Suchergebnisse

Recent developments in the technology of weaponry have brought about a reconsideration of the "geopolitical" importance of Canadian northern spaces to the physical-security interests of the two superpowers, and especially of the United States. Those technological developments have been apparent in three areas : ballistic missile defence (BMD), nuclear-propelled (and sometimes-armed) submarines, and air-launched cruise missiles (ALCM). Both the BMD and nuclear-submarine issues have generated much debate of late in Canada ; considerably less attention has been accorded the analysis of developments in the domain of the ALCM. It is with this latter weapon-system and in particular with the manner in which Washington regards Soviet ALCMs, that this article is concerned. Argued here is the view that the perceived Soviet ALCM threat has been of major importance in the recent modernization of North American air-defence Systems. In addition to discussing the development and consequences of Soviet ALCMs, this article also explores the extent to which technological transformations in weapons-systems might also have the effect of achieving conceptual transformations in strategic analysis. A major sub-theme of the article is the contention that technological variables have been occasioning a reconsideration of the manner in which theorists of international relations and strategic studies have been assessing the relationship between geographical configuration and the perceived strategic significance of states. The article observes that the once-moribund field of "geopolitics" has been undergoing a modest revival among theorists, in part because of changes in those weapons technologies in discusses.

This article explores changes in the international political significance of "strategic minerals" over the past half-century. The method of analysis is comparative historical, or "diachronic", and the major issues examined are: 1) minerals as a cause of international conflict; 2) minerals as a factor contributing to the military potential of states; and 3) the question of mineral scarcity. In addition to the above issues, the author analyzes two central concepts, "geopolitics" and "strategic minerals" . He concludes that while it does make sense to speak of a "new geopolitics of Minerals" in the post-1973 era, there are nevertheless important ways in which recent strategic-minerals issues resemble those of the earlier period under examination, the interwar years (and, in particular, the 1930s). What does not seem to have changed in respect of strategic minerals since the 1930 s is that access to them continues ultimately to be a function of political processes, and therefore the access question remains what it was, a matter of geopolitical concern. Where there have been differences in the relevance of strategic minerals, these have mainly consisted in: 1) the declining importance of minerals as a major contributory factor in the breakdown of world order; 2) the lessening of what had formerly been a deterministic equation between mineral possession and military potential; and 3) the increased salience in the post-1973 era of the perception that access will be affected by the growing scarcity of minerals, whether due to the actual depletion of reserves or politically induced supply disruptions.

Cet article avance l'hypothèse que la politique étrangère et sécuritaire du Canada, que nous réunissons ensemble sous le terme « grande stratégie », a reflété les éléments d'une approche géopolitique particulièrement nord-américaine connue comme étant l'« isolationnisme ». Ainsi, au cours de l'entre-deux-guerres, le Canada, à l'instar des États-Unis et malgré des divergences évidentes sur le plan des origines et de la pratique, a cherché à profiter des avantages géostratégiques de sa situation sur un « continent retiré », retiré des vicissitudes et dangers de l'équilibre des pouvoirs en Europe. Ottawa, comme Washington, a cherché pendant cette période à isoler sa population et ses institutions des troubles qui avaient cours dans cette région du monde considérée par plusieurs au Canada anglais comme davantage un danger qu'un réconfort. La célèbre remarque de Dandurand, selon laquelle le Canada habitait « une maison protégée du feu et loin des matériaux inflammables », prend ainsi toute sa signification