Canadian
Historical Association
T
hi
H
istorians
and
P
ublic
P
olicy
:
Some Reflections Based on a Visit to Canadian Peacekeepers
A part-time member of the history department at Wilfrid Laurier University, I am also a FacultyAssociate at the Laurier Centre for Military, Strategie and Disarmament Studies (LCMSDS). The purpose of the Centre is to “foster research, teaching, and publicdiscussion of military andstrategie issues of national and international significance.” Wilfrid Laurier is oneof twelve universities across Canada which receive financial support fromthe Security and Defence Forum(SDF)of the Department of National Defence as partof its mandate to “developa domes-tic compétence and nationalinterest in defence issues ofcurrent and future relevance to Canadian security.” Under this mandate, the Directorate of Public PolicyatNationalDefence organized a visit bythe SDFDirectors ortheir représentativesto Israël and Egypt in March 1997 primarilyto studythe Middle East Peace Process. Tours of CanadianForces Missions in the région were included in the itinerary. Givenmy teaching andresearch back-ground in peaeekeeping as a historian of Canadian foreign and defence policy, Iwas named as the LCMSDS participant.
As a studentof the past, being offered a chance to travel to a part of the world which literally oozes 2 000 years of history from every pore was a spécialprivilègein andof itself; in the emotion- ally-charged atmosphère of the Middle East, history really is everything. However,thisfieldtripalso afforded agolden oppor-tunity not only to gain abird’s eye view ofCanadianpeacekeepers —and thus comparepersonalimpressions withhistorical stéréo typés—but to consider aswell what historians can bring to issues ofpublic policy.
Such excursions can be a boon to the historian. It ail dépends, ofcourse, on the type of historyone studies, but in my case at least the benefits were pronounced. Military historians often claim that a battle can trulybe understood only by “walking the ground”, that is,by exploring the battlefielditself. My own recent expérience suggests that this axiom has widerapplications. The unobstructed vistas of miles of Israeli and Syrian territory obtainedstanding in an abandoned Israelioutpost atop the Golan Heights drive home their strategie importance — andhence the value ofthepeacekeepersstationedthere— moreforcefully than any written description ever could. Visiting isolated peaeekeep ingobservationposts —whether ona cold andwindswept day in theGolan or on a barren strip of Mediterranean beach nearthe Israeli-Egyptian border —givesonea flavour of the monotonous but indispensable tasksperformedbyaveragesoldiers in thefield, especially in terms of confidence-building between parties. The dedication and professionalism of peacekeepers are starkly displayed in briefings conducted by officers at various headquar-ters. Finally, no textbook account of thevagaries ofpeaeekeeping life can compare with actually bunking on a base in the Sinai Desert for acouple of days and witnessing the daily routinethere.
I hâve oftenfound itsomewhat difficult to relate to theformer and still-serving Canadian soldiers who act as guest speakers in my undergraduatecourse on peaeekeeping. Perhaps Iwillunderstand their réminiscences and recollectionsbetter havingwalked a little in their shoes, and mystudents will no doubt be the beneficiaries in lectures and seminars whose content will hopefully now seem more “real” tothem. One particular conclusion that I willbeable toimpart to them,having seen its manifestation firsthand, isthat some of the “clichés” associated with Canada’s traditional rôle as peaeekeeper that hâve developed over the years are not simply hoary generalizations, but actually ring true. Canadian peacekeepers are clearly well-likedand highly respected for their impartiality by local populations and govemments, and much prized by force commanders because of their expérience and expertise. I hâve often wincedat repeated labelling of Canadaas global “honest broker” and “helpful fixer”, but this joumey reminded me thatevery legend has itsbasisinfact.
Thus, the trip was immenselyrewarding in terms of the insights into peaeekeeping which Iwas able to glean andthat can nowbe incorporated into myown research and teaching. However,italso showedmethat historians hâve much tocontribute themselves to such assignments. Historians were not specifically recruited to participate; the vastmajority of our délégation were political sci- entists and strategie studies analysts. I leamed much from them, especially about the utility of theoretical constructs in the study of conflict and conflict resolution, and found them to be well aware of the relevancy of historical interprétation in the analysis of contemporaryevents. Even so,the perspectives of the two dis ciplines are different,and this often revealed itself in the kinds of questions whichwere asked duringround table discussion. The historian’sinterest in comparing past and présent, and in using the former to shed light on the latter, can prove auseful complément tothe international relations practitioner’s focus on gauging the relationship between today’s problems and tomorrow’s solutions.
It seemsto me that byvirtue of their training historians bring two strengths in particulartogovemment’s and academe’sperpét uai search for waystobridgethegap between policy and practice. Although not original ideas, they are often forgotten or down- played. One is their emphasisonthe lessonsto be learnedform the past. Surelywestill study history in order toavoidmaking the same mistakes twice. Watching peacekeepers in the Middle East strugglewith many ofthe same intractable problems which con- fronted them 30 years ago reinforced this truism for me. Peaeekeeping missions face an ongoing challenge to retain an institutional memory, and historians obviouslyhâve a lot to offer in assistingthis process.
The other area in which the historical profession can make a significantcontribution to the makingof public policy fiesin its
Société historique
du
Canada
core commitment to explaining whythingsarethe way they are today. Why,forinstance, do Canadian peacekeepersenjoy sucha sterling réputation intheMiddleEastandwhyare they invariably assignedtopositions of influence and responsibility? Much ofthe answerlies in their pastperformance and historiansnaturallyhâve a spécial skill in identifying these kind ofcontextual factors. Such background information can be crucial to decision-makers charting future policy. I can think ofat least one example related to my own area ofstudy. Historicalprecedentsabound to confirm the old adage that “peacekeeping is no job fora soldier, buta job only a soldier can do”. Having a small taste of operational realities validated for me thismaxim, which has become increas-ingly disputed in the post-Cold War rush to civilianize peace keeping.
The importance of historians’ taking on more public rôles is great, therefore. Although history often appears to be under assault from some quarters, my trip provided ample evidencethat it is neither dead nor irrelevant— unless we allow it to be. We need to educate ourselves more thoroughly about the kind of
public outreach programs which the fédéral governmentopérâtes through the university community and how to access them. Moreover, historical groups (like the CHA) might lobby the gov ernment to makeaconsciouseffort to includehistoriansasa mat-ter of coursein activitiesassociated with those programs. That way, the profession could play a more active part in informing Canadians on contemporarypolicy issues while widening its rele- vancy and increasing the demand for its services. Certainly it would be ameans ofadding credibility to classroom instruction, injecting greater depth into curricula, and bringingnew dimen sions to research projects. Thisisnottomentionthepedagogical (and networking!) Benefits which would accrue from exposure to colleagues in otherdisciplines. Finally,and onapurely pragmat- ic note, today’s constricted employment situationcompels young historians in particularto pursue ail options for selling their wares and thereby making themselves more marketablebothwithinand without the halls of academe.
Dr.
David A.
Lenarcic,
Wilfred
Laurier
University
&
In Memoriam / Décès
Margaret Ancboretta Ormsby, president of the CHA
$
. (1965-66), died at herOkanagan home in Coldstream BC on
? $■
?
2 November 1996 at the âge of 87. When she attended her firstCHA meeting in the early 1940s, she and Hilda Neatby were theonly women présent.
After receiving a B.A and M.A from the University of i British Columbia and aPh.D. from BrynMawr, shetaught at k ; a private school in California and at McMaster. In 1943 she retumed to UBC. From 1963 until retirement in 1974 she headedthe rapidlyexpandingHistory department.
Hermost important work,British Columbia: A History (1958, 1971)was a bestsellerinthe provinceand isstillan invaluable reference on the early political history of her native province.
She received manyhonours including mostrecentlyan hon- orary doctorate from the University of Northem British Columbia andmembership in the Order of British Columbia and the Orderof Canada.
PatriciaRoy, University of Victoria
$
s
;
Révérend Père G.E. Giguère est décédéle 7 novembre 1996.
Michel Grenon, professeur de l’Université du Québec à Montréal, est décédé des suitesd’une maladie foudroyante en décembre 1996. Jean-Paul Bernard rappelle les principaux éléments de sa carrière dans un texte publié dans leBulletindu
département d'histoire del’UQAM (n° 22, hiver 1997, p. 16-18), dontnous reproduisonsquelques extraits.
Michel Grenon est néàMontréalen 1936. Ila poursuivi ses études de baccalauréat à l’Université d’Ottawa (diplômé en 1957), de licence etdedoctoratàl’Université de Montréal. Sa thèsea pour titre: «L’idéede progrès et le débat sur l’orienta- | tion de l’instruction publique pendant la Révolution | française». Il estdevenu professeur àl’UniversitédeMontréal | en 1961, mais, en 1970, il s’est joint à l’équipe professoralede l’Université duQuébecà Montréal. Spécialistedel’histoirede < l’Europe moderne, «il était l’européaniste du Groupe de < recherche sur les idéologies dans la société canadienne- | française (GRIS CAF) ». Il s’est intéressé à l’avenir de la | pratique historienne comme en font foi les communications i qu’il a données au Congrès des Sociétés savantes (Windsor | 1988) : «De l’avenir de l’histoire après les Annales»; et au colloque «Où s’en va l’histoire?» (Université Paris VU, ; 1989) : «Vers une nouvelle alliance avec la littérature et la ; philosophie?». Jean-Paul Bernard souligne que «Michel * Grenon était un historien heureux de son appartenance disci- J plinaire. Mais il s’intéressait aussi, activement, à la littérature, àl’histoire de l’art età la philosophie. Ildéfinissait l’universi taire comme quelqu’unà qui ona donné le loisir deréfléchiret qui a l’obligationderendrecompte de sa réflexion».
?
