Many thanks for the Defence article, Bill!! It is well-written and one I missed in the Hill Times. Many thanks for sending it -- I have forwarded it on to others. Muriel M. Davidson ----- Original Message ----- From: Bill Blaikie To: [email protected] Sent: Monday, November 08, 2004 1:48 PM Subject: Defence Policy: Hill Times Article Defence Policy Blaikie, MP NDP Defence Critic Ten years ago, the government of Canada released its most recent White Paper on defence, a white paper that in no way, if it ever did, accurately reflects the state of the world and the proper role of Canada within it. At the very least, the peace dividend that many expected with the end of the Cold War proved illusory, and we live in a world considerably more dangerous than that of 1994. In the 1990's it was all too conventional to envision a world in which Canadian peacekeepers would raise the Canadian flag throughout the world as part of UN peacekeeping missions, enforcing the peace after it had been negotiated. The Canadian Navy would retain a role as a key component of NATO 's presence in the Atlantic Ocean, as well as providing support for peace keeping operations. The Canadian Air Force would remain an important part of NORAD and a support to UN sanctioned missions throughout the world. The nuclear threat was still being dealt with through the preventive but dangerous paradigm of mutually assured destruction, albeit several steps further away from the nuclear abyss than had been the case during the Cold War. The first Gulf War at the beginning of the 90s, and the out of area NATO intervention in Kosovo near the end of the decade were certainly harbingers of a changing world order and the need for a new look at Canadian defence and foreign policy, as were, less obviously at the time, the genocide in Rwanda and the demonstrated need for combat capable peacemakers in places like the Medak Pocket in the Balkans. The 21st Century promises plenty to worry about. Terrorism, failed states, pre-emptive war doctrines, the upcoming weaponization of space (NMD), polarization between rich and poor, environmental degradation, and the possibility that nuclear weapons could find their way into the hands of non-state actors, are factors that have to be addressed. And all in the geo-political context of a United States which is both uncontested superpower and Canada's anxious neighbour. This is no small challenge for Canada in its relationship to the world and the US as we try to be our multi-lateral UN friendly selves in a bilateral relationship with the unilaterally inclined, and in a UN badly in need of reform and renewed moral and political legitimacy. Ad hoc responses, even good ones like the decision to stay out of Iraq, are not enough. During the election, the Liberal party made numerous promises about a new White Paper. Though this was supposed to be a full and complete review of Canada's defence priorities, it seems now that the International Policy Review will have been a much more internal exercise with a minimum of public consultation and very little new thinking. The NDP urges the creation of a new White Paper, or perhaps even a Green Paper in which various options are set out without recommendation. But if the IPR is all there is to be, then we will insist on adequate time for public feedback. On the table immediately is the decision about the US request for Canadian participation in NMD. The Liberals appear to have made up their minds about this, in opposition to Canadian public opinion on the substance of the issue itself, and in contempt of their minority status in Parliament, given the unanimous position of all of the opposition parties that any decision on this issue should be taken by Parliament. The Liberal reluctance to involve Parliament in a meaningful and decisive way shows an unhealthy attachment to a particularly Canadian habit, uncharacteristic of most other Western democracies, of confining decisions on major issues like NMD, or treaties, or troop deployment to the executive power of cabinet. Unfortunately, and tragically, the debate in the near future about defence policy will no doubt have to be focused to some degree on what happened to the HMCS Chicoutimi, and all the questions, new and old, that need to be asked about the submarine purchase, and the overall Liberal record on defence spending and procurement. It's a record marked by delay, by politics, by unwise cutbacks, and by a general Liberal indifference to all things military. The failure to replace the Sea King helicopters in a timely way stands out as the worst example of Liberal policy, but there are others. Jobs have been privatized or contracted out on bases, while the DND bureaucracy shows no sign of shrinking. All parties have been in agreement for years on the need for a larger reserve army, but the Liberals have taken their sweet time in expanding the Militia. Meanwhile rifle ranges in armouries have had to shut down for lack of appropriate modernization, and even shortages of ammunition for target practice. One thing is clear. Whatever role one envisions for the Canadian Forces, either as interoperable arm of the US military or as meaningful resource to the UN that doesn't have to depend on others to get where they are needed, or somewhere in between, it will be expensive if our military personnel are going to be able to do the job properly. The sooner we have a real debate, decide what we want them to do, and fund them to do it, the better. -- To unsubscribe from this list visit this link To update your preferences visit this link