UNI320Y: Canadian Questions: Issues and Debates

Week 12: Transnational Citizenship

Professor Emily Gilberthttp://individual.utoronto.ca/emilygilbert/

Transnational Citizenship

I. A North American Community?

II. Transnational Politics and Citizenship

III. Conclusions

I: A North American Community?

Jennifer Welsh Professor of International

Relations, Oxford University Born Regina, Saskatchewan Metis background B.A. from University of

Saskatchewan; then Rhodes Scholar at Oxford, where she received MA and PhD

Consultant to Paul Martin government on new foreign policy

“We should conceive of Canada not in traditional terms, as a middle power, but as a citizen in the world of nation-states. In fact, I believe Canada has the potential to be a model citizen for the 21st century”

Can compare North America to Europe? European citizenship

1970s+: idea for common European identity 1976: elections in European Parliament 1981: move to uniform passport

1984-1992: shift to common market 1992: Maastricht Treaty: European Union

1992+ Address common identity and democratic deficit 1997: Treaty of Amsterdam 2004 Constitution (rejected in French and Dutch

referenda 2005)

Can’t compare NA to Europe Asymmetry of power US exceptionalism No North American grand purpose

But can take two lessons from Europe: European citizenship did not require strong

or unified European identity Economic market making leads to strong

pressures for democraticization

Is a NA community viable? Significant cross-border co-operation

Limited provisions for public participation or citizenship

But vague sense of shared norms and purposes Little aspiration for political union or

citizen equality across the region

Some interest from Mexico More open cross-border mobility

Some interest from Canada Strengthen economic relationship with US But Canadian perspective more “Can-global”

As world citizens; civil society activism

US: Post 9/11 protectionism Homeland security and defense Concerns regarding population mobility

Should consider how to ensure more legitimacy in NAFTA More transparency and options for public

participation Enhance rule of law in North America

But what about NAFTA-plus: a new “big idea” Customs union Common market Currency union

Security and Prosperity Partnership of North America

Signed March 23, 2005 Interest in regional cooperation

and concerns about global competition

Aims are to make region safe and secure to ensure businesses are competitive,

economies are resilient to ameliorate quality of life

Expands on earlier bilateral and trilateral agreements Economic cooperation; eg autos Harmonization of external tariffs Regulatory cooperation; eg energy Pre-clearance programs and biometrics

Report to Leaders, June 2005—had 90 days to report on their progress on:

Prosperity: Electronic commerce Liberalization of rules of origin Commercial products re public health and safety Textiles and apparel labelling Temporary worker entry, for professionals Migratory species and biodiversity Harmonized approach to BSE Border flow analysis Aviation safety Airspace capacity Harmonized air navigation systems

Security: NTC-NRAC exchange Public safety along US-Mexico border Progress on Windsor-Detroit 25% challenge Expanding infrastructure at Nogales, Arizona Science and technology cooperation Nexus marine pilot Pre-clearance site at Thousand Islands

Bridge WCO framework Joint initial verification team examinations Port security exercises

SPP also includes quality of life issues The environment, eg clean air and water Education, especially higher education Science and technology, eg innovation Health, eg Aboriginal peoples

Appeals to “citizens” or “the people” being “protected,” “responded to,” “invested in,” their “full potential” promoted

Rationalized in terms of a shared belief in freedom, economic opportunity, and strong democratic values and institutions

“Our Partnership will accomplish these objectives through a trilateral effort to increase the security, prosperity, and quality of life of our citizens. This work will be based on the principle that our security and prosperity are mutually dependent and complementary, and will reflect our shared belief in freedom, economic opportunity, and strong democratic values and institutions. Also, it will help consolidate our action into a North American framework to confront security and economic challenges, and promote the full potential of our people, addressing disparities and increasing opportunities for all” (SPP 1)

SPP and ‘development’ of marginal populations

“In the long run, healthier indigenous communities will be able to more fully participate in the social, economic, and cultural life of North America” (Annex to the SPP)

“Improvements in human capital and physical infrastructure in Mexico, particularly in the center and south of the country, would knit these regions more firmly into the North American economy and are in the economic and security interests of all three countries” (Independent Task Force on the Future of North America)

SPP draws together “sovereignty—discipline—government” (Foucault) at the trilateral level the defense and security of the population the regulation and disciplining of subjects into citizens the optimization of subjects by governing life and the

economy

Concerns that Provides no mechanisms for shared governance Consultative only with business community: North

American Competitiveness Council No discussion of trilateral citizenship: representation,

accountability, transparency

"Continental Prosperity in the New Security Environment”

Fairmont Banff Springs Hotel, Sept 12-14, 2006

Co-chaired by George Shultz, former Secretary of State to President Ronald ReaganDr. Pedro Aspe, former Secretary of Finance to President Carlos SalinasHon. Peter Lougheed, former Premier of Alberta

Keynote address by Defense Secretary Donald  Rumsfeld on military to military cooperation

Other participants include:Mr. Thomas d’Aquino, Canadian Council of Chief Executives Dr. Wendy Dobson The Institute for International Business Hon. John P. Manley,  McCarthy, Tetrault LLP Dr. Robert A. Pastor, Director, Center for North American Studies,

American University, Washington, DC Emb Andrés Rozental (Mexican Coordinator), Mexican Council on Foreign

Relations

Tim Keating, US NorthCom Admiral and NATO commanderGeneral Rick Hellier, Chief of Defense Staff

Representatives from Lockheed Martin, Chevron, Mexico's PEMEX, Suncor Energy 

Working behind the sceneson infrastructure, regulatoryframeworks: “evolution by stealth”

Canada to host June 2007 meeting in Kananaskis

II: Transnational Politics and Citizenship

Peter Jay Smith Professor of Political Science,

Athabasca University (AB) BA (University of Portland, Oregon);

MA (McMaster); PhD (Carleton)

Information and communication technologies (ICTs) New forms of expression and connection

among people Creating new public spaces

Contesting globalization Anti-MAI, -WTO, -IMF activism

Economic globalization Challenges Westphalian state model Challenges assumption that politics and citizenship

only possible within the state

Alongside challenges to state-centric Canadian citizenship Quebec nationalism Aboriginal claims Social movement activism

1960s+ and rise of non-traditional forms of participation

Shift from democratic citizenship (participation, shaping decisions) to consumer citizenship (self-interested, atomistic consumers of government services)

Rethinking public spaceHannah Arendt on combative politics Association and contestation Site of struggle Political realm emerges out of sharing of words and

deeds Public and private always contested, negotiated “The polis, properly speaking, is not the city-state in

its physical location, it is the organization of the people as it arises out of acting and speaking together for this purpose, no matter where they happen to be” (Arendt)

Internet Promotes interactivity Is open and flexible Horizontal links: control of information

in hands of more people Rise of alternative public spaces But biased and exclusive?

Multilateral Agreement on Investment Discussions originated in 1995 to

1) broad multilateral framework for investment 2) further trade liberalization 3) effective dispute settlement mechanism 4) open to OECD members first, then others

Draft text leaked February 1997 Public Citizen and Polaris Web mobilization: 400 web sites

France withdraws Oct 1998, discussions end Dec 1998

Importance of internet mobilization

Internet used to facilitate debate: Co-ordinate global campaign Provide draft faxes and open letters To share press releases Make public information

Used alongside traditional lobbying methods

Millennium Round of WTO negotiations All participants make use of the Internet

Sept 1998: MIT Sergio Marchi invites public discussion on WTO: extensive consultations ensue

Sept 1998: Council of Canadians begins cross-country tour

Feb 1999: DFAIT establishes own web-site; then consultations with business, public

Summer 1999: 40 Canadian NGOs sign on-line Civil Society Declaration (1,100 organizations from 87 countries)

Government On Line (GOL) initiative (1999) Citizen on-line service delivery to “brand”

Canada DFAIT doubles IT budget to $100 million

(1999/2000) Biggest department is Information Management

and Technology Bureau Implements MITNET (multi-user

International Telecommunications Network)

Dialogue on Foreign Policy (DFP) Launched January 2003 To discuss: “Canada’s place in the world”

Includes relationship with US and 3 foreign policy pillars: 1) security, 2) prosperity and 3) values and culture

MFA Bill Graham: “public input and partnerships are central to the process”

Includes: Town hall meetings Expert roundtables Electronic discussions on dedicated website

Internet offers potential to have more direct representation importance alongside declining interest in formal politics

But problems with ICTS Quality of information uneven Quantity of data can exceed capacity to process and

analyze Predominance of English language Digital divide persists Customized environments where dissent eliminated

Can ICTS promote transnational citizenship? Is transnational citizenship viable?

III: Conclusions Citizenship requires trusted intermediaries,

institutions, and agencies to: Bring people of different points of view together Mediate differences Construct consensus Make decisions

Citizenship in action

But does this require nation-state?

David Held: erosion of nation-states: need transnational democratic legal order

Will Kymlicka: nation-states still powerful, territorial politics important, transnational associations not possible