TOWARD THE END of November, Canadian Liberal and Opposition leader Pierre Eliot Trudeau, who previously held the office of Prime Minister for 11 years until his party's defeat last May 22, stunned political circles by announcing his retirement. Trudeau absorbed the full brunt of the Liberal loss, which placed a Conservative government, headed by Alberta's fledgling Joe Clark, into federal power for the first time in 16 years.

Although the Tories gained only a minority, political observers saw their partliamentary grip from as far from tenuous; most predicted a "stable" term. Saturated with politics, the Canadian public prepared to watch the chessplayers make the most of a half-hearted mandate. The Liberals had in fact siphoned off a greater percentage of the popular vote than the Conservatives, due largely to overwhelming support in the province of Quebec.

Polls leading up to the last election showed paradoxically that while most Canadians considered Trudeau an unequivocally superior leader to Clark, most preferred the youthful Westerner as Prime Minister. Trudeau's projection of an arrogant image blew up in his face; he ran a campaign which placed primacy in Clark's incompetence, and offered no substantive policy alternatives. Trudeau presented himself as the only alternative, and Canadians defiantly kicked him out of office.

So when Trudeau announced his resignation November 20, he startled those who felt he would attempt to exact revenge for his only political loss. But Trudeau has an unparalleled political acumen, as anyone will concede--the debate continues over the question of whether his motives are high-minded or underhanded.

Trudeau's warnings of Clark as Prime Minister were borne out beyond any Liberal's wildest hopes. Clark convened parliament later than ever, causing substantial resentment and foreshadowing fear. After promising to move the Canadian embassy to Jerusalem from Tel Aviv, Clark first shelved the idea and then canned it, bowing to Arab business interests.

The promise to move the embassy had wooed Jewish voters, particularly in suburban Toronto. These voters played an instrumental role in Clark's accession; five Liberal cabinet ministers were ousted in crucial Toronto districts.

Further, Clark fumbled on the issue of Petrocan, Canada's nationalized oil company. In 1976, he called for its dismantling; in 1978, he said it should be privatized; in the spring election campaign, his vague suggestions ran into tough sledding and he backed down.

Clark faces considerable pressure from oil-rich Alberta's Conservative provincial Premier Peter Lougheed. Talk has now turned from potential separation by Quebec from Canadian confederation to the possibility of Albertan secession. Alberta has felt shackled by Canada's regional economic inequities. The wealthier provinces, particularly highly-industrialized Ontario, oil-rich Alberta and resource-rich British Columbia have traditionally offered support to the country's poorer regions. But the booming economy in Alberta has made Albertans impatient, headed by the outspoken Lougheed. The advantages of remaining in confederation have been increasingly eclipsed for residents of Clark's home province.

So the idealistic Clark, who promised greater independence to the provinces in the last election, has been force-fed lessons in realpolitik.

THE PROVERBIAL LAST straw came when Clark introduced a budget that was trumpeted as austere but criticized as unfair. The government fell December 13, and the Tories slated a national election for February 18, the first campaign in the midst of Canada's frigid winter since 1887. Many experts claim that the Tories engineered their downfall. Given Trudeau's resignation and the constant harassment by both the Liberals and the socialist, labor-backed New Democratic Party, (NDP) an election seemed a good time to consolidate Conservative support, catch the Liberals in a tricky interregnum bind, and at the same time blame the unwanted campaign on defiant opposition.

Evidence indicates that if Clark knew his government was about to fall, he did little to avert defeat. His External Affairs minister was absent on a mission; one Member of Parliament was vacationing in tepid Fiji; and the fringe Social Credit party, which held five seats, received no concessions to discourage them from abstaining. As Prime Minister, Clark had the prerogative to postpone the debate until his wayward part members returned or until the Social Credit members could be brought around. The seven affirmative votes would have avoided defeat; Clark exerted no such efforts.

Meanwhile, anxious Liberals caucused to decide the leader for the hasty election. They really had no choice; not enough time remained to organize a leadership convention before the federal campaign. They asked Trudeau to return for an unspecified period, and he agreed solemnly to take up the Liberal red banner.

Since Clark's victory Trudeau had played his cards with considerable elan. After his initial resignation in November, the country was swept in a swelling tide of nostalgia. The man, after all, had occupied the Prime Minister spot for 11 years. His self effacement successfully dispelled the harmful image of arrogance. Suddenly, he appeared as the elder statesman, firmly etched in history, and the media which expressed antagonism during the May campaign began to spout superlatives. Trudeau knew he had the budget gambit, and he knew the Liberal party could not replace him in the event of a winter election.

So why did Trudeau proffer his resignation in the first place? At the time, he attributed his action to a desire to pay more attention to his three sons. More likely, Quebec provincial Liberals convinced him his usefulness had expired. The Quebec Liberals triumphed in a handful of crucial by-elections, demonstrating a trend away from separatist sentiment. Trudeau's political raison d'etre, national unity, had faded; his Quebec advisers felt capable of repairing disunity themselves.

THE BOTTOM line is that Canadians must confront an election a mere six months after going to the polls. Attitudes in Toronto this week ranged from disgust to, at best, martyr-like tolerance. The May 22 results clearly showed a polarization along East-West lines. The Liberals dominated Quebec, the Tories swept the West and the NDP chipped away across the country. Conservative primacy in Ontario swung the scales to the Tories, but this time a surge in Liberal sentiment seems certain in Ontario.

The campaign so far hearkens back to the British elections during the early 1900s. As Lloyd George reportedly said in parliament, Canadian politicians may have principles, but their first principle is expediency. The Conservatives have conducted an anti-Trudeau campaign, similar to the winning strategy employed last spring. Trudeau, meanwhile, has maintained a low profile and shied away from the strong leader image--he emphasizes the "team" concept, knowing that Canadians do not doubt his capabilities. The Liberals have focused on Clark's incessant flip-flops and his inadequacies as a Prime Minister.

Surprisingly, support for the NDP has eroded. Instead of capitalizing on the antagonisms toward the other two leaders, NDP chief Ed Broadbent has fostered the notion that voting for his party is a waste. He has made promises at an incalculable rate (67 at last count), thus reinforcing the idea that he will never be Prime Minister.

The Liberals hold a 21-point lead in the latest polls, showing that their slogan "Nobody voted for the type of government Joe Clark gave Canada" has so far proved successful. As the Liberals gain strength in the linchpin province of Ontario, as well as in the Maritimes and on the Prairies, the possibility of a majority looms larger.

Which does not mean the larger questions have been sufficiently answered. Where, for instance, are the issues? Are parliamentary politics committed to convenience at the expense of policy? How long will Trudeau remain in office if elected? Who would succeed him? And what about Quebec and Alberta, not to mention inflation, unemployment, and energy? February 18 cannot determine answers. But talk of the country's "decline" is Canadian self-indulgence, particularly if viewed in the global context. The election, however, remains a test of Canadian parliamentary democracy's stability and credibility.