Common security arose in response to superpower rivalry and arms trade escalation that follows unilateral military armament practices. It was obvious that nations should consider the effects of policies that might cause concern from those they perceived as rivals. Common security, now a term in broad circulation internationally, is the basis of nonprovocative defence. It is a dramatic and entirely rational departure from NATO's present dangerous predicament based on irrational doctrine, military superiority, spiraling escalation , bluff and intimidation. If ambiguity is a reflection of strategic planning by Canada, this review may be the opportunity to show our cards face out, and to call publicly for popular support for a reconstructed NATO strategic concept that 1, eschews nuclear deterrence doctrine and 2, ultimately includes a nonprovocative defence posture.
Someone has to lead.
Common security principles are not inimical to the traditions of a middle power or loyal ally, peacekeeper and honest broker. These were two major campaigns that required courage and leadership and that are successful. Government took diplomatic risks but relied on public trust and support and the advocacy of NGOs that were seized by the issues. Canada is well placed as a close ally of NATO's pre-eminent nuclear weapons power. Canada called for this re-evaluation of NATO's strategic concept.