Canadian Foreign Policy During the Interwar Years free essay sample

When putting words to paper, each person has their own creative method. This rings especially true when writing about history. With the seemingly endless supply of information and accounts, no two readings or viewings will contain the same exact information or viewpoint. Deciding which resource to agree with or more importantly to relate too often times prove difficult, as simply reading the information without further deliberation as to the authenticity may lead one down an incomplete path. This paper will discuss in large part the differences of two particular passages and which of the two I found most persuasive. James Eayrs’ article â€Å"A Low Dishonest Decade: Aspects of Canadian External Policy, 1931-1939† and Norman Hillmer’s article â€Å"Defence and Ideology: The Anglo-Canadian Military Alliance in the 1930s† both explain Canada’s relations, or lack thereof, with Great Britain. While Eayrs’ viewpoint is a much more negative one. For instance Eayrs explains that â€Å"nothing was done by the Canadian Government to assist United Kingdom defence officials in their effort to stimulate the manufacture of arms in the overseas dominion † insisting that the Canadian Government was putting forth no effort to assist the members of the Dominion with their requests to prepare themselves for the defence of their own territories. While Hillmer’s explanation of a similar situation is that â€Å"The PM William Lyon Mackenzie King cabinet was agreeable to the placing of British orders in Canada and to private firms taking the initiative in the establishment of munitions and aircraft plants †. This explanation while stating essentially the same thing has a much more positive connotation and seemingly positive outcome on the people of Canada. It is also one that would lend itself more to the notion that the countries are, while remaining within their own constraints, working together towards a common goal. The negative view of Eayrs is present throughout his article and paints a much more reluctant Canada to any request made by the United Kingdom. Eayrs furthers his dark view with explaining how Canadians â€Å"held conviction that in reoccupying the demilitarized zone Hitler was only avenging the wrongs of Versailles, taking possession of what rightfully belonged to Germany †. It seems that the interpretations put forth by each author vary on the tone of articles. There was a noticeable amount to research conducted by each author, as indicated by the number of references included with each article. Both Eayrs and Hillmer included some seventy quotes to more than sixty different references each. The references used by both authors seem credible in that they used many minutes from Government meetings, debates and published internal documentation. Despite taking different routes to explain some of the thoughts at the time Hillmer actually referenced a previous work of Eayrs’ in his own article. This may not come as much of a surprise, since in essence both authors came to a similar conclusion on where Canada stood at the time with respect to helping the United Kingdom in a future war effort. As Hillmer explains, â€Å"although on the issue of peace or war the country would be split nless matters had been very badly handled, Canada would end in being in the war †. Eayrs noted on the same issue that â€Å"it is already decided that if Britain declares war, Canada must accept the situation†. Attempting to decide which article is the most persuasive is a difficult task. After reading both articles and noting the difference in tones I tried to figure where such difference may have arisen. The first thing that I noticed was that Eayrs article was published in 1960, a short 15 years after the end of World War II. It is quite possible that a negative view of the government and its agreement to partake in this war was still very much alive. This may have added to his tone and reason for creating such an article. Nonetheless, his references seem very much authentic and there does not seem to be any reason why he would want to mislead someone into having a thought for or against his writing. On the other hand I could not help but notice his almost sympathetic view towards Germany while including information on how Canada rejected requests from the United Kingdom time and time again during the interwar period. Hillmer’s article was published in 1978, and given that he was born during the war, may offer some insight into his more patriotic and positive twist to the interwar timeframe. While Hillmer would have been around to witness the post war affect on Canada, not being directly involved in the time leading up to World War II or the war itself means a loss of the national sentiment at the time. This however, does not affect how persuasive I find his writing. Hillmer’s references do add credibility to his writing and, as mentioned above to Eayrs. I find both articles persuasive on their own merits but given the current global situation I would like to think that Canada was a little more receptive to the requests made by the United Kingdom and as such find Hillmer’s article a little more persuasive. It is noted that when writing about history one can only research these periods of time. With the amount of views which exist today about historical times it is difficult to decide how many of these are presenting the information in the most neutral and truthful manner. If it was believed that this had already been accomplished then writers of history may find themselves short on employment. Truth be told, each historian believes that they have their own unique view on the events in which they write about, if they did not there would be no point in writing anything new about historical times. I believe the key to reading and learning about history is finding the stories, articles, papers etc That one can most directly relate too, as this is where their interest will lie. Endnotes James Eayrs, â€Å"A Low Dishonest Decade: Aspects of Canadian External Policy, 1931-1939† The Growth of Canadian Policies in External Affairs (1960): 356 Norman Hillmer, â€Å"Defence and Ideology: The Anglo-Canadian Military â€Å"Alliance† in the 1930s† International Journal 33-3 (Summer 1978): 91 Eayrs, 353 Hillmer, 89 BIBLIOGRAPHY Eayrs, James, â€Å"A Low Dishonest Decade: Aspects of Canadian External Policy, 1931-1939† The Growth of Canadian Policies in External Affairs (1960) Hillmer, Norman, â€Å"Defence and Ideology: The Anglo-Canadian Military â€Å"Alliance† in the 1930s† International Journal 33-3 (Summer 1978)