Forging National Identity: The Relationship Between Canadian Mythology and Foreign Policy Strategy

Edward Said writes that “nations are themselves narrations”, suggesting that nations of the world have a propensity to formulate distinct images and fundamental beliefs defining and binding their peoples as different from others. Often passed down through generations, these narrations are based on core myths that signify who a member of the nation is, what they stand for, and how they should act. Mythologies regarding national identity circulate within Canadian society perhaps more than any other society in the world. These often historically rooted narratives construct the world today as foreign policy leaders, looking to legitimize their policy of choice, link their strategies to these mythological elements of national identity that already have resonance amongst the population. As these foreign policy strategies are adopted, the representations of self and other present in the mythologies, become realized, though never quite as they were originally articulated. By attuning my focus to the myths that supposedly underlie the national identity of citizens in Canada, I ask what is the relationship between Canadian national identity as rooted in its myths and the foreign policy decisions of its government? Are these narrations of self and other powerful enough to dictate Canadian foreign policy or do foreign policy decisions reflexively alter these myths and the particular understandings of history they depend upon? After reviewing the mythological narratives underpinning Canadian national identity and tracing references to these elements in Canadian Parliamentary debate surrounding the state’s involvement in the 2001 Afghanistan and 2003 Iraq wars, I question the impacts this relationship has on those inside and outside Canada. The actual execution of these policies produces results that run counter to the national myths they supposedly reinforce (those Canadians have a duty to protect go unprotected, roles Canadians ought to fill, go unfilled). Yet, it appears that while the specific content of these myths are able to change, the sense of righteousness and unity amongst those who propagate the myths remains, even while Canadian foreign policy fails to uphold the mythological precepts it was seemingly created to defend. In conclusion, I offer some implications of the co-constitutive relationship between national myths and foreign policy outside the Canadian context.