When most Americans look to the north, they see a secure, stable, democratic, and peace-loving country, but that country could well be on the brink of dissolution. Unlike the United States, Canada's union of provinces has never been challenged by an attempted secession. But Rene Levesque, the new premier of Quebec, has called for the future separation of Quebec from the rest of Canada, thus casting doubts on the future of Canadian unity.

The casual observer of Canadian affairs is probably unaware of the cultural differences that exist between the French-Canadian and his English-speaking counterpart. Sociologists generally trace current social problems to historical origins; and Canada's problem is no exception. Until the defeat of French soldiers by the British on the Plains of Abraham in 1759 the French played the major role in developing the territory now known as Canada. In the tradition of British colonialism, the vanquished French were allowed to exist alongside their conquerors, maintaining their own language, religion, and culture. As a result Canada became a cultural mosaic in which separate nationalities constituted distinct but integral parts. This cultural mosaic worked well enough to result in the emergence of Canadian Confederation in 1867.

One of Canada's most compelling problems relates to its vast size and its geographic regionalism. Quebecers find themselves cut off from British Columbia in western Canada by thousands of miles of land and by the Rocky Mountains. When this feeling of isolation is compounded by a feeling of cultural dissimilarity, the people soon lose their sense of a common national identity. Unfortunately, more than three-fourths of Canada's 6 million French-Canadians live in Quebec where they outnumber English Canadians 3 to 1; the remaining French-Canadian population lives mostly in the adjoining provinces of Ontario and New Brunswick. Canadians west of Ontario have thus had little chance to shake hands with a French-Canadian, even, though French-Canadians constitute more than 25 per cent of Canada's population. Hostilities on both sides are fanned by ignorance. Like a giant centrifuge, Canada's geography has polarized its two major ethnic groups.

Although most Canadians still consider their mosaic experiment successful, English-French differences have spawned inevitable problems, some of which may cause the dissolution of the 110-year-old Canadian nation.

"Language is the first thing; language is the vehicle for thinking," Gratia O'Leary, an avowed separatist and Levesque's press secretary, said last week. The most obvious difference between Quebecers and "les anglais," the language issue has been a constant irritant in Canadian politics. The British North America Act, which became Canada's constitution in 1867, attempts to perpetuate a nation of two languages and Federal ministers have struggled to institute bi-lingualism by requiring manufacturers to label all products in both English and French, encouraging English in Quebec schools, and introducing French in schools outside Quebec. More and more school children learn French every year.

"That's an effort; that's nice," said O'Leary, "but if they will not practice French, they will not speak this language." Little French is spoken west of Ontario, and many people in the western provinces resent having to learn another language. Some feel that the government takes their taxes in order to "shove French down their throats." This attitude is obviously not conducive to the preservation of Canadian unity.

What about the government's stipulation that federal civil servants speak both languages? Speaking English and French "at the level of federal functionaries" is not "bilingualism around Canada," O'Leary said.

Robert L. Stanfield, Member of Parliament from Halifax, Nova Scotia, and former Leader of the Opposition, cited historical precedents for Canada's language problems. "Traditionally, when you have two languages, you have a problem," he said last week singling out the Basque drive for independence from Spain as an example.

Marc Lalonde, federal Minister of Health and Welfare and leader of the Quebec wing of the federal Liberal Party, declared last month to the Canadian Institute on Public Affairs: "How can we, French-speaking Canadians, take seriously the perfunctory exercise that is taking place in most English-language school systems in Canada? It shows an agonizing lack of determination, a dragging of feet, a purely lip-service commitment to the notion of two official languages in Canada."

Lalonde's point is valid. High school students in British Columbia generally learn the Parisian dialect of French which is noticeably different from the language spoken by Quebecers. Despite the federal government's investment of several million dollars in British Columbia, the teaching of French lacks continuity and is ineffectual.

John Fraser, Member of Parliament from Vancouver South, British Columbia, explained current Quebecois separatist aspirations at a level deeper than language differences. "It doesn't matter which one you scratch, you find a French-Canadian nationalist," he said last week, refering to French-Canadian Quebecers. "They look upon Quebec and themselves as a separate nation. They do not see themselves culturally or ethnically as part of the English-speaking mosaic of the rest of the country.

"We've been easily lulled by patriotic rhetoric and fervor about one Canada. Well, to the Quebecer, there are two Canadas; there's the Canada, les Canadiens, and there's the Canada, les Anglais. Those who are federalists are prepared to have the two nations within a single state, but almost all of them by instinct understand what you mean by two nations."

Despite worldwide respect for their country, Canadians have traditionally treated their nationality with a cynicism bordering on embarrassment. In a country whose people are unaccustomed to national pride, the separatists have a least for the moment seized the initiative. The "patriotic rhetoric and fervor" which Fraser mentioned presently belong to the Parti Quebecois. "This country will be lost if people aren't prepared to get just as tough as Levesque is," Fraser suggested.

Jeanne Sauve, federal Minister of Communications and Member of Parliament from Ahuntsic, Quebec, said last week the Parti Quebecois may have a deleterious impact on Quebec's economy. "The uncertainty that exists in the province of Quebec is very damaging economically. The kind of irresponsibility [the Parti Quebecois] has introduced in Quebec... will probably mean economic hardship for a lot of people in Quebec," she said. "We have no statistics on the indecision about investments, but all we hear is bad news... Certainly if the businesses have not decided not to invest in Quebec, they have decided to postpone [their investment] for the time being." Sauve added that "come the winter, we will have a very bleak picture in the province of Quebec... That, I think, is irresponsible on the part of the people in charge because the first thing people want, and I'm sure Quebecers want their culture very badly, is to have a decent standard of living."

William Clarke, Member of Parliament from Vancouver Quadra, British Columbia, voiced the doubts of many economists: "There's no evidence that Quebec can survive alone. I think Quebec would have a much more difficult time."