Theater & Continental Balistic Missile Defence . . . and Canada

[Bruce Monkhouse]

Here comes some of the economic costs already,

Goose Bay Radar Project in jeopardy
NORAD surveillance aid: U.S. cancels meeting after PM refused to join missile defence
 
a journalist
CanWest News Service

Tuesday, March 01, 2005

U.S. officials cancelled an information briefing on a proposal to install a missile defence radar in Goose Bay, Labrador, shortly after Paul Martin announced Canada would not take part in the Pentagon's missile shield, federal officials say.
The federal government and aerospace industry representatives were pushing for the installation of the X-Band radar for NORAD surveillance and space monitoring roles, but the sophisticated sensor on the East Coast would also have been able to detect an incoming rocket fired from the Middle East.
The construction of the radar, which uses U.S. technology, was being promoted as a way to contribute to the North American Aerospace Defence Command's surveillance mission while enabling Canada to keep a strong military presence at Goose Bay. Several NATO nations who conduct flight training at the military base have told the federal government they intend to pull out, and the Defence Department has been scrambling to find new military customers or roles for the facility, one of the area's main employers.

The installation of the X-Band radar, built by aerospace giant Raytheon, would have created 340 short-term jobs in the area as well as 100 permanent positions. There was hope in some Liberal circles that the announcement of the construction of the radar would help the party's fortunes in an upcoming byelection to replace MP Lawrence O'Brien. Mr. O'Brien, the Liberal MP for Labrador, died of cancer in December at age 53.
Steve Jurgutis, a spokesman for Defence Minister Bill Graham, said the proposal was being pushed by industry representatives and did not have any endorsement from the Minister. "There are no plans whatsoever to install an X-Band radar at Goose Bay," he added.
Mr. Graham is in Goose Bay tomorrow to make an announcement on a contract for construction work at the base, sources said.
Officials say the X-Band proposal is not dead, but acknowledged the Prime Minister's decision to opt out of the missile shield has hindered the plan.

The X-Band radar was being promoted in government circles as more of a space surveillance system than a missile shield sensor. The high-powered radar can monitor positions of satellites and other spacecraft such as the space shuttle, allowing NORAD to do its job of cataloguing the whereabouts of objects in orbit.
But the radar's location in Goose Bay would also give it a valuable role in the monitoring of missile launches from countries such as Iran. According to a study obtained by the Ottawa Citizen, the installation of a missile-defence radar on Canada's East Coast would provide for the intercept of missiles headed for North America as much as three minutes faster than if the surveillance devices were based in the United States. That advantage would be particularly important if the missile was carrying nuclear or chemical weapons, according to the May, 2001, report.
"To properly address the Middle Eastern threat an East Coast system would have to be deployed," notes the Defence Department study. "Canada's value-added role would be to provide a place to deploy such a system."

The missile shield would use interceptor rockets to shoot down warheads aimed at North America.
Shooting down a missile quickly is essential to preventing debris from hitting Canada or the United States, according to the report released under the Access to Information Act.
The report concluded there would not be any advantage to having the missile interceptors themselves located on Canadian territory.

Rick Lehner, a spokesman for the U.S. Missile Defence Agency, said he hadn't heard about plans for a Goose Bay radar. But he added that if Canada was looking for an X-band radar for tracking space debris and spacecraft, then the missile agency would not be involved.
Mr. Lehner said X-Band radars for the missile shield would be installed in Alaska, with portable versions of the radar in locations throughout the Pacific region.
The missile defence system uses a ground-based interceptor rocket to destroy incoming warhead.

Hope nobody in Goose Bay needed a job............

 

[S McKee]

The "fallout" (no pun intended) from not participating in BMD begins. Does a Liberal MP represent Goose Bay?

 

[George Wallace]

I find this article a little odd.  Was it not the X Band Radars that were installed in the mid 70's and 80's that closed down most DEW sites and the Pine Tree and Mid Canada Lines?

GW

 

[old medic]

Actually Old Medic, the public and our parliament were not consulted. The Liberal caucus probably, maybe on Mr Dithers, made a decision, mostly based on:
1. Minority govt status.
2. Losing votes in Quebec.
3. Liberal womens caucus threatening not to support Mr Dithers in upcoming Liberal convention.
4. God knows what else went through Mr Dithers head because he did not consult with Parliament.

So NO, this was not a democratic decision based on solid foreign policy that was well thought out as being GOOD for Canada. Only good for Liberals.

B M.

Actually Blue Max,

Every poll conducted shows between 54% to 60% of Canadians saying No.

Explain how a government following the will of the voters is not democratic.

 

[Bruce Monkhouse]

http://www.canairradio.com/acc.html

It would appear that way??????

 

[Bruce Monkhouse]

Quote,
Every poll conducted shows between 54% to 60% of Canadians saying No.

Old Medic
Now come on, you must do better than that, lets just let the polling company's run the roost now will we?

 

[buzgo]

Other than on this board, I haven't heard too many people lamenting our non-participation, and that includes people in my unit.

 

[jmacleod]

The US unveiled a plan in September 2004 fostering international participation in the Missile Defence
Program (MDP) which calls for "significant partner cost-sharing as well as new agreements". The key
element in this strategy is the Northrop-Grumman led Kenetic Energy Interceptor (KEI) which is
being developed with a rocket booster from the Raytheon Corporation. The US is seeking a risk
reduction formula at the same time focusing on the next technical process in the evolution of the
KEI. These are private sector initiatives, contracted by government, and there is nothing to prevent
Canadian companies participating with international and US organizations in this phase of the MDP,
indeed, if Canadian companies are technically qualified and acceptable to US security requirements
they are motivated for one thing under the provisions of the North American Free Trade Agreement
(NAFTA). Canadian companies are already participating in the US F-35 Joint Strike Fighter Program
(JSF) which has created over $400 million in direct participation contracts, which is driven primarily
by Lockheed-Martin. The political implications of direct Federal government support of the MDP will
eventually be resolved, but the loss of the proposed X-Band Radar (XBR) at Goose Bay Labrador
is a sad situation. The XBR is a large phased-array fire control sensor, featuring discrimination and
interceptor support. Readers who are familier with the Litton/Orelikon LLADS and the CP-140
acquisition will be familier with XBR, introduced in Canada about 1983. MacLeod

 

[a_majoor]

"Well, Mr X, thank you for your very interesting RFP. The BMDO is always interested in this sort of technology. Just one more question; your company headquarters is where? Montreal? Oh, (pause) well thank you once again for your RFP and we will certainly take it under advisement. Sorry? Oh , don't worry. someone will call back in due course (when hell freezes over)"

 

[Kirkhill]

I DO HEREBY RESOLVE AND DECLARE I WILL HAVE NO FURTHER PART IN DISCUSSIONS WHERE ANTI-AMERICANISM IS PARADED AS A SORRY EXCUSE FOR CANADIAN PATRIOTISM.

Patriotism was once described as the last refuge of the scoundrel.  At least it had the virtue of defining the nation in POSITIVE terms and required the patriot to consider things done.  All that most twits that adopt the Anti-American line seem to be able to is constantly mumble "Nya Nya Nya Nya Nya, what a bunch of Maroons...." echoing their favourite Canadian Icon "Bugs Bunny".

 

[old medic]

Quote,
Every poll conducted shows between 54% to 60% of Canadians saying No.

Old Medic
Now come on, you must do better than that, lets just let the polling company's run the roost now will we?

Well, until we have a referendum on it Bruce, I can't see to many other ways to gauge it.
But I find it interesting that a government in Canada, in a rare move, finally pays attention
to public opinion, but gets blasted for it here.

 

[jmacleod]

There will be limited RFP (Requests For Proposals) associated with the MDP, prime contractors will
seek technology expertise and cost savings associated with their input into the Program, particularly
Northrop-Grumman and Raytheon, who will be focused on other international programs in which
Canada will seek expertise and investment: the Amphibious Support Vessels, and the new
ships for the Canadian Coast Guard etc.. This is not the world of political or media bullshit, the high
technology/aerospace/shipbuilding sector is profit driven, plus many US companies have decades
of association with Canada, and many former Canadian citizens as employees. Most of the senior
people we worked with on the NFAP (New Fighter Aircraft Program) from Northrop, Garrett,
Wilcox Electronics, etc. were former AVRO employees, veterans of the Arrow debacle. The PM
made a political error, which he will correct. He has the right man to do it in Washington in the
presence of former NB Premier Frank McKenna - a smart guy. Regards, MacLeod

 

[Acorn]

Well, until we have a referendum on it Bruce, I can't see to many other ways to gauge it.
But I find it interesting that a government in Canada, in a rare move, finally pays attention
to public opinion, but gets blasted for it here.

"Finally pays attention...??!"

The Liberals have always been a political weathervane, swinging to the winds of their pollsters (yes, Virginia, there are Liberal pollsters). That's just the problem - they don't lead or govern, they simply put all their energies into staying in power. Add the fact that intellect is inversly proportional to the size of the group, and one can easily conclude that, despite political platitudes, Canadians are an ignorant bunch. Most Canadians form their opinions and then look for facts to suit them (that applies to what I've seen of both sides of this discussion, by the way.)

Anyway, the decision is taken, though it may be reversed in the future. So be it. Those of you happy with that had better be able to accept the consequences.

jmacleod: I admire your optomism, but I have my doubts that this PM will be able to reverse any decision he takes. after all, he takes so few.

Acorn

 

[Jungle]

http://cnews.canoe.ca/CNEWS/Canada/2005/03/02/947638-cp.html

Belinda Stronach, the Conservative international trade critic, said the ruling highlights the failure of the Liberals to establish better relations with Washington on a range of issues, including missile defence.

"When the prime minister should have been nurturing support throughout the American political system to keep the border open, he and his cabinet were skulking away from a proper discussion of missile defence with the U.S. government,' she said in a release.

"The border closure on BSE is a perfect example of the kind of real-world situation where Canadian interests would be looking for maximum help from the administration."

Is this related to BMD ? Who knows...
BUT, the USA is a sovereign country, they can make whatever decision they want, right ??

 

[FastEddy]

http://cnews.canoe.ca/CNEWS/Canada/2005/03/02/947638-cp.htmlIs this related to BMD ? Who knows...
BUT, the USA is a sovereign country, they can make whatever decision they want, right ??

Well like you say, maybe or maybe not. We didn't need a crystal ball to know something down the road was coming.

Like I've previously said, how much sniping at their heals before they BITE back?.

 

[buzgo]

Russia working on 'defense-proof' nuclear missiles: minister
MOSCOW (AFP) Mar 01, 2005
Russian Defense Minister Sergei Ivanov said Tuesday that Moscow was creating a nuclear weapon capable of thwarting any defense system in the world, Interfax news agency reported.

"There is not now and will not be any defense from such missiles," the news agency quoted Ivanov as saying.

It was not immediately clear what type of weapon Ivanov was referring to. He has however said in the past that Russia's future nuclear defenses will be based on the mobile, Topol-M rocket.

Ivanov said also that Russia was now focusing its attention on the Baluva, a sea-based strategic missile model that can be armed with a nuclear warhead.

Russia currently stores most of its heaviest, intercontinental ballistic Topol-M missiles in silos.

Ivanov has been charged with streamlining Russia's Soviet era nuclear defenses, relying more heavily on a small range of powerful weapons as thousands of old missiles become decommissioned.

"We will not be baking rockets like cakes as we did in the Soviet era," Ivanov was quoted as saying.

Russia has said on repeated occasions that it was developing missiles capable of penetrating the missile defense shield being developed by the United States, whose construction Moscow had furiously opposed.

Analysts have suggested that Russia is developing a missile which can "zigzag" while in flight and thereby dodge anti-missile defenses.



http://www.spacewar.com/2005/050301170127.6njr94li.html

 

[buzgo]

And the latest from Ambassador McKenna:

Missile trade war?: McKenna links shield refusal to wood, beef

Sheldon Alberts; with files from Aileen McCabe in Ottawa
CanWest News Service

Thursday, March 03, 2005

WASHINGTON - Frank McKenna, Canada's new ambassador to the United States, suggested Ottawa's decision to reject George W. Bush's missile defence shield was a "direct result" of Canadian outrage over lingering trade disputes with America over beef and softwood lumber.

On his first day at work in Washington yesterday, Mr. McKenna said public support for missile defence eroded in the face of frustration over the impact U.S. actions in the softwood and beef disputes have had on the Canadian economy.

"Let me say this, that this [missile defence] issue in some ways perhaps could be construed as the direct result of letting fester some of the transactional issues," he told reporters at the Canadian embassy. "From a Canadian perspective, you can understand how the atmosphere has not been conducive to creating a political environment where a different decision might have been achieved on the ballistic missile defence issue."

It was the first time a senior government official has linked Canadian pique over trade disputes to decision-making on an issue of national security.

It also appears to signal Mr. McKenna's willingness to adopt the same blunt-spoken tone toward Washington that Paul Cellucci, the outgoing U.S. ambassador to Canada, has used for years to pressure Ottawa on military spending.

The former New Brunswick premier was critical of the United States for refusing to lift import duties on Canadian softwood lumber -- which have already totalled in excess of $4-billion -- despite several NAFTA rulings in Canada's favour.

"Canadians are outraged about that. I think they are outraged, maybe outraged is too strong a term, but they are certainly disconcerted about this bread-and-butter industry for Canada being subjected to this process," he said.

The ban on live cattle shipments, meanwhile, has contributed to Canadian unhappiness with the United States because American decisions have caused "the destruction of some farms and ranches."

Asked specifically if resolutions of the softwood and beef disputes would have produced a different decision on missile defence, Mr. McKenna said: "One can't say definitively, [but] I think one can say we would have had a much lower temperature in Canada in which to operate.... It is my belief that the temperature in Canada has, in part, been at a pretty high level as a result of these ongoing irritants. So the logical extension of that is that if you could turn down the temperature, you would have a different political environment in which to operate."

Canadian officials later said Mr. McKenna was not suggesting the missile defence decision was taken in retaliation for trade problems, but was speaking about the overall public attitude toward U.S.-related issues.

Melanie Gruer, press secretary to Prime Minister Paul Martin, said in response to Mr. McKenna's comments that ''I don't see him drawing the linkage'' between the trade disputes and missile defence. ''There have certainly been some bumps along the way in our relationship but we are going to continue working in partnership with the United States.''

Mr. McKenna landed in the centre of the controversy over missile defence just a week ago. After an appearance before a House of Commons committee, he said Canada was already participating in the U.S. shield because it agreed to allow NORAD, the binational air defence command, to notify the American military of any incoming missiles.

A day later, however, Mr. Martin's government informed the Bush administration it would not offer its political support to the system. The conflicting messages added to White House discontent with Canada's decision.

Mr. Bush has signalled his displeasure with Mr. Martin by refusing to return a telephone call the Prime Minister placed last week to explain Canada's decision.

The two men last spoke on Feb. 3, when Mr. Bush called Mr. Martin to express his gratitude to Canada for training Iraqi election officials.

Ms. Gruer said the Prime Minister and Mr. Bush "probably won't talk until they get together face to face in Texas" at a summit this month to discuss trade issues.

As part of the diplomatic effort to ease U.S. anger, Mr. Martin hosted a private dinner on Tuesday night for Mr. Cellucci at 24 Sussex Drive, which Mr. McKenna attended.

"I think their disappointment is real and we have to acknowledge that," Mr. McKenna said.

While he was critical of U.S. trade policy, Mr. McKenna was just as blunt in saying that long-standing American complaints about Canada's military spending have been legitimate.

He said the challenge will be convincing the Bush administration that last week's federal budget -- which included $13-billion in new defence spending over five years -- signals Canada is ready to do its share on continental defence and international peacekeeping.

"I think, with some justification, the United States of America has looked at us and felt that we have not been carrying our full share of the load in terms of defence. In some ways, as Canadians, we have been sailing our ship in yesterday's wind," Mr. McKenna said.

"We have lived off our reputation as peacekeepers and we haven't put our resources where our mouth is."

It is clear Canada "has work to do" to repair its relations with the United States and that the missile defence controversy will make the job more difficult, he said.

"Somehow or another -- and I don't want to sound Pollyannish on this -- we need to reconnect or connect again on an emotional level," he said. "We need to define a relationship that's bigger than the instant dialogue of the day between the President and the Prime Minister.... I don't think we should end up being judgmental of the relationship based on a phone call, or a trip."

The Bush administration greeted Mr. McKenna's appointment with enthusiasm. He has a personal friendship with former president George H.W. Bush -- the men have golfed together in Canada -- and past business ties with Washington power brokers through the Carlyle Group.

"There is a lot of respect for him," said a senior U.S. official, who spoke on condition of anonymity. "I don't think anybody would want to do anything to embarrass McKenna or make his job more difficult."
© National Post 2005


http://www.canada.com/national/nationalpost/news/story.html?id=e049e880-097d-4f69-a083-03d5a1138553

 

[Blue Max]

What happens when you are not forthright and honest with your neighbors. They invite you over for a barbeque, but you refuse on principle because you are a recent convert as a Vegan.

Unfortunately the civility becomes much shorter next and mud pies start to get thrown back and forth. It takes one of the 2 parties to suck up their pride and clear the air so as to get back to a neighborly relationship, where each can trust the other to look after their house when they are out.

The US does not trust us to look after their house if they went out for a night.

B M.

 

[Cloud Cover]

While the principal subject matter of this article is BMD, it is interesting how Graham has clearly and openly identified who the primary antagonists to national defence issues are within the liberal caucas. Nothing new, other than the remarkable clarity and candidness. I also think it is interesting he is staying on board to protect the interests of DND, particularly the CAF, within cabinet. Does this mean that he feels support for renewing the CAF is weakly supported by cabinet, and that Mr. Dithers might pull a BMD like switcheroo on Hillier's program?

_____________________________________________

From the Toronto Star on line: http://www.thestar.com/NASApp/cs/Co...out/Article_Type1&c=Article&cid=1109976610177Defence minister admits he `lost war' in cabinet

GRAHAM FRASER
NATIONAL AFFAIRS WRITER

OTTAWAâ ”Defence Minister Bill Graham acknowledged yesterday that he had lost the fight in cabinet on Canadian participation in the U.S. missile defence system.

"The question is, how do I feel?" Graham told Liberal delegate and peace activist Marsha Akman at a policy workshop at the Liberal convention. "I lost the war. What the heck, you can't win them all. You won the war."

It was an unusually candid admission, and a break from traditional cabinet secrecy, in which ministers maintain the fiction that they all came to agreement around the cabinet table.

According to a source, Graham thought "for about a nanosecond" about resigning over the decision not to participate in the ballistic missile defence system.

(In 1963, then-prime minister John Diefenbaker's defence minister, Douglas Harkness, resigned when Diefenbaker decided Canada would not accept nuclear warheads for BOMARC missiles on Canadian soil.)

But Graham concluded it would not be the right thing to do, particularly in light of the government's decision to dedicate almost $13 billion to defence over the next five years.

He talked to U.S. deputy secretary of defence Paul Wolfowitz, who told him that Canada had not been "a player" on ballistic missile defence anyway, and that Canada had a special military role to play in the world since Canadian troops could go to countries where U.S. troops could or would not.

Graham, who had been publicly defending Canadian participation in the U.S. ballistic missile system for months, was conceding defeat to a group of peace activists who had been working inside the Quebec wing of the Liberal party for several years on this issue.

After the policy workshop, which passed a resolution urging the government to reject any role for Canada in the missile system and all other systems that include space-based weapons, Graham talked to reporters.

"I lost the argument. I supported one side of the argument, and it was not accepted by the majority of cabinet and the Prime Minister. So you carry on."

He said Canada has a strong position on defence in collaboration with the United States. "I'm the defence minister, so I lost an argument," he said. "I'm not prepared to discuss who was on what position in cabinet; the point of the matter is there was a vigorous debate, both in cabinet, in Parliament, in our caucus, in the country about this issue. It was decided at the cabinet meeting last Thursday, we made the decision, we move on â ” and as the Prime Minister says, we move on in the sense that we are great collaborators with the United States."

He said the decision was made on the basis of "political and strategic and other analyses." He told reporters he is comfortable with the decision, particularly since Martin has said Canada will continue to collaborate militarily with the Americans.

 

[FastEddy]

While the principal subject matter of this article is BMD, it is interesting how Graham has clearly and openly identified who the primary antagonists to national defence issues are within the liberal caucas. Nothing new, other than the remarkable clarity and candidness. I also think it is interesting he is staying on board to protect the interests of DND, particularly the CAF, within cabinet. Does this mean that he feels support for renewing the CAF is weakly supported by cabinet, and that Mr. Dithers might pull a BMD like switcheroo on Hillier's program?

I've supported the Liberals for a lifetime, even this Election, but I tell you Steven Harper is starting to look pretty good.

Min. Bill Graham has never been one of my favorites, let alone Min.of National Defense, but you have to give him credit in the BMD matter.

" as the Prime Minister says, we move on in the sense that we are great collaborators with the United States."

Yes we are, especially when we don't have to do anything or its free, or upset the Libral's apple cart.

Mr. Dither's doesn't have to many more Bridges to burn.

As for the Carrot he's holding out to the CAF, only time will tell.

He said the decision was made on the basis of "political and strategic and other analyses." He told reporters he is comfortable with the decision, particularly since Martin has said Canada will continue to collaborate militarily with the Americans.