Recent CAF equipment buys—like the C-19 rifle, Harry DeWolf ships, and new handguns—ignore sound business logic. Alternatives, such as upgrading Lee-Enfields or refitting foreign vessels, could cut costs and boost Canadian industry. A practical businessman would prioritize value, efficiency, and local production over prestige and inflated spending.
Show Us A Sign!
By Mike Nickerson
Well done, Mark! Can I call you Mark? You seem affable enough in interviews, so I’m going with Mark. And by gum, Mark, that was quite a turnaround. Only a few months ago the Liberal party was on life support, looking down the barrel of the worst election defeat since 1993. Now, whether that turnaround was your doing or Donald Trump’s is an open question, though Jean Chrétien calling for Trump to be awarded the Order of Canada, was probably on the mark (pardon the pun). I mean, let’s face it, if Kamala Harris was President you’d still be in the private sector making ungodly amounts of money. Though I guess putting it that way means condolences are actually in order. So, tough blow old chap.
Regardless, you are now the duly elected prime minister of our fair land, with a set of expectations I dare say no prime minister in recent memory has had to shoulder. And may I just say, so far so good. You passed your first test, meeting with your political benefactor, where you not only succeeded in keeping down your lunch in the Oval Office, but calmly and adroitly stage managed what could have turned very messy in a hurry (Volodymyr Zelenskyy anyone?). It was just the right balance of deference and firmness dealing with the most volatile ego in US presidential history. He might still turn on you anytime now like the attention deficit afflicted child that he is, but a good start nonetheless.
In the meantime, you’ve set yourself some lofty goals if your campaign pledges are anything to go by, particularly with the Canadian Armed Forces (CAF). To be clear, whether people voted Liberal or Conservative, they all had some serious expectations about getting our military back on its feet in a way that will protect our sovereignty while not being so beholden to our flaky neighbours to the south.
And sure, you made all the right noises such as ordering a re-evaluation of our F35 procurement, and reaching out to European allies to work together and actually be involved in producing some of the military kit that’s all the rage in our conflict-riddled world.
Unfortunately, every government makes the right noises during an election. Your predecessor did it with great regularity while actually doing jack squat, if I may use the technical term. It was why Liberals were about to be forced into retirement en masse until everyone got worried about being annexed by Uncle Sam. So if I may offer just a soupçon of advice it would be this: for the love of whatever god you worship, please get moving on your pledges. Because it’s no exaggeration that Canadians are desperately looking for results.
What might that look like? Well, for a start you might want to accelerate your timeline. As it stands, you’ve pledged to merely maintain the operations and maintenance budget for one more year before tripling it in 2026. The CAF has been struggling to keep its head above water with that amount, much less actually being ready to do anything. It’s what keeps the military operating, helps with recruitment, training and maintenance of the decade’s old junk that’s still actually running, if in ever-limited numbers. In short, triple it now, not next year, and give leadership the money to start building and training our CAF members to be ready to operate all that nice, non-US kit you’ve promised.
Speaking of which, you may have noticed that our military brass has a real fondness with all things American. So not to put too fine a point on it, but you need to show them and Canadians who’s the new boss in town, with none of the whining and stalling tactics senior leadership gets up to when they don’t get their US grade A go-bang toys this coming Christmas.
Needless to say, for that to work you’re going to have to put your money where your campaign mouth was and get moving on streamlining the procurement process. Not next year (or never, as has generally been the case) but now. Canadians need a sign that this time around they’ve got a leader that keeps his bloody promises.
I could go on, be it making our presence felt in the Arctic or fixing the myriad problems with Veterans Affairs. In short, Canadians need to see that things are being done, not tomorrow but today. It’s a tall order I know, but it’s that sort of urgency you encouraged during the election, and rightfully so given the changing times. So please Mark, show us a sign it wasn’t all for naught…again.
Follow the Money: Trudeau's Promises Kept
(Teresa Marshall / @teeamarshall on Instagram)
Mike 'Blazer' Blais
I am pretty sure that veterans will recall outgoing Prime Minister Justin Trudeau’s promises, which he made during the 2015 election campaign. A decade has passed since then. Admittedly there have been times wherein as an advocate, I felt compelled to pro-actively hold him to his word. This was particularly the case, when Trudeau's government appeared to be waffling on key issues such as the Pension for Life. However, by and large Canadian veterans have done well under his mandate. Objectively speaking, a majority of the promises which Trudeau made to dis-enfranchised veterans in 2015 have been honoured. While there yet may be work still required to 'fine tune' some of these new-and-improved policies, disabled veterans, particularly those who were injured or wounded in Afghanistan, should be grateful for those reformed benefits which they now receive.
I have been a proactive veterans stakeholder since 2011, and under the Liberal mandate, I have served on successive Veterans Affairs Canada (VAC) Minister’s policy and mental health advisory committees. I currently serve as one of the Co-Chair’s for the new minister’s Health and Well-Being advisory. Be advised, I have a rigid policy with respect to assessing advocacy successes and the correlation of comprehensive legislation and subsequent funding. I am confident readers will concur with me when I state, unequivocally, a government’s promises are worthless without legislation and adequate financial support.
The resultant repercussions, which were inherent upon the last Conservative government’s reign of austerity at VAC. proved catastrophic to many within the veterans community. Budget-balancing initiatives cruelly targeted VAC and stripped the department of hundreds of case managers, client service agents and administrative staff. Consequently, case management suffered greatly as the remaining staff were forced to confront increased levels of veteran’s dissatisfaction due to unrealistic Client:Case Manager ratios. The dreaded backlog, having already attained critical dimensions, became overwhelming once the Liberal promises were honoured and disenfranchised veterans, by the thousands, stepped forward to avail themselves of the eligibility modified or remedial programs. Despite refilling hundreds of positions, the backlog persists in challenging the 16-week departmental adjudication threshold and case management ratio standards remain problematic.
When Trudeau made VAC’s staffing promises, he also responded to veterans who challenged Conservative plans to render several district offices redundant, by pledging to reopen them. Once again, the promise has been honoured. If one 'follows-the-money', to date some $78 billion has been dispersed over five years on staffing and reopening the once shuttered offices in Charlottetown, Sydney, Corner Brook, Windsor, Thunder Bay, Saskatoon and Kelowna. Furthermore, an additional VAC office was established in Surrey, BC and the outreach program expanded to include support for veterans living in remote regions in the far north.
Trudeau spent $3.6 billion to sponsor the Pension for Life program and in conformance with our advocacy objectives, this has provided veterans a choice between a life-time, non taxable monthly pension for younger veterans and, the for community's elders, a lump sum award (LSA). As promised, in 2019 the Liberals also raised the maligned LSA threshold to achieve parity with the $360k civilian insurance payouts. Legislation included supplemental programs which acknowledge severe and catastrophic disabilities through both the Pain and Suffering Compensation and Additional Pain and Suffering Compensation plans. Veterans who were cast adrift by SISIP after the mandatory two-year periods were provided the Income Replacement Program with a 90% threshold. This is 15% higher than those who are SISIP, established. Furthermore, the Liberals created a retirement benefit for veterans with a Diminished Earning Capacity (DEC) designation and through this award, for those aged 65 and up, financial support will be provided at 70% of the IRB award, for life.
Substantial funds have been dedicated towards creating or improving programs which pertain to veteran’s mental health. An allocation of $140 million was dedicated to support five years of mental health services and to support those veterans with PTSD, Depression or Anxiety Disorders while their disability benefit is being processed. This is a remarkable change in policy obligations, and to their credit, specifically designed to bypass the inherent service restrictions posed by the backlog and afford immediate treatment funding for services while the individual case is still being determined.
In 2024, $62 million was dedicated to the newly launched homelessness program. Another $4 million was dedicated to the Veterans Emergency Fund in 2018, along with $1 million per year to ensure these vital, emergency-focused support systems remain viable. Over $133 million was spent to support the education and training benefit with an additional $10 million budgeted per year on an ongoing basis. The Caregiver Recognition Benefit, was started in 2016 with a $187 million infusion. Since then, close to $10 million per year has been committed to this project.
Trudeau kept many of his other, very expensive, electoral promises such as; the Centre of Excellence’s on Mental Health and Chronic Pain, the Family Well-Being Fund, and the National Veterans Employment Strategy. Consultation with veterans and stakeholders was vastly improved through six ministerial advisory committees which were struck to assess and advise the Minister on; Policy, Service Excellence, Mental Health, Families, Care and Support and Commemoration. I can attest that an array of positive policy changes identified following robust consultation with stakeholders, have indeed been implemented. Many veterans of all eras have utilized the Education and Training Benefit, now augmented by a $10 million dollar annual disposition and Military Family Resource Centres, often the primary link during transition, have been expanded from 7 locations to 32 locations across the country.
Like him or not, Trudeau was good for veterans and yes, he kept his promises to them.
Now Reel ‘Em In!
By Mike Nickerson
What’s the first rule in fishing? No it’s not packing a case of beer, though that is important. No sir, the first rule of fishing is to never let up tension on the line. Once that fish is hooked, you reel that line in like your life depends on it! Well that might be a little hyperbolic but you get the idea. The key is to never give up because that fish might spit the hook out and go its merry way. No, if you want more than beer for dinner, then don’t let that fish off that hook!
Now not knowing which political fish Canadians actually managed to hook this election matters not a whit when it comes to my mid-April prognosticating. Because whether it’s the Liberals or the Conservatives, they both have been putting forward some whopper ideas for Canada’s military. That means some mighty fine eating is on the way…politically speaking of course. Don’t actually eat members of parliament. Bad form that; and way too many bones.
Whether you are feeling Canada Strong, or you’re happy we elected someone who puts Canada First for a change, we’ll have a new government that has made substantive military proposals. For while the Liberal and Conservative platforms could not be more different in specifics, overall they both stress that the time is now to finally step up and invest in our military. They both reflect a growing unease Canadians have with Donald Trump and the United States.
And regardless of who actually won, they both put forward some rather good ideas. The Liberals touted an “unprecedented acceleration in our armed forces” with the sort of zeal that might make one dare to believe it might happen. Expect ship building, icebreaker production, submarine purchases, made-in-Canada drone development, wage hikes for military members, a focus on new military alliances and procurement outside of our good old U.S. of A. comfort zone and the like.
Or perhaps Canadians chose door number two: a new military base in Iqaluit, armed icebreakers, 2000 more Arctic rangers, and a revamp of Veterans Affairs to cut wait times for benefit claims. And much like their Liberal rivals, a promise to spend like there’s no tomorrow (with Trump involved, it just might be), meeting our NATO spending targets sooner than later, and a general sentiment that we need to buy Canadian where possible, and invest and develop the Canadian defence industry when it isn’t.
So with all the turmoil of Trump, the annexation threats, tariff threats, pulling out of NATO threats, and generally just threats from a tweaked out, scatterbrained man child, the Canadian populace has become more focused on all things military than it’s arguably been since the Second World War. Somewhat more of a surprise, given the party proposals this election, is that our federal leaders have actually taken notice.
Unfortunately it’s at about this point that Canadians usually let their government off the hook. Election is over, back to our regular lives, roll your eyes while around the watercooler that the government is backsliding on its promises. It’s a time-honoured tradition in this country, and quite frankly it’s why nothing ever gets done; we let it happen.
Now I’m not suggesting Canadians take the nuclear option with public protest like some did during the pandemic, if for no other reason than the man who approves my paycheque lives in Ottawa and had his fill of truckers honking their air horns the first time around. But the threats bandied about in this election are real, both to our sovereignty and security. And the government (regardless who won) needs to act with the vigour and haste that was promised or else we are in real trouble.
In short, don’t let up on the government and its military commitments. Too many times we’ve let governments off the hook and now face the inevitable result of that lapse in effort. So when you start seeing signs of backpedaling or the inevitable excuses and rationales governments are prone to then by God pull on that line! It’s that or be stuck with a case of warm beer while toasting the Fourth of July.
WWJD?
By Vincent J Curtis
HMS Dreadnaught was the first modern battleship. Laid down on October 2nd, 1905, Dreadnaught was launched on February 10th, 1906, and commissioned on December 2nd, 1906. She had a length of 527 feet, a beam of 82 feet, and a draught of 30 feet. Driven by 23,000 shaft horsepower, Dreadnaught had a top speed of 21 kt and a range of 6620 nautical miles. She cost £1.8 Million. She was the first all big gun battleship, bearing ten 12” guns in five double turrets. Dreadnaught made all previous battleship obsolete.
Dreadnaught was the brain-child of First Sea Lord Admiral “Jacky” Fisher. He ordered her construction to demonstrate to the Germans that Britain could build anything bigger and faster than they could.
Canada doesn’t have a Jacky Fisher. Canada’s new surface combatant ship, the Type 26 frigate, was conceived in 2011, with acquisition to begin in 2017. Of course, that never happened. The outgoing president of Irving Shipbuilding Kevin McCoy, said that the production timeline of a Type 26 is seven and a half years, two years longer than had been originally planned. Program costs ballooned from an original estimate of $26 billion in 2008 to $82 Billion presently. The current plan is for construction of the first ship to begin in 2023-24, first delivery in 2031, and for the fifteenth ship to be delivered in 2044-45. But if construction begins in 2027-28, then the final ship will be delivered in 2048-49.
Ever desirous of gilding a lily, Canada’s version of the Type 26 is going to be loaded with “pretty much every single weapon that you can think of for a modern, high-end combatant” said Timothy Choi, a researcher and observer of the RCN. The ship has packed on 900 tons over the original projected displacement. Canada’s Type 26 would be 495 feet long, 68 feet across the beam, a draught of 26 feet, displace 9400 tons, have a top speed of 26 kt, and a range of 7000 nautical miles. The Parliamentary Budget Office presently estimates the cost of a single unit to be $5.46 Billion.
I have long advocated for an off the shelf purchase of an Arleigh Burke class destroyer as Canada’s primary surface combatant. An Arleigh Burke also displaces 9400 tons, is 14 feet longer, and two feet narrower than a Canadian 26, a draught of 31 feet, a top speed of over 30 kt,, a range of 4400 nautical miles, and a unit cost of US$1.85 Billion. The U.S. is still constructing this class of vessel, with, at present 6 under construction, 3 more on order, and a further 12 to complete the construction program.
Dimensionally, there’s not much difference between a Type 26 and an Arleigh Burke, but the difference in unit cost is enormous. The cost versus capability question hasn’t escaped the attention of outside naval experts. Bryan Clark, a retired U.S. submarine officer and a senior fellow of the Hudson Institute, observed “…a reasonable way forward is to go with a ship with a proven design and cost associated with it….If you’re Canada do you need to be on the leading, bleeding edge of technology development? Or do you go with something that is proven – modern, but proven and modern but maybe isn’t the next generation of ship?...I’d say you’re better off maybe going with a proven hull design, but ensure it’s got sufficient modularity that you can upgrade it over time.”
The SCS program is part of a larger strategy to create a stable shipbuilding industry that avoids boom and bust cycles. If the ships are built quickly, as the Halifax class of frigates were, there’s nothing left for the shipyards to do for twenty years, and they lose capability. But build them slowly, and inflation ruins the budget.
So, what then is the purpose of the CSC program – to provide Canada with fighting ships or provide a corporate welfare program for Irving Shipbuilding?
The Americans Are Coming!
By Mike Nickerson
How are you for grenades? They are a handy little item in any insurgency, and we have ‘em all. We got fragmentary, incendiary, stun, smoke, and this week only a crazy deal on some anti-tank grenades that I guarantee you’ll regret not snapping up while they last. Speaking of which, I have some customers in Denmark rather eager to buy so I wouldn’t waste time. I mean seriously, how long can you really count on not having to get all asymmetrical while some crazed dictator keeps making threats on your person? Not too damn long if you ask me, so I recommend our special Guerilla War Package before things get too crazy. I’ll even throw in a free set of Ginsu steak knives with each order, so whaddya say?
Now I’m not here to suggest that Canadians are, as a group, stocking up on munitions over fear that the United States is about to annex us on its way to Greenland. But don’t be surprised to hear of an uptick in ammunition sales in the coming months. It’s surprising how tub-thumpy many have gotten since the stream of consciousness that is Donald Trump started musing about Canada becoming the 51st state. You have academics arguing in all seriousness, that the US will never win, because we’ll fight to the bitter end, dragging the US down with us like some modern day Viet Cong. The punditry is calling for a faster rearmament, a patriotic recruitment drive, and a general ‘all hands on deck’ mentality in the face of such a brazen threat to our sovereignty. My God, Chrystia Freeland has suddenly become a war hawk, wanting us to reach NATO spending commitments by 2027! Whether that’s the old two percent commitment or the new five percent one that Trump recently mused about isn’t clear, in part because it’s not really clear to NATO. But for now, spend spend spend!
It’s true that Canada’s investment in its military has been woeful for decades, and it’s awfully tempting to just sit back and let this patriotic wave jumpstart a renewed focus and appreciation of how vital a well-armed and staffed military is. However, it is a well-known fact that making choices while in a state of hysteria over imminent invasion tends to lead to stupid decisions. In the case of ramping up our military spending by fifty percent in two years, one has to ask what exactly we would be spending it on.
Consider that in the first month of office alone, Trump and his cadre of sycophants have both argued for absurd NATO spending targets that the US doesn’t even meet, and weakened America’s commitment to the alliance. So when someone like Freeland goes all warmonger calling for accelerated military spending the question is how exactly? Should we be arming ourselves to be a good little NATO ally like we planned, or given that Trump seems likely as not to abandon the alliance should we instead pivot our military focus to align with the US, namely on all things China? Perhaps we should stock up on grenades and prepare for the inevitable invasion!
Well at the risk of being rational: none of the above. For while I’m loathe to suggest a pause in procurement, the fact is that the Trump administration has laid bare for all to see that for the next four years at least the United States is no friend of us or our European allies. And that requires some deliberation and reassessment, not just on what to buy, but from whom, and how that spending might be used as a bargaining chip in our current trade war.
We also need to consider our diplomatic options before we lock and load. One suggestion, as outlined by the CBC’s Murray Brewster, would be to invoke Article Four of the NATO charter. Simply put it commits members of NATO to "consult together whenever, in the opinion of any of them, the territorial integrity, political independence or security of any of the parties is threatened." Repeatedly musing about Canadian statehood might just qualify as a threat to our “political independence.” Why not formally discuss it?
Regardless, Trump has put the state of the world in flux, waiting on his every utterance. He’d like nothing more than to have everyone: us, Europe, the Middle East, running about like headless chickens. And while the cry of “The Americans Are Coming” may stir our patriotic hearts, the fact is they aren’t storming our shores any time soon. So let’s take this one diplomatic crisis at a time, shall we?
Greenland?
By Vincent J. Curtis
President Donald Trump stirred international controversy when he renewed his proposal that the United States acquire Greenland. Though many international observers found this proposal outrageous, it is actually consistent with historical American territorial expansion, and is taken seriously in the United States.
President Thomas Jefferson purchased Louisiana from France in 1803. President James Monroe declared in 1823 American opposition to European colonialism in the Western Hemisphere: the Monroe Doctrine. In 1845, under President James K. Polk, it became the “Manifest Destiny” of the United States to expand across the entire continent. ‘Manifest Destiny’ became the justification for the Oregon Boundary dispute with Great Britain, which was settled in 1846 by the Oregon Treaty that demarked the 49th parallel as the boundary between the United States and British North America. The Republic of Texas was annexed in 1845, sparking the Mexican-American War of 1846-48, that also gained the United States the territories of New Mexico and California. The Gadsden Purchase of 1853 completed the acquisition of Arizona.
In 1867, under President Andrew Johnson, Secretary of State William Seward, purchased Alaska from Russia for $7.2 million, an acquisition called at the time “Seward’s Folly.” When Seward proposed purchasing Greenland and Iceland from Denmark, the proposal went nowhere. In 1910 and 1917, discussions with President Woodrow Wilson concluded with the U.S. acquiring the Danish West Indies (now the U.S. Virgin Islands); but Denmark made an agreement with Britain in 1917 to give her the right of first refusal should Greenland be sold, protecting loyal Canada from envelopment.
The United States occupied Greenland in 1941, after Nazi Germany occupied Denmark and the Danish Ambassador signed a treaty of defence. The U.S. used Greenland for bases to protect the Atlantic convoys carrying Lend-Lease aid to Britain.
In 1946, the Truman Administration proposed purchasing Greenland for $100 million, but was turned down. In 1951, the United States signed the Greenland Defense Agreement with Denmark, which permitted the United States to keep the WWII bases and to build new ones. The U.S. promptly built Thule Air Force Base, with a 10,000’ runway, that become a home to the Strategic Air Command, flying B-36s, B-47s, B-52s, and KC-95 tankers. Reconnaissance flights from Thule could keep tabs on Soviet activity in Murmansk, Novaya Zemlya, and Dikson. Thule still handles 3,000 flights a year.
Presently, the United States maintains 45,000 personnel in Greenland, and Thule AFB is now controlled by the U.S. Space Command. BMEWS (Ballistic Missile Early Warning System) radars were first installed in 1961 to detect Soviet ballistic missile launches from Russian territory and from submarines operating in the Arctic and North Atlantic Oceans.
Thule people moving eastward from Canada occupied Greenland shortly after the Vikings did during the Medieval Warm Period; but while the Vikings died out, the Thules survived, and today comprise 90 percent of Greenland’s population of 56,000. In 1721, Greenland was claimed it as a Danish colony. In 2009 Denmark granted Greenland self-governance. President Trump has wondered aloud about the legality of Denmark’s claim on Greenland, and there’s talk that an offer of $400 billion would mollify Danish concerns about an American take-over.
Why would America want sovereignty over Greenland when it already has all the control it needs from a NATO ally, Denmark, for defense of North America? One answer may be mineral wealth. Greenland has large deposits of strategically vital rare earth minerals, the global supply of which is controlled by China. Access to these mineral deposits may become viable if shipping routes that are blocked by ice year round open in the event of global warming.
Greenland forms the western boundary of the Denmark Strait, one of the passages from the Arctic Ocean into the North Atlantic.
The proposal that the United States purchase Greenland is consistent with a 200 year history of expanding American control over the Western Hemisphere. The United States presently has all the military control it needs for defense, but the mineral wealth of Greenland might make it worthy of acquisition, as Alaska was.
The Myth of Meritocracy
By Mike Nickerson
Did you ever hear the story of the Little Soldier Who Could? Oh come on, you must have! Why as a young lad my father would put me on his knee, light his pipe like all wise fathers used to do, and tell of a mythical world where people only succeeded because of what they did and how well they did it. Merit my boy, merit! That little soldier would go to the nearest recruiting office and begin his magical journey where merit is recognized and ambition rewarded. He’d rise through the ranks, an inspiration to all, finally making it to the top. On merit and nothing but. Quite a tale, don’t cha think?
It’s much like the story of how Santa Claus delivers presents under the Christmas tree each year because all the kiddies have been so darn nice. After a while you come to learn there’s more complexity to the story. In Santa’s case it was actually stressed-out parents spending all week searching for toys and maxing out their credit cards for kids who are definitely not on anyone’s nice list, but who will nonetheless cry bloody-blue murder if they don’t get their G.I. Joe with the Kung Fu grip. Not based on any kind of merit, but through sheer annoyance. Inspiring it isn’t, but reality doesn’t tend to be.
So while some of us grew up and got on with the messy complexities of life, there are others who won’t let go of those idealistic dreams of yore. Why, those tales really can become true if only we could return to simpler times; times where merit mattered, where affirmative action and feminism wasn’t so darn annoyingly there; where DEI (that’s Diversity, Equity & Inclusion to you laypeople) had never been conceived. My God, a time where people weren’t so damn awake!
But hey, don’t take it from me; take it instead from a long serving, accomplished veteran, wise in the ways of the world. In this case I speak of Maj. (ret'd) Barbara Krasij-Maisonneuve, who last fall waxed eloquent in an interview with The National Post about how “the whole DEI, radical progressive movement is forced on [the military].” And along with a female hiring quota “we added all of the DEI, tiny little minority special interest groups to that quota. And now we spend money making a third bathroom or putting sanitary napkins in the men’s room and stuff, but we’re still buying our own helmets.” Yes, you read that right: sanitary napkins in the men’s room are what stand between our soldiers and their heads getting blown off. Damn that DEI!
Now if the good Major’s last name seems familiar it might be because she is married to one Lt.-Gen. (ret’d) Michel Maisonneuve, who a couple of years ago caused a stir when he railed in a speech while accepting that year’s Vimy Award on how in today’s world “taking personal responsibility for our own actions has disappeared from the landscape” with society “lost in these days of entitlement, Me First, not my problem and endless subsidies and handouts.” He also weaved in something about how the world will come to an end at the altar of climate change and such, but you get the picture.
And the Maisonneuves are certainly not alone in this. Donald Trump has ridden back into the White House on a sea of anti-woke, anti-DEI bile, and our soon-to-be prime minister, Pierre Poilievre, has vowed to change our military from a “woke” culture to a “warrior” one. Yes, all our problems will just melt away if we get back to basics; where we promote on merit, not quotas; to a time where we weren’t so sensitive to the feelings and aspirations of minorities; where we reward a person on merit, not demographic profile.
Well I have news for the Maisonneuves and anyone else under the impression that the military was once a meritocracy. It never was a meritocracy. For decades (nay centuries) it has rewarded overwhelmingly white men, and even more to the point, white privileged men. Any idiot with a bachelor’s degree in his pocket gets to be an officer and lead men into battle, not solely on merit, but on class, education and connections. The upper ranks are filled as much by politics than actual accomplishments.
The whole idea of DEI is to give capable people an equal chance, to level the playing field. Krasij-Maisonneuve all but says that our current CDS got the post because she’s a woman. Well, yeah! If things were left to the anti-woke brigade, she’d never have had the shot, no matter how eminently qualified she is.
All this culture war crap distracts from the real problems with our military, be it bureaucratic cock-ups, limited budgets, poor planning, or mundane things like lack of affordable housing, all of which has nothing to do with pronoun preference and the like. In these perilous times the last thing we need are distractions. But it is distraction the Trumps and Poilievres of the world will happily exploit if we let them.
The Northern Flank
Photo credit: al Jazeera
By Vincent J. Curtis
On Wednesday, July 24, Russian and Chinese bombers together entered the Alaskan Air Defense Identification Zone, approaching to within about 320 kilometers of the American coast.Though the aircraft, identified as two Russian T-95 (Bear) and two Chinese H-6 bombers, remained in international airspace, this new show of force and demonstration of expanding military cooperation has the United States concerned. The bombers were tracked by NORAD, and intercepted by U.S. and Canadian fighter jets. But it was the first time that Chinese bomber aircraft have flown that close to Alaska.
China and Russia both acknowledged what they called a joint patrol over the Bering Sea.
Chinese naval ships have appeared near Alaska in international waters, as recently as mid-Jul, 2024, when four Chinese ships were spotted in the U.S. Exclusive Economic Zone, which extends 200 nautical miles (370 kilometers) from the shore.
The United States has become so concerned about the broadening China-Russia military cooperation that they released a new strategy document on June 21, 2024, entitled 2024 Arctic Strategy. The United States military sees the Arctic as a “strategically important region for the United States.” The United States is content to see the status in the Arctic region remain quo; and hence views Russian and especially Chinese efforts to change the economic and military balance in the High Arctic with skepticism. The High Arctic is portrayed as a vulnerable northern flank of NATO and of the United States; and activities there could divert U.S. military efforts from more decisive places elsewhere, “threaten the ability of the United States to project power both to Europe and the Indo-Pacific region, constraining [US] ability to respond to crises.”
Threats in the High Arctic can become direct threats to the U.S. homeland which demand military protection. The Arctic Ocean provides a route for Russian nuclear submarines to quickly get close to the U.S. mainland before firing nuclear missiles. Those familiar with the geography will see that that means the Russian subs have to enter sovereign Canadian Arctic waters, sailing as far south, possibly, as James Bay.
The Russian threat has long been known, but China could play the joker in the deck. China is the potential alteration to the current balance of power in the Arctic. “The PRC includes the Arctic in its long-term planning and seeks to increase its influence and activities in the region. Though not an Arctic nation, the PRC is attempting to leverage changing dynamics in the Arctic to pursue greater influence and access, take advantage of Arctic resources, and play a larger role in regional governance.
“The PRC seeks to bolster its operational expertise in the Arctic, where its presence, while limited, is increasing. The PRC operates three icebreakers—the Xue Long, Xue Long 2, and Zhong Shan Da Xue Ji Di—which enable the PRC’s dual civil-military research efforts in the Arctic. Over the course of the PRC’s 13 Arctic research expeditions to date, the vessels have tested unmanned underwater vehicles and polar-capable fixed-wing aircraft, among other activities. People’s Liberation Army Navy (PLAN) vessels have also demonstrated the capability and intent to operate in and around the Arctic region through exercises alongside the Russian Navy over the past several years.”
In April, Canada released a new defense policy, Naked and Afraid, in which defense of the High Arctic justified increasing defense spending to reach, with difficulty, 1.79 percent of GDP. If only someone in the Trudeau government took defense seriously, Canada could take on the role of being the guardian of NATO’s (i.e. America’s) northern flank. Canadian defense doves can console themselves with the thought that a vigorous Canadian defense effort in the High Arctic would protect Canadian sovereignty from three threats: from China, Russia, and from the United States, who will not respect Canadian sovereignty if the U.S. must project the power of its Joint Force because Canada can’t handle the threats posed by the other two countries.
“Although the vast majority of the Arctic is under the jurisdiction of sovereign states, the PRC seeks to promote the Arctic region as a ‘global commons’ in order to shift Arctic governance in its favor. The PRC’s 2018 Arctic Policy claims non-Arctic states should contribute to the region’s “shared future for mankind” due to the Arctic’s global significance. Its “Polar Silk Road” has been used to gain a footing in the Arctic by pursuing investments in infrastructure and natural resources, including in the territory of NATO Allies.” The Chinese policy is a direct threat to Canadian sovereignty in the High Arctic.
The U.S. is content for now to “monitor and respond” to threats as they occur at present.
“Insufficient investments in early warning and air defense sensors in the Arctic will increase risks to the U.S. homeland. A lack of Arctic-capable domain awareness and communications capabilities would hamper the U.S. military’s ability to operate in the region in response to competitor activities.” Complementing these needs of the U.S. dovetails well within the aims of Naked and Afraid, and ought to spur serious pursuit of the strategic aims and spending priorities of the new defense policy.
Getting Uncomfortable
By Michael Nickerson
Ok class, please take a seat. You’ll see that there are padded recliners for everyone this year, as we had a few complaints about the leather sofas provided in the past. Not very comfortable was the general gist, and I know our vegan students didn’t much appreciate sitting on animal skin. Well I can assure you we don’t want that! Comfort is key! So sit back, relax, choose your massage setting, and when everyone is ready we’ll proceed with our Remembrance Day festivities. And in the interest of keeping things light we’re dispensing with the actual ceremony and all that war unpleasantness. Instead, please enjoy these puppy videos!
I don’t know about you, but when I was a wee lad that wasn’t the way our Remembrance Days were observed. For one thing there was no YouTube, so finding films of puppies was a bit of a chore. But more importantly, they were rather somber, reverential affairs lead each year by our school janitor, a World War II naval veteran who served on a Royal Canadian Navy MTB in the North Sea. He made sure that the school staff took the day very seriously, and the day became our first exposure to the concept of armed conflict and the best and worst of humanity. Not the most comfortable of experiences that, and nary a puppy in sight.
Fast forward to today and it seems school Remembrance Day ceremonies have moved away from a sobering reflection of war, sacrifice and loss to an exercise in not offending the sensibilities of anyone involved. At least that was initially the plan for the kids of Sackville Heights Elementary. You see, concerned over possibly upsetting some students that have come from conflict zones, the school made a rather cheeky request for veterans to attend, but only wearing civilian clothes. In an email to families, their school principal explained that they wanted to ensure that everyone involved would feel “comfortable” and some had expressed “discomfort with images of war which includes those of individuals in military uniforms."
Now I’m all for concern about the feelings and fears of others to the point that I might finally get a tattoo reading “woke” in big bold letters…though somewhere I can also conceal it should it make anyone uneasy (damn this woke stuff gets complicated!). But there are times when things are so serious that trying to be accommodating to everyone turns the whole thing into a pointless farce. Learning about the cost of armed conflict in all its bloody reality is not the time for a congenial meet and greet with tea, cookies and a round of Tiddlywinks.
This very fleeting policy was born out of the best of intentions, and rest assured the school’s staff has been thoroughly pilloried in public for being nice if rather ignorant. But the whole episode I think was rather telling about what Remembrance Day means today. Nova Scotia Liberal Leader Zach Churchill opined that the day is for “celebrating” our veterans, as if it’s some sort of festive holiday. Lost in all this back and forth is what many would argue is the purpose of Remembrance Day: recognizing the shear insanity that is war. As Robert Huish, associate professor of international development studies at Dalhousie University, opined to CTV News, the day is an opportunity to educate students on not just “a simple history that explains the dates and times of conflicts, but the real meaning about how war changes a society.”
These discussions need to be had, and from an early age. The simple fact is armed conflict occurs when we as a society screw up. It’s then that we turn to our militaries to deal with the mess we have made, sometimes with their lives. It’s a brutal, uncomfortable subject, one we seem to avoid to the point that a large portion of our society doesn’t understand the sacrifice we ask of our military, nor the relentless effort needed to avoid them having to make that sacrifice.
We’ve put comfort over responsibility. And the subject of war should never be comfortable. Only when you get uncomfortable talking about it do you know you’re on the right track.
REMEMBRANCE: Unsung Heroes
By Mike Blais
I think no one is more affected during Remembrance than those whose loved ones made the ultimate sacrifice during the Afghanistan War. Time has yet to blunt the depths of their grieving. The annual cycle of honouring Canada’s fallen poses a constant reminder, and traumatic recollections for; mothers, fathers, sons and daughters and of course, their regimental brothers and sisters. All will assemble with Canadians on the eleventh hour of the eleventh day, of the eleventh month to offer profound respect for the fallen and, equally important, to acknowledge their national sacrifice.
One hundred and fifty eight valiant Canadians were sacrificed to the war in Afghanistan. Many more would succumb to their wounds and injuries long after repatriation. This was particularly true during the dark era wherein the Harper Conservatives gutted the department of Veterans Affairs Canada (VAC) capabilities despite the fact that Canada incurred most of the combat casualties under their stewardship. We know that during Canada’s longest war, thousands of troops sustained catastrophic levels of mental duress and as is with many modern wars, the number of suicides has now superseded the numbers of those who were killed in action (KIA).
Tragically, the levels of support provided to the survivors are lacking on many levels. Many Memorial Cross recipients felt that, once the intense dramatics inherent with the repatriation and subsequent journey down the Highway of Heroes had passed, they were accorded substandard levels of respect, and services through Veterans Affairs Canada. To be fair, the current government has since addressed some of these shortcomings. However, most of the casualties were incurred at a time when survivor supportive benefits were grotesquely deficient.
Faced with overcoming grief and simultaneously confronting a bureaucratic wasteland, many simply gave up. The unsung heroes of this very unique community, chose instead to fight and have their voices heard.
One such unsung hero is Jacqui Girouard, (spouse of CWO Robert Girouard – KIA Nov, 2006) who the Canadian Veterans Advocacy successfully nominated for the Queens Diamond Jubilee medal in respect for her survivor related efforts.
Another is Amanda Anderson (Spouse of Cpl Jordan Anderson, PPCLI, who fell to an insurgent IED in 2007 while serving in Afghanistan). Consequential to the departmental adversity Amanda confronted, she now leads a mission specific support network designed to assist bereaved military families. Her support network helps families to navigate the maze of bureaucratic necessities Veterans Affairs Canada requires in order to provide compensation and the suite of benefits that are now provided to the survivors of the fallen. Amanda currently administers a private Facebook Group that is focused entirely on the survivors. In addition to administrative support, the group offers peer support with respect to coping with grief, raising children as a solo parent and identifying mental health provisions that may be required for individuals and family units. Amanda is acutely aware of the administrative difficulties they are confronting and has become the Canadian Veterans Advocacy’s leading subject matter expert (SME) on survivors as we collectively strive to improve the standards of care VAC provides to our Memorial Cross community.
Amanda is currently promoting improved mental health provisions for both widows and their families. This is a serious issue and while the current government has responded by doubling the amount of professional mental sessions VAC will support to 20 sessions, this is hardly sufficient. Surely we can agree that the death of a spouse or child is the most difficult mental health challenge a person can encounter?
Surely, we understand military widows’ grief is exacerbated by losing a loved one in a war zone or through suicide. Surely, we understand that the mental health challenges which survivors encounter are profound and lifelong.
Grief never ends. Accordingly, Amanda and her team are fighting to have this restrictive policy reformed and mental health provision extended and accorded by need, not bureacratic restrictions.
Amanda’s second priority pertains to the establishment of a team of dedicated case managers and veterans service agents. Legislation and policy respecting survivors’ national sacrifice is unique and consequently, poses many challenges to the rank and file at VAC. Survivors are distinct from veterans and in order to provide effective support, the department must acknowledge the issues of grief and death related trauma are diverse in scope and intensity. Mission specific training in the bureaucratic nuances and entitlements of the survivor legislation and a clinical understanding of the levels of service-related compassion required must be improved.
Canada’s first First Soldier
By Vincent J. Curtis
General Sir William Otter (December 3, 1843 – May 6, 1929) was the first Canadian born Chief of the General Staff, making him Canada’s first “First Soldier.” His career is a monument to the Administration principle of war, and of showing up for work every day.
Otter was born in near Clinton, which lies in Southwestern Ontario, then Canada West. Many young men his age in Canada West signed up for the Union Army during the depression of 1863, but Otter instead joined the colonial Non-Permanent Active Militia, a force under British command, in Toronto in 1864
Enrolling as a private in the Victoria Rifle Company of the Queen’s Own Rifles, Otter was appointed Staff-Sergeant on October 21, 1864, then Lieutenant in the 2nd Administrative Battalion at Niagara 1864-65. On his return he was appointed Lieutenant in No. 1 Coy QOR May 19, 1865; Adjutant, August 19, 1865; Captain, March 8, 1866; and Major, June 4, 1869. Otter was CO of the QOR from 1875 to 1883.
Otter’s first action was at the Battle of Ridgway, a Fenian Raid near Niagara Falls, which saw the inexperienced Canadian troops routed in confusion. He received a service bar on his Canadian General Service Medal for that and 1870, the year of the first Riel Rebellion, but also a year of another Fenian raid.
In 1883, Canada created its own army, styled the Permanent Active Militia, or Permanent Force, and Otter secured an appointment as the Commanding Officer of Canada’s Infantry School in Toronto. Sent west under the command of General Frederick Middleton to deal with the second Riel Rebellion, Otter commanded the Battleford Column (April – July 1885); and, at the Battle of Cut Knife (May 2, 1885), Canada’s first professional was worsted by a couple of Indian amateurs, Poundmaker and Fine-Day. Poundmaker, invoking a mercy rule, spared Otter’s whupped and retreating column further casualties, their having suffered 8 KIA and 14WIA. After Batoche and the end of the rebellion, Otter was unable to nab an elusive rascal named Big Bear, who (all’s well that end’s well), eventually surrendered.
Withal, Otter was appointed Commander of No 2 Military District effective July 1, 1886; and in 1893, was appointed the first Commanding Officer of an outfit called the “Royal Canadian Regiment of Infantry” (or some such). Otter was known to be something of an austere professional, or martinet, and that proclivity for extreme attention to military detail and discipline seems to have passed on, generation after generation, in 1RCR. This sort of attitude can arise in men who have seen action, experienced failure, and they employ it against those who haven’t. Otter was appointed Inspector of Infantry on May 16, 1896.
When the Secord Boer War rolled around (1899-1902), Canada sent a large contingent of troops to aid the British effort. For this service, Canada created a Special Service force, and Lieutenant Colonel Otter commanded the 2nd (Special Service) Battalion of the RCRI, which was dispatched to South Africa, and saw action at the Battle of Paardeberg. In South Africa, he could have encountered Sam Hughes and Charles Ross. Otter was gazetted Colonel on July 19, 1900.
Returning to Canada, Otter was appointed OC Military District No 2, and in 1908 he was promoted BGen and appointed CGS (1908-1910), becoming the first Canadian born head of the Canadian Militia, which, until then, had ben commanded by a British officer. (The RCN didn’t come into existence until 1910.). He retired, aged 67, in 1910 in the rank of MGen, and was knighted in 1913. During World War I, he came out of retirement to command detention operations of enemy nationals in Canada. In 1922, he, along with Sir Arthur Currie, was promoted to full General.
In 1914, Otter published The Guide: A Manual for the Canadian Militia (Infantry) perhaps a Canadian first attempt at a comprehensive training manual. He also headed the Otter Commission which established the perpetuation of Canadian Expeditionary Force units in Canadian militia units.
Cold Comfort
Photo Credit: DND
By Michael Nickerson
It can get cold in Canada. Seriously, I kid you not. We’re quite famous for it. Last winter I even saw snow! Indeed, it’s that white stuff dogs love to roll around in and people wish for every Christmas. Tad cold to be around if we’re honest, but amazingly we have stuff to deal with that: gloves, boots, toques, sweaters, scarfs, long underwear, and parkas to name just some of those tried and true solutions. Like good little scouts you can count on Canadians to be ready for whatever winter throws at us!
Well not quite all Canadians. For if you’re one of the poor slobs kitted out with the latest and greatest from the defence department, namely the new General Purpose Sleeping Bag System (GPSBS), you better hope the weather is mild and you have an extra pair of long johns in your sack. Because doing anything north of the 50th parallel will be at best uncomfortable, and at worst downright dangerous.
As recently reported by Murray Brewster of CBC news, last November 350 soldiers belonging to the 3rd battalion Princess Patricia's Canadian Light Infantry were out on a training exercise in Ram Falls Provincial Park near Red Deer, a place not known for its balmy climate. With temperatures approaching minus twenty at night, soldiers complained of being cold even while tucked in tight with their GPSBS in a stove-equipped tent. According to an internal briefing note from the battalion’s quartermaster, the new sleeping bags were "better suited for use in weather conditions that are characteristic of late spring to early fall."
Now when the government released this year’s defence policy update “Our North, Strong and Free: A Renewed Vision for Canada’s Defence” I dare say it didn’t stress being strong and free south of the 50th parallel. Though to be fair, the new GPSBS was meant to be a bit of a jack of all trades. As a member of the GPSBS project team Alexandre Legault indicated in a government news release in 2023, “It’s about making sure we have everything the soldier needs to be able to perform in Iraq in the summer all the way to the high Arctic in the winter.” Unfortunately they missed that winter bit.
Needless to say, for an arctic nation this has become a bit embarrassing, even making international headlines. You can almost hear our allies’ snickers. As defence expert Rob Huebert of the University of Calgary put it to the CBC: “I wonder if they should have just gone to Canadian Tire.” A bit cheeky that, but considering the program has so far cost $34.8 million, he might be on to something.
If you were to average out that cost over our combined regular and reserve army strength, it works out to about $765 per soldier. And while Canadian Tire is a little lacking in military grade sleeping solutions, a quick check of what other arctic nations are using is instructive. Consider the Finns, who proudly use sleeping bags by Austrian manufacturer Carinthia. A sleeping bag actually designed for the “high Arctic in the winter” will set you back about $425, without factoring in bulk buying. I dare say if you bought 45,502 sleeping bags you could do a hell of a lot better than $34.8 million.
And this brings us to the thorny issue of military procurement in this country. It’s so poor that we have sleeping bags better suited to New Orleans than Nunavut, at almost twice the price of our allies. It’s one of many cockups by a ministry more concerned with covering its ass than properly supplying our soldiers. The result is either substandard equipment or none at all with never ending promises of things to come providing cold comfort for our freezing soldiers.
We can’t afford to spend years sorting out a problem decades in the making. We have allies, like the Finns, who have already done the legwork for us. Given how eager NATO members are for us to rearm, one can bet they’d be more than happy to share that knowledge so we could start buying off-the-shelf solutions now instead of customized solutions later. Our thermally compromised soldiers deserve no less.
Junkyard Diplomacy
By Michael Nickerson
Junk. If you asked Lester B. Pearson some 70 years ago whether Canada’s diplomatic influence would come down to what junk it has on hand, he’d scoff! Even the mere suggestion that a rich nation like Canada, fresh from playing a pivotal role in defeating the Nazis, would be offering up scraps to our allies, scrounging through our proverbial basement for some military hand-me-downs in times of conflict, would be heresy. We’re part of the G7, a founding member of NATO for goodness sake! We should be pulling our weight and leading the diplomatic charge; blue berets here we come!
Alas no, just junk. As the conflict in the Ukraine drags on in its third year, our latest contribution to NATO’s call to keep the Russian Bear from landing on Europe’s doorstep amounts to a ragtag collection of military surplus that makes up in numbers what it might lack in cutting-edge effectiveness. To wit: 80,840 1970’s era CRV7 rocket motors sans warheads; 970 surplus C6 machine guns; 10,500 WWII-era 9mm pistols (oldies but goodies!); 29 decommissioned M113 armored personnel carrier chassis and 64 Coyote LAVs to serve as spare parts. There is nothing like trying to get some diplomatic mileage out a little fall housecleaning, eh?
And if things keep going the way they are, the Ukrainians might get themselves even more equipment that we plan on mothballing because we can’t afford the maintenance. Before you know it, the Black Sea will be littered with old Canadian minesweepers and the odd bobbing submarine to use as target practice, and the skies dotted with ex-Snowbird tutor jets the Ukrainians will no doubt repurpose in some clever way we could only dream of.
Seems like a win-win, no? Well, not exactly. Sure, we’ve cleaned out our cupboards, taken the trash to the curb, and got things all neat and tidy for all those new toys we’re apparently going to get at some point in the distant future. But as long as our contribution is limited to junk, we really have no significant voice or sway in how this war plays out. And oh my but is it playing out in some very frightening ways.
Sick of taking it on the chin for over two years, the Ukrainians took the fight to Russia in August, actually invading their territory in the Kursk region in what Lt. Gen. (Ret.) Andrew Leslie described as “a bold, brilliant, gutsy move.”And by all indications they plan on staying there.
So what you say? Seems like a clever piece of strategy that. Unfortunately they’re doing it in part with our crap and have committed us to a situation that is both very dangerous and very difficult to extricate ourselves from. As history buffs will attest, Russia has a rather long and bloody history involving people invading them, and they get a tad twitchy at the idea of it happening again. In fact, the growing presence of NATO on their doorstep has been one of the reasons floated by Russia for their invasion of Ukraine. And whether intended or not, our little bit of housecleaning has put Canada in the middle of an actual proxy war with Russia.
Specifically, Canada and NATO are now attached to an incursion into Russian territory, by a country that when this conflict is hopefully over will most likely join NATO. Now call me crazy, but if I were Putin, or the average Russian, that state of affairs wouldn’t be very palatable, and it makes it incredibly hard to see how the situation can be brought to any reasonable diplomatic conclusion thanks to that “bold, brilliant, gutsy move” on the part of our new ally.
Unfortunately, however it plays out, Canada is merely on for a very dangerous ride at this point. Long gone are the days of the “honest broker” or a NATO member with any military heft to back up its point, much less defend our interests (even our own soil) if this all goes pear shaped. That’s junkyard diplomacy for you…may the fates be kind.
ROADMAP TO SUCCESS: Filing a VAC Claim
Mike Blais has become a stolid advocate for veterans
By Michael Blais CD
The Canadian Veterans Advocacy has matured over the past fourteen years. We have transformed from an organization which originally contested inadequate government veterans' policies through protest. Now that many of our legislative objectives were secured, CVA has become a stolid base for close to 12,000 disabled veterans, their family members and Memorial Cross recipients. Over time, we have established a solid foundation of Subject Matter Experts (SME) who have successfully assisted thousands of mentally and physically wounded veterans throughout our mandate. Through these engagements, commonalities have been identified and CVA SME Group has prepared a series of Aide de Memoires to provide information & guidance to those seeking acknowledgement in regard to their national sacrifice. Or for those within VAC’s client base, relevant information pertaining to available entitlement programs and directions on how to apply for any additional benefits which they deserve.
We will start by asking, just how do I file a disability claim with Veterans Affairs Canada? You have several options but I would suggest that you simply contact VAC by telephone, 1-866-522-2122. Inform them you wish to make a claim for [FILL IN THE BLANK] and request that they send the appropriate documentation to your home. Or you can email them through the VAC website. To VAC's credit, they provide a series of supportive links which present vital information to the applicant on how to successfully process a disability claim. The CVA Aide de Memoire presents five VAC links ranging from application forms and benefit navigators to disability tables and compensation values for illness or injury. The RCMP are provided services through their own unique link.
The process commences once you receive or download VAC’s 923e form. I would strongly encourage you to make the appropriate preparations before filling out this form. There are a total of ten pages, most of them requiring that you provide relevant information which will ultimately determine whether your claim is successful and, if so, the degree of the financial compensation which you will be granted. Failing to adequately comply with the department’s requirements will result in substantial delays in the time it takes VAC to process the claim. Read the questions carefully. Think before you respond. Be prepared. Have handy your service number, deployment(s) periods and date of service and any medical or administrative documents relating to the injury and the theatre of operations. Make an honest determination on how the injury has affected your quality of life and be inclusive of the adverse impact it has borne on your family, social, sport and personal relationships. Quality of life responses are critical if the adjudicator is to properly assess the depths of your disability. Be sure to read VAC's Quality of Life rating chapter and document when and how any commonality factors adversely affect your quality of life. When making your preparations, do so with the perspective of your worst days in mind. There is no such thing as too much information or trivialities, so be comprehensive.
Regarding medical documents, it is vital that you talk to your doctor about your injury and how it relates to your military service. Define the circumstances to them. They are civilians. Should you fail to convey to the doctor the correlation between trauma and your military service, the documentation which they will subsequently submit may not directly link the injury. Linkage is the primary objective. If necessary, resort to the Access to Information (ATI) Act to secure your military medical files.
Sign the 3rd party consent form. This will expedite the time it takes to process your claim by providing authority to the adjudicator to engage your health professional(s). Complex cases often include the services of psychiatrists, psychologists, occupational therapists, physiotherapists and others with relevant information pertaining to your claim or involved in your subsequent treatment plan. Or supplemental benefits. Provide your banking information for direct deposit. If you prefer a cheque, be advised this will further delay payment.
How long will it take? The adjudicators are highly trained individuals, if you have applied due diligence in your preparations and complied with the department’s administration requirements, the claim should be processed in an expedient manner. Should the applicant have provided everything required and is seeking recognition for a non-complex issue such as hearing, there is a good chance that processing will conform to the department’s stated objective of 16 weeks. The more complex the condition is, the longer it is going to take. I would remind veterans who are applying for conditions related to mental trauma to be aware that Veterans Affairs will sponsor their treatment costs from the date the application is accepted by VAC and will be extended for two-years regardless of the determination of the claim.
You will be formally notified by mail when your claim has been adjudicated and, if successful, informed of the compensation percentage awarded. You have two options for the tax-free award: monthly payments or a lump sum award. Should the size of the award require you to consider financial advice, VAC will pay 500 dollars toward this service.
Not everyone will be pleased regardless of the decision. For many, the experience is bittersweet as while being successfully processed, the percentage degree of compensation was far below expectations. Should you feel that an error in Law or policy occurred, you may request a Departmental Review. Should this fail, you next option is to contact the Bureau of Pensions Advocates representative and request they appeal the case before the Veterans Review and Appeal Board. The same process is applicable should the claim have been denied.
Running With Scissors
By Michael Nickerson
Safety first. Two simple words every kid has heard from their parents since the invention of fire. Closely followed by: Don’t play with matches; Don’t run down stairs; and Don’t run with scissors. Being a rather hyper child, I got that last one a lot, if for no other reason than I ran around constantly and if I had scissors in my hands so much the better! Somehow I managed to not put anyone’s eye out, and I’m proud to say I haven’t run with scissors in some time. Not much call for it really. I guess that makes me an adult now.
Well let’s not go that far, but you get the idea. Children can be a tad irresponsible and are likely to get killed without some mature, grown-up guidance. And let’s face it, there is no need to run with scissors. Dangerous stuff that at any age, and who needs cutting implements that hurriedly? But what if we really do need a set of clippers posthaste? What if lives depend on getting someone a sharp pair of shears a fast as your little feet will get them there? You might lose an eye, but the answer seems clear. Throw caution to the wind!
Well Canada isn’t facing a massive need for hordes of children to go charging hither and yon clutching the latest in pointy-ended grooming implements, but it is facing a rather pressing need for adults (presumably of the mature variety, but let’s not quibble) to throw caution to the wind and race to get on the A.I. train before it and everyone else leaves the proverbial station. For lives really are at risk and this country’s safety imperiled if we don’t get our act together and face the revolution of artificial intelligence head on.
Now we’re not talking about ChatGPT, Siri, Alexa, or your phone’s spellchecker. We’re talking about systems that can autonomously control drones, game out strategy options quicker that any human could hope, and employ facial recognition that could both stop a terrorist and intrude on civilian privacy. Encryption, planning, industrial design, these developments are all happening now, and our allies and foes are already rushing headlong into a future developing in leaps and bounds by the day, not the months and years we all seem to think we have.
Back in March, aeons ago by A.I. standards, the Department of National Defence published their strategy when it comes to the future of A.I.. It’s not voluminous but it does recognize the opportunities and perils of the technology, the significant cultural change needed to develop and adopt it, and the ethical questions that come with such a powerful tool. A.I. has the potential to be more significant and dangerous than the invention of nuclear weapons, but also a lot easier to attain.
The strategy has set a target of being “A.I. enabled” by 2030, which by their estimate is a pretty ambitious timeline. Unfortunately that’s about six years too late which means that in the name of military security and effectiveness, we must ask the DND, Canadian Armed Forces (CAF), and whatever government happens to be governing at any given moment to effectively ‘run with scissors’ as fast as their bureaucratic bunions will let them.
But are these really the right adults for the job? Part of that job will involve not just onboarding the software, but deciding and enforcing ethical standards to go with it. Whether it’s the current state of procurement, or recent examples of the CAF using social media to snoop on innocent Canadians, the prospects aren’t encouraging. And the current Liberal government can barely get a handle on regulating social media, much less A.I.
What is needed is a central entity, be it an oversight committee or preferably a dedicated ministry, composed of bipartisan members with the mandate to (let’s all put on rosy glasses now) rise above daily politics and focus on these challenges now, with real powers and real money to get real results. A.I. isn’t waiting folks. We need to pick up those scissors and run like hell. It’d be nice if we had adults who might actually be able to handle it.
TOTALIZE Plus 80
By Vincent J. Curtis
August 7th to 11th, 2024, mark the Eightieth Anniversary of Operation TOTALIZE. This operation was intended to be Lt-Gen Guy Simmonds’, the 2nd Canadian Corps’, and the 21st Army Group’s punch and pincer arm that would force the closure of the Falaise Gap, entrapping the German 7th Army of some 150,000 troops. Totalize was timed to co-ordinate with Gen Omar Bradley’s Operation COBRA in the far west of France, and was intended, secondarily, to hold the German heavy armour in front of the 21st Army Group.
Of all the forces landed on D-Day, the Canadians advanced the farthest. No.2 Troop, C Squadron, 1st Hussars, commanded by Lt. William F. McCormick, found an unopposed route from Camilly on Phase Line Elm all the way to Phase Line Oak, the Caen-Bayeux rail line. Turing east, McCormick’s troop exploited as far as Carpiquet airfield. Seeing Caen essentially undefended, McCormick tried, but failed, to reach higher command by radio; and, inexplicably, higher command wasn’t wondering where No. 2 Troop was. D-Day ended with the 3rd Canadian Division digging in on Phase Line Elm, three miles north of Caen, with four hours of daylight remaining. The Germans occupied Caen in strength that night.
There followed: Op WINDSOR to capture Carpiquet village; Op CHARNWOOD to capture Carpiquet airfield and Caen north of the Orne; Op ATLANTIC to capture Caen south of the Orne, and to create a bridgehead for an attack on Verrières Ridge (Op SPRING).
Lt-Gen Guy Simmonds was at his wits end with the incompetence at divisional and brigade levels; and quality even at the battalion level was uneven. Hence, Totalize was structured to minimize command decisions. Simmonds invented the APC, by the “defrocking” of “Priests,” i.e. Sherman tanks that had their turrets replaced with 25 pdr guns; “artificial moonlight,” and he used heavy, strategic bombers in a tactical role.
As I wrote for the 75th anniversary, “Totalize was a familiar set-piece battle, but using bigger hammers, closer timing between blows, and other techniques of ancient renown. Tactically, Totalize was a case of hi-diddle-diddle- straight up the middle, the middle being the Caen-Falaise road. Heavy strategic bombers were to carpet bomb both sides of the highway south of the start-line. Immediately upon completion of the air mission, artillery would open up and the first wave of tanks and APCs would drive south in a night attack, bypassing pockets of resistance along the way. Tracers from Bofors 40 mm guns and target marking artillery shells were guides to direction.
Great innovations from Simonds, but then gremlins crept in to undermine the plan. There was no radio comms with air. Some bombs dropped on 3rd Canadian Division HQ and wounded Maj-Gen Rod Keller. Bombing the route of advance created a tank obstacle course which was run en mass at night by inexperienced APC drivers. Simonds ordered a halt at noon on the 8th to bring up the artillery after the first objectives were taken. Given a respite, the Germans regrouped and a second dose of heavy bombing failed to destroy German counterattacking panzer groups. Totalize stalled.
Trying to restore momentum, Simonds ordered Worthington Force to capture Hill 195. The result was the most infamous event of Totalize. An inexcusable navigation error had Worthington Force, a battlegroup consisting of the British Columbia Regiment and the Algonquins, seize Hill 140, seven kilometers from the assigned objective. Unsupported by Canadian artillery or Typhoons, it was annihilated by a counterattack force of German Panther tanks.”
In a near postscript to the combat, Totalize culminated with the capture of Hill 195 on the 11th by a lone infantry regiment that infiltrated at night into the position. The Argyll and Sutherland Highlanders of Canada, under the command of Lt-Col Dave Stewart, who, with Scout platoon ahead, and his battalion following in single file; occupied Hill 195, eliminated what opposition there was, established a defense, which included a couple 17 pdr anti-tank guns; and repulsed German attacks that day.
Their line pierced, the Germans withdrew to Falaise.
What’s A Promise Worth?
By Mike Nickerson
Clean your room! That was my parents’ opening salvo in a long test of wills, understandable given that my room resembled a cross between a scrap yard and a fuzzy petri dish. But thankfully there was always an easy answer to that problem that didn’t involve sorting or disinfectant. I’d promise to clean it. This bought time until the next confrontation, when I’d point out the fiscal limitations of cleaning my room. When that didn’t work, it was time to note the impact all that cleaning would have on my health, or the environment, or how it might keep me from helping old ladies cross the street. And it all worked famously until my parents kicked me out and sold the house.
Well NATO just told Canada to clean its room for about the umpteenth time last month at their summit in Washington D.C., and guess what? We promised we would. Or more specifically, Justin Trudeau did, promising to increase military spending to two percent of GDP by 2032 despite repeated (and surprisingly reasonable) arguments that it is an arbitrary and flawed metric. But two percent it is; now leave us alone.
Of course the brilliance of this is that neither Trudeau nor his government will be around to make good on that promise. A nifty trick that, something I wish I thought of during those tense family negotiations of yesteryear. No, it will most likely land on Pierre Poilievre’s shoulders to sort out, though if his recent pithy musings about Canada’s military are anything to go by (“I will replace the woke culture with a warrior culture”) NATO better not be banking on us picking up our metaphorical dirty underwear anytime soon, especially given Poilievre’s zeal to cut spending and taxes the second he takes office.
Unfortunately this has not stopped many a pundit and general from dreaming of all the new kit we’ll be buying to reach that two percent figure, with visions of sugar-plums dancing joyously in their heads. Well, not so much sugar-plums as submarines, which are considerably more expensive. And it’s also glossed over a far more fundamental problem, namely a severe lack of personnel to make all this hallucinating a reality.
Now it’s well known that Canada’s military is short some 16,000 members, with shortages in just about every area save for senior brass. What perhaps is less talked about is a severe shortage of staff to handle the procurement of all that lovely new kit, to say nothing of a depleted and underfunded diplomatic corps to keep us from having to use it in the first place.
It’s an open question whether the funds for all those shiny new toys NATO wants us to buy will ever materialize, for really, what’s a promise worth these days? But there are unspent billions currently on the books that could be spent right now getting Canada ready to use those toys should Santa Pierre actually come through with the goods, and that’s spending on people, be it hiring, housing, training, guaranteed medical and financial support for veterans, cost-of-living subsidies, or simply better food in the mess hall.
And if NATO is so eager for Canada to step up, then they should be more than happy for new recruits to embed in their militaries for training, procurement officers to liaise and learn from their NATO counterparts, and a refreshed diplomatic core to work and learn alongside their allies in the art of avoiding conflict in the first place. It’s the sort of fundamentals that need to be in place long before you start acquiring multi-billion dollar weapon systems. And it will allow Canada to truly start contributing now as opposed to 2032, by which time, at the rate we’re going, the world will likely just be a cinder.
So by all means play for time offering promises and platitudes, a tried and true method for messy children and feckless governments alike. But in the meantime actually start doing what is possible now, and that’s invest more in Canadian forces members than sparkly new toys that go boom. For those socks won’t pick up themselves.
Attack class submarines
Vincent J. Curtis
On 16 September, 2021, Australian Prime Minister Scott Morrison announced a trilateral security pact with the UK and the US, called AUKUS, (or NOTCANNZ in some circles) The UK and US would help Australia acquire nuclear powered submarines. An hour before the announcement, the Aussies informed the French government that it was cancelling the contract to acquire the French designed Shortfin-Barracuda class submarine, a conventional diesel-electric, which the Aussies were going to dub the Attack class. The French explosion and cries of maudit-anglais, were heard around the world. (Roughly translated, the French complained of an Anglo-Saxon condominium.)
On 11 June 2022, Australia’s new Labour government made financial settlement with the French to the tune of US$584 million, which is a lot to pay for blueprints you’re not going to use.
Australia’s strategic requirements ask of her submarines an unusually long operational range, a manifestation of the ‘tyranny of distance’ in the Pacific theatre. Australia’s current Collins class submarines, conventional diesel-electrics, are on the big side.
A Collins class sub displaces 3100 tons (surface), is 77.4 m in length, 7.8 m beam, 11,500 nmi range, 50 days endurance, and a complement of 58.
The Attack class subs would have displaced 4500 tons (surface) be of 97 m length, 8.8 m beam, 18,000 nmi in range, 80 days endurance, and a complement of 80. The rising threat of China, and a desire to operate closely with the United States in respect of China, accounts for the greater capability of the newer class. By granting Australia access to U.S. nuclear technology, the U.S. gives the RAN much greater operational capability in terms of range and endurance.
Australia replaced its Oberon class subs with the Collins class. Canada replaced hers with the Lemon class of subs. (HMCS Lemon, Cumquat, Pomegranate, and Pumpkin. What’s that? The Victoria, Chicoutimi, Windsor, and Corner Brook? Hokay.)
The Upholder/Victoria/Lemon class displace 2455 tons (surface), are 70.3 m in length, 7.2 m beam, 8,000 nmi range, an endurance of 30 days, and a complement of 53. Though acquired by Canada in 1998, the class did not become fully operational until 2016. Under the Trudeau government’s defence white paper, Weak, Anxious, Distracted these subs are to undergo life-extending refits for another life-cycle of eight years. This will take the service of the class into the early 2030s. These babies are already pushing forty years old, and by the middle 2030s will be at the half-century mark in age. They’ll have definitely hit CRA. Even if the steel can hold up to the pressures of 200 m depth, the electronics in them will be as obsolete as vacuum tubes.
Replacing the Lemons (er Victorias – can’t help myself!) with Attack class subs seems to present itself. Attacks may offer more capability than Canada needs – if you’re focussed on the North Atlantic. But after the Ukraine, the US and UK can likely handle the Russian Atlantic threat without Canadian help. In the Pacific, however, where China continues to sabre-rattle vigorously over Taiwan, and extends her reach farther south in the Pacific and into the Indian Ocean, the RCN might find usefulness in the North Pacific, home not only to the Chinese fleet, but to the port of Vladivostok.
Alternatively, Canada could opt for the nuclear-powered version of the French sub, giving her fleet under-ice capability. But the Trudeau government doesn’t want that. Perhaps fearing the adverse perception of ‘nuclear’ as beset the Mulroney government’s acquisition plans, or perhaps it doesn’t want to know, and therefore have to confront, Russian and American presumptions upon Canada’s claimed territorial waters in the High Arctic. Ignorance being bliss.
The Attack class won’t come cheap. The Aussies were budgeting A$90 billion to acquire a dozen. That translates into C$28 billion for four. Canada is already committing C$77 billion for 15 frigates. Will the RCN get another C$30 billion for 4 new subs or will that capability lapse? Decisions need to be made before 2025 to avoid lapse.
Naked and Afraid: The Defence Policy Update
By Vincent J. Curtis
Naked and Afraid, Canada’s defense policy update, is a catalogue of irresolute, empty promises for a future government to fulfill, and is fraught with pollyannish conviction. Naked and Afraid is the 2024 update to the 2017 Defense Policy paper, Weak, Anxious, and Distracted; and, despite being the successor to a seven-year-old document, N&A projects a vision of spending over a twenty-year period. It boldly declares timidity: its forecasted expenditures will bring Canada’s defense spending to a colossal 1.79 percent of GDP by 2029-30, short of the 2023 commitment to 2.0 percent.
Prime Minister Trudeau received an extraordinary letter, dated May 23rd, signed by 23 United States Senators, calling attention to that shortfall, and asking for a more ambitious program from him at the NATO conference in July.
Canada will be relying upon polar bears to do much of the CAF’s dirty work. The expenditures are remarkably deficient in fighting teeth: $18.4 billion over 20 years is allocated to acquire new “tactical helicopters”. Problem is, the detailed wording doesn’t distinguish between an AH-64E Apache tactical helicopter and a CH-147F tactical lift helicopter. There’s $2.7 Billion over 20 years allocated to acquire long-range missile capability, which could mean a Lockheed-Martin HIMARS rocket artillery battery (passim). There’s mention of, but no money associated with, acquiring a ground-based air defense system for critical infrastructure; and one reads Saab’s MSHORAD missile system between the lines. There is only mention of “exploring options” to acquire long-range air- and sea-launched missiles, Tomahawk cruise missiles fitting this description.
Otherwise, there’s $9.0 Billion over 20 years for updates to existing equipment to preserve deployability. There’s mention of, but no monetary commitment towards, upgrading or replacing the “main battle tanks” and the LAVs. After 20 years, one would think replacement was unavoidable, but the hesitancy to make a commitment is palpable.
All this is rather strange when the main threat to Canada, supposed by the paper, is in the far North. To move a battle group around the High Arctic would require about 100 tac lift helos, but that’s not foreseen in the paper.
To deal with threats to the far North, there’s money for surveillance and infrastructure, and a mention of, but no money allocated to, some mythical conventionally powered sub with under-ice capability. There’s $1.4 Billion over 20 years to acquire maritime sensors to monitor the maritime approaches to the Arctic and North. There’s $222 million over 20 years (where do they get these precise numbers?) for a new satellite ground station in the Arctic. There $307 million over 20 years for airborne early warning aircraft, which could mean either a Boeing P-8 Poseidon or a couple of Saab’s GlobalEyes (passim). There’s $5.5 Billion over 20 years to acquire satellite communications capability. And there’s reference to “exploring options” to acquire a suite of surveillance and strike drones.
There’s stuff in Naked and Afraid that should be routine defence expenditures: replenishing ammunition stocks that were given to Ukraine. manufacturing our own artillery shells, training, housing, health- and child-care, and upgrading domestic infrastructure.
Significantly, there’s no specific mention of the Type 26 frigate; there’s only money set aside to refit the existing fleet ofHalifax class frigates.
In EdC Vol 30-12 and 31-2, I sketched what threats to Canada’s sovereignty in the far North would look like, and what’s required to meet them. Meeting them requires an all of government approach, including skeptical reviews of foreign investment. The RCN and the RCAF have to be able to put platoon-plus sized units at threatened locations in Canada’s Arctic Archipelago, and be able to support them both logistically and tactically. A Gripen E operating off an austere runway in Resolute Bay will be better than a daintier F-35 out of Bagotville, but that’s water under the bridge.
Naked and Afraid seems to be a grab-bag of pet and harmless expenditures without a strategic vision. Just like the Indo-Pacific Strategy.