Middle power liberal internationalism and mediation in messy places: The canadian dilemma

Abstract

Canada seeks to increase its role in mediation as part of a renewed liberal internationalist foreign policy. This means confronting the question of how to manage the domestic political consequences of engaging as a mediator with those violating cherished international norms, while also upholding the view that they should be punished. Key to all this is the concept of impartiality, particularly as it relates to the objectives of liberal internationalist countries. This paper explores multiple meanings of the term ‘‘impartial’’ as they pertain to mediation, particularly with respect to the question of mediations involving those who have violated international norms. The paper then explores whether increased support for ‘‘arms length’’ mediations, such as Track Two diplomacy, might allow for more involvement in mediation, while avoiding direct involvement in morally fraught situations. The paper concludes that Track Two can be useful in developing a national capacity for international mediation, and that work can also be done to make Track Two—which is currently based largely on Western concepts—more indigenous. However, support for Track Two does not answer the fundamental question of how Canada, as such, can be more active as a mediator if it is not willing to engage with actors who have committed atrocities.