The early twenty-first century witnessed a shift in Canadian international action, how such action is portrayed, and how Canada's international history is deployed to understand Canada and its evolution. This shift has contributed to a growing awareness of the intellectual and political significance of Canada's international history and a heightened awareness of the need for a re-engagement with this history to produce more complex narratives. Demonstrating and encouraging such a re-engagement is the purpose of this historiographical article, which traces the writing of Canadian international history from its origins to a period of crisis in the last three decades of the twentieth century. In so doing, it explores how “empire” and its legacy run through this historiography's various overlapping currents. Flowing from this discussion, the article highlights three “tragedies” that have marked the historiography and that are reflective of, and linked to, tragedies in the history of Canadian encounters with the world. This is followed by an examination of current trends that are contributing to a renewed, more expansive literature, thereby emphasizing the value and potential of Canadian international history as a means to obtain greater understanding of Canada as a project of rule.

Charles de Gaulle’s cry of “Vive le Québec libre!” during his 1967 visit to Montreal was the product of the convergence of Canadian, Quebecois and Gaullist nationalist reactions to preponderant US influence and globalization’s rise after 1945. The dynamic was especially pronounced in the cultural sphere. Consistent with the trend towards increased transnational exchanges, cultural relations grew in the Canada-Quebec-France triangle in the fifteen years after the Second World War. Quebec neo-nationalism’s rise was accompanied by a greater appreciation of France as an ally as Quebec strove to preserve its francophone identity. Such preoccupations corresponded to French apprehensions about the ramifications on France at home and abroad of American cultural ‘imperialism.’ In addition to nationalist concerns in France and Quebec, English Canadian nationalists were preoccupied with American influences on the Canadian identity. If these three interacting nationalist reactions shared a preoccupation about American cultural power and Americanization that encouraged a growing state involvement in culture and promoted greater exchanges, the differences between them also helped set the stage for the tempestuous triangular relationship of the 1960s.Le « Vive le Québec libre! » lancé par Charles de Gaulle lors de sa visite de 1967 à Montréal est le produit de la convergence de réactions nationalistes canadiennes, québécoises et gaullistes face à la montée de l’influence des États-Unis et de la mondialisation après 1945. Cette dynamique fut particulièrement prononcée dans la sphère culturelle. Dans la foulée de la hausse des échanges transnationaux, les relations culturelles s’étaient intensifiées dans le triangle Canada–Québec–France au cours des quinze années suivant la Seconde Guerre mondiale. La montée du néonationalisme québécois s’était accompagnée d’une meilleure appréciation de la France à titre d’alliée, au moment même où le Québec tentait de préserver son identité francophone. Ce genre de préoccupations rejoignait les appréhensions françaises quant aux ramifications, à la fois en France, sur le continent et à l’étranger, de « l’impérialisme » culturel américain. Les nationalistes canadiens-anglais s’ajoutaient aux Français et aux Québécois, qui se souciaient pour leur part des influences américaines sur l’identité canadienne. Ces trois courants nationalistes partageaient un malaise par rapport à l’hégémonie culturelle américaine et à l’américanisation et demandèrent, parfois en interaction, l’intervention croissante de l’État et l’intensification de leurs échanges mutuels. Cependant, les différences entre ces courants ont aussi préparé le terrain aux relations triangulaires tumultueuses des années 1960

Decolonization's impact was by no means restricted to the Global South. It is impossible to understand developments in the Canada-Quebec-France triangle in the 1960s without referring to the discourse, ideas, and examples of anti-colonial resistance that marked international life after the Second World War. In addition to influencing the postwar development of France and Quebec, the decolonization phenomenon figured prominently in the process of rapprochement that developed between them in the post-1945 period. After discussing the global reach of decolonization, this article examines its impact on the Canada-Quebec-France triangle. Particular attention is paid to its intellectual and political consequences, notably the ‘Quebec as colony’ metaphor and the reimagining of France as a champion of decolonization. The intersection between these two ideas was crucial to the evolution of the France–Quebec relationship.

Employing information gathered chiefly from the archives of France's Ministère des Affaires Étrangères (MAE), this article examines official French perceptions of the October Crisis, and how these were influenced by evolving attitudes in Paris regarding Quebec and Canada. It is argued that French official perceptions of the October Crisis were shaped foremost by a belief that arose in the 1960s among elements in the French political class that Quebec was evolving toward some form of international sovereignty. The October Crisis, thus, was perceived in French circles as a manifestation of Quebec's larger political evolution; Ottawa's hard-line response was seen as misguided and ultimately exacerbating the crisis, and as consistent with federalist resistance to Quebec épanouissement. These French perceptions were reinforced by the invocation of the War Measures Act. The result was a rather ambiguous response from Paris that condemned FLQ actions out of a general opposition to political violence, but that was tempered by a concern that the reaction of Canadian and Quebec authorities, notably the former, not be permitted to interfere with the French view of the Québécois interest. À partir d'informations recueillies principalement aux archives du ministére français des Affaires étrangères (MAE), cette étude examine les perceptions françaises officielles concernant la Crise d'octobre, et la manière dont ces perceptions ont été influencées par l'attitude qu'a adoptée Paris à l'égard du Québec et du Canada. Cet article soutient que les perceptions françaises officielles concernant la Crise d'octobre ont avant tout été influencées par une conviction, parmi certains membres de la classe politique française dans les années 60, que le Québec s'acheminait vers une forme de souveraineté internationale. Ainsi, dans les milieux français, la Crise d'octobre a été perçue comme une manifestation de l'évolution politique générale du Québec; la réaction intransigeante d'Ottawa a été perçue comme une erreur qui avait contribué à l'aggravation de la crise et qui illustrait l'opposition fédéraliste à l'épanouissement du Québec. Ces perceptions n'ont été que renforcées par le décret de la Loi des mesures de guerre. Il en a résulté une réponse plutôt équivoque de la France, qui a condamné les actes du FLQ par opposition à toute violence politique, mais dont la condamnation a été tempérée du fait qu'elle ne voulait pas que la réaction des autorités québécoises et, surtout, canadiennes contrarie les intérêts québécois tels que les concevaient les Français.

This essay brings environmental and diplomatic history into conversation in order to examine the Trudeau government’s response to the 1969-70 voyages of the oil tanker Manhattan through the Northwest Passage. By passing the Arctic Waters Pollution Prevention Act and extending Canada’s territorial sea to 12 miles, Ottawa successfully instrumentalized the heightened environmental concern of the period in order to press Canadian claims to sovereignty in the Arctic. The essay demonstrates that this custodial approach was consistent with the functionalist tradition in Canadian liberal internationalism. More broadly, it reveals the promise of re-examining Canadian international history through the prism of environmental history.