Tensions between Canada and the Trump administration continue to fuel public anger, with criticism directed at U.S. Ambassador Pete Hoekstra and Canadian billionaire Tobias Lütke over their controversial views. Meanwhile, Canadian politicians faced backlash for praising the late U.S. Senator Lindsey Graham, despite his strong support for Trump and criticism of Canada.
Iran is leveraging viral AI-generated Lego-style videos mocking Donald Trump as part of a sophisticated propaganda campaign tied to the ongoing conflict with the U.S. Meanwhile, Canada’s Defence Minister faced scrutiny over conflicting statements about an Iranian attack on a Canadian-linked base, raising concerns about transparency and government communication.
Tim Ryan examines debate over arming the Canadian Coast Guard after CBC’s Murray Brewster raised the issue. While defence officials oppose militarization, critics argue last-minute wartime arming is risky. Ryan also highlights U.S. disinformation controversies, including CIA messaging on Iran and Trump’s dubious “discombobulator” claims in Venezuela.
Donald Trump’s threats toward NATO allies are fuelling debate over the future of the F-35 program. While Canada and others remain committed, concerns about U.S. reliability, Arctic sovereignty, and pressure on journalists are prompting renewed calls to reconsider reliance on American defence equipment.
Canada’s fighter jet decision remains unresolved as Prime Minister Mark Carney reviews the F-35 purchase amid U.S. political tensions. Saab has launched an aggressive campaign for its Gripen, promising Canadian assembly, thousands of jobs, and technology transfer—intensifying a heated PR battle with Lockheed Martin as the RCAF awaits a final choice.
Defence Minister David McGuinty’s missed deadline to release the F-35 review has intensified political pressure on the Liberals, with media and opposition demanding answers. While McGuinty fumbles communications, Conservative MP James Bezan attacks the government—despite his party’s own record of delays, cuts, and veterans’ neglect when in power.
Vice-Admiral Angus Topshee’s recent interviews raised eyebrows after he suggested Canada could buy submarines from both German and South Korean suppliers. Defence experts slammed the idea as costly, and Prime Minister Mark Carney swiftly rebuked the notion, reaffirming a single-fleet strategy. PMO and PCO are now moving to rein in Topshee’s media freelancing.
The F-35 debate in Canada is intensifying amid U.S. pressure, rising costs, and questions of sovereignty. Ambassador Pete Hoekstra and Lockheed Martin supporters are pushing hard, but Canadians are challenging threats, misinformation, and lack of transparency. Calls grow for deeper journalism, accountability, and debate before committing billions to the fighter jet.
The battle over Edmonton’s Savaryn Drive continues as critics demand it be renamed due to Peter Savaryn’s Waffen SS past. Jewish groups stress the atrocities committed by the SS Galicia Division, denouncing efforts to whitewash history. Supporters defend him, while calls grow to honor Ukrainian-Canadians who fought against Nazism instead.
Journalist Marcus Kolga recently called Canada’s mission in Latvia “the most important since WWII.” Esprit de Corps questions this claim, pointing to Canada’s major contributions in historic operations including Varsity, Korea, the Cold War, the Balkans, and Afghanistan. These missions, marked by sacrifice and scale, arguably outweigh Latvia’s significance.
Canada faces renewed controversy over streets named after Nazi collaborators, including Max Brose in London, Ontario, and Peter Savaryn in Edmonton. Journalist Lev Golinkin’s findings sparked calls from the Friends of Simon Wiesenthal Center to rename them, citing harm to Holocaust survivors and dishonour to Canadian soldiers who fought Nazism.
Global Affairs Canada has introduced a “dissent channel” for employees to critique foreign policy, but restrictions require criticism not undermine leadership, be sent from official emails, and be management-approved. While leaders promise no retribution, skepticism remains, citing past retaliation in other departments like National Defence against dissenting views.
Donald Trump’s presidency strained U.S.-Canada relations, marked by economic threats, insults, and annexation rhetoric. Many Canadians now see the U.S. as a threat. Despite this, some retired Canadian leaders support Trump. U.S. officials and allies appear dismissive of Canadian concerns, further eroding trust in the longstanding partnership between the two nations.
Retired General Wayne Eyre, former Chief of the Defence Staff, resurfaced promoting leadership and defence spending, despite a controversial tenure marked by backlash over inclusive dress policies, morale issues, lawsuits from fellow generals, and saluting a Waffen SS veteran. He’s now writing memoirs that may address his many public criticisms.
DND Deputy Minister Jody Thomas, now retired, has been speaking out (US DoD photo)
By Tim Ryan and Newell Durnbrooke
You have to give former National Defence deputy minister Jody Thomas credit. At times she appears to be the master of distancing herself from the decisions or issues that previously took place under her watch.
Take for instance, the F-35 purchase. Prime Minister Stephen Harper’s government wanted to buy 65 of the U.S.-built stealth fighters in 2011.
Then, the government of Prime Minister Justin Trudeau increased that number to 88 jets. That 88 figure was recommended to the Liberal government by the Department of National Defence and the Canadian Forces as the right amount of fighter jets needed by Canada.
But on April 1, 2025, Thomas was questioning whether 88 was indeed the right number of aircraft to purchase. “Eighty-eight doesn't allow for attrition,” she said in an interview with CBC’s The Current. “It doesn't allow for multiple deployments at the same time. And so I think that it is time to look at capability requirements and truly what needs to be purchased to meet those and meet our international and domestic commitments.”
You don’t say. But who was Deputy Minister of the Department of National Defence between October 2017 and January 2022 when the fighter jet purchase was conceived and presented to the Trudeau government? Well…come on down Jody Thomas.
The same CBC interview contains some choice comments from Thomas about the need for Canadian companies to have more of a role in providing equipment to the country’s military.
This debate largely stems from the issue of the U.S. control over systems being installed on the Canadian Surface Combatant (CSC) ships.
But this isn’t a new issue.
The Ottawa Citizen reported in December 2020 that Canadian defence industry officials had previously warned Thomas and Bill Matthews, then deputy minister at the procurement department, about the potential dangers of U.S.-controlled technology and the lack of Canadian content onboard the CSCs.
Officials with various firms had been complaining to politicians and media outlets that the Canadian Surface Combatant project had fallen far short on its promises of creating domestic employment. There was little work for Canadian firms, besides the politically-connected Irving shipbuilding.
But Thomas told the executives they were hindering the project and she characterized their efforts as being those of sore losers. “I think there’s still too much noise from unsuccessful bidders that makes my job and Bill’s job very difficult,” she said, referring to Matthews, deputy minister at Public Services and Procurement Canada.
Interestingly, that the now retired Thomas seems to have a different view. During the interview on CBC’s The Current, Thomas stated that more emphasis should be placed on buying Canadian systems, instead of American equipment. “We obviously need to be interoperable with the United States,” she said. “NATO is interoperable with the United States, but we don't need to be quite as integrated as we are.”
“I also think we need to see where we're going to invest in Canadian capacity in Canadian industry,” she added in her CBC interview. “We're never going to have the defence industrial base that the United States has, but we do have some niche areas where we are really, really technically advanced, and I think that's where we should be investing in Canadian technology and anywhere where we can see an opportunity to accelerate existing programs.”
Retired Lt. Gen. Mike Day has accused CBC of “teribble (sic) reporting.” (Esprit de Corps file photo)
Retired Lt.-Gen. Mike Day continued his attacks on the CBC but at least this time he didn’t go after the corporation’s defence journalist Murray Brewster (as he has in the past). For his latest on X, the social media platform, Day jumped into the issue of the ongoing debate on whether to continue funding the CBC. (Most Canadians support funding the CBC…right wing types don’t). Day noted in an April 6, 2025 tweet that Canada benefits from government support of the public broadcaster. But then he added: “The CBC provides absolutely teribble (sic) reporting.”
Day’s latest foray into media slamming was reminiscent of his April 9, 2024 comments on X, again about the CBC. “Gvmnt funded CBC has 0 coverage of the Def Pol UPdt.”
Day’s claim was inaccurate, as the CBC had indeed been covering the Defence Policy Update with a variety of reports.
Retired Col. Brett Boudreau, who had senior positions in the Canadian Forces public affairs branch, responded to Day’s comment with this view: “An unfounded and unreasonable take that panders to the CBC haters.”
Boudreau pointed out that if Day needed a “whipping boy” for the lack of perspective and explanation of defence policy since April 2022, then the retired general only had to look at the Canadian Forces and his fellow senior officers who have remained silent for years and have said little in public.
CBC journalist Murray Brewster also responded to Day, pointing out the broadcaster’s “wall to wall coverage.”
Who knows what motivates Day, the former head of Canadian special forces. But some have suggested he is still smarting from the media coverage about the military police investigation into allegations of special forces wrongdoing in Afghanistan.
That investigation looked into allegations that unarmed Afghans were executed by members of Joint Task Force Two during the Afghanistan war and that special forces officers tried to cover that up. The case also involved additional allegations of wrongdoing by Canadian special forces…all of these allegations coming from a former member of JTF2.
CBC first broke the story in 2010 and in October 2024 reported on new details that the former JTF2 soldier is now suing the federal government. Day has been named in the lawsuit.
The CBC reported that the JTF2 soldier, Claude Lepage, is claiming he was shunned by JTF2 and pushed out of the military after he denounced Canadian troops' alleged involvement in the killing of unarmed people in Afghanistan. The lawsuit contains a number of details about attacks on Afghan civilians.
In response to CBC News questions, Day wrote that the allegations that led to the military police investigation known as Sand Trap have been "consistently refuted" and that airing them has a "direct impact on the well-being of those accused and exonerated of these acts."
"They have repeatedly been proven innocent," he wrote, "and yet once again they will be the victims of media attention that will doubtless dwell on the salaciousness of the fictitious events."
It should be interesting to see what comes out of this lawsuit….or whether federal government secrecy rules over special forces operations prevent any information from being made public in court by Claude Lepage.
Retired Lt.-Gen. Andrew Leslie (US DoD photo)
By Tim Ryan
Retired Lt.-Gen. Andrew Leslie has a new gig….he joins the stable of “senior fellows” at the right-wing think tank, the Macdonald-Laurier Institute.
Leslie, the former Canadian Army commander, has had quite a journey over the last decade plus.
In 2013 he was a staunch Liberal and supporter of Liberal leader Justin Trudeau.
“My name’s Andy and I’m a Liberal,” Leslie boasted at the time. “I wanted a leader I could follow heart and soul,” he said pointing at Trudeau during a rally.
It seemed to be love at first sight. "This is the guy I've chosen to follow in terms of a vision for Canada,” Leslie stated.
The retired lieutenant general was a loyal soldier to the Liberal government but after he was passed over for a cabinet position Leslie eventually soured on his good friend Justin Trudeau.
Since leaving politics, Leslie has repeatedly taken aim at his former party. (Some veterans, however, have criticized Leslie, questioning why he was silent when his former party screwed over military personnel and the Canadian Forces).
These days, Leslie is in good graces with Conservative leader Pierre Poilievre’s team. Recently Conservative defence critic James Bezan promoted Leslie’s appearance before a parliamentary committee, calling it a “scathing assessment of Trudeau’s mismanagement.”
But Leslie also took a lot of flak for his Feb. 19, 2025 social media comments which were seen as supporting U.S. President Donald Trump and the American campaign against Canada. Leslie took to X to question why Canada was not fixing “the things that are causing US angst?” He included border security, defence and the trade imbalance in that list. “It’s not that hard,” Leslie claimed.
You can read about that here:
Leslie’s comments prompted Globe and Mail columnist Andrew Coyne to question why Canada should give into Trump’s threats: “Why are ex-military guys counselling surrender?” Coyne asked on X.,
That was followed by almost 500 comments from the public about Leslie’s post, many not complimentary towards the retired lieutenant general.
It’s not surprising to some that Leslie would join the fold of the Macdonald-Laurier Institute. The institute has been funded by Trump allies. That includes money from the Charles Koch Foundation (Koch, a billionaire is a key Republican financier). On Jan. 27, 2025 the Guardian newspaper in the United Kingdom reported that Charles Koch had put $20 million in a war chest to support Trump cutting taxes for the rich and rolling back regulations hindering Trump-aligned companies
You can read about those links here:
https://www.espritdecorps.ca/media-watch/bill-blair-caught-misleading-journalists-on-arctic-project
RMC’s Howard Coombs (in Canadian uniform) doesn’t think much of the government’s efforts to battle Trump (US DoD photo)
By Tim Ryan
Royal Military College associate professor Howard Coombs has been getting a lot of press lately for some of his views on how Canadians would react to a U.S. invasion.
Such nightmare scenarios have become fodder for news media reports ever since U.S. President Donald Trump started his bully talk about annexing Canada.
Coombs, director of the Queen's Centre for International and Defence Policy, doesn’t think too highly of his fellow citizens, figuring that they love the good life too much to cobble together some kind of insurgency against American invaders.
He told CBC’s Front Burner in a Feb. 18 podcast he expects Canadian collaborators to run a Vichy-type of government for the Americans.
And Coombs didn’t hold back about what he thought about the Liberal government’s efforts to deal with Trump. “Honestly, we are in a state of disarray right now,” he told the CBC. “Our government is not effectively reacting.” In terms of central resistance on an economic front, it didn’t seem like anything was happening, he added.
Coombs was again being interviewed on a potential U.S. invasion in late March. In a March 30 Canadian Press news service article, Coombs claimed that the U.S. military would try to limit the amount of destruction and death aimed at Canada to prevent creating a disaffected population. Coombs, who served with American troops and was a Canadian advisor in Afghanistan, claimed such a strategy was successful in Iraq and Afghanistan.
Really?
The U.S. military’s indiscriminate use of firepower in both countries significantly contributed to the rise of an effective insurgency against the Americans. Increasing civilian deaths in Afghanistan as a result of U.S. and NATO firepower helped strengthen the Taliban.
Approximately 200,000 Iraqi civilians were killed during the U.S. occupation, with a significant number caused by trigger-happy American troops.
