What did the Canadian government do (in its major decisions and through the phases they form)? Why did it do it (i.e., the relative importance of the key individual, governmental, societal and external determinants)? and briefly, at the end and based on your answers to the first two questions, What could and should it have done differently to better secure the outcomes it (and perhaps) you wanted?
Chicago author-date citations, endnotes only as necessary, and a list of at least 12 core scholarly references and a total of at least 24 citations (including from popular sources such as think tank reports, and media sources)
Foreign Policy: What did Canada do, why, and, in the very short conclusion, what could and should it have done differently in Coping with China since 2018
This case centers on the detention of Ms. Men, Michal Spavor and Michael Kovrig, the Huwaei 5G issue, but expand to other aspects of Canada?s policy towatd?s China, especially after September 2021. Start on January 1, 2018 when the 5G Huawei issue was already underway. It includes Canada?s major decisions on the international coalition against arbitrary detention, in the G7, G20 and UN summits regarding China, including on environmental issues.
What did the Canadian government do (in its major decisions and through the phases they form)? Why did it do it (i.e., the relative importance of the key individual, governmental, societal and external determinants)? and briefly, at the end and based on your answers to the first two questions, What could and should it have done differently to better secure the outcomes it (and perhaps) you wanted?
Answers to the first two questions will each constitute about 40% of the essay, those to the final question (on feasible, superior policy alternatives) 10%, and the introduction (composed of the significance of the case, competing schools of thought, ?puzzles? and your thesis about what Canada did and why) 10%. Your own normative judgments should appear only very briefly in the final section, if at all, even if the literature you use is full of such criticisms and condemnations of what the Canadian government did.
The introduction to your essay will include in turn a treatment of the following elements: the policy and theoretical significance of the case; the debate among the competing schools of thought about the case itself, which requires you to group scholarly writings based on their common views on your topic (these are the specific ?schools? identified from the author?s writing on the specific case examined in your paper, about what the Canadian government did in its major decisions and why); the puzzles, aspects of the case that existing schools of thought do not adequately describe or explain; and your thesis or central argument, about what the Canadian government did and why.
You must clearly state in the introduction, ideally in two to four sentences, your thesis ? your central argument about what happened (the central pattern of Canadian foreign policy behaviour you have identified, including identifying trends and phases in Canadian behaviour) and why (the key causes of that behaviour, identifying the most salient external, societal, governmental, and individual determinants). Remember, a scholarly research essay is not a murder mystery novel where the reader has to wait until the very end to find out ?whodunit? ? that is, what really happened and why. This thesis statement in the introduction should be a clear, complete statement that offers a better account (i.e., solves the puzzles) than the existing inadequate arguments offered by the competing schools of thought.
In the beginning and body of the essay, your thesis is derived from the subject-specific competing schools of thought and the puzzles they leave. In the conclusion, you must start by summarizing how the determinants your highlight changes at the right time, in the right direction and degree, to cause the changes in the key decisions you choose and the phases they create.
To organize your essay, start with a chronological treatment of the major decisions and the resulting phases works best. Follow this with a treatment of the major changes in the external, societal, governmental and individual determinants. In each section and the conclusion, you should directly connect changes in effects (what Canada did in its major decisions) and changes in the determinants
(why it did it). You must relate your analysis directly to your thesis that you specify in the introduction.
Each case covers the start date indicated above through to the present, unless an earlier end date is notified above. In a few cases you might be able to focus on a handful of major decisions (and the determinants for each), but in most cases the many decisions should be grouped into major phases, defined by the dominant direction and degree of the decisions within them.
Chicago author-date citations, endnotes only as necessary, and a list of at least 12 core scholarly references and a total of at least 24 citations (including from popular sources such as think tank reports, and media sources)
1 EXAMPLE AND 20 SCHOLARLY REFERENCES PROVIDED
