difference to chosen, but these tend to be where US is relatively disinterested or national security implications of choice are indirect or ambiguous. And there are cases where party in power seems to matter, even where stakes are high, but these all tend to be cases where effect of party or partisanship is indirect - that is, fact of governing party's power having created an opportunity for certain policy entrepreneurs or interest groups to influence agenda. In these cases, however, influence of these actors seems to be genuinely exceptional, in sense that their goals or strategies are not widely shared within party itself. It therefore seems that it is these exceptional individuals or coalitions - and not parties per se - that are doing most of work in explaining otherwise-unexpected outcomes. It would be too much to say that party doesn't matter in Canadian defence policy, but evidence suggests that party usually matters only at margin, and only indirectly or in certain kinds of contexts. …" @default.
• W1161936398 created "2016-06-24" @default.
• W1161936398 creator A5030407043 @default.
• W1161936398 date "2009-03-01" @default.
• W1161936398 modified "2023-09-25" @default.
• W1161936398 title "Parties and Partisanship in Canadian Defence Policy" @default.
• W1161936398 doi "https://doi.org/10.1177/002070200906400105" @default.
• W1161936398 hasPublicationYear "2009" @default.
• W1161936398 type Work @default.
• W1161936398 sameAs 1161936398 @default.
• W1161936398 citedByCount "7" @default.
• W1161936398 countsByYear W11619363982013 @default.
• W1161936398 countsByYear W11619363982014 @default.
• W1161936398 countsByYear W11619363982015 @default.
• W1161936398 countsByYear W11619363982016 @default.
• W1161936398 countsByYear W11619363982017 @default.
• W1161936398 countsByYear W11619363982019 @default.
• W1161936398 crossrefType "journal-article" @default.
• W1161936398 hasAuthorship W1161936398A5030407043 @default.
• W1161936398 hasConcept C10138342 @default.
• W1161936398 hasConcept C138921699 @default.
• W1161936398 hasConcept C162324750 @default.
• W1161936398 hasConcept C17744445 @default.
• W1161936398 hasConcept C190253527 @default.
• W1161936398 hasConcept C198082294 @default.
• W1161936398 hasConcept C199539241 @default.
• W1161936398 hasConcept C2776554220 @default.
• W1161936398 hasConcept C2778757428 @default.
• W1161936398 hasConcept C2780668109 @default.
• W1161936398 hasConcept C93377909 @default.
• W1161936398 hasConcept C94625758 @default.
• W1161936398 hasConceptScore W1161936398C10138342 @default.
• W1161936398 hasConceptScore W1161936398C138921699 @default.
• W1161936398 hasConceptScore W1161936398C162324750 @default.
• W1161936398 hasConceptScore W1161936398C17744445 @default.
• W1161936398 hasConceptScore W1161936398C190253527 @default.
• W1161936398 hasConceptScore W1161936398C198082294 @default.
• W1161936398 hasConceptScore W1161936398C199539241 @default.
• W1161936398 hasConceptScore W1161936398C2776554220 @default.
• W1161936398 hasConceptScore W1161936398C2778757428 @default.
• W1161936398 hasConceptScore W1161936398C2780668109 @default.
• W1161936398 hasConceptScore W1161936398C93377909 @default.
• W1161936398 hasConceptScore W1161936398C94625758 @default.
• W1161936398 hasLocation W11619363981 @default.
• W1161936398 hasOpenAccess W1161936398 @default.
• W1161936398 hasPrimaryLocation W11619363981 @default.
• W1161936398 hasRelatedWork W1493108189 @default.
• W1161936398 hasRelatedWork W1589199249 @default.
• W1161936398 hasRelatedWork W1968700190 @default.
• W1161936398 hasRelatedWork W1979898588 @default.
• W1161936398 hasRelatedWork W1983468335 @default.
• W1161936398 hasRelatedWork W1987332668 @default.
• W1161936398 hasRelatedWork W1999503203 @default.
• W1161936398 hasRelatedWork W2034400411 @default.
• W1161936398 hasRelatedWork W2086312913 @default.
• W1161936398 hasRelatedWork W2156190997 @default.
• W1161936398 hasRelatedWork W2156632200 @default.
• W1161936398 hasRelatedWork W2314301252 @default.
• W1161936398 hasRelatedWork W2315871531 @default.
• W1161936398 hasRelatedWork W2319926190 @default.
• W1161936398 hasRelatedWork W2331220179 @default.
• W1161936398 hasRelatedWork W2476296694 @default.
• W1161936398 hasRelatedWork W318390105 @default.
• W1161936398 hasRelatedWork W657884148 @default.
• W1161936398 hasRelatedWork W67261666 @default.
• W1161936398 hasRelatedWork W2463934687 @default.
• W1161936398 isParatext "false" @default.
• W1161936398 isRetracted "false" @default.
• W1161936398 magId "1161936398" @default.
• W1161936398 workType "article" @default.