# Great Britain Offers to help Canada defend its Arctic (CBC)



## SeaKingTacco (24 Sep 2021)

I suspect there is now a coordinated effort between London and Washington to bring Canada out of Defence slacker status…


----------



## suffolkowner (24 Sep 2021)

SeaKingTacco said:


> I suspect there is now a coordinated effort between London and Washington to bring Canada out of Defence slacker status…


I hope so


----------



## Humphrey Bogart (24 Sep 2021)

SeaKingTacco said:


> I suspect there is now a coordinated effort between London and Washington to bring Canada out of Defence slacker status…



My take is that this is a not so subtle message to "either step up or we are going to do it for you and you won't like how we necessarily do it".

Ironically this pressure has historically had the greatest effect on Canadian Defence spending.


----------



## MilEME09 (24 Sep 2021)

SeaKingTacco said:


> I suspect there is now a coordinated effort between London and Washington to bring Canada out of Defence slacker status…


one can hope, but unless there is a lot of back room pressure, it looks more like "you aren't doing it so we have to", which may then lead to trying to get us to step up, especially in the arctic.


----------



## suffolkowner (24 Sep 2021)

We have fallen so far behind and have so far to go. I expect it will be quite a shock to the Trudeau government


----------



## MilEME09 (24 Sep 2021)

suffolkowner said:


> We have fallen so far behind and have so far to go. I expect it will be quite a shock to the Trudeau government


We need a serious kick I'm the ass, to get procurement, etc... going back on track


----------



## Good2Golf (24 Sep 2021)

suffolkowner said:


> We have fallen so far behind and have so far to go. I expect it will be quite a shock to the Trudeau government


Au contraire, SO.  I’m willing to bet that the 20-somethings paid by PMO to monitor the pulse of “Woke-anada” didn’t even bring it up to Prince Woke and his fart-catchers’ attention…

UK and US should just plant a joint brewery on Hans Island and direct NORSOVOPS from there…


----------



## Humphrey Bogart (24 Sep 2021)

Invite the Danes and Norwegians in to AUSUKUS 😁


----------



## Colin Parkinson (24 Sep 2021)

SeaKingTacco said:


> I suspect there is now a coordinated effort between London and Washington to bring Canada out of Defence slacker status…


I hope that effort involves a field telephone to a certain somebody testicles.


----------



## Brad Sallows (24 Sep 2021)

Rule Britannia, Britannia rules the ice...


----------



## OldSolduer (24 Sep 2021)

SeaKingTacco said:


> I suspect there is now a coordinated effort between London and Washington to bring Canada out of Defence slacker status…


Perhaps a very public visit by POTUS or VPOTUS to discuss matters of "mutual interest".

Followed by a very private "get your shit in order with your DND. Its a barrel of retarded monkeys and it needs to be sorted the fuck out" or words to that effect.


----------



## Brad Sallows (24 Sep 2021)

> Perhaps a very public visit by POTUS or VPOTUS to discuss matters of "mutual interest".



What is it you think either of those two is capable of discussing?


----------



## OldSolduer (24 Sep 2021)

Brad Sallows said:


> What is it you think either of those two is capable of discussing?


The VPOTUS I have a better feeling about this discussion. I am going on the premise that POTUS or VPOTUS would be well briefed on our situation.

 I think the real impetus for change would be a face to face with SECDEF and the CJCS and our MND and CDS. 

But maybe I'm wrong. Who knows?

Anyways the offer of help to defend the Arctic by the Brits should be setting off alarm bells in our heads.


----------



## Brad Sallows (24 Sep 2021)

Harris is not highly regarded for policy competency.  Nor, really, for political acumen.  She didn't earn her current position; she was picked because of characteristics assigned at birth.


----------



## FJAG (24 Sep 2021)

Brad Sallows said:


> Harris is not highly regarded for policy competency.  Nor, really, for political acumen.  She didn't earn her current position; she was picked because of characteristics assigned at birth.


How was that different for all the white, male VPs that went before her?


----------



## SeaKingTacco (24 Sep 2021)

FJAG said:


> How was that different for all the white, male VPs that went before her?


Oh, it isn’t. Brad was just say’n…


----------



## Brad Sallows (24 Sep 2021)

> How was that different for all the white, male VPs that went before her?



It wasn't.  Somewhere on another thread I opined that the VP is the weakest part of the US system of government.  VP candidates are selected for demographic appeal to complement the presidential candidate (thus Biden, not because of his experience and foreign policy acumen but because he was white and old and Obama was young and black).  Just about the worst possible criteria, but the person is next in line if the president thunders in.


----------



## Good2Golf (24 Sep 2021)

Brad Sallows said:


> It wasn't.  Somewhere on another thread I opined that the VP is the weakest part of the US system of government.  VP candidates are selected for demographic appeal to complement the presidential candidate (thus Biden, not because of his experience and foreign policy acumen but because he was white and old and Obama was young and black).  Just about the worst possible criteria, but the person is next in line if the president thunders in.


Hmmm…quite different than Canada where the democratic system appropriately selects the best candidate as D/PM….oh wait…


----------



## Remius (24 Sep 2021)

Good2Golf said:


> Hmmm…quite different than Canada where the democratic system appropriately selects the best candidate as D/PM….oh wait…


Deputy PM isn’t even a required thing.  plenty of PMs never had one nor appointed one,  Harper Being the most recent to not have one.


----------



## Czech_pivo (24 Sep 2021)

Brad Sallows said:


> Harris is not highly regarded for policy competency.  Nor, really, for political acumen.  She didn't earn her current position; she was picked because of characteristics assigned at birth.


Did you just describe VPOTUS or our current PM because I swear to God that you were talking about our current PM.


----------



## Brad Sallows (25 Sep 2021)

Sure, but Harris isn't the deputy PM.  I suppose the PM could emulate Biden and select one based on gender and skin colour.


----------



## Brad Sallows (25 Sep 2021)

> our current PM



With 3 election victories, his political competency at least meets standard.


----------



## Good2Golf (25 Sep 2021)

Brad Sallows said:


> With 3 election victories, his political competency at least meets standard.


…in a kind of scraping just as little plurality as the rules require, sure.


----------



## Brad Sallows (25 Sep 2021)

Yes, but the silence from the left on the small matter of the popular vote outcome of the past two elections is some consolation.


----------



## CBH99 (25 Sep 2021)

Humphrey Bogart said:


> *Britain offers Canadian military help to defend the Arctic*
> 
> Experts say that concerns about sovereignty have made Ottawa reluctant to let allies operate in the region
> 
> ...


I suppose the universe does have a sense of humour in so many, yet subtle ways.  Irony seems to be a favourite.  

The UK decides to rid itself of any MPA capability - despite being an island nation, with Russian naval vessels transiting nearby on a regular basis.  

So, other countries - including Canada - deploy MPA to fill the gap until the UK takes possession of it’s P8 fleet it quickly purchased once realizing their folly. 



Canada, being an Arctic nation, hasn’t bothered to invest in capabilities that will make a truly meaningful contribution to Arctic security, minus the AOPs coming online.  (Still waiting on commitment & timeline to replace or upgrade radar systems and underwater sensor networks, etc).  

**Canada’s satellite network above the Arctic being the exception - and quite the useful tool.  

So the UK offers to assist us, and Arctic nation, in an area where we shouldn’t need assistance, the same way we did for them being an island nation.  



I suppose that’s why allies are important, in all seriousness.  🍻


----------



## Kirkhill (25 Sep 2021)

I think D&B pretty much had it with this link.  Trump's offer to buy Greenland was laughed at.  China's attempt to buy Greenland is taken seriously.

And trading Akvavit for Rye on Hans Island could turn into something entirely different if China actually becomes a circumpolar nation with more of the world's Rare Earths (and fresh water) in hand.  And a very transactional view of Greenpeace and The Environment.









						Defending Canadian Arctic Sovereignty
					

Meanwhile US Navy is really interested in European NATO's "high north" off Norway, not in North American Arctic:    BTW the Vice Commander of US 2nd Fleet is an RCN Rear-Admiral: https://www.c2f.usff.navy.mil/Leadership/Article/1961644/rear-adm-steve-waddell/  Mark Ottawa   Mainly because they...




					www.army.ca
				




"Do you want a lawn mower?  Or do you want AUKUS to cut your grass?"

I've made this link before:

DEW line - Autopact
North Warning Line - Free Trade

What is it going to cost to re-open the borders post-Covid?  The Yanks seem to be in no hurry to normalize relations.  Trudeau is.


----------



## Kirkhill (25 Sep 2021)

Somebody, I think it was Kissinger, once said something to the effect that the problem with the EU was that he didn't know who to call.  

Perhaps we have the same problem with the US these days.   I hear reference to POTUS and VPOTUS. Milley has been talking to the Chinese without reference to his bosses.  Nancy Pelosi had just returned from a visit to Downing Street a couple of days before the AUKUS announcement.

Who is the ringmaster?  

Same problem in Canada - Trudeau Minor, Butts, Telford?  Or Freeland?


----------



## daftandbarmy (25 Sep 2021)

Humphrey Bogart said:


> *Britain offers Canadian military help to defend the Arctic*
> 
> Experts say that concerns about sovereignty have made Ottawa reluctant to let allies operate in the region
> 
> ...



_Timeo Danaos et dona ferentes_​





						Beware of Greeks bearing gifts - Wikipedia
					






					en.wikipedia.org


----------



## FJAG (25 Sep 2021)

Brad Sallows said:


> Yes, but the silence from the left on the small matter of the popular vote outcome of the past two elections is some consolation.


I sometimes wonder about that. The most recent popular vote outcomes are:

CPC - 5,742,605
LPC - 5,556,491
NDP - 3,036,030
Bloc - 1,301,831
Green - 398,775
PPC - 844,122

Of those CPC and PPC form right of centre for - 6,586,727
while LPC and NDP and Green form left of centre - 8,991,296

The Bloc is unique in that it comes from both a PC and Liberal base, espouses mostly left of centre ideals but has a particular focus that makes it difficult to typify the membership. I've left it out of the equation.

In short the popular vote goes left of centre at 8,991,296 out of 15,578,023 or 57.72%

What government is formed in any given election is entirely dependent on the vote per riding split as between left leaning parties and the right leaning parties. The CPC forms governments primarily when it doesn't split the vote with another right leaning party at a time when the NDP pulls votes away from the LPC. This used to happen because there is a stratification as between the less left LPC and a more left NDP with a middle group that can be swung from a moderate left to a more extreme left depending on the circumstances.

In the past, before the 1980s, there was less of a stratification amongst the right leaning elements which were mostly fiscal conservatives. After that, however, social conservative issues rose to the surface that created a division between mostly fiscal conservatives and mostly social or populist conservatives which ended up in the Reform party and its permutations and uneasy assimilation into the CPC. The PPC seems to be drawing that populist conservatism to its banner with its share of the vote having risen since 2019 from 294,092 to 844,122, a significant increase of 550,030 which undoubtedly came from the CPC which dropped from 6,239,227 in 2019 to 5,730,515 a loss of 508,712.

I think that if anything can be drawn as a conclusion from this election it's that the CPC is in trouble. It's leader wants to map a direction towards the left and gather the central "fiscally concerned" vote which is staying with the LPC because it is "scared" of the CPC's social conservative elements. Meanwhile a large portion of the CPC wants a stronger social conservative voice and is pushing hard against O'Toole's agenda. Calls for a leadership review are already happening. This does not bode well for the party which may very well fragment with people escaping both to the left and the right.

The issue is that essentially, Canada is a mostly left leaning country with a very strong rural v urban divide. We're all in for a bumpy ride.

🍻


----------



## dapaterson (25 Sep 2021)

When the writ was dropped, the prognosis was dire for the CPC.  O'Toole kept them from getting clobbered, kept things moving forward, and retained the party's position, while making some inroads into places without CPC representatives.

The greatest beneficiary from the CPC deposing O'Toole and going hard to the SoCon side... would be the LPC.


----------



## SeaKingTacco (25 Sep 2021)

FJAG said:


> I sometimes wonder about that. The most recent popular vote outcomes are:
> 
> CPC - 5,742,605
> LPC - 5,556,491
> ...


The Liberals are not, naturally, a left leaning party. Only since Trudeau the elder in 1968. And even in the 1990s under Chretien, there was nothing particularily “left“ about them.
The Liberals are about power. They will move in whatever direction on the political spectrum gets them the most votes. Well, seats.


----------



## Kirkhill (25 Sep 2021)

FJAG said:


> I sometimes wonder about that. The most recent popular vote outcomes are:
> 
> CPC - 5,742,605
> LPC - 5,556,491
> ...



The Bloc, doesn't that owe some of its genealogy to the SoCreds or Real Caouette?  Which also, I believe, helps to explain the CPC success in Bernier's back yard around Quebec City and La Beauce.   For some " Le ciel est bleu, l’enfer est rouge "  Encore.









						Le ciel est bleu, l’enfer est rouge
					

POINT DE VUE / Il en manquait peu pour que le premier ministre Legault prononce cette phrase que nos parents ont entendu des curés du haut de leur chaire le dimanche, en appui à l’Union nationale, le parti bleu de Maurice Duplessis.




					www.lesoleil.com
				




What is defined as populist now used to be popular all the way from BC to Quebec.


----------



## Oldgateboatdriver (25 Sep 2021)

The Bloc has no ties whatsoever to the old Social Credit of Camille Sansom or Real Caouette.

It was born from the Quebec wing of the Progressive Conservative Party (and that wing was always on the more centrist/progressive side of the Party) after the rejection of the Meech Lake Accord by some English provinces. Bouchard slammed the door on Mulroney's cabinet and took a large portion of the Quebec PC caucus and even some LPC member from Quebec. At the next election, it basically garnered large number of votes and MP's as a result of Quebec looking at the election as a protest vote against all Federal parties. It's been going downhill since. and may have lost its appeal to Quebecers if it hadn't been for that stupid interviewer who was more interested in making herself look smart and politicians look stupid to inflate her own ego.

BTW, going back to the original theme of this thread, I don't believe that the British government's offer is disinterested. Gaining access to support facilities and intel in the Arctic is in their interest: Looking at the world from a globe instead of a map (one of my favourite perspective, which I try to get more people to use) you can see that should the PRC want to make trouble for the UK (something the UK expect, I assume, in view of it's current clear opposition to Beijing), the best way is to send some of the PLAN nuclear boats to the UK under the polar ice route.

P.S.: "L'enfer est rouge, le ciel est bleu" related to the Union Nationale party in Quebec, not the Social Credit. The Union Nationale was both conservative and nationalist, but not "separatist", and was basically the Quebec Conservative party while it existed.


----------



## Kirkhill (25 Sep 2021)

Thanks for the corrections OGBD - been a while since you stood me up.    

I think I could phrase my point another way.  Where did all those SoCred/Union Nationale voters go?  In BC and Saskatchewan they turned into the Provincial Liberals.  In Alberta they became the Provincial PCs and then the United Conservative Party.   In Ontario they moved out of the GTA.  Where did they end up in Quebec?

And I agree.  The British government always considers its interests.  Especially these days.  They are looking to make the odd quid here and there.


----------



## Oldgateboatdriver (25 Sep 2021)

Social Credit has basically disappeared in Quebec. Its primary source of recruiting was the Franco ultra-orthodox wing of the Catholic Church (people who still think mass should be in latin in the pre-Vatican II format) and French Quebec has become the single most secular place in North America.

The Union Nationale crowd was first absorbed into the Party Quebecois as a result of the choice they had to make for the first referendum (under our Referendum Act, any issue put to a referendum has to be fought under two umbrella groups, basically the yes and the no sides, so political parties have to decide which side to take. Thus multiple parties can end up in one side and that creates pressure to renounce certain aspect of their platform. In our case, it led to the UN being absorbed in the PQ to become its right/centre wing balancing out the  more left elements). 

After the failure of the second referendum, the multiple internal pressures of the "umbrella" that was the PQ started to explode it. The more right wing elements became the Action Democratique du Quebec, a nationalist right wing party that renounced seeking independence, while the more left wing part became Quebec Solidaire, a socialist party that still embraces independence. This greatly weakened the PQ. Some time after, M. Legault decided that there was no future in seeking independence and that we just had to stop talking about another referendum. He split from the PQ and created the Coalition Avenir Quebec as an umbrella party willing to take any  centrist willing to join a group that just wanted to govern, without reference to any "national question". It quickly absorbed the Action Democratique.

All this to say that  the old Union Nationale - minus the cozy relationship with the Catholic church - can probably be found today in the CAQ of premier Legault.


----------



## ballz (25 Sep 2021)

FJAG said:


> I think that if anything can be drawn as a conclusion from this election it's that the CPC is in trouble. It's leader wants to map a direction towards the left and gather the central "fiscally concerned" vote which is staying with the LPC because it is "scared" of the CPC's social conservative elements. Meanwhile a large portion of the CPC wants a stronger social conservative voice and is pushing hard against O'Toole's agenda. Calls for a leadership review are already happening. This does not bode well for the party which may very well fragment with people escaping both to the left and the right.




I have a very different take on this and it's why I hope the CPC doesn't turf O'Toole.

People seem to be making hay about the fact that they lost some votes in Alberta... who cares? Michelle Rempell went from 70% to 50% and people are acting like this is a catastrophe... Sorry but 50% in our system is a walloping of your opponents.

Meanwhile, in Ontario, the Liberals in 2019 had a ~15% lead in popular vote over the CPC which as has been reduced to 5%.... for the last two years the Liberals have been handing out free money, hogging all the air time, O'Toole has had zero chance to actually become a known quantity, and managed to to reduce the Liberals lead in the popular vote in Ontario by 67%, and positioned them in many many ridings within a hair of the win, could easily translate into a big flip in the next election, in particular after a few more Trudeau et al scandals.... one of which, the Chinese scientists, is looming and the Liberals can't run from it this time.

The fact that he shifted the party to a _national_ party, being considered by all Canadians and not just overwhelmingly supported by the West, is a huge step in the correct direction for a plurality next time around. Sure he didn't gain seats, but they were so far behind in most of the ridings they lost that gaining seats was a tall order. They're positioned to win a bunch more next time... when he's a more well-known quantity and more experienced (getting played by the gun control scare card is an inexcusable rookie error that I doubt he'll make again).


----------



## Brad Sallows (25 Sep 2021)

The BC "Social Credit" party had a short life as what it was originally intended to be.  It very quickly became a merger of conservatives and liberals to oppose the CCF.


----------



## The Bread Guy (25 Sep 2021)

Brad Sallows said:


> It wasn't.  Somewhere on another thread I opined that the VP is the weakest part of the US system of government ...


Just ask Julia Louis-Dreyfus ...


----------



## daftandbarmy (25 Sep 2021)

Brad Sallows said:


> The BC "Social Credit" party had a short life as what it was originally intended to be.  It very quickly became a merger of conservatives and liberals to oppose the CCF.



The Socreds dominated BC politics for decades. Interestingly, mainly by winning the seats outside of Vancouver it seems. They collpased into obscurity after 1991.

The BC Liberals absorbed some of their people and alleginaces and, like their predeccesor, are most popular in BC's rural areas.









						British Columbia Social Credit Party - Wikipedia
					






					en.wikipedia.org


----------



## FJAG (25 Sep 2021)

ballz said:


> I have a very different take on this and it's why I hope the CPC doesn't turf O'Toole.
> 
> People seem to be making hay about the fact that they lost some votes in Alberta... who cares? Michelle Rempell went from 70% to 50% and people are acting like this is a catastrophe... Sorry but 50% in our system is a walloping of your opponents.
> 
> ...


 I agree with you on those points. I had a neutral view of O'Toole at the leadership convention but since then have come to consider him a good leader that wants to take the party in the correct direction.

Unfortunately, it's the membership in the party I don't like anymore. The most recent convention had a lot of positions being put forward that were soc-con oriented and when you can't even get a vanilla motion on global warming passed, you have to wonder. Then there was the totally unnecessary back bench nonsense in parliament about medical conscience rights. The whole mismanagement of the vaccine issue during the election is another example of the membership pushing O'Toole where he didn't want to be in order to hold the wings of the party together.

I used to be part of a family that was solid conservative - now I'm the last hold-out. All the rest have jumped ship.

Like it or not, the CPC is divided and basically the right wing of it takes no prisoners and will eat its own (yes, it's a double metaphor). They do not compromise on issues of conscience and will not stop pushing their agenda (hell, they'll hardly shut up when it matters - there's always one back bencher that will bring some fool bill). If we're lucky, they'll all move to the PPC but that won't help win elections unless what's left of the CPC can win over lots of liberals. We've were there in 1993. It didn't work out so well.

🍻


----------



## dimsum (25 Sep 2021)

FJAG said:


> Unfortunately, it's the membership in the party I don't like anymore. The most recent convention had a lot of positions being put forward that were soc-con oriented and when you can't even get a vanilla motion on global warming passed, you have to wonder.


Yep.


----------



## MilEME09 (25 Sep 2021)

I think we are watching the Blue divorce unfold in front of us as the old Canadian Alliance and conservatives split back up into the CPC and PPC. Frankly it likely needs to happen at this point, in order for them to move to being right of center. Some may say that dooms us to liberal government but the NDP is rising in popularity among younger voters.


----------



## daftandbarmy (25 Sep 2021)

MilEME09 said:


> I think we are watching the Blue divorce unfold in front of us as the old Canadian Alliance and conservatives split back up into the CPC and PPC. Frankly it likely needs to happen at this point, in order for them to move to being right of center. Some may say that dooms us to liberal government but the NDP is rising in popularity among* younger voters*.



Who don't vote much.


----------



## Good2Golf (25 Sep 2021)

MilEME09 said:


> I think we are watching the Blue divorce unfold in front of us as the old Canadian Alliance and conservatives split back up into the CPC and PPC. Frankly it likely needs to happen at this point, in order for them to move to being right of center. Some may say that dooms us to liberal government but the NDP is rising in popularity among younger voters.


It may be enough clearing out the hard right to PPC or others, that Blue Liberals uncomfortable with the current surge of SOCON in the CPC, may ‘return’ to previous Red Tory lives…


----------



## FJAG (26 Sep 2021)

Good2Golf said:


> It may be enough clearing out the hard right to PPC or others, that Blue Liberals uncomfortable with the current surge of SOCON in the CPC, may ‘return’ to previous Red Tory lives…


The problem in this age of the "Big Lies" is that the soc-con fear factor will be invoked over and over again regardless of whether the CPC gets purged or not. I have a theory that until the CPC puts the word "Progressive" back into the party's name, no one will believe that there has been a change ... and even then ...

🍻


----------



## Good2Golf (26 Sep 2021)

Yup.  It was a sad day when the ‘Progressive’ name (and spirit) was kicked to the curb.


----------



## Kirkhill (26 Sep 2021)

Getting back to the original post....

We can all relax.  They are from the government and they're here to help.    









						Royal Navy could expand into the Canadian Arctic to support allies
					

Closer military ties with Canada may be necessary as strategic rivals show interest in untapped oil and gas reserves




					www.telegraph.co.uk


----------



## Altair (26 Sep 2021)

Isn't our deep sea arctic port supposed to come online next year?


----------



## daftandbarmy (27 Sep 2021)

Kirkhill said:


> Getting back to the original post....
> 
> We can all relax.  They are from the government and they're here to help.
> 
> ...



More proof that, now they can't play with Europe anymore, the British are lonley


----------



## CBH99 (27 Sep 2021)

daftandbarmy said:


> More proof that, now they can't play with Europe anymore, the British are lonley


If they think they are lonely now, just wait until they go on patrol in the Arctic 😕

Much more fun across the channel!


----------



## Czech_pivo (27 Sep 2021)

Altair said:


> Isn't our deep sea arctic port supposed to come online next year?


If you're referring to the facility that will be operational for 3-4 months of the year and not manned for the other 8-9 months, then yes, it looks to be finally operational summer of 2022.


----------



## Altair (27 Sep 2021)

Czech_pivo said:


> If you're referring to the facility that will be operational for 3-4 months of the year and not manned for the other 8-9 months, then yes, it looks to be finally operational summer of 2022.


Better than zero but man do we suck.


----------



## MilEME09 (27 Sep 2021)

Altair said:


> Better than zero but man do we suck.


Making open 12 months a year doesn't win votes


----------



## Altair (27 Sep 2021)

MilEME09 said:


> Making open 12 months a year doesn't win votes


----------



## Czech_pivo (27 Sep 2021)

MilEME09 said:


> Making open 12 months a year doesn't win votes


True, but thinking out 12-15yrs, what are the chances that we’ll need to have people there anyways if shipping via the NW Passage becomes more the norm? 
I mean it’s only been since 2007 when Harper announced the intention to expand/modernize the location and here we are 14yrs later and it’s just about ready to be used in a reduced fashion.


----------



## lenaitch (27 Sep 2021)

Seeing as it just a fueling station, what would it and it's staff do during the winter?  If I recall, it was originally touted to be the home port for the AOPS.  If places like Cold Lake et al are seen as a detriment to recruiting and retention, I doubt shots of Nanisivik would be on the recruiting brochure.


----------



## FSTO (27 Sep 2021)

lenaitch said:


> Seeing as it just a fueling station, what would it and it's staff do during the winter?  If I recall, it was originally touted to be the home port for the AOPS.  If places like Cold Lake et al are seen as a detriment to recruiting and retention, I doubt shots of Nanisivik would be on the recruiting brochure.


It was never going to be a home port.


----------



## Stoker (27 Sep 2021)

Czech_pivo said:


> If you're referring to the facility that will be operational for 3-4 months of the year and not manned for the other 8-9 months, then yes, it looks to be finally operational summer of 2022.


Because the rest of the time its frozen in.


----------



## Brad Sallows (27 Sep 2021)

Nothing we've done so far matters enough to make a difference.  Eventually a challenge we can't ignore will be made to Canada's Arctic claims.  Our response will be limited to lodging a complaint at the UN about respect for territorial integrity.  Prediction: we will suddenly learn almost all other nations - but most particularly the US, EU, Russia, China, and their associated clients - have a much greater affinity for the idea that the resources potentially lying in that large expanse of the earth's crust should be "international".


----------



## KevinB (29 Sep 2021)

Stoker said:


> Because the rest of the time its frozen in.


If you had a real ice breaker it wouldn't need to be.


----------



## Stoker (29 Sep 2021)

KevinB said:


> If you had a real ice breaker it wouldn't need to be.


What type of icebreaker, a PC 1?, nuclear? The CCG doesn't operate there in the winter. There's very good reasons why the refueling station is closed during that time. People making statements saying why don't we keep it open 365 don't have a sweet clue frankly. Do people even know why we don't keep fuel there in the winter?


----------



## Colin Parkinson (29 Sep 2021)

The plan with the Polar 8 was to be year around capability, but the reality is that there is little call for CCG breakers up there in the winter months, but a lot of demand down south.


----------



## Stoker (29 Sep 2021)

Colin Parkinson said:


> The plan with the Polar 8 was to be year around capability, but the reality is that there is little call for CCG breakers up there in the winter months, but a lot of demand down south.


The thing is that how many polar 8 icebreakers are there world wide? I would imagine not many.


----------



## Oldgateboatdriver (29 Sep 2021)

Actually, in winter, the only things operating on the surface there are either snowmobiles/sleighs or Russian nuclear icebreakers. And they only have about half a dozen that could get steam up at any time, which, with a capability of carrying about a hundred soldiers each, hardly constitute a menace - especially considering their likely life expectancy against an air attack by even a token fighter jet force is probably in the 5 to 6 minutes range.


----------



## Kirkhill (29 Sep 2021)

Humphrey Bogart said:


> *Britain offers Canadian military help to defend the Arctic*
> 
> Experts say that concerns about sovereignty have made Ottawa reluctant to let allies operate in the region
> 
> ...




So how's this for a suggestion of the future.

The RAN and the RCN get an offer to join HM's Submarine Service- for a modest fee you too can learn how to pilot Her Majesty's nuclear attack subs, while you are waiting for your own subs to be built.  Or should that be the AUKUS Submarine Service?

The F35 has kind of set the pace with multinational training in the States and USMC F35s flying off the QE.

No sovereignty questions then because it is a "Canadian" boat when transiting.   And the fastest route from Faslane to the Pacific is via the North Pole.  I believe.


----------



## Oldgateboatdriver (29 Sep 2021)

Correct on the fastest route.


----------



## Kirkhill (29 Sep 2021)

Oldgateboatdriver said:


> Correct on the fastest route.


Thanks.


----------



## Colin Parkinson (29 Sep 2021)

Oldgateboatdriver said:


> Actually, in winter, the only things operating on the surface there are either snowmobiles/sleighs or Russian nuclear icebreakers. And they only have about half a dozen that could get steam up at any time, which, with a capability of carrying about a hundred soldiers each, hardly constitute a menace - especially considering their likely life expectancy against an air attack by even a token fighter jet force is probably in the 5 to 6 minutes range.


The Russian nuke icebreakers would put our Polar 8 to shame, they are seriously big and capable ships.


----------



## KevinB (30 Sep 2021)

Stoker said:


> What type of icebreaker, a PC 1?, nuclear? The CCG doesn't operate there in the winter. There's very good reasons why the refueling station is closed during that time. People making statements saying why don't we keep it open 365 don't have a sweet clue frankly. Do people even know why we don't keep fuel there in the winter?


My point is, you don't own land you don't occupy.
   Look at the new Russian base - they are occupying their land in the Arctic - 

The fact isn't that one can't have a base open 24/7 365 in the Arctic, it is that Canada doesn't have the equipment to do so.
   Because there is not Political will.

I'd go buy a mirror about your "don't have a sweet clue aspect" - yes it is miserable, yes there are fuel storage issues without insulated tanks, and stabilizers - but people do exist in the Arctic - you act like it is impossible, when it is simply impossible for Canada.

Canada claims to be an "Arctic Nation" - but it isn't, and YOUR allies are getting concerned about what can go on when no one is home.



Oldgateboatdriver said:


> Actually, in winter, the only things operating on the surface there are either snowmobiles/sleighs or Russian nuclear icebreakers. And they only have about half a dozen that could get steam up at any time, which, with a capability of carrying about a hundred soldiers each, hardly constitute a menace - especially considering their likely life expectancy against an air attack by even a token fighter jet force is probably in the 5 to 6 minutes range.


The surface isn't the problem at least at the outset -- but what can be left either in the ice, or on the surface CAN be a big problem.

IF I wanted to cause issues - I'd drive a nuke boat up - leave some RPV's that have some different roles.
  1) GBAD
  2) Deep Strike
  3) Other Area Denial Affects
  4) ASM

 It's not hard to have an RPV drill into the ice insert a charge - and withdraw - blow it and you get some open water for a bit to do your business.


Red Teaming the Arctic and how to mess with it is pretty easy - even on a budget - heck one might even be able to convert an old SSK with some significant battery bank increases to do a one way trip if the crew is fanatic enough..


----------



## The Bread Guy (30 Sep 2021)

Kirkhill said:


> ... The RAN and the RCN get an offer to join HM's Submarine Service- for a modest fee you too can learn how to pilot Her Majesty's nuclear attack subs, while you are waiting for your own subs to be built.  Or should that be the AUKUS Submarine Service? ...


Perhaps a naive question:  with the recent deal that UK, USA & AUS signed, how willing would the U.S. be to let Canada better exert its sovereignty over bits of the Arctic the U.S. considers (or at least considered as of June 2019) international waters? Or am I being paranoid here?


----------



## Colin Parkinson (30 Sep 2021)

KevinB said:


> My point is, you don't own land you don't occupy.
> Look at the new Russian base - they are occupying their land in the Arctic -
> 
> The fact isn't that one can't have a base open 24/7 365 in the Arctic, it is that Canada doesn't have the equipment to do so.
> ...


Two of these LST's would be good for us


----------



## KevinB (30 Sep 2021)

Colin Parkinson said:


> Two of these LST's would be good for us


They certainly are not pussyfooting around with the Arctic.




That Hovercraft seems to have some interesting potential multi-season in the Arctic


----------



## daftandbarmy (30 Sep 2021)

Colin Parkinson said:


> Two of these LST's would be good for us



They can't be very good at their jobs though... no cam uniforms or morale patches


----------



## Pieman (1 Oct 2021)

Realistically can Canada even procure the resources needed to actually Defend the arctic solely? I suspect not and we will need the help anyway. From the British and US perspective having Canada lose the arctic to Russia or some other power is an unacceptable loss of control of a major future trade route. Perhaps the best for Canada would be to concentrate on building arctic ports/supply depots to establish a presence that allies will be dependant on if they want to patrol the area.


----------



## CBH99 (1 Oct 2021)

Pieman said:


> Realistically can Canada even procure the resources needed to actually Defend the arctic solely? I suspect not and we will need the help anyway. From the British and US perspective having Canada lose the arctic to Russia or some other power is an unacceptable loss of control of a major future trade route. Perhaps the best for Canada would be to concentrate on building arctic ports/supply depots to establish a presence that allies will be dependant on if they want to patrol the area.


I don’t think we will lose the Arctic to Russia, or anybody else.  And China can go screw itself if it thinks it will be taken seriously as a ‘near Arctic nation’.  

The areas where Russia is quite active aren’t as close to us as many would think, nor can we blame them as they are operating in their own interests in their own territory.  They are proactively developing economic assets and thinking ahead, whereas we are avoiding most opportunities for economic growth.  


Does Canada need to have eyes and ears up there?  The ability to influence activity militarily if required?  Absolutely, for many reasons.  

But for us, our reasons are just as much politically and economically strategic  compared to the US or UK which are more militarily strategic.  

As per your suggestion, I think it has merit. If nothing else, having a few sites to support inevitable shipping in the region does plant a pretty solid foot in the area.  


0.02


----------



## Kirkhill (1 Oct 2021)

With respect to Sovereignty, perhaps the Americans would prefer that they, and the Brits, have access to a Canadian Northwest Passage rather than having the Passage recognized as International Waters.

The USN has to contest every bit of salt water.  Proforma.  That means arguing for access to both the Russian controlled North East Passage as well as the Canadian controlled North West Passage.  But realistically they are never going to have access to the Russian side.

If the USN were successful in having the NWP recognized as international waters then the Russians and the Chinese would have free passage from the Pacific to the Atlantic via the fastest route.  I'm sure that is not something they would be happy with.

It is, I believe, better for the US generally to have the NWP considered internal waters to which they, and the Brits, as allies, have access.  Perhaps even something akin to the  St Lawrence Seaway reflecting the interests of Alaska, Greenland and Nunavut.

As near as I can see there is a deep water mid-atlantic trench that can be exploited by the Brits and the US to get to the North Pole.  The hard part seems to be getting out of the Arctic across the shallows of the Bering Sea and between the Aleutian Islands.

With the NWP secured then they can transit "safely" through Canadian controlled internal waters from Greenland to Alaska and then through US waters to the Bering Strait - the critical choke point.

If any places needs to be held they are Adak and Dutch Harbor.


----------



## Kirkhill (1 Oct 2021)

Orange Pins are Canadian Ranger Patrols - effectively every native community has one.  Newfoundland is the anomaly.  They are settler communities - due to a lack of local natives.

Green Pins are settler communities with a Militia presence.  The clustering in the St Lawrence region is noticeable and reflects Canada's settlement preferences.  The Prairies and BC are pretty sparsely held.

Two points of interest

The Canadian Shield proper, the Barrenlands, the Hudson Bay Lowlands and Northern Quebec are not settled by anybody.  The natives are more at home on the coasts or in the boreal forests.    Divided among the Inuit, Cree, NaDene and Coastal nations.

Second point of interest is the lack of Canadian Ranger patrols among the natives living among the Settlers - predominantly Alqonquian-Anishinaabe, Siouan and Iroquoian.

Most northerly native community and ranger patrol is at Grise Fjord.   And the Inuit didn't go there voluntarily and couldn't figure out how to survive there without southern support.

There are a couple of hundred native communities each with a couple of hundred inhabitants.  There are about 5000 Rangers with about 20 to 30 in a patrol.  

Population of 
Nunavut - 38,780 as of 2019 (7740 live in Iqaluit) - 31,000 in country settlements
Northwest Territories - 44,826 as of  2019 (19,569 live in Yellowknife (2016)) - 24,000 in country settlements
Yukon - 42,152 as of 2020 (25,085 live in Whitehorse (2016)) - 17,000 in country settlements.
Similar population densities in Northern Quebec, Labrador and Northern BC Interior.


----------



## dimsum (1 Oct 2021)

Kirkhill said:


> Second point of interest is the lack of Canadian Ranger patrols among the natives living among the Settlers - predominantly Alqonquian-Anishinaabe, Siouan and Iroquoian.


I'm guessing here, but that might be because those who would join the CR end up joining the PRes (or Reg F) instead.


----------



## Kirkhill (1 Oct 2021)

Same map but with a wider perspective.  Shows the deep trench through the GIUK gap from Faslane to the deep waters under the North Pole.

Boomer subs up there own the Northern Hemisphere.   Transiting the Arctic from Faslane to the Pacific is real fast - if you can manage the shallow waters of the Bering Sea, the gap between Little Diomede and Big Diomede in the Bering Straits and the Aleutian Island chain.

So northern transit is desirable.  More desirable is the domination of the No-Mans Land of the North Pole.


----------



## Kirkhill (1 Oct 2021)

Same map showing the North West Passage linking Greenland with Alaska via Nunavut.   All Thule Inuit territories.  All members of the Arctic Council.  All of commercial interest to "Outsiders".

And the NWP provides a "sheltered" route for shipping, including subs, to rapidly shift from the left to right flanks of the northern No-Mans land where the Boomers roam.


----------



## Kirkhill (1 Oct 2021)

dimsum said:


> I'm guessing here, but that might be because those who would join the CR end up joining the PRes (or Reg F) instead.



Real possibility, even likelihood.  But given the tensions with the southern native communities and their constant concern over services, I think that development of the Ranger Patrol system in the south may be missing a bet.


----------



## Kirkhill (1 Oct 2021)

The impact of moving 4 Long Range Precision Strike elements of the type envisaged by the US Army and Marines, or the Aegis Ashore SM3/SM6 units of the US Navy already in service in Poland and Romania.

One at Longyearbyen on Svalbard.   One at Reykjavik on Iceland.  One at Thule on Greenland.  One at Alert on Ellesmere.

1500 km range against surface targets (like surfaced SSBNs).  Useful capabilities against missiles on launch, during boost and during terminal phases.


----------



## dimsum (1 Oct 2021)

Kirkhill said:


> View attachment 66666
> 
> The impact of moving 4 Long Range Precision Strike elements of the type envisaged by the US Army and Marines, or the Aegis Ashore SM3/SM6 units of the US Navy already in service in Poland and Romania.
> 
> ...


Frankly, Inuvik would be a better spot than Alert based on those circles.


----------



## daftandbarmy (1 Oct 2021)

Kirkhill said:


> View attachment 66664
> 
> Same map showing the North West Passage linking Greenland with Alaska via Nunavut.   All Thule Inuit territories.  All members of the Arctic Council.  All of commercial interest to "Outsiders".
> 
> And the NWP provides a "sheltered" route for shipping, including subs, to rapidly shift from the left to right flanks of the northern No-Mans land where the Boomers roam.



Speaking of the NW Passage:


BZ Hard Over Harry! Couldn't let the RCMP have bragging rights on that one for much longer, could you? 

Royal Canadian Navy ship completes Northwest Passage journey for first time since 1954​


			https://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/north/canadian-navy-ship-completes-northwest-passage-1.6194739


----------



## CBH99 (1 Oct 2021)

Kirkhill said:


> With respect to Sovereignty, perhaps the Americans would prefer that they, and the Brits, have access to a Canadian Northwest Passage rather than having the Passage recognized as International Waters.
> 
> The USN has to contest every bit of salt water.  Proforma.  That means arguing for access to both the Russian controlled North East Passage as well as the Canadian controlled North West Passage.  But realistically they are never going to have access to the Russian side.
> 
> ...


I believe it was Stoker, OGBT, or one of our other career Navy guys on this site that had mentioned that a few years ago when the US (under the Trump administration at the time) had started to argue it should be international waters, rather than an internal Canadian waterway.  

That quickly disappeared when (I’m assuming) someone had taken Secretary of State Pompeo aside and explained precisely what you mentioned.  

 If it was an international passage, the Chinese and Russians could legally transit that waterway at all, and even park an asset or two there if they wanted.  

As a Canadian internal waterway, it limited the amount of traffic in the area, and the USN would be ‘granted permission each time they requested it’ for transit.  (Aka they don’t ask, and we don’t bother getting them to request.)

Every few years, some younger minds start to make a stink of it in the US.  And every few years, the more seasoned folks take them aside and explain why the status quo is to be maintained.  And it quietly becomes a non-issue all over again.  


While the Russians and Chinese seem to be becoming quite friendly with each other, I believe that is more a matter of us (re ‘the west’) pushing them together more than anything else.  

I don’t think the Russians want the Chinese up there any more than we do.  


0.02


----------



## Kirkhill (1 Oct 2021)

CBH99 said:


> I believe it was Stoker, OGBT, or one of our other career Navy guys on this site that had mentioned that a few years ago when the US (under the Trump administration at the time) had started to argue it should be international waters, rather than an internal Canadian waterway.
> 
> That quickly disappeared when (I’m assuming) someone had taken Secretary of State Pompeo aside and explained precisely what you mentioned.
> 
> ...



As usual - I'm picking up on someone else's ideas.  It wouldn't surprise me if it was OGBD or Stoker.


----------



## daftandbarmy (1 Oct 2021)

dimsum said:


> Frankly, Inuvik would be a better spot than Alert based on those circles.



A better spot for whom?


----------



## Pieman (1 Oct 2021)

All good points here.



> . More desirable is the domination of the No-Mans Land of the North Pole.


It's always a bit of a crapshoot with global warming simulations but most scientists have the arctic being ice free between 2035 and 2050. Not that far away is it? Invariably we tend to discover that the earth has a great deal more ice/water than we have data for so that timeline could easily extend a bit or even gain momentum if CO2 trends keep climbing.



> And China can go screw itself if it thinks it will be taken seriously as a ‘near Arctic nation’.


I don't know...if you even been to Beijing you might change your mind on that. They have plundered North America of its wealth. Not to mention their increasingly sophisticated technical know how. Did you know the Chinese have their own space station and robots on the Moon and Mars now? I suspect the states is going to have to work hard to stay ahead in the weapons game.


----------



## CBH99 (2 Oct 2021)

Pieman said:


> All good points here.
> 
> 
> It's always a bit of a crapshoot with global warming simulations but most scientists have the arctic being ice free between 2035 and 2050. Not that far away is it? Invariably we tend to discover that the earth has a great deal more ice/water than we have data for so that timeline could easily extend a bit or even gain momentum if CO2 trends keep climbing.
> ...


In another thread, there were some quotes of statements made by JT that he essentially ‘admired the Chinese ability to get things done, and not have to debate everything to death & move ahead on consensus.’

And taking whether or not he admires them out of it - _he isn’t wrong when it comes to their efficiency._  They have a long term strategic goal, and work quite creatively and ambitiously to make it happen.  


I imagine they are on par with the US in most areas of weaponry as it is, whether the US wants to admit that or not.  

Sure there are some niche capabilities that the US enjoys a clear advantage (subs, naval aviation, etc) - but Chinese warships are looking pretty darn modern and sleek these days.  

Even if their software is a generation or two behind (and that’s us clearly guessing, as we haven’t seen them in action) - that still makes them pretty deadly.  Their submarine force is being rejuvenated and expanded, and an ICBM with 10+ individually targeted warheads doesn’t need to be super accurate.  

Guaranteed the Chinese will be the first to start mining Helium 3 from the surface of the moon.  

The only way the Chinese will succeed in extracting resources in the Arctic is if actual Arctic nations procrastinate and delay, or do the bare minimum.  Our failure WILL be their success, and thus far the Russians are the only ones putting any real effort into the Arctic.


----------



## The Bread Guy (2 Oct 2021)

dimsum said:


> I'm guessing here, but that might be because those who would join the CR end up joining the PRes (or Reg F) instead.


I don't have data, but my dealings with Canadian Rangers lead me to believe they're doing something right in their own home communities, sort of like a militia in a good way.  

Transfer is never zero, but I know of Rangers that have been Rangers in their community a long time.  I don't see the same "one component to the other" thing anywhere near as much as I see among urban reservists & reserve units.

That said, my experience is in northern (mostly northwestern) Ontario, so other areas may differ.


----------



## daftandbarmy (2 Oct 2021)

CBH99 said:


> In another thread, there were some quotes of statements made by JT that he essentially ‘admired the Chinese ability to get things done, and not have to debate everything to death & move ahead on consensus.’
> 
> And taking whether or not he admires them out of it - _he isn’t wrong when it comes to their efficiency._  They have a long term strategic goal, and work quite creatively and ambitiously to make it happen.



China's greatest threats are internal, as with any communist dictatorship.



China is growing threat but internal issues may undercut its rise, top US intelligence officials say​​"I don't think there is any country that presents a more severe threat to our innovation, our economic security and our democratic ideals - and the tools in their toolbox to influence our businesses, our academic institutions, our governments at all levels are deep and wide and persistent," said Christopher Wray, director of the FBI.

Wray cited the example of an indictment last fall relating to China's "Operation Fox Hunt" allegedly involving illegal Chinese law enforcement activities on US soil designed to threaten, intimidate and harass members of the Chinese diaspora.

"It's an indication and illustration of just how challenging and diverse this particular threat is," he said.

The FBI has some 2,000 investigations linked to the Chinese government, he said. It is now opening a new China-related investigation every 10 hours on average and has seen investigations of economic espionage increase by 1,300 per cent in recent years, he added.

Wednesday's testimony came as senators work on a bipartisan bill aimed at countering Beijing's influence and its bid for technological supremacy.









						China is growing threat but internal issues may undercut its rise, top US intelligence officials say
					

Do you have questions about the biggest topics and trends from around the world? Get the answers with SCMP Knowledge, our new platform of curated content with explainers, FAQs, analyses and infographics brought to you by our award-winning team. But "it is worth noting that its economic...




					finance.yahoo.com


----------



## Kirkhill (2 Oct 2021)

daftandbarmy said:


> China's greatest threats are internal, as with any communist dictatorship.
> 
> 
> 
> ...



China GDP 14.72 trillion USD (2020)
USA GDP 20.94 trillion USD (2020)

China Defence Budget 261 billion USD (2019)
USA Defense Budget 649 billion USD (2019)

China GDP per capita 10,500 USD (2020)
USA GDP per capita 63,543.58 USD (2020)

A prosperous nation.  Probably with similar capital investments to the US in defence given that most of the US budget goes to hiring troops from a prosperous society.

On the other hand the Chinese troops come from a relatively poor society.  It conscripts if necessary but mostly people join voluntarily - three hots and a cot, beer money, rank and privilege beat scrounging for a Nike job.

By the same token those that don't make it to the comfortable levels of society find themselves competing with Uighurs for power, unpolluted water, food, jobs and space (Edit and girls - the result of the one child policy and the preference for boys).  They also have Hong Kong to compare themselves to.

Patriotism doesn't fill many rice bowls.  Iron or not.


----------



## daftandbarmy (3 Oct 2021)

Kirkhill said:


> China GDP 14.72 trillion USD (2020)
> USA GDP 20.94 trillion USD (2020)
> 
> China Defence Budget 261 billion USD (2019)
> ...



Well, although they're posturing alot lately, one might argue that in comparison with 'The West' in general, China is a positive peacenik when it comes to invading other countries etc.

Regardless, 'jaw jaw' vs. 'war war' might still be the best approach with a cranky China.

An interesting article from 2020...

What war with China could look like​
Experts roundly agreed that immediate conflict remains unlikely, given the huge costs in lives and treasure. Moreover, the nuclear weapons on both sides certainly serve to make leaders more cautious. But within the next decade or less, straining relations coupled with increased Chinese military capability could bring events to the brink.









						What war with China could look like
					

A host of scenarios could push China and the United States into some kind of conflict.




					www.militarytimes.com


----------



## Brad Sallows (4 Oct 2021)

>What war with China could look like​
A littoral bit here, and a littoral bit there...


----------



## FJAG (7 Oct 2021)

Maybe China isn't the biggest problem:



> Russia plans new Arctic naval fleet as Putin celebrates his 69th birthday by moving to ensure further stranglehold on Europe's gas supplies​
> *Russia announced plans for a new Arctic naval fleet as Putin's 'birthday present' *
> *Intended to help Russia secure the polar region's future gas and energy supplies *
> *Strongman has been accused of deliberately withholding gas supplies to Europe *
> *He is trying to leverage the bloc to approve a pipeline that would bypass Ukraine*





> Russia plans new Arctic naval fleet as Putin celebrates his birthday
> 
> 
> The new Arctic naval fleet - announced today on Putin's 69th birthday - will help Russia tighten its stranglehold on Europe's gas supplies by securing future energy reserves in the polar region.
> ...



🍻


----------



## Czech_pivo (7 Oct 2021)

Kirkhill said:


> View attachment 66666
> 
> The impact of moving 4 Long Range Precision Strike elements of the type envisaged by the US Army and Marines, or the Aegis Ashore SM3/SM6 units of the US Navy already in service in Poland and Romania.
> 
> ...


Svalbard is a no go zone in terms of placing anything remotely militarily there.  Its a complete non-starter. A treaty from about 100yrs ago assures that this is the case and will remain the case.


----------



## Kirkhill (7 Oct 2021)

With respect Pivo

Belgium's neutrality in 1914 had been guaranteed by Britain since 1839.  

In 1936 Belgium reiterated it was neutral
In 1939 Netherlands declared it was neutral, as did Denmark, Norway and Iceland.

Belgium, the Netherlands, Denmark and Norway were all invaded by Germany.  Iceland was invaded by Britain then garrisoned by Canada and the US.

Scraps of paper will not save anybody.  Certainly not from well armed scrap metal merchants and seal hunters.

As to the range circles, it was pointed out that Inuvik would probably be a better site than Alert.  I agree.  The Americans could just as easily move to Nordkapp in Norway, Thule or Independence Fjord on Greenland and Point Barrow in Alaska, as well as Reykjavik on Iceland, and achieve the same, or greater effect.  And not have to bother Canadian politicians at all.

They can cheerfully ignore us.  And our claims.  

Do we want to be ignored?


----------



## Czech_pivo (7 Oct 2021)

Kirkhill said:


> With respect Pivo
> 
> Belgium's neutrality in 1914 had been guaranteed by Britain since 1839.
> 
> ...


100% true statements, the difference between all of those is that Russia was not involved. With Russia guaranteed certain privileges in Svalbard I'm not certain that we'd have an easy time in just sailing up and unloading the infrastructure necessary to be operational without the Russians making an appearance. 
Besides, with the appearance of the new Russia hyper-sonic sub launched missiles, I can see the need for a layered, defence in depth series of these circles in order to deal with the potential limited time to impact we could be dealing with. 
But going back to Svalbard and its neutrality, as the Czech's know all to well, a piece of paper and the phase 'Peace in our times' means nothing...


----------



## Kirkhill (7 Oct 2021)

Czech_pivo said:


> 100% true statements, the difference between all of those is that Russia was not involved. With Russia guaranteed certain privileges in Svalbard I'm not certain that we'd have an easy time in just sailing up and unloading the infrastructure necessary to be operational without the Russians making an appearance.
> Besides, with the appearance of the new Russia hyper-sonic sub launched missiles, I can see the need for a layered, defence in depth series of these circles in order to deal with the potential limited time to impact we could be dealing with.
> But going back to Svalbard and its neutrality, as the Czech's know all to well, a piece of paper and the phase 'Peace in our times' means nothing...



Sorry about the Sudetenland......

Not one of Britain's better days.

And you are dead right about the Russians.  Unfortunately I think the question is whether the Russians will break the agreement before the Norwegians do.  The new Russian base is only three or four hundred kilometers away from Svalbard.  That is why my comment about scrap metal merchants and seal hunters.  That was the Argentine justification for being in the South Atlantic.


----------



## CBH99 (7 Oct 2021)

FJAG said:


> Maybe China isn't the biggest problem:
> 
> 
> 
> ...


I think the difference is that Russia, while it may yearn for better times, doesn’t delude itself with visions of absolute global domination.  

It knows it’s a middle power that enjoys the benefits of a huge geography within it’s borders, plenty of natural resources that the world needs, and plenty of ‘pockets’ of ethnic-Russians in countries bordering or nearby.  

It also enjoys the luxuries of having just enough expeditionary forces to keep it’s backyard as clean and stable as it can be, and deny the use of those areas by the west. 

China, in my opinion, is an entirely different animal.  And one far more dangerous, I’d reckon.  


-  I’m not familiar with the region in question, nor how various international laws would apply to this situation.  But could the EU not have secured those same oil & has supplies themselves, or at least part of them?


----------



## rmc_wannabe (8 Oct 2021)

CBH99 said:


> I think the difference is that Russia, while it may yearn for better times, doesn’t delude itself with visions of absolute global domination.
> 
> It knows it’s a middle power that enjoys the benefits of a huge geography within it’s borders, plenty of natural resources that the world needs, and plenty of ‘pockets’ of ethnic-Russians in countries bordering or nearby.
> 
> ...



China and it's populace have been indoctrinated for 70 years that all their moves for power and influence are need to prevent another Century of Humiliation by Western Powers.

Its almost like "Animal Farm" in a sense.


----------



## daftandbarmy (8 Oct 2021)

rmc_wannabe said:


> China and it's populace have been indoctrinated for 70 years that all their moves for power and influence are need to prevent another Century of Humiliation by Western Powers.
> 
> Its almost like "Animal Farm" in a sense.




I'm no China apologist, but history shows that China _did _suffer from many years of 'humiliation' by Western powers. And Japan, of course, who killed millions of their citizens e.g., Japanese invasion of Manchuria - Wikipedia


----------



## Colin Parkinson (8 Oct 2021)

There is suspicion that the Fentayal problem is China's cold revenge for the opium pushed on it by Great Britain.


----------



## CBH99 (8 Oct 2021)

Colin Parkinson said:


> There is suspicion that the Fentayal problem is China's cold revenge for the opium pushed on it by Great Britain.


I’m not kidding, I had never even heard of the opium wars until about a week ago.  I then watched too short but informative documentaries on the basics of what it was and some of the key events.  

Couldn’t believe I had never heard of them until now.  


(How do we not learn about some of this stuff in school!?  I learned some of the same basic facts about Canada for six years in a row… not once did I learn about the opium wars, details of WW2, etc etc.)


----------



## Colin Parkinson (8 Oct 2021)

Because your teachers never learned and only teach that which is in the curriculum. Even in my day the textbooks were wrong and they went into more detail. Start talking about how First Nations were conducting Slave raids up the Fraser River around 1860's and see heads explode. 

History is messy and utterly fascinating to the curious mind.


----------



## daftandbarmy (8 Oct 2021)

CBH99 said:


> I’m not kidding, I had never even heard of the opium wars until about a week ago.  I then watched too short but informative documentaries on the basics of what it was and some of the key events.
> 
> Couldn’t believe I had never heard of them until now.
> 
> ...



And then there's the connection between the Opium Wars (lost by China) and Chinese immigration to Canada, which is how we built our railroads (with plentiful and cheap Chinese labour) and saved the country, West of Winnipeg, from annexation by the good old US of A by fulfilling the Western territories' Confederation requirements for the railroad.

So, there is a good argument to made that if the Chinese had won the Opium Wars, there would be no Western Canada as we know it today, and we can thank the efforts of Chinese immigrants for making it possible for Canada to now extend from 'Sea to Sea to Sea'.


History of Canada's early Chinese immigrants​
The first wave of Chinese immigrants to arrive in Canada were motivated by various push and pull factors. Negative factors can "push" people to leave their home while positive influences "pull" people towards a particular country.

The push factors, such as floods and wars in China, made it hard for people to grow crops for food, live in safety and peace, or make a living.

Pull factors for Canada were related to the young nation's pace of growth. New settlements and new industries often had a shortage of workers. British Columbia's distance from Europe and eastern North America meant that China was the closest large source of low-cost labour.

Decisions on where to migrate were also shaped by other factors, such as the efforts of labour recruiters, and influence of family and village networks.

For many years, European countries had been moving into China to sell their products. After losing the Opium Wars to Great Britain in 1842 and in 1860, China was forced to open more of its port cities to trade with Europe. When trade moved to these newly opened ports, less cargo passed through the port of Guangzhou. The result was that porters, warehouse hands and boat crews lost their jobs.

After the Opium Wars, a condition of China's surrender was a massive payment to Great Britain, an amount which was one-third of the annual intake of China's treasury. This cost was passed on to the ordinary Chinese citizens who had to pay higher taxes.






						History of Canada's early Chinese immigrants - Library and Archives Canada
					

History of Canada's early Chinese immigrants - Library and Archives Canada




					www.bac-lac.gc.ca


----------



## MarkOttawa (8 Oct 2021)

Looks like, as so often, Mr Brewster was torquing things--RoyalNavy interested in High North up from GIUK Gap plus Norwegian, Barents Seas--to work with CCG:



> Royal Navy sailors to get Canadian polar training as part of a new collaborative agreement​
> More Royal Navy sailors will be trained in taking ships into challenging polar waters thanks to a new collaborative agreement with the Canadian Coast Guard.​
> Its sailors will benefit from Canadian training in navigating through icy waters, breaking sheets of ice where necessary, while Canadian Coast Guard personnel will have operational training opportunities and gain experience with crewless technology with the Royal Navy.
> 
> ...


----------



## Kirkhill (8 Oct 2021)

daftandbarmy said:


> I'm no China apologist, but history shows that China _did _suffer from many years of 'humiliation' by Western powers. And Japan, of course, who killed millions of their citizens e.g., Japanese invasion of Manchuria - Wikipedia



But it was western forces that freed China from the many years of "humiliation" by the Manchurian Qing Dynasty in 1912 after 300 years of subjugation of the Han.

In fact the Han only got a look in between 1300 and 1600 with the Ming Dynasty when they could no longer tolerate the humiliation of being subjugated by the Mongols (1205 to 1368)

So from 1205 to 2021 China has been ruled by the Han for about 270 years, including the CCP years, out of 800.  Beyond that they have been subject to Mongol, Manchu, Japanese and Westerners.  Although, to be fair, the Westerners didn't subjugate them so much as exploited them.


----------



## Kirkhill (8 Oct 2021)

MarkOttawa said:


> Looks like, as so often, Mr Brewster was torquing things--RoyalNavy interested in High North up from GIUK Gap plus Norwegian, Barents Seas--to work with CCG:



The 1987 White Paper was the right answer then and is still a better plan that what we have now.

Things have changed a bit and technology, especially UUV technology, means that perhaps we don't need as many subs.

But perhaps we could also exploit arrangements like  British pilots on American carriers and American aircraft on British carriers.  NATO E3 Sentries.  Canadians as deputies in Norad, Colorado and in the US Army's III Corps.  The original First Special Service Force.  And even the Five Eyes intelligence sharing.

Let's say that we decided we needed a standing patrol of 2 SSNs and we needed 4 to 6 SSNs to sustain that.  How difficult would it be to buy 2 or 3 subs for the Americans, or the Brits, have them commit 2 or 3 of their existing boats to the Canadian patrol and then we supply half the man-power and they supply the other half.  Or maybe it is a 3 way split with the Brits, or 4 ways with the Aussies and the Patrol includes the Pacific.

We give them free passage. They recognize Canadian sovereignty over the internal North West Passage.









						CHALLENGE & COMMITMENT LOST: Part 1: Looking Back At The Defence White Paper Of 1987 - A Made-In-Canada Policy — espritdecorps
					

(Volume 24-8)  By Robert Smol  Thirty years ago the Progressive Conservative government of Brian Mulroney (1984–1993) tabled what was then, and still remains, the most ambitious and expansive defence policy proposal in recent memory. For those serving at the time, the 1987 White Paper Challenge and




					espritdecorps.ca
				












						CHALLENGE & COMMITMENT LOST: Part 2: 1987 Defence White Paper Wish List Whacks RCN — espritdecorps
					

(Volume 24-09)  By Robert Smol  One does not have to read far into the report to understand that, of all the services, the Royal Canadian Navy had most to gain as a direct result of the 1987 White Paper, titled Challenge and Commitment: A Defence Policy for Canada. Likewise, the Navy had the most, p




					espritdecorps.ca
				




So many other good ideas ... canned.


----------



## Colin Parkinson (8 Oct 2021)

MarkOttawa said:


> Looks like, as so often, Mr Brewster was torquing things--RoyalNavy interested in High North up from GIUK Gap plus Norwegian, Barents Seas--to work with CCG:


The CCG will likely be happy to sell them the two AOP's they are slated for.


----------



## Happy Guy (8 Oct 2021)

Back when I was in CANOSCOM there was study paper written by a friend of mine about logistical support in the Arctic.  The North is a Logistician's nightmare with impossibly long geographic distances, little to no infrastructure on which to rely on, little integral transportation / logistical resources to develop a line of communications and horrible, horrible weather.  Building any permanent infrastructure would be costly and there will always the problem of resupply.  A refuelling station up north would demand why type of fuel, should we winterize it? How much is enough? Would it get used to justify the cost? How do we maintain fuel quality control? Who would man it?  How do we protect it?  How do we maintain it? The Grand picture looks nice to order DND and other responsible gov't departments, but once you get into the details you'll quickly understand the requirement for firm guidance from our political masters (who for the most part do not understand Arctic Operations nor do they have capacity to do so).  Most politicians do not have much time and their staffs do not have per-requisite skill set to handle complex problems.  This is based on my experience in dealing with them.  They want the big RED EASY button.  They cannot answer the question - what do you want and are you willingly to pay for it?

What do you mean by protecting the North and sovereignty?  Is this satisfied by satellites?  Do we augment this by some other capability?  If yes what? Do we develop some infrastructure and forward deploy supplies? What happens when a cruise ship, this will happen in the next few years, breaks down in the North West Passage? What about a major plan crash (MAJAID)? What about a foreign submarine incursions? What should be our response?

Any operation in the North will cost a tremendous amount of money PERIOD.  There will be a need to develop the expertise to work in the north. We will need to work closely with Inuit for their help and not ignore them as we did in the past.  That is why every government has expressed the need to protect our Northern sovereignty but when faced with the reality and hand out for money, they quickly become silent.


----------



## Colin Parkinson (8 Oct 2021)

It's horrendously expensive from a security viewpoint, but when you look at it from a "All of Governments" outlook, it becomes only very expensive. The buildup of infrastructure there does not fit the South's political cycle, therefore it does not get the attention it should. All the stuff we are patting ourselves on the back for doing is about 30 years late. This is a 50 year+ project that makes the NSS look like a child's game. You can talk about new technologies, but fuel, NG and food all require real infrastructure that allows the flow to happen.


----------



## FJAG (8 Oct 2021)

daftandbarmy said:


> The first wave of Chinese immigrants to arrive in Canada were motivated by various push and pull factors. Negative factors can "push" people to leave their home while positive influences "pull" people towards a particular country.


One of my friends from Edmonton had framed and hung on his office wall the "Head Tax Certificate" given to his Great (great?) grandfather when he immigrated from China to Canada in the late 1800s and had paid the tax. The tax varied from $50 to $500 over time (the equivalent of two years salary) and was designed to prevent, or at least minimize, Chinese immigration to Canada.



> Chinese head tax - Wikipedia
> 
> 
> 
> ...


🍻


----------



## Oldgateboatdriver (9 Oct 2021)

MarkOttawa said:


> Looks like, as so often, Mr Brewster was torquing things--RoyalNavy interested in High North up from GIUK Gap plus Norwegian, Barents Seas--to work with CCG:



I hate to burst anyone's bubble, but this is just the renewal of a past training agreement. Mr. Brewster is trying (though he doesn't state it because (1) he has no validating info, and (2) he probably knows it would be wrong) to create a false impression a short time after the articles on the UK offering help to Canada in the Arctic, that this would be part of it or that Canada somehow "accepted" the offer.

Nothing is further from the truth: The RN comes here for ice navigation training for its crews on HMS PROTECTOR, which is both the Falkland defense ship and the UK's Antartica sector patrol vessel. That is where they need and use their ice navigation experience.

As they say in police vernacualr: "Nothing to see, keep moving".


----------



## Colin Parkinson (9 Oct 2021)

So a wet version of BATUS?


----------



## daftandbarmy (9 Oct 2021)

Oldgateboatdriver said:


> I hate to burst anyone's bubble, but this is just the renewal of a past training agreement. Mr. Brewster is trying (though he doesn't state it because (1) he has no validating info, and (2) he probably knows it would be wrong) to create a false impression a short time after the articles on the UK offering help to Canada in the Arctic, that this would be part of it or that Canada somehow "accepted" the offer.
> 
> Nothing is further from the truth: The RN comes here for ice navigation training for its crews on HMS PROTECTOR, which is both the Falkland defense ship and the UK's Antartica sector patrol vessel. That is where they need and use their ice navigation experience.
> 
> As they say in police vernacualr: "Nothing to see, keep moving".



It's probably more of a grand standing effort to show the Russians and Chinese that 'we're a team', or something like that.


----------



## Kirkhill (26 Oct 2021)

dimsum said:


> Frankly, Inuvik would be a better spot than Alert based on those circles.











						Canada–Freeloader, Rather Than Vested Defence Partner in NORAD
					

Lieutenant-Colonel Andrew Wood is an artillery officer having served in the British Army for 20 years, including on operations in Northern Ireland and Iraq, as well as on exchange in Army Doctrine bef




					www.realcleardefense.com
				




Published in the Canadian Military Journal then immediately picked up by the US defense news aggregator Real Clear Defense.

We are being worked around.


----------



## Kirkhill (26 Oct 2021)

Reaper Aircraft Capabilities Tested in Canadian Arctic
					

Reaper Aircraft Capabilities Tested in Canadian Arctic




					www.nationaldefensemagazine.org
				






> General Atomics’ MQ-9A Reaper remotely piloted aircraft has reached unprecedented northern latitudes, paving the way for future security and surveillance missions in the Arctic regions, according to the company.
> 
> The MQ-9A “Big Wing” configured platform – which has a 79-foot wingspan and 43-hour range – successfully flew past the 78th parallel north for the first time, General Atomics Aeronautical Systems announced in September. The Reaper took off at a company flight and training test center in Grand Forks, North Dakota, Sept. 7, passed over Haig-Thomas Island in the Canadian Arctic and returned Sept. 8.
> 
> ...



An American company launched an American aircraft from American soil into the Canadian Arctic.  Do they need us to buy them?  Operate them?  Ask permission to use them?



> *The Arctic is an area of increasing strategic importance to the Pentagon, as adversaries China and Russia make military investments in the region.*



They could just as easily launch from Fairbanks and Thule with no Canadian input.


----------

