Canada's New, Liberal, Defence Policy

[Eye In The Sky]

While it is possible to do so in something like an Aurora, due to the amount of room inside, consider why the USAF is so desperate for the F-35: centralized network nodes like the AWACS are extremely vulnerable. A shoot down would be a disaster, but even a simple failure of electronics would cripple the entire system. A "mesh network" of distributed nodes (which is what a squadron of F-35's actually is, the routers are packaged inside supersonic jets) can cover a larger area, has fewer single point of failure nodes and can gracefully degrade as planes are lost, damaged or suffer electronic or mechanical breakdowns.

Having high performance aircraft as the nodes also gives much more flexibility; imagine a USAF strike package in 2025: there will be dozens of UCAV's carrying munitions and countermeasures with some F-35's hidden somewhere in the flock. Even if the enemy were to somehow burn through the layers of UCAV's, there are still full on jet fighters waiting inside capable of fighting and carrying on the mission on their own. A repurposed C-130 or Challenger full of electronics will not have these capabilities (and it is questionable they would have the performance to keep up with the UCAV flock anyway).

Much like the EH 101 debacle of the 1990's, the CF will lose or never gain critical capabilities that will be employed for decades to come in the pursuit of very short term partisan advantage. This analysis also does not include the industrial or political benefits of having a high tech aerospace industry making cutting edge equipment or being able to back words with actions in the international arena.

:goodpost:  My  :2c: is a simple addition;  "don't put all your eggs in one basket".

 

[YZT580]

Altair, I am not particularly an F35 fan as my posting record will attest.  I personally believe that a mixed fleet, with proper air to air squadrons are what is needed to defend our very large and almost empty country.  But they need guidance and the best aircraft to do that is probably the 35.  Mix a few of them in to direct the others and you have a very potent weapon. 

But we stand to lose a lot if we back out of the consortium.  We will lose business and investment and we will more importantly lose a very vital strategic capability.  Printed below is a statement by Bogdan reference our pending withdrawal.  When you read between the lines it bodes ill for our manufacturing sector and no temporary factory to build Eurofighters will compensate for the cash and no-how that we WILL lose.  Sorry it isn't in one of those posted and attested box things but those skills are outside of my current capabilities.  The article was posted in Defense News this a.m.

On Capitol Hill today, Lt. Gen. Chris Bogdan, JPO chief, said the remaining international partners would see a million-dollar increase in price per plane if Canada pulls out of the program. That country had planned to buy 65 F-35s.

“If any partner, or any service, moves airplanes to the right, takes airplanes out, the price of the airplane for all the other partners and all the other services goes up,” Bogdan told the House Armed Services subcommittee on tactical air and land forces on Wednesday.  “We have estimated the increase in price is 0.7 to 1 percent [or] about a million dollars a copy for everybody else.”

If Canada pulls its F-35 buy, there would be no impact to the development program, which ends in 2017, Bogdan stressed.  However, the international partners would be forced to absorb Canada’s 2.1 percent share in the cost of future sustainment and follow-on modernization, he said.

One unanswered question: If Canada pulls out of the F-35 program, what happens to the Canadian supply base, which has spent millions to help develop technology and components for the plane?

Bogdan said the JPO does not have a “set rule” to deal with this scenario, but said the international and industry partners should have a “discussion” about what to do with the Canadian companies building parts for the F-35.

“We do not have a set rule as to what happens to that industrial participation if a partner reduces airplanes, adds airplanes or leaves the program,” Bogdan said. “But it is my opinion that the remaining partners and our industry partners are going to have a discussion about what to do with all of the industry in Canada that is building parts for the airplane.”

However, Bogdan stressed that the JPO has not received any notification that Canada is prepared to pull out of the program.

Liberal Party leader Justin Trudeau does not become prime minister until Nov. 4 and details about how he will proceed with the withdrawal from the F-35 program are still unclear. Asked about the impact on Canadian firms now building components for the F-35, a Liberal spokesman pointed to the party’s election platform that argues such companies could earn more work from an open competition for Canada's fighter jet replacement. That platform noted that under the F-35 program Canadian firms are not guaranteed work but under a Canadian-run competition they would be.

 

[dimsum]

It seem to me that it's unlikely that there isn't at least one suitable alternative to this aircraft,no? None that come even close to offering what you're talking about in the F35?  I'm no SME, naturally, but to my knowledge Europe is no technological laggard, their jets should have some sort of redeeming factors, no?

The Gripen NG, Rafale, Typhoon, even Super Hornet etc weren't built to be "servers in supersonic jets", as was mentioned.  They were also all designed in the 80s-90s, when technology and what could be done with a fighter-bomber was much more limited than now.

A simplified analogy would be like calling the F-35 an iPhone (or similar) and the rest early 2000s flip phones.  You can make calls with both, but you can only do Internet Banking (or check Facebook) with one of them.  Now imagine if all of your friends only communicated through Facebook - you'd be left out of the loop.

 

[Rick Goebel]

The Promoting International Peace and Security section of the Liberal platform document REALCHANGE says:

"We will recommit to supporting international peace operations with the United Nations, and will make our specialized capabilities – from mobile medical teams to engineering support to aircraft that can carry supplies and personnel – available on a case-by-case basis.

To help the UN respond more quickly to emerging and escalating conflicts, we will provide well-trained personnel that can be quickly deployed, including mission commanders, staff officers, and headquarters units."

Looks like an emphasis on support functions with no specific mention of Canadian pointy end contributions.  This would make a degree of sense since the majority of UN Peacekeeping appears to be concentrating in Africa and there seems to be a worldwide sense that Africans should do the bulk of the in contact work to avoid the appearance of colonialism.

 

[Jed]

The Promoting International Peace and Security section of the Liberal platform document REALCHANGE says:

"We will recommit to supporting international peace operations with the United Nations, and will make our specialized capabilities – from mobile medical teams to engineering support to aircraft that can carry supplies and personnel – available on a case-by-case basis.

To help the UN respond more quickly to emerging and escalating conflicts, we will provide well-trained personnel that can be quickly deployed, including mission commanders, staff officers, and headquarters units."

Looks like an emphasis on support functions with no specific mention of Canadian pointy end contributions.  This would make a degree of sense since the majority of UN Peacekeeping appears to be concentrating in Africa and there seems to be a worldwide sense that Africans should do the bulk of the in contact work to avoid the appearance of colonialism.

That's all well and good but who is going to secure our own Canadian assets when we get deployed to all the world's cesspools? Be prepared for a bunch of Romeo Dallaire or Medak Pocket reruns as the blue helmets go in with target indicators on their back and BS Rules of Engagement or their security forces sourced from 3rd world nations.

 

[dimsum]

That's all well and good but who is going to secure our own Canadian assets when we get deployed to all the world's cesspools? Be prepared for a bunch of Romeo Dallaire or Medak Pocket reruns as the blue helmets go in with target indicators on their back and BS Rules of Engagement or their security forces sourced from 3rd world nations.

The silver lining (if that term can be applied at all) is that in this age of social media and 24/7 news coverage, something like the Medak Pocket will probably blow up on Twitter if Canadian military members are injured/killed, with the inevitable tough questions on Question Period and the like. 

It's a lot harder to hide/quash things these days.

 

[MilEME09]

The silver lining (if that term can be applied at all) is that in this age of social media and 24/7 news coverage, something like the Medak Pocket will probably blow up on Twitter if Canadian military members are injured/killed, with the inevitable tough questions on Question Period and the like. 

It's a lot harder to hide/quash things these days.

That won't be much comfort to those actually in theatre, but the point is there, social media will play a big role, not to mention a over zealous media presence would ensure everything is known.

 

[Edward Campbell]

The Promoting International Peace and Security section of the Liberal platform document REALCHANGE says:

"We will recommit to supporting international peace operations with the United Nations, and will make our specialized capabilities – from mobile medical teams to engineering support to aircraft that can carry supplies and personnel – available on a case-by-case basis.

To help the UN respond more quickly to emerging and escalating conflicts, we will provide well-trained personnel that can be quickly deployed, including mission commanders, staff officers, and headquarters units."

Looks like an emphasis on support functions with no specific mention of Canadian pointy end contributions.  This would make a degree of sense since the majority of UN Peacekeeping appears to be concentrating in Africa and there seems to be a worldwide sense that Africans should do the bulk of the in contact work to avoid the appearance of colonialism.

This has been alluded to in this and other threads, but a case can be made for the Liberal position:

    First: Canada, like almost every other nation, has a small handful of obvious national security objectives ~

          1. Assert and protect it's own sovereignty,

          2. Promote and protect its vital interests in the world by, inter alia, promoting and protecting international peace and security (preventing but, if that's impossible, helping to resolve conflicts), and

          3. Addressing situations likely to result in conflict before real conflict occurs.

    Second: Canada, like some other nations, has a small but important coterie of firm, traditional allies: America, Australia, Britain, Denmark, Netherlands, New Zealand and Norway. These are nations which have stood with us,
    through even some desperate times, which (unlike France) have never tried to drive wedges into our body politic, and which (unlike, say, Poland) have never turned their back on the liberal West. Those allies expect us to do a
    fair share of the heavy lifting in the global security business, but not all of it. Our allies do not expect us to be "on side" with all of them on every single issue, but if we are "off side" with too many of them on too many issues then we
    should re-evaluate our positions.

    Third: the main force we want to use in defending our sovereignty and promoting our vital interests and in securing international peace is diplomacy, but we understand that diplomacy (soft power) only works when
    it is backed by a sufficiency of (but just enough) hard power which we have proved willing and able to use.

The military component for the assertion and protection of our sovereignty is, mainly, a Navy and RCAF task. Promoting and protecting our vital interests might involve power projection, the Navy's quintessential role, but it, and securing international peace and security, might also require Canada to deploy expeditionary land and air forces either unilaterally, for low-intensity operations, or in conjunction with allies, for mid-intensity missions.

One can start to develop a list of military capabilities from the above ...

 

[Brad Sallows]

Is Trudeau a R2P Liberal?  (Genuine question in search of enlightenment, not bitter muck-raking.)

 

[FSTO]

Is Trudeau a R2P Liberal?  (Genuine question in search of enlightenment, not bitter muck-raking.)

Do not know. I haven't seen Lloyd Axworthy (one of the pushers) on TV to extol its virtues.

 

[Cloud Cover]

Is Trudeau a R2P Liberal?  (Genuine question in search of enlightenment, not bitter muck-raking.)

Does the Devil wear Prada? I suspect he hasn't been told (as of yet) where he stands on that, unless he somehow thinks it means Really2Pretty.
If Bill Graham somehow ends up to do an advisory turn on the catwalk, yeah on the catwalk, yeah on the catwalk, JT might decide that he's not to sexy for CadPat.

 

[cavalryman]

Is Trudeau a R2P Liberal?  (Genuine question in search of enlightenment, not bitter muck-raking.)

Search not for enlightenment.  If it is yours to have, it will come.  If it is Justin's to have, he'll not know it passed him by (and that's no muck).  ;D

 

[safetysOff]

The CF is going to decline with JT as PM unless something big comes up at the international stage, bigger than the middle east stuff going on now.  The CF will become just another portfolio he'll tuck underneath his environment & educational folders/initiatives.  But hey maybe he surprises people

 

[a_majoor]

Is Trudeau a R2P Liberal?  (Genuine question in search of enlightenment, not bitter muck-raking.)

Based on his own words in the years prior to the campaign (one can assume words during the campaign were carefully vetted before being placed in his mouth), his view seems to be essentially the world will be better if we dispense teddy bears and humanitarian aid. Joking about the Russian invasion of Ukraine would indicate a lack of understanding of geopolitics. Thinking that running deficits is a good thing after a year of wall to wall coverage of the Greek debt crisis, or simply viewing the decade long decline of Ontario would indicate not paying attention to events in the real world.

If he is an R2P Liberal, the disconnect between "cause" and "effect" leads me to believe any belief in R2P is more "virtue signalling" than any actual belief in the necessity or effectiveness of R2P in practice. (Anyone who believes that R2P is an actual real world doctrine probably understands the necessity of hard power to secure the ground for any actual protection to take place).

 

[OldSolduer]

The CF is going to decline with JT as PM unless something big comes up at the international stage, bigger than the middle east stuff going on now.  The CF will become just another portfolio he'll tuck underneath his environment & educational folders/initiatives.  But hey maybe he surprises people

And how would you know this? Inside info?

I'll tell you this, Sunny Jim, the CAF has survived over 100 years with governments like this in charge.

 

[jollyjacktar]

Today's Chronicle Herald Cartoon

Someone here at the office stated in response to the cartoon, "they voted them in and did it to themselves, screw em". 

 

[Humphrey Bogart]

Today's Chronicle Herald Cartoon

Someone here at the office stated in response to the cartoon, "they voted them in and did it to themselves, screw em".

Lol, people out East have never been the best at connecting the dots.  I'm saying this having spent the majority of my life out there.

 

[Good2Golf]

Today's Chronicle Herald Cartoon

Someone here at the office stated in response to the cartoon, "they voted them in and did it to themselves, screw em".

Galatians 6:7

 

[Oldgateboatdriver]

;D

2 Corinthians 9:6

 

[jollyjacktar]

Lol, people out East have never been the best at connecting the dots.  I'm saying this having spent the majority of my life out there.

I am quite sure, having worked on the floor at FMF, that the majority of the workers voted Liberal.

Galatians 6:7

Yes, yes they have.

;D

2 Corinthians 9:6

That's because everyone else had their stamps already...