Cutbacks crippling [Canadian] Armed Forces, Martin told

[Lavie Enrose]

Cutbacks crippling Armed Forces, Martin told

Globe and Mail
Wednesday, Dec. 3, 2003

Ottawa — Prime-minister-in-waiting Paul Martin will inherit a military that lacks the personnel and the equipment for the overseas missions that would normally be dictated by Canada's foreign policy, a report to be released Wednesday says.

Edited by Professor Douglas Bland of Queen's University, the report argues that the Canadian Forces will be unable to perform crucial functions in coming years — at home and abroad — because of the funding cutbacks of the 1990s.

When Mr. Martin was the minister of finance in 1995, he cut funds to the Department of National Defence by about $2-billion a year. As a result, DND was forced to dip into its capital budget, which is designed to build the Canadian Forces for the future, not to pay for day-to-day operations.

"The time required to replace major equipment, develop coherent military capabilities, and rebuild the 'trained effective strength' of the armed forces simply exceeds the mandate of the next government," the report says.

 

[Lavie Enrose]

A few more details on the report (if anyone is interested)

I'm still searching for a copy of the report...

Armed forces' future grim, study says
Military needs money or Canada will suffer loss of control over its own territory, report states

David Pugliese
The Ottawa Citizen

OTTAWA -- Canada's air force, as well as either the army or navy, will likely cease to exist around the end of this decade unless the federal government orders a massive infusion of cash, warns a Queen's University study to be released today.

In a scathing report: Canada Without Armed Forces?, researchers paint a gloomy picture about the country's defences.

If the situation isn't fixed, Canada will have trouble exerting control over its own territory, making a contribution to the international scene and repairing the country's damaged relationship with the U.S., the study concludes.

"The next government will be caught up in a cascading policy entanglement initiated by the rapid collapse of Canadian Forces core assets and core capabilities. This problem will inevitably disarm foreign policy as Canada repeatedly backs away from international commitments because it lacks adequate military forces."

If funding for new equipment continues to decline and is not increased, "then the air force will likely disappear through the 2008-2013 time-frame, and either the army or navy will disappear in the same time frame."

"Even if he found $3 billion a year for the armed forces, it's not going to solve his problem because of the legacy he's been left with by Mulroney and Chretien," Bland, chairman of the defence management studies program said. "We ran out of armed forces."

He noted fixing the problem will take the efforts of Martin's government as well as the next. Bland predicted Martin will likely cut military capabilities to solve other problems he faces.

 

[geni]

With the exception of the US every western country has been cutting back on its spending since the end of the cold war. Sooner or latter someone was going to cut back too far. In real terms with the amount the US is spending on defence no one can really keep up.

 

[Tony]

I predict Canada will be absorbed by the US sometime this century.

 

[FFed]

Is anyone in Canada actually surprised?
I am not even proud to be Canadian anymore. We are a joke to the world.

 

[Tony]

Is anyone in Canada actually surprised?

Could you please explain what you mean by this?

 

[Zep]

So who's lining up to invade poor defenceless Canada anyway? Iceland?

 

[Tesserat]

I predict Canada will be absorbed by the US sometime this century.

Really? How? Why? Your prediction is about as vague and pointless as one of Sylvias. If you have some reasoning, some trends, whatever, I'd be interested in hearing your argument.

Originally posted by FFed


I am not even proud to be Canadian anymore. We are a joke to the world.

Really? Well I'm sick of whiners. Canada! love it or leave it, pinko.

Ok, so we haven't had the "build up the army" mentality. The thing that embarasses me is that we don't spend enough on education. Yep, we should spend more on defense. Yep, we should spend more on education. And yep, it's sad the the system is a populaty contest, where leaders can get elected by pushing their belief in God, or revenge, or macho nationalism.

We're a joke to the world? Really. To which countries in particular, and for what reasons,

 

[Jon_in_london]

Pity us Brits!

Our international military presence is hugely bigger than yours, we probably have more troops in more places than anyone except the US. The army is stretched to breaking at the moment.

The Iraq invasion saw the biggest call-up of reservists and TA since WWII.

So of course the gov is cutting 9000 front line troops!!! Thats not logistics and other support arms, thats the people who are at the sharp end in Iraq and Afghanistan etc...

The gov says that this is because they arent needed anymore.
I guess thats why another 1000 reserves and TA and being called up at the moment? Becasue we dont need the troops?

Chop the regular army. Reserves and TA are much cheaper after all, arent they Mr Hoon?

 

[Graham]

Is anyone in Canada actually surprised?
I am not even proud to be Canadian anymore. We are a joke to the world.

In my experience (having lived in Canada and elsewhere) this is an opinion largely held only in Canada and the US.

The latter is understandable and perfectly normal - almost every country has a love/hate relationship with one or more of its neighbours.

The former is less normal though and quite a shame. Canada is a lovely country. Granted it has its problems, like every other country, but given the option I'd quite happily move back there today.

Graham

 

[Jon_in_london]

Is anyone in Canada actually surprised?
I am not even proud to be Canadian anymore. We are a joke to the world.

I dont think so. Im quite envious of Canada, I have considered living there but it sounds a wee bit chilly.

 

[Lavie Enrose]

So of course the gov is cutting 9000 front line troops!!! Thats not logistics and other support arms, thats the people who are at the sharp end in Iraq and Afghanistan etc...

Canada has approximately 2000 front line combat troops in total.

 

[Lavie Enrose]

So who's lining up to invade poor defenceless Canada anyway? Iceland?

Famous last words...

 

[Andonyx]

Is anyone in Canada actually surprised?
I am not even proud to be Canadian anymore. We are a joke to the world.

What's to be upset about?

You've somehow managed to stay a first rate nation with a high standard of living and fantastic social benefits while at the same time not sending your young men and woman all over the world to fight and die, sometimes because of other people's conflicts...

If you can do all that without a military, and not be preyed upon by every two-bit nut-job dictator, I think you should be pretty frickin happy.

I'd like to think having a prosperous free society with no need for a military is the goal of every major power, it's just that in the majority of cases, circumstances simply don't allow it yet. (And may never, sadly.)

 

[FFed]

Could you please explain what you mean by this?

Our government has been cutting back the military for years. Our helicopters are being grounded all the time for mechanical problems. It's up to what now? 30 hours of service for every one hour of flight time? Yet the PM spends half a billion to cancel the contract to replace them. Then a few years later has to finally buy some new helicopters which still won't be here for years. Yet his new 100 million dollar jets are delivered right away.

Come election time it is all about health care and social issues. Special interest groups are always crying on tv and so the squeaky wheel gets the grease here. As soon as there is some announcement to military spending there are people whining about spending money on the military instead of the homeless, the unemployed. There have been countless news stories over the years about how sad our military is, so it should come as no surprise.

 

[FFed]

Really? Well I'm sick of whiners. Canada! love it or leave it, pinko.

Actually I am looking to leave. I guess I don't really have a choice since my two options are either to love it or leave it right?

 

[FFed]

What's to be upset about?

You've somehow managed to stay a first rate nation with a high standard of living and fantastic social benefits while at the same time not sending your young men and woman all over the world to fight and die, sometimes because of other people's conflicts...

If you can do all that without a military, and not be preyed upon by every two-bit nut-job dictator, I think you should be pretty frickin happy.

I'd like to think having a prosperous free society with no need for a military is the goal of every major power, it's just that in the majority of cases, circumstances simply don't allow it yet. (And may never, sadly.)

We have young men and women all over the world. One of my friends even killed himself when he returned peachkeeping, Cyprus if I remember. We have peacekeepers all over. I have several friends who have served. My brother has been to Somalia, Bosnia, and Afghanistan. The reason we couldn't send troops to Iraq is because we don't have the military capabilities because our troops are in Afghanistan, and our warships are patrolling over there.

Our medical system consists of long waiting times. I knew a guy at university who was waiting over two years for knee surgery. So he hobbled around on crutches all that time. My mother almost died in the hospital waiting for her angioplasy surgery. If you need small services like seeing a doctor or minor stuff like stitches, it is good though.

Having no military may be the goal of every major power, but in this day and age you need one. The only reason we have let ours deteriorate is because we live next to the US.
Who, as President Bush said, isn't even our best friend anymore.

 

[Jon_in_london]

If you can do all that without a military, and not be preyed upon by every two-bit nut-job dictator, I think you should be pretty frickin happy.

Aye, Ill second that. (Unfortunately we have a government that still wants to be a major expiditionary nation but still chop the army. Cant have it both ways.)

But theres another side to this. Its important for most western antions to realize we live in an unstable world and that it may be neccesary to re-arm with great speed should the poo-poo hit the fan. Obviously it becomes more and more difficult to do this as your armed forces become smaller and the core of proffesional soldiers available to train new forces sinks below the necessary critical mass. The result is that upon re-armament, you are left with a large, inexperienced and poorly trained forces who will suffer as a result (and/or the people they should be protecting will suffer).

There are historical precedents for this.

Firstly, Britains 'New Armies' that walked into the holocaust of the Somme in 1916. There was virtually no experience amongst those armies whatsoever and they paid the price. They would keep paying the price until the spring of 1918. It took that long for them to aquire the skills, confidence and experience neccesary to push back the Germans.

Secondly, and more relevant to the Canadians is the RCN during WWII. The Royal Canadian Navy underwent massive expansion during WWII to such an extent that what was a pre-war coastal defence force was soon large enough to take on 50% of the north Atlantic convoy escort responsibilities. While this was a massive feat of production, will power and a credit to Canada's national character, the new RCN was essentialy devoid of experience. Anyone with any maritime experience whatsoever could quite easily find himself in charge of a corvette. Most RCN vessels had only one or two officers or ratings with any sea-going experience at all. Of course, the merchant seamen paid the price. Convoys escorted solely by the RCN suffered disproportionally high losses.

Given that the defence of the realm is one of the primary responsibilities of any government, surely it is not too much to ask to ensure that such critical mass is maintained in the armed forces?

 

[Tony]

Actually I am looking to leave.

You're welcome to come to Houston, but please bring some BC bud with you.

 

[Lavie Enrose]

What's to be upset about?

The treatment of Canadian troops. They are shipped off for 6 month missions, come home for what is supposed to be a 1-2 year rest, and then are shipped off to another 6 month mission deployment sometimes in a little as 4 months after they finished their last mission because our troops are too few, and spread too thin.

Canadian troops frequently show up to UN missions and wars with obsolete and improper essential equipment, and must borrow, or buy proper essential equipment from other troops - everything from guns and ammo to boots and uniforms - because our government will not pay for what our troops need.

Most troops come back mentally damaged from the horrors they witnessed and experienced in places like Bosnia, and yet they get discarded and forgotten about, or recycled back into the mix without any treatment.

...while at the same time not sending your young men and woman all over the world to fight and die, sometimes because of other people's conflicts...

Canadian troops have fought and died in the South African War, W.W.I, W.W.II, and the Korean War. They have fought in the Gulf War (Iraq/Kuwait), Kosova, and fought and died in Afghanistan (war and 'peacekeeping' mission). Canadian troops have participated in every single UN peacekeeping mission. More than 100 Canadian soldiers have died in UN peacekeeping missions.

And the biggest single combat involving Canadian troops since Korea happened in 1993 when Canadian 'peacekeeping' troops fought an intensive day long gun battle with Croat military forces at a place called Medac Pocket in Bosnia, as the Canadian troops tried to protect Serb civilians in a village the Croat forces were 'ethnically cleansing'. The Canadian government had refused to acknowledge the bravery of the Canadian troops, or even that the battle had happened, for years after.

Canadians are sent to fight in wars and into very dangerous so-called peacekeeping missions, and yet our government refuses to give our military the needed support it needs to do what Canada asks our military to do. The government keeps cutting back badly needed support while still expecting the military to do its job. That puts our troops at an unacceptable risk. It sickens me that our troops should come home dead or mained just because our government wanted to 'save some money'.

Sorry about my rant, Andonyx.