Canada and the United Nations Security Council, 1999–2000 – a reassessment

Riekhoff, Harald von

doi:10.1080/11926422.2002.9673308

Cited by 3 publications

(2 citation statements)

References 5 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…The dominant interpretation was that the humanitarian crisis, combined with the fact that the FRY was in clear violation of several UNSC resolutions, provided sufficient justification for military action even without explicit UN approval (Heinbecker and McRae, 2001: 123–24). In short, the use of force was deemed illegal but not illegitimate (von Riekhoff, 2002: 93).…”

Section: The War In Kosovomentioning

confidence: 99%

“…While the Chrétien government would have preferred a UN mandate, it was willing to consider military action without it. Ottawa decided to circumvent the UNSC because it feared that a formal Russian veto might encourage the defection of hesitant allies like Italy and Greece and jeopardize NATO unity (Heinbecker, 1999: 21; von Riekhoff, 2002: 92). The dominant interpretation was that the humanitarian crisis, combined with the fact that the FRY was in clear violation of several UNSC resolutions, provided sufficient justification for military action even without explicit UN approval (Heinbecker and McRae, 2001: 123–24).…”

Section: The War In Kosovomentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Why Canada Goes to War: Explaining Combat Participation in US-led Coalitions

Massie

2019

Can J Pol Sci

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Canada has taken part in six wars since 1945, all of which have been conducted under US leadership. Despite such military interventionism, there have been no systematic comparative analyses of Canada's decisions to take part in US-led wars. The objective of this article is to develop and test a theoretical framework about why Canada goes to war. More specifically, it seeks to account for variations in Canada's provision of combat forces to multinational interventions led by the United States. It assesses leading theoretical explanations by examining five post–Cold War cases: the wars in Kosovo, Afghanistan and Libya; the war against ISIS; and the refusal to take part in the invasion of Iraq. The article concludes that Canada's willingness to go to war is shaped primarily by a desire to maintain transatlantic alliance unity and enhance Canada's alliance credibility. Threats to national security, the legitimacy of the intervention, government ideology and public opinion are not found to consistently or meaningfully shape Canadian decisions to take part in US-led wars.

show abstract

Section: The War In Kosovomentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: The War In Kosovomentioning

confidence: 99%