Wishful Thinking With No Strategic Plan

In the decade prior to and after the September 11, 2001 attack on America, the Liberal government has been in a state of denial when dealing with the disastrous way in which it has funded the Canadian Forces. It has repeatedly discounted assessments of the threat of terrorism, and denigrated those who have consistently warned Canadians of the declining state of our armed forces. Clearly, the government lacks a vision upon which our senior military leaders might build a strategic plan. Its insulting indifference to what it has done to the military has aggravated the situation to the point where it will soon be too late to successfully deal with the many problems it has allowed to become embedded in the armed forces.

There are countless examples proving all is not well in Canada's armed forces, and for that matter, the government in general. The most recent demonstration of strange behaviour on the part of a government leader came in the form of Deputy Prime Minister Manley's fallacious comments of December 12, proclaiming that the aggressive lobby for more military spending has backfired. Manley blamed the happening on, "…a lot of bleating retired generals who have been portraying the Canadian Armed Forces as the 'Keystone Kops' [it] is totally counterproductive. I don't believe them."¹ Perception tells one that his comments were nothing less than inane judgement and political posturing in its worst form.

There are many, including the Auditor-General, suggesting that the government has intentionally misled Canadians about serious defence and financial issues which confront the country. Ralph Maddocks put his finger on the defence problem when he described the state of the CF when he wrote, "This government's performance in the area of defence is perhaps the most appalling display of neglect by any Canadian government within memory. Mr. C. [Chrétien] like many of his predecessors, doesn't seem to care much for the armed forces except when making a gesture to send them into harm's way when the US President of the day requires it."² Harsh language to say the least.

Deputy PM cum-Finance Minister Manley's task is difficult because he is surrounded by colleagues, including the PM, who are out of step with reality when it comes to dealing with international and domestic security and sovereignty issues. His irrational and uncalled for comments concerning retired generals prompt one to ask: what on earth is the government's mind set when it considers the problems facing our armed forces? Especially when the chaotic situation has been so well documented by House of Commons and Senate Committees, the Auditor-General, a host of defence analysts, academics, retired military people (many by the way, using information obtained under the Access to Information Act).

The highly respected Conference of Defence Associations (CDA), of which NOAC is now a member, recently released an excellent assessment of the state of our armed forces. Entitled, A Nation At Risk: The Decline of the Canadian Forces, the report quotes a British naval captain who, when explaining his thesis, stated "that no developed nation in post-modern times has experienced military bankruptcy. Canada however, is embarking on a course that would demonstrate post-modern military bankruptcy. NATO should appreciate the lessons of military bankruptcy that Canada would share in the coming years. Bankruptcy is all about shortfalls, risk management and lack of decision making."³ The Chief of the Army Staff confirms the near bankruptcy situation in the army when he is quoted as saying, "the Army is unaffordable and unsustainable as it stands."⁴ We are then told that almost half of the army's services, vehicles and weapons, will shortly be out of service because of lack of spare parts and technical skill to repair them.

The biggest secret kept from Canadians is that, "the Air Force lost almost one-half of its manpower during the Canadian Forces downsizing of the past decade."⁵ While it waits for the replacement of the Sea King helicopters, we learn that the inventory of CF-18 fighters will be reduced from 120 to 80, and that following an expensive upgrading, a number of CF-18s will be offered for sale. Hopefully the plan to replace the air force's lost strategic air-to-air refuelling capability will come to fruition.

Maritime surveillance capability provided by the air force's Aurora maritime patrol aircraft (presently undergoing a long overdue upgrading) will be decreased to the point where neither coast will have sufficient hours available for patrols in the Arctic, therefore failing to meet the requirements of the CF Northern Area. Without additional funding, the air force will not meet Department of Fisheries & Oceans High Seas Drift-net requirements on the West Coast.⁶ This comes with reduced capability of the navy to patrol our coastal waters, and the announcement that, for want of proper funding, the Canadian Coast Guard will have to reduce its patrol operations. Ultimately, Canadian territorial waters will be left open to all who would illegally fish in our waters, land drugs and/or illegal immigrants..

There are additional urgent equipment replacement problems facing the navy. The Iroquois-class destroyers, laid down in 1969 and put through the TRUMP modernization programme between 1987 and 1993, will soon have to be replaced. Failure to do so will mean the navy will eventually lose the capability to provide effective air defence as well as command and control capabilities, thereby losing the capability to support independent Canadian Task Groups.⁷

The disposal sale of the overage operational support ship Provider, has meant that the navy is left with two refuelling support ships in commission. The delay in making a decision regarding their replacement has serious implications. The fact is that if and when a new statement of support ship requirements is completed, and a decision is made to negotiate a contract, DND will discover that as a consequence of the Industry Department's decision to shut down the Canadian shipbuilding industry, replacement of built-in-Canada support ships will not be possible.

MGen. (Ret'd) Lewis MacKenzie has said when assessing government action, "Dismissing constructive criticism doesn't strengthen our national defence. It never has."⁸ Dismissing constructive criticism is precisely what is happening in Ottawa today. Surely Canadians have the right to expect that our government has the armed forces in place to protect Canada's territorial integrity, and that our armed forces are actually in a position to do so.⁹

At this writing, the Canadian Forces are in no way capable of protecting the territorial integrity of Canada, nor are they in a position, without direct air-lift and air-tanker refueling assistance provided by US forces, to deploy overseas. Even dealing with a domestic emergency of any kind would be difficult to handle.

It is said that diplomacy only has strength when it is backed up by military power. With the latter, Canada does not count, and that is exactly what appears to be happening. "Canada is coasting into irrelevance on the world stage for a variety of reasons. The most important is that Ottawa refuses to give our military the resources it needs."¹⁰

Even when talking about money, the government has made misleading statements regarding the total amount of "money" invested in DND's budget since 1999.¹¹

To be specific, close to $4 billion of the $12 billion allocated to DND (almost one-third of the total) is not available for expenditure on military capabilities. Up to $2 billion is normally allocated to pensions, Employment Insurance, transfer payments, disaster and similar financial arrangements with the provinces. $1 billion must be applied by DND to programmes such as bilingualism, gender equality, diversity and dozens of others mandated to all government departments by the Treasury Board, but they detract from the first priority of DND-maintaining combat-capable forces.¹²

The September Speech From the Throne, promised a foreign policy review. In the interim, Minister of Foreign Affairs, Bill Graham, has not given much attention to the question of how Canadian foreign policy should change with the times. While acknowledging terrorism presents new challenges for Canada, he believes this doesn't require an alteration in our "present policy framework."¹³

Minister of National Defence, John McCallum, is having second thoughts as to when he and Mr. Graham will develop a new foreign and defence policy. A policy which would give the CF clear direction as to what the country expects them to undertake, and then undertake some serious strategic planning. Why are they waiting? One guess is that nothing will happen until after the next federal election. By then, the armed forces will be beyond repair.

"There is no record in history of a nation that ever gained anything valuable by being unable to defend itself."¹⁴

Canada has already captured the reputation of being a "defence freeloader," all of which brings us one step closer to a more serious observation that, "Among other evils which being unarmed brings you, it causes you to be despised.¹⁵

In the meantime … Nili Illegitimo Carborundum.¹⁶

FOOTNOTES:

1. Shawn McCarty and Jane Taber, "Budget to focus on health care, PM tells caucus," globeandmail.com, Dec. 12, 2002.
2. Ralph Maddocks, "Chrétien: The Man Who Lost His Way," Le Québecois Libre, October 12, 2002, No. 111.
3. Conference of Defence Associations, "A Nation at Risk: The Decline of the Canadian Forces," September 2002, p.15.
4. ibid, p.23.
5. ibid., p.24.
6. ibid., p.26.
7. Bill Twatio, "Ready, Aye Ready?," "esprit de corps, Canadian Military Journal," Dec. 15, 2002.
8. Lewis MacKenzie, "There's no bureaucratic life like it," Globe & Mail, Oct. 14, 2001.
9. Ralph Maddocks, "The Opposite but Similar Ends," Le Québecois Libre, Oct. 13, 2002, No. 90.
10. "In Search of a New Foreign Policy, National Post, Dec. 27, 2002.
11. Conference of Defence Associations, "A Nation at Risk: The Decline of the Canadian Forces," September 2002, p. A-2.
12. Conference of Defence Associations, "A Nation at Risk: The Decline of the Canadian Forces," September 2002, p. A-3.
13. "In Search of a New Foreign Policy, National Post, Dec. 27, 2002.
14. Conference of Defence Associations, "A Nation at Risk: The Decline of the Canadian Forces," September 2002, p. 8.
15. ibid., p.37.
16. Translation: don't let the bastards grind you down.