How We Lead: Canada in a Century of Change

by Joe Clark

A passionate argument for Canada's reassertion of its place on the world stage, from a former prime minister and one of Canada's most respected political figures.
     In the world that is taking shape, Canada's unique success as a diverse society and its reputation as a sympathetic and respected international partner are invaluable assets--at least as valuable as the country's natural resource wealth. As the world becomes more competitive and complex, and the chances of deadly conflict grow, the example and the initiative of Canada can become more important than ever. However, its assets will lose their value if Canadians don't recognize or use them, or worse, if they waste them.
     How We Lead is a compelling examination of what kind of a nation Canada has been, has become and could yet be. A successful foreign minister himself during the collapse of the Soviet Union and the end of Apartheid, Joe Clark employs anecdote and analysis to take readers beyond formal foreign policy and shows how innovative organizations and individuals can put Canada's unique combination of assets to work and renew Canada's constructive influence on international events.

Genres: Nonfiction, Politics, Canada

288 pages, Paperback

First published January 1, 2013

Reviews

[Judd Street · Rating 4 out of 5]

After the first couple of pages of 'How We Lead,' I wasn't terribly excited for the rest of the book. The opening paragraphs are chock full of exceptionalism and paternalistic entitlement. But, fortunately, the rest of the book is more nuanced and insightful and, if at times a bit repetitive, does land a few quotable moments.

At its core, Clark (former Prime Minister of Canada, and member of the Progressive Conservative party, before leaving it over concerns of its post-merger drift towards social conservatism) has three arguments. The first is that Canada must exercise soft power (diplomacy, relationships, and trust) rather than hard power (military or economic) given its constraints - hardly a new argument, but well founded. The second argument is a full-bore, well-articulated and justified assault on Stephen Harper's (a later Prime Minister) attempts to make Canada a hard power without understanding its unique strengths; got off on talking loudly and burning bridges; and seemed quite intentional about undermining the institutions that made Canada strong. The third argument is a bit political nerdy, focusing on the importance of governments working closely with non-governmental organizations. These arguments are well made and their only limitations are perhaps being too self-evident and returning to the same examples slightly too frequently.

There were some relatively astute comments. For instance, Clark takes on the ways that obsession can become manifest, arguing re: focus on terrorism that

"The danger is that this process creates its own spiral. As societies become more fearful, governments focus - and lead public discourse to focus - on the threats in the world, especially terrorism. As one result, the disproportion is enormous between the money and attention that Western governments spend on defence and "homeland" security compared to the capacity to achieve co-operation, understanding and tangible improvements in the conditions that often give rise to upheaval, crime and terrorism. Violence and extreme behaviour have several sources, but there is no doubt that desperation, poverty and prejudice are fertile breeding grounds, and addressing those conditions is precisely where the constructive non-state actor, with their roots int he ground, already make a huge difference. Non-state actors could be even more effective is the issues they address, and the forward-looking perspectives they acquire, were treated as seriously as military and terrorist issues." (p. 60-61)

Of course, it's Clark's own party - or, rather, the post merger version of it - that attempted to skewer Prime Minister Trudeau when he (in the year of this book's publication) articulated nearly the same thing. When he highlighted the importance of understanding "root causes" of terrorism, the right wing attempted to crucify him for being weak on terror. Indeed, that's one place where this book is a little weaker than I wish it could be. Clark takes a decidedly and intentional ecumenical approach, but it leaves one wondering: it's many of his former supporters that are the ones who seem to devote themselves to tearing down the very ideals he espouses within this book. What is the remedy?

His analysis of why Harper was so, to be frank, intentionally destructive to Canadian soft power and institutions is also interesting. He accords much of this blame to the feeling of being an 'outsider' (p. 101-102) particularly from Alberta; to reactionist tendencies towards perceived exclusion by the 'liberal elites' in an American vein; and to inexperience with Canadian institutions (stemming, again, from western provincialism). He doesn't much mince words with Harper's view of government:

"In office, ["these Conservatives"] have given as much attention to stopping or reversing the initiatives of former governments as to taking legislative initiatives of their own... The "curtail government" view is different from a positive belief in, for example, fiscal responsibility... It reflects instead a substantially negative view of government, which contrasts sharply with Canada's historic and bipartisan creation of public institutions as essential partners and leaders in building a strong country, economy and society." (p. 103)

This is perhaps a tepid version of the critique of current American politics, wherein the Republican's sole reason to be in government is to tear apart government itself (perhaps with the exception of trying to regulate women and incarcerate people of colour). This may not be true, yet, to the same degree in Canada, but it's clear that Clark's critique is similar, if cautious.

Finally, one place I think the book is wanting is with respect to social media. For most of the book, Clark highlights the power of social media and the internet to bring people together. By 2021, amidst the pandemic and polarization from hell, it seems pretty clear this wasn't all it was cracked up to be. Clark offers something of a caution on this note late in the book:

"Canada needs national conversation that reach across interests that might divide us, or regions that might confine us, or silos that are inevitable in a vast and diverse country. That separateness can become reinforced by the ease with which we can burrow into communications with "people like us" beyond our national boundaries - our business networks, our Facebook friends, our allies in interest groups we fervently support. Ironically, the easy access to a wider world can narrow our own sights, rather than broaden them and, in that process erode our sense of connection to our actual neighbours and environment." (p. 200)

While I very much appreciate Clark's call for the importance of national conversations through royal commissions and the like, the book does read a little thin when it comes to excessive optimism in the power of the internet. While less than a decade old, the tendency to see the internet as a win comes across as a little naive. An update is desperately needed, pushing further on what can be done to tackle the incredibly deep, polarized divisions that threaten to rip us apart in this country. While Harper might be temporarily gone, his ilk lives on in Kenney, Ford, and others, and Clark is in a unique perspective - as something of key figure in the previous chapter of Canadian conservatism - to help us understand how the right wing can be shifted from an almost arsonist approach to institutions and collaboration towards a more, as he articulates it, principled and positive approach.

[Alex Mulligan · Rating 4 out of 5]

This book may be a quick short and easy read, but don’t let that lead you to believe it’s not loaded with insights, thought provoking ideas, and excellent explanations for the challenges Canada and the world face.

The book is critical of the Harper Government’s (lack of) foreign policy and focus on “hard power”. Instead, Clark argues Canada should re-focus on our “Soft diplomatic power” and build alliances beyond the traditional west and east power centres, while strengthening our connections with NGOs.

Clark believes the rules of intentional engagement have changed, and Canada’s soft power is uniquely able to manage that change.

One of our best Foreign ministers, and former prime minister, and internationally respected leader, Clark lends a unique voice to why Canada has a foreign policy and where to go from here.

[Jeffrey Sylvester · Rating 4 out of 5]

“How We Lead” by Joe Clark is a decent read.

As a former conservative Prime Minister of Canada, Minister of Constitutional Affairs, and long-time Secretary of State of External Affairs, Clark has ample credibility when it comes to describing changes in the machinations of Canadian government, how Canada has provided global leadership, and how we could lead in the future. Yet however optimistic this sounds, Clark’s impetus for writing this book is troubling or at least should be for most Canadians.
How We Lead is an open indictment of the Harper administration’s gutting of all that was good about Canada in the global sphere, a response that is rare from a former head of state, let alone a fellow conservative.

According to Clark, our former ministers and prime ministers had toiled for decades to develop the “soft power” attributes Canada became known for only to have these legacies quashed by Stephen Harper within a decade. To Clark, our value-added soft power strengths in the areas of development and diplomacy are where Canada has been able to make meaningful and positive headway globally. Clark stated that up until the Harper administration there had been a “continuity in the policy and approach of different Canadian governments to international policy across a wide spectrum” and that our most recent shift away from this consensus has not only adversely affected our international reputation, but that it has also reduced our level of influence and has upset many of the relationships we had with numerous states.

Clark claims that one overlying objective of the Harper administration has been to project an international optic of strength, but that in reality, this optic is void of substance leading to a disconnect between what Harper says, and what Harper does.

For example, Harper has attempted to bolster Canada’s image as a military “hard power” and has tried to cultivate trade links with emerging markets to reduce our dependency on the vacillating fortunes of the U.S. economy, which sounds good, but is it?

With respect to the military, Clark doesn’t contest that our men and women in uniform require adequate resources on the front-lines but what he is saying is that promoting a macho image without being able to back your mouth with commensurate power is a dangerous shell game to play. At the end of the day, Canada is a middle power that is remarkably weak even when compared with many countries with only emerging market economies. And these countries recognize this limit, which not only invalidates the husk behind this message, but it sends a message of ambivalence to others that was not previously associated with Canada.

On the trade front, when Harper was first elected he took a hard line on China’s human rights violations (as defined by the West…) but abruptly reversed course a few years later when he realized how economically stupid that was. And while the current EU/Canada trade deal may be good for Canada in the aggregate (and particularly for Saskatchewan, where I’m from) it has recently emerged that post-negotiation, Harper’s cabinet had established few, if any, tangible prospects for Canadian business in European markets. In other words, the deal may have been negotiated on an ideological supposition that trade is good rather than a thorough cost-benefit analysis. But according to Clark, this is how Harper rolls.

Clark claimed that Harper’s inner circle has not only centralized decision-making power among themselves more than any other PMO since WWII, but that they also ignore the advice provided by civil servants, the actual experts on various issues. Instead, this clique has engaged in the practice of making public policy decisions based on ideology rather than evidence which serves only the party’s constituents as opposed to the broader interests of all Canadians. What bothers Clark most however is Harper’s break with Canada’s traditional involvement with multilateral organizations such as the Commonwealth Secretariat (where I’d like to work) and the United Nations, organizations that work to spread peace, order and good government across an array of developing nations, which in turn, reciprocate Canada’s civil and commercial interests. In fact, Harper’s representatives have been openly hostile to the UN to the point of derailing multi-nation talks on climate change.

Perhaps most shocking was Clark’s assertion that Canada went from contributing the largest peacekeeping force in the world to now only contributing 1/58th of what we once did, which essentially eliminates our world respected role. But in terms of non-shockers, there were several including how Harper routinely flouts democratic processes for the purposes of fulfilling his own short-term political self-interests at the expense of the long-term collective interests of Canadians.

In terms of my own learning, I found the stats and explanations regarding the rise and effectiveness of NGOs useful as well as the economic stats on how several African countries are consistently outpacing BRICs in economic growth. I also found it sad, although not surprising, that Harper has taken an official side in the Israeli/Palestinian conflict, a move Clark claims is divisive and obstructs any real prospect of achieving a durable peace in the region.

Overall, I found Clark’s book a little light on information when compared with the likes of Kissinger but for Canadians who are less familiar with our foreign policy this book provides a decent overview of the purpose of foreign policy, of the recent evolutions in our market democracy as well as areas where we could provide progressive global leadership during the 21st century. Clark also discusses the factors underlying the inevitability of globalization, and as such, encourages traditional critics to look for opportunities within that as opposed to being obstructionist, which I feel is helpful (because obstructionists are unhelpful).

Having met Clark in 2001, I had developed a favorable impression of him based on a speech he delivered that focused on the need to address issues that affect all Canadians. After reading his book it is clear to me that his convictions haven’t changed and, if anything, have emboldened in response to the regressive nature of Harper’s leadership.

As a Canadian, I am thankful for Joe Clark’s honesty and integrity.

4 stars for Clark!

[Rob Dekker · Rating 3 out of 5]

This is about my 10th book either written by or about book about a Prime Minister. What is clear is the way PM Clark feels about the “current” PM is the time ‘How We Lead’ was written. That difference between himself and Mr. Harper more than anything clarifies how governing had changed on the 20+ years when Mr. Clark was sworn in as the Prime Minister in 1979.

What I appreciated here was his view of the political/government landscape. There is also, laced into the pages here, the pride of what Canada has done internationally. I think there is a wish to go back to those days but there is also a reality they never can.

The chapter on Canada/US relations reads like fiction based on what we are living now with the US.

Mr. Clark demonstrates his love of Canada and a hope we can go back to a time of international influence and persuasion. Based on what is happening today, the answer for that wish is contained in a book I recently read, “Avoiding the coming Anarchy “.

As a review of Canadian actions globally this book reminds of what we have accomplished and what could be, if we can once again look inward and act outward as a nation.

[Eric Wilson · Rating 2 out of 5]

Although Mr. Clark is a man of great intellect and wisdom, this book fell flat: although short in length, the arguments feel repetitive over the course of 200 pages. The main issue of the text is of soft vs. hard power, but that seems to be the entire premise behind every chapter and so the perspectives don’t add enough to make a major dent within the text.

Do keep in mind that since this book is fairly outdated, the use of references is iffy and its most likely that had this book been written today, the book would have been a lot different. The chapter on Stephen Harper’s foreign policy, for example, no longer applies as relevant due to a new government having taken its place. And foreign relations with China and Russia have changed greatly since then, meaning that references to “positive relations” with these two countries seems awkward and out of place.

[Horus · Rating 3 out of 5]

A treatise on, mostly, international policy as reflected on by a previous Prime Minister and Foreign minister. Clark demonstrates his statesman status with a very even-handed view of what foreign policy should be. However, there is a considerable amount of repetition of points that would have been better served to have some decent editing. It is also, obviously a commentary on the changes in the Conservative party under Harper, and while I don’t disagree with him, it seems like the book was an excuse to critique instead of being a critique in name. While there are still good things to learn from this book, I feel like there could have been more in line with the original premise.

[Strick · Rating 5 out of 5]

A first rate argument"

[Stanley Lee · Rating 3 out of 5]

Succinct summary of Canada's place in emerging global problems.

[Blair · Rating 5 out of 5]

Maybe this sounds kind of judgmental but if you care about Canada, you ought to read this book.

I've always admired Joe Clark. He's clearly a very intelligent person and during his short term as Canada's Prime Minster he was honest and clear about his objectives. Since then he's been involved at the core of Canada's politics and truly fits the bill of a "statesman". Not a label that can be applied to many of our politicians these days.

I didn't fully understand the title "How We Lead" at first but the Clark clarifies this in short order in the book. The title couldn't be better.

Canada is a small player on the world stage. With only 35 million people, we're small compared to most countries. And yet, over the last century, we've carried a huge amount of political clout on the world stage. How we lead is by working in partnership with other countries and with NGOs to build a better world; environmental initiatives, peacemaking, poverty reduction. These are the things that Canada has built a positive reputation on.

Unfortunately, and in Clark's own estimation, not just my personal opinion, the current Government of Canada is systematically and tragically dismantling Canada's foreign activities, relationships, and reputation. In an increasingly complex world, this is not only short-sighted, it is downright dangerous. We are losing partners, losing trust, and worse, creating enemies by pretending that we somehow have political might or military clout. We don't.

Clark himself disavows any relationship to Harper's government claiming, rightly, that he has never been a member of the party led by Stephen Harper.

We, as Canadians, don't often pay much attention to what our government is doing in foreign affairs but over the last few years Canada's government has abandoned treaty after treaty dealing with poverty, water, environment, and security. We ought to be more concerned and more involved.

Clark also talks a bit about the cheapening of our democratic process and the centralization of power into the PMO. That is another development that is not good for us or our future.

The book looks daunting but half the book is notations and references so it is actually a fairly easy read and Clark's writing style is accessible enough. I highly recommend it.

[Holly · Rating 5 out of 5]

There are a few books who have shaped how I view the world and my place (and my country's place) in it and this book has vaulted right up that list. Joe Clark shows us how Canada fits in a global world and how Canada can contribute globally, but he also shows us how much damage Harper did to us as a nation. How he silenced us not only at home, but internationally. All Canadian politicians should read this book. Heck all Canadian voters should read this book - so we never again allow a leader to take us down the path that Harper did.

[Megan Bowers · Rating 3 out of 5]

I admire Joe Clark and I agree with most of what he is saying. However, this book was really repetitive and I thought that he could have summarized his main point ("Canada used to be much more active in international diplomacy and we should be once again today because we are a country well-equipped to do so") in the length of one chapter, rather than a whole book.

I would have also enjoyed more anecdotes from his political career.

[Hilary · Rating 5 out of 5]

A book full of ideas, facts, promises and warnings that the young Canadian cohorts should take into consideration when faced with tough political decisions that will impact the future of Canada on the international stage.