The Honourable William “Bill” Graham (’64) joined Professor Karen Knop’s new class.
“Foreign Affairs and the Canadian Constitution,” on Wednesday, January 29, 2014. A former law professor and statesman, Graham discussed the role of Canada’s constitution in the conduct of foreign affairs with students from the faculty of Law and the Munk School of Global Affairs.
Graham has a storied history at the Faculty of Law. He was his graduating class’s Gold Medalist and he later returned to the Faculty to teach international law from 1980 to 1994. During his years as a Member of Parliament, Graham was intimately involved in Canadian foreign policy. As a government backbencher, he served as a member, and then chair, of the Standing Committee on Foreign Affairs and International Law.
In January 2002, shortly after the attacks of 9/11 and invasion of Afghanistan, Graham was tapped to serve as the Liberal government’s Foreign Minister. He served in this capacity under Prime Ministers Chretien and Martin, and in 2004 he became Minister of Defence. His time at Foreign Affairs coincided with the US-led invasion of Iraq and the controversies regarding detentions at Guantanamo Bay.
After reminiscing about his university days, Graham began a frank discussion with students about constitutional and international law, based on his personal experience as a decision-maker during major Canadian foreign affairs events.
Graham explained that the practice of policy deliberation was drastically different from the theory and domestic application of law. When referring to Canada’s decisions surrounding military actions in Kosovo, Afghanistan, and Iraq, he outlined the limits of the Constitution’s influence on actual decisions, and the uncertainty of international law.
“International law is to law what Swiss cheese is to cheese; it is law, but full of holes,” Graham said.
Regarding legal constraints on Canadian foreign policy, Graham suggested that in his time the government had given considerable attention to international law, and relatively little consideration to constitutional or other domestic law. However, he indicated that considerations of all legal constraints in the conduct of Canadian foreign policy appreciated considerably during his tenure.
Graham was asked about the distinction between the legality of the Kosovo and Iraq wars—as Canada participated in the former and not the latter, though Kosovo was not initially sanctioned by the UN Security Council. Graham stated frankly that, in the strict sense, the Kosovo War was initially “illegal”, however, he contended that it was “legitimate.” He defended such “illegal” but “legitimate” actions by noting that such actions are occasionally necessary to advance positive changes in international law. He cited Prime Minister Pierre Trudeau’s decision—taken expressly in violation of international law—to enforce Canadian environmental laws in the Arctic beyond its territorial waters.
Concluding, Graham flagged the issue of technological advancements such as cyber warfare as particularly important for consideration by students and scholars. He was convinced that, because such matters were sufficiently new to foreign policy and constitutional law, they will likely radically transform the legal landscape of foreign policy-making.
