|
Contributor: danf
Date: 2003-04-21 16:11:20
National Defence. Because trade, foreign policy and national defence are linked, a few words on our defence posture are appropriate.
Although it may be tempting to nestle beneath the wing of the American eagle, as we formerly did between the paws of the British lion, that would be ill-advised. Conventional thought suggests that Canada s limited military resources should be employed as an adjunct to those of the USA and NATO. That is a dangerous policy. Canadians have learned, to their sorrow, that foreign commanders are not always competent, and Canadian blood may be shed needlessly in futile operations such as General Haig s mad frontal assaults in the massacres of the Somme and Mountbatten s costly fiasco at Dieppe. Although we gain some valuable expertise and access to advanced technology by a close association with the superpowers, and I do not recommend severing those ties completely, if we become totally integrated we lose the autonomy which comes from having an independent military force.
The current supremacy of American military power rests on command of the air through use of superior technology. If infantry is the Queen of battles several recent wars have shown that air power is the King of Wars. There will always be a need for foot soldiers. However, without air cover, even the best trained and most courageous ground forces are doomed to fail.
Accordingly, if Canada is to be defended effectively, we must find ways to blunt or defeat an enemy s ability to dominate the aerospace above our land. I believe that Canadians have both the scientific know-how and the resources needed to develop weapons capable of blinding GPS satellites, jamming radar systems and disrupting electronic communications. Those are areas where we already have great expertise; we should strive to improve our capabilities. If we do not, we may be sure that Russia, China and several other nations will, leaving both our now friendly ally to the south and ourselves naked and vulnerable.
A Canadian aerospace force with the capability to counter the most advanced electronic technology would contribute far more to our security than a new fleet of destroyers, or another armoured regiment acting under foreign control. I do not suggest that we need to make vast expenditures to equip squadrons with the latest air superiority fighters developed by the Americans. Instead, Canada should develop laser weapons, electromagnetic pulse devices, anti-aircraft rocketry, night-vision equipment and camouflage, as well as electronic, acoustic and optical sensors and jamming equipment, which could be deployed in innovative ways both on the ground and aboard less-expensive aerial and marine platforms, including unmanned drones. We may not be able to bite like lions, nor can we hope for an eagle s talons, but we can adopt the strategy of hornets and killer bees, combining with others to repel invaders with myriad stings.
One of the fundamental rules of defence is: Know your enemy. Although we already benefit from some data provided by satellites and spy networks of the USA and other powers, Canada must maintain and improve her own surveillance capability. There have already been more than a few hints that some US agencies use intelligence data to gain an upper hand in trade and other negotiations; certainly, other nations have done so. Terrorists also, have proven their ability to penetrate our country s defences; we need the means to infiltrate and deter such militant groups. And that can only be done by agents. Canada has a wealth of ethnic minorities from which to draw for that task. Technical means, such as drone reconnaissance aircraft, may provide a relatively economical way of patrolling our vast northern regions. Not only should we design our own surveillance drones, and improve our methods of eavesdropping on potential enemies, but we must devise ways to frustrate the spying ability of other nations. The expenditures needed to provide an effective intelligence/counter-intelligence capability, need not be large and would give us far more protection per dollar spent, than military hardware such as tanks, ships and fighter planes.
In sum, an appropriate defence policy for Canada should be one that focuses on force-multipliers that include specialist troops such as JTF2, sophisticated weaponry, and superior intelligence gathering. We should avoid attempts to produce powerful conventional forces involving tanks, fighter aircraft and warships, which would, at best, provide limited support for stronger allies, and at worst, overwhelm our economy. If America s current pace of arms construction continues, the economy of that country runs the risk of collapsing like the steed of a crusader crumpling beneath the surcharge of a gigantic heavily armed knight.
Contd ...
Reply to this message
|
