«PATERSON REVIEW Volume 10, 2009 The Norman Paterson School of International Affairs Carleton University 1401 Dunton Tower 1125 Colonel By Drive, ...»
Volume 10, 2009
The Norman Paterson School of International Affairs
1401 Dunton Tower
1125 Colonel By Drive,
Ottawa, Ontario, Canada
The Paterson Review of International Affairs, formally E-merge,
is a scholarly journal exclusively showcasing the work of
graduate students in the field of international affairs. Managed by students from the Norman Paterson School of International Affairs, the Paterson Review is dedicated to publishing articles on a wide range of emerging issues in the theory and practice of international affairs. Copy requests and submissions may be sent electronically to firstname.lastname@example.org or by mail to Paterson Review c/o Norman Paterson School of International Affairs, 1401 Dunton Tower, Carleton University 1125 Colonel By Drive, Ottawa, Ontario, K1S 5B6 Canada.
Copyright © 2009, Paterson Review of International Affairs
1. International Relations – Periodicals. 2. World Politics – Periodicals. 3. Policy Sciences – Periodicals.
CONTENTS viii Letter from the Editor Justice, Equality and the Ethical Implications of the Clean Development Mechanism Beth Jean Evans, International Development Studies, Dalhousie University Spy versus Spy? Rethinking the Dynamic of Canadian Forces Intelligence Sharing in Afghanistan Andrew Feltham, Norman Paterson School of International Affairs, Carleton University The Law of the North: An Examination of the Role of International Law in Canadian Claims Over and Policy Toward Arctic Waters Shawn Friele, Norman Paterson School of International Affairs, Carleton University Development Effectiveness: Towards a Broader Understanding Shannon Kindornay, Norman Paterson School of International Affairs, Carleton University A Neo World? Neoconservatism, International Relations and the Iraq War Nathaniel Lowbeer-Lewis, Norman Paterson School of International Affairs, Carleton University Feminist Identities in Argentina: The Divergence Between Women’s Movements and Feminism Ashley McEachern, Development Studies, York University Approaching the Palestinian Refugee Crisis in Lebanon from a Modified Human Security Perspective Annahita Mirsalari, Political Science, University of Waterloo Revolution or Disappointment? Early Prospects of Implementation of Advance Market Commitments for Vaccines in Developing Countries Gonzalo Moreno, Norman Paterson School of International Affairs, Carleton University Conflict Management in the Democratic Republic of Congo Mallory Mroz, Norman Paterson School of International Affairs, Carleton University Conflict, Displacementand Cyclone Nargis: Understanding Burma Through an Analysis of its Complex Humanitarian Emergencies Kirsten Pontalti, School of International Studies, Simon Fraser University
Treasurer and Marketing Manager Gilbert Cabiles Graphic Designer Sara L’Espérance Blind Reviewers Melissa Bolster Gilbert Cabiles Jesse Cressman-Dickinson Iyad Dakka Brandon Deuville Christopher Heffernan Paul Knight Jen MacDowell Doug MacQuarrie Philippe Martin Kat McLellan Louise Mimnagh Gonzalo Moreno Mallory Mroz Peter Loveridge Azin Samani Contributing Editors Melissa Bolster Gilbert Cabiles Nicholas Decock Scott Fitzsimmons Julia Garant Ryan Grigg Sophie Hashem Alexandra Johnson Peter Loveridge Nathaniel Lowbeer-Lewis Jen MacDowell Trisha Maclean Kat McLellan Louise Mimnagh Mallory Mroz Ashley Proceviat Kirsten Thomasen
ACKNOWLEDGEMENTSExpert Reviewers Stephen Brown, PhD., Associate Professor of Political Science, School of Political Studies, University of Ottawa Lynda Collins, L.L.M., Assistant Professor of Law, Faculty of Law, University of Ottawa John H. Currie, L.L.B., L.L.M., Associate Professor of Law, Faculty of Law, University of Ottawa David Long, PhD, Professor of International Affairs, Norman Paterson School of International Affairs, Carleton University Christopher Penny, L.L.M., Assistant Professor of International Law, Norman Paterson School of International Affairs, Carleton University Elinor Sloan, PhD. Associate Professor and Associate Supervisor of Graduate Studies, Department of Political Science, Carleton University Ian Spears, PhD., Assistant Professor of Political Science, Department of Political Science, University of Guelph Mira Sucharov, PhD., Associate Professor of Political Science, Department of Political Science, Carleton University Lisa Mills, PhD., Assistant Professor, School of Public Policy and Administration, Carleton University James Milner, PhD., Assistant Professor of Political Science, Department of Political Science, Carleton University Elliot Tepper, PhD., Associate Chair of Political Science, Department of Political Science, Carleton University Special Thanks to Vivian Cummins Genevieve Leroux Norean Shepherd Centre for Security and Defense Studies Centre for Trade Policy and Law Diplomat & International Canada vii Letter from the Editor The process of examining international affairs and international politics is not an easy one. In a world that is becoming increasingly complex, the provision of in-depth and nuanced analysis is crucial in shaping our understanding of these changing trends and their consequences. Not only must we question and analyze the world around us, but we must also be able to identify emerging issues in the international system and develop ways to confront these potential challenges.
It is with this spirit that the Paterson Review of International Affairs, now entering its tenth volume, seeks to contribute to the current international policy environment.
Based out of the Norman Paterson School of International Affairs (NPSIA), at Carleton University, Canada, the Paterson Review is an annual peer-reviewed publication that showcases the work of graduate students throughout North America.
In order to be published, the articles must go through a rigorous editorial process.
First, a blind review is held to select a list of publishable submissions. If selected, the articles are then sent to an academically qualified expert in the subject matter for their evaluation, followed by substantive editing by the Paterson Review editorial staff. Of the 35 submissions received this year, 10 articles were selected for publication.
Our contributors investigated a broad range of relevant issues in international affairs, providing a critical analysis of a topic that they feel is deserving of debate within the field.
Beth Jean Evans examines the role of environmental justice and international equality in achieving success in international environmental agreements with an in-depth look at the Clean Development Mechanism of the Kyoto Protocol. Andrew Feltham provides an assessment of intelligence sharing between Canada and other countries of the International Security Assistance Force in Afghanistan, outlining the challenges faced by the Canadian Forces and how these might be addressed. Shawn Friele also examines a timely Canadian issue through the lens of international and customary law with his study on the uncertainties regarding Canadian claims to the Arctic. Shannon Kindornay examines the concept of development effectiveness and the varying interpretations and understandings of the term by different aid actors, suggesting that these differences can have potential implications for policy and research.
Nathaniel Lowbeer-Lewis presents a theoretical analysis of American foreign policy using the case of the War in Iraq, while Ashley McEachern engages in a study of feminism in Argentina, noting the historical conditions that have led to the development of a women’s movement that remains disconnected from feminist ideology. Annahita Mirsalari examines the Palestinian refugee crisis in Lebanon from a modified human security perspective, and provides potential policy solutions for the conflict. Gonzalo Moreno explores the complications that have prevented the establishment of an attractive vaccine market in developing countries, and considers how financing mechanisms such as Advance Market Commitments may be able to help overcome these hurdles. Mallory Mroz questions the effectiveness of peace agreements as a conflict management tool, and finally, Kirsten Pontalti detaches the label of ‘chaos’ from the situation in Burma and presents a study of the conflict from a complex humanitarian emergency approach.
The 2009 edition of the Paterson Review was made possible through the hard work of a large group of students, primarily from NPSIA, who contributed in the blind reviewing, editing and design of the journal. This year, the journal also underwent a complete design overhaul courtesy of Sara L’Espérance, our talented graphic designer who is an architecture student at Carleton University.
Since 2007, the Paterson Review has been published in a hard-copy format and is circulated to international affairs and public policy schools around the world. The journal is also available online through Diplomat & International Canada magazine at www.diplomatonline.com. As of this year, the Canadian Library of Archives will begin holding copies of the Paterson Review, another mark of the growth and expansion of the journal.
The Paterson Review would like to express its sincere appreciation to everyone who contributed to the tenth volume, as well as the continued expansion and growth of the journal. I would like to extend a special thank-you to all the expert reviewers, contributing editors, blind reviewers and designer who dedicated their time and expertise to the publication; to the authors for their wonderful contributions to the journal; to the staff at NPSIA for their ongoing support; to Diplomat & International Canada for their continued partnership; and to our sponsors, the Centre for Security and Defence Studies, the Centre for Trade Policy and Law, and NPSIA, for making this all possible.
CLEAN DEVELOPMENTMECHANISM Beth Jean Evans International Development Studies, Dalhousie University ABSTRACT Using the Clean Development Mechanism (CDM) of the Kyoto Protocol as a case study, this paper explores the importance of environmental justice and international equality in securing global participation in international environmental agreements. Through an examination of a variety of distributional and procedural inequalities inherent in the CDM’s market structure, this paper will suggest that market mechanisms and global environmental justice are incompatible in that the former creates inequalities which, by definition, preclude the latter. Further, because these inequalities are antithetical to developing nations’ perceptions of a just regime, an abandonment of market mechanisms may be necessary to facilitate continued international cooperation in emissions abatement regimes.
INTRODUCTIONA wide body of literature has emerged in recent years emphasizing that support for global environmental regimes and acceptance of their recommended courses of action will depend largely upon how equitable, or ‘just,’ the regime is perceived to be by all participants.1 This realization is perhaps most relevant with respect to the Clean Development Mechanism (CDM) of the Kyoto Protocol due to its unique reliance upon the voluntary participation of developing nations to achieve its dual objectives of mitigating emissions and facilitating global sustainable development. The initial objective of this paper is to examine the relationship between justice and legitimacy, as it exists within the context of the CDM, in order to evaluate the ‘justness’ of the regime. In Section I, I situate the CDM in its role as the grand compromise to the North-South environmentdevelopment debate which acted as a major impediment to the ratification of the Kyoto Protocol at the time of its negotiation.
I then outline the differences between developed and developing nations’ concepts of environmental ‘justice’ and address how these different notions are represented within the CDM framework. Here I argue that the CDM, despite rhetoric to the contrary, fails to strike a balance between the needs and expectations of all parties as its market structure necessitates a tradeoff between cost-efficiency and sustainable development benefits. Section II addresses how the market mechanism of the CDM creates biased and unequal project-type and project-location distribution patterns which further insult developing nations’ notions of justice and legitimacy. In this section I also contend that the capital mobility provided for by the CDM’s market mechanism forces developing nations to ‘attract’ CDM investment through acquiescence to investor demands, resulting in procedural inequalities which leave host nations with little leverage to derive promised benefits from the Mechanism. Section III discusses the implications of the aforementioned inequalities and injustices of the CDM for future developing nation cooperation with emissions abatement agreements. In the remaining sections, I expand upon the conclusions inferred by my research, suggesting that because inequalities inherent in market mechanisms are antithetical to developing nations’ conceptions of justice and legitimacy, an abandonment of these mechanisms may be necessary to facilitate the future cooperation of developing nations in emissions abatement regimes.