BMD, eh? Missile defence the Canadian way: Realist roots and liberal rhetoric in the February 24, 2005 'Refusal'

Following the February 24, 2005 announcement declaring that Canada was refusing participation in the American Ballistic Missile Defence program there has been a significant debate regarding the implications of this decision. This paper will directly address this debate, providing a theoretical analysis of the decision and attempting to prove that contrary to the opinions of a number of observers, this was a solidly realist foreign policy and did not reflect the principles of liberalism. The thesis will compare realist and liberal interpretations of the debate, noting that Canada's core national interests, as defined by realism, are firmly protected and that the decision did not seem to reflect an alternative liberal conceptualization of national interest. Furthermore the role of domestic factors does not detract from this conclusion. Thus, the decision appears firmly rooted in realism, notwithstanding the liberal rhetoric that is often applied to the decision.