Author Topic: Canada's New, Liberal, Foreign Policy  (Read 138565 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

Offline MilEME09

  • Army.ca Veteran
  • *****
  • 37,015
  • Rate Post
  • Posts: 1,606
Re: Canada's New, Liberal, Foreign Policy
« Reply #200 on: January 24, 2016, 12:56:22 »
IMO if you stay in canada just to get a Canadian passport then leave immediately and never return i'd call that fraud and grounds to have it revoked.
"We are called a Battalion, Authorized to be company strength, parade as a platoon, Operating as a section"

Offline PuckChaser

  • Directing Staff
  • Army.ca Fixture
  • *
  • 920,570
  • Rate Post
  • Posts: 8,177
    • Peacekeeper's Homepage
Re: Canada's New, Liberal, Foreign Policy
« Reply #201 on: January 24, 2016, 18:12:32 »
The Liberals would call that policy you suggest as two-tier citizenship, and we should be so gracious to have these people choose to abuse us.

Online Brad Sallows

  • Army.ca Veteran
  • *****
  • 67,990
  • Rate Post
  • Posts: 3,803
Re: Canada's New, Liberal, Foreign Policy
« Reply #202 on: January 24, 2016, 18:23:52 »
There's nothing inherently wrong with two-tier citizenship.
That which does not kill me has made a grave tactical error.

"It is a damned heavy blow; but whining don't help."

Despair is a sin.

Offline E.R. Campbell

  • Retired, years ago
  • Army.ca Subscriber
  • Army.ca Myth
  • *
  • 484,350
  • Rate Post
  • Posts: 18,374
Re: Canada's New, Liberal, Foreign Policy
« Reply #203 on: February 07, 2016, 18:56:57 »
Cartoonist, commentator, and author J.J. McCullough gets it in one:


Source: http://www.jjmccullough.com/index.php/2016/02/07/puppet-show/

I guess it's clear enough that it's our military that's being jerked around by two untested political neophytes who are being controlled by one of Premier Kathleen Wynne's henchmen ...
It is ill that men should kill one another in seditions, tumults and wars; but it is worse to bring nations to such misery, weakness and baseness
as to have neither strength nor courage to contend for anything; to have nothing left worth defending and to give the name of peace to desolation.
Algernon Sidney in Discourses Concerning Government, (1698)
----------
Like what you see/read here on Army.ca?  Subscribe, and help keep it "on the air!"

Offline Thucydides

  • Army.ca Legend
  • *****
  • 195,580
  • Rate Post
  • Posts: 13,733
  • Freespeecher
Re: Canada's New, Liberal, Foreign Policy
« Reply #204 on: February 07, 2016, 21:37:49 »
Foreign policy really does not matter to Gerald Butts et al, because the Liberal vision is essentially to treat Canadians as cows to be milked for the benefit of the LPC and its cronies.

Now if we could convince them that foreigners should be milked for the benefit of the LPC and their cronies, then things will become different....
Dagny, this is not a battle over material goods. It's a moral crisis, the greatest the world has ever faced and the last. Our age is the climax of centuries of evil. We must put an end to it, once and for all, or perish - we, the men of the mind. It was our own guilt. We produced the wealth of the world - but we let our enemies write its moral code.

Offline Bird_Gunner45

  • Army.ca Veteran
  • *****
  • 52,986
  • Rate Post
  • Posts: 1,114
Re: Canada's New, Liberal, Foreign Policy
« Reply #205 on: February 07, 2016, 22:49:30 »
Cartoonist, commentator, and author J.J. McCullough gets it in one:


Source: http://www.jjmccullough.com/index.php/2016/02/07/puppet-show/

I guess it's clear enough that it's our military that's being jerked around by two untested political neophytes who are being controlled by one of Premier Kathleen Wynne's henchmen ...

Realistically, Canada has very limited foreign policy options when you get down to it. With the US foreign policy currently focused on creating a global hegemony vice attempting to create a regional hegemony or concert of nations/power balancing, Canada can:

A. Assist the US in creating a global hegemony under US leadership, which involves going to fight the wars of reassurance (what Korea, Vietnam, Kosovo, etc were in essence; activities to convince key allies that America could AND would fight to secure their interests so they wouldn't need to develop large militaries of their own). This would require a strong expeditionary army which I doubt the LPC is interested in;

B. Assist the Americans in ensuring hegemony under American leadership for North America. We do this already with NORAD, but if this is our strategy than we need to do MORE in terms of Air superiority, naval forces, and cut back on army/expeditionary capabilities. This is more or less what the Canada First Defence Policy attempted to do. It would involve a lot of investments in the Air Force and Navy;

C. Canada can attempt to become part of another hegemony to attempt a balancing of power. Canada could, in theory, align more closely with outside nations to balance US power. Without a real US threat outside of doing this and a lack of will to purchase the military required to do this, it's a non option. Canada benefits too much from American protection and economics to align outside of economic means.

There are other combinations and options, but these, to me, are the major ones as of this time.

At this point, it appears that we're attempting to do all three without doing any well. We dont enough army to make a proper expeditionary force, nor enough air force and navy to properly assist in US hegemony in North America. We see some of C with the attempt to create free trade agreements with nations around the world as a means of lessening our dependence on the US.

Which strategy is the best right now? I would say B, but we'll see how it goes. I just hope that the government puts out a real strategy!

Offline Lumber

  • Donor
  • Army.ca Veteran
  • *
  • 59,714
  • Rate Post
  • Posts: 2,101
Re: Canada's New, Liberal, Foreign Policy
« Reply #206 on: February 08, 2016, 13:58:10 »
Realistically, Canada has very limited foreign policy options when you get down to it. With the US foreign policy currently focused on creating a global hegemony vice attempting to create a regional hegemony or concert of nations/power balancing, Canada can:

A. Assist the US in creating a global hegemony under US leadership, which involves going to fight the wars of reassurance (what Korea, Vietnam, Kosovo, etc were in essence; activities to convince key allies that America could AND would fight to secure their interests so they wouldn't need to develop large militaries of their own). This would require a strong expeditionary army which I doubt the LPC is interested in;

B. Assist the Americans in ensuring hegemony under American leadership for North America. We do this already with NORAD, but if this is our strategy than we need to do MORE in terms of Air superiority, naval forces, and cut back on army/expeditionary capabilities. This is more or less what the Canada First Defence Policy attempted to do. It would involve a lot of investments in the Air Force and Navy;

C. Canada can attempt to become part of another hegemony to attempt a balancing of power. Canada could, in theory, align more closely with outside nations to balance US power. Without a real US threat outside of doing this and a lack of will to purchase the military required to do this, it's a non option. Canada benefits too much from American protection and economics to align outside of economic means.

There are other combinations and options, but these, to me, are the major ones as of this time.

At this point, it appears that we're attempting to do all three without doing any well. We dont enough army to make a proper expeditionary force, nor enough air force and navy to properly assist in US hegemony in North America. We see some of C with the attempt to create free trade agreements with nations around the world as a means of lessening our dependence on the US.

Which strategy is the best right now? I would say B, but we'll see how it goes. I just hope that the government puts out a real strategy!

What about option D? Let do like Switzerland and just become Neutral. Except, instead of Switzerland, who uses conscription and a mountainous geography to make themselves looks like a porcupine (not very big, but seriously, not worth the trouble), we use a couple vast oceans and our proximity to the US for the same purpose. Get rid of the military and just stay out of everyone's affairs.

The only bad outcomes of this that I can think of are:
a. abysmal reputation in the world for not helping out;
b. US gets tired of our **** and invades Canada... which would mean I no longer have to steal US Netflix, so I guess this is kind of a good thing...
"Aboard his ship, there is nothing outside a captain's control." - Captain Sir Edward Pellew

“Extremes to the right and to the left of any political dispute are always wrong.”
― Dwight D. Eisenhower

Death before dishonour! Nothing before coffee!

Offline Flavus101

  • Member
  • ****
  • 12,025
  • Rate Post
  • Posts: 218
Re: Canada's New, Liberal, Foreign Policy
« Reply #207 on: February 08, 2016, 14:55:01 »
What about the economic repercussions to option D?

Offline Lumber

  • Donor
  • Army.ca Veteran
  • *
  • 59,714
  • Rate Post
  • Posts: 2,101
Re: Canada's New, Liberal, Foreign Policy
« Reply #208 on: February 08, 2016, 15:55:36 »
What about the economic repercussions to option D?

Oh the reprecussions are quite promissing. We sell off all of our military gear to help lower the national debt (12 x $1bn warships would make a big dent!). We keep our procurment plans in place, but respec them for whichever foreign military wants them.
"Aboard his ship, there is nothing outside a captain's control." - Captain Sir Edward Pellew

“Extremes to the right and to the left of any political dispute are always wrong.”
― Dwight D. Eisenhower

Death before dishonour! Nothing before coffee!

Online milnews.ca

  • Info Curator, Baker & Food Slut
  • Directing Staff
  • Army.ca Relic
  • *
  • 417,225
  • Rate Post
  • Posts: 21,962
    • MILNEWS.ca-Military News for Canadians
Re: Canada's New, Liberal, Foreign Policy
« Reply #209 on: February 08, 2016, 16:35:34 »
Oh the reprecussions are quite promissing. We sell off all of our military gear to help lower the national debt (12 x $1bn warships would make a big dent!). We keep our procurment plans in place, but respec them for whichever foreign military wants them.
But if we really want to be neutral (like Switzerland or Austria), we'd have to build a military force that would take on ANYONE wanting to take a serious poke @ Canada - including the U.S.  Your plan would make us less than neutral, but a slave to whoever has the biggest military willing to pimp us out protect us.

You think bilingualism is bad -- how's your Mandarin Chinese?  >:D
“The risk of insult is the price of clarity.” -- Roy H. Williams

The words I share here are my own, not those of anyone else or anybody I may be affiliated with.

Tony Prudori
MILNEWS.ca - Twitter

Offline Bird_Gunner45

  • Army.ca Veteran
  • *****
  • 52,986
  • Rate Post
  • Posts: 1,114
Re: Canada's New, Liberal, Foreign Policy
« Reply #210 on: February 08, 2016, 20:27:30 »
What about option D? Let do like Switzerland and just become Neutral. Except, instead of Switzerland, who uses conscription and a mountainous geography to make themselves looks like a porcupine (not very big, but seriously, not worth the trouble), we use a couple vast oceans and our proximity to the US for the same purpose. Get rid of the military and just stay out of everyone's affairs.

The only bad outcomes of this that I can think of are:
a. abysmal reputation in the world for not helping out;
b. US gets tired of our **** and invades Canada... which would mean I no longer have to steal US Netflix, so I guess this is kind of a good thing...

I'll assume that you're being sarcastic. What do you see our real strategic interest as? And in any scenario do you not see our interests being underwritten by the US (such as they were by Great Britain up until 1950-ish)? Canada is a small player in a big pond. For us to have any influence internationally we require enough military to meet a mission, but need to decide the mission.

Offline Thucydides

  • Army.ca Legend
  • *****
  • 195,580
  • Rate Post
  • Posts: 13,733
  • Freespeecher
Re: Canada's New, Liberal, Foreign Policy
« Reply #211 on: February 09, 2016, 04:26:28 »
Option "D" has been the default position of the NDP for decades, and was also the preferred option of the Sun King (until various fellow members of NATO let him know just how much was going to be at stake, including trade and international influence. Suddenly buying some Leopard 1 MBTs to replace the Centurions and so on became an option again).

Considering how the alliance reacted to Canada's suggestion of pulling out of the combat role against ISIS, do you really want to see that again on a larger scale?

As well, there is this quote to consider:

It takes but one foe to breed a war, and those who have no swords can yet die upon them
Dagny, this is not a battle over material goods. It's a moral crisis, the greatest the world has ever faced and the last. Our age is the climax of centuries of evil. We must put an end to it, once and for all, or perish - we, the men of the mind. It was our own guilt. We produced the wealth of the world - but we let our enemies write its moral code.

jollyjacktar

  • Guest
Re: Canada's New, Liberal, Foreign Policy
« Reply #212 on: February 09, 2016, 08:06:25 »
I don't always like his work, but today's Michael deAdder hits the spot.

9 Feb 2016 Chronicle Herald Cartoon

Offline Lumber

  • Donor
  • Army.ca Veteran
  • *
  • 59,714
  • Rate Post
  • Posts: 2,101
Re: Canada's New, Liberal, Foreign Policy
« Reply #213 on: February 09, 2016, 08:51:00 »
But if we really want to be neutral (like Switzerland or Austria), we'd have to build a military force that would take on ANYONE wanting to take a serious poke @ Canada - including the U.S.  Your plan would make us less than neutral, but a slave to whoever has the biggest military willing to pimp us out protect us.

You think bilingualism is bad -- how's your Mandarin Chinese?  >:D

I always wanted to learn Mandarin!

But my point was that unlike Switzerland, we wouldn't need a really big military because we're so damn far away. We'd piggy back off the US, and just assume that they wouldn't want the Chinese or Russians controlling Canada (realistically the only two that could possibly conquer us, even if we didn't fight back).

I'll assume that you're being sarcastic. What do you see our real strategic interest as? And in any scenario do you not see our interests being underwritten by the US (such as they were by Great Britain up until 1950-ish)? Canada is a small player in a big pond. For us to have any influence internationally we require enough military to meet a mission, but need to decide the mission.

It is indeed sarcasm; think of it as a thought experiement. Our real "strategic" asset would be to become everyone's friend, and to have a resource based export economy. Our interests are already heavily underwritten by the US, so this wouldn't be a significant change.

"Aboard his ship, there is nothing outside a captain's control." - Captain Sir Edward Pellew

“Extremes to the right and to the left of any political dispute are always wrong.”
― Dwight D. Eisenhower

Death before dishonour! Nothing before coffee!

Online milnews.ca

  • Info Curator, Baker & Food Slut
  • Directing Staff
  • Army.ca Relic
  • *
  • 417,225
  • Rate Post
  • Posts: 21,962
    • MILNEWS.ca-Military News for Canadians
Re: Canada's New, Liberal, Foreign Policy
« Reply #214 on: February 09, 2016, 09:02:01 »
We'd piggy back off the US, and just assume that they wouldn't want the Chinese or Russians controlling Canada (realistically the only two that could possibly conquer us, even if we didn't fight back).
That's not really "neutral", then - more like a colony of the U.S.
It is indeed sarcasm; think of it as a thought experiement. Our real "strategic" asset would be to become everyone's friend, and to have a resource based export economy. Our interests are already heavily underwritten by the US, so this wouldn't be a significant change.
And an interesting "far end of the spectrum" alternative to consider & discuss - especially that bit in yellow.
“The risk of insult is the price of clarity.” -- Roy H. Williams

The words I share here are my own, not those of anyone else or anybody I may be affiliated with.

Tony Prudori
MILNEWS.ca - Twitter

Offline Dimsum

    West coast best coast.

  • Mentor
  • Army.ca Fixture
  • *
  • 177,735
  • Rate Post
  • Posts: 5,221
  • I get paid to travel. I just don't pick where.
Re: Canada's New, Liberal, Foreign Policy
« Reply #215 on: February 09, 2016, 09:16:00 »
That's not really "neutral", then - more like a colony of the U.S.

I'd say it's more like the Australia-NZ relationship; with no fighter aircraft of their own, Australia (in effect) protects NZ's airspace.
Philip II of Macedon to Spartans (346 BC):  "You are advised to submit without further delay, for if I bring my army into your land, I will destroy your farms, slay your people, and raze your city."

Reply:  "If."

Offline Lumber

  • Donor
  • Army.ca Veteran
  • *
  • 59,714
  • Rate Post
  • Posts: 2,101
Re: Canada's New, Liberal, Foreign Policy
« Reply #216 on: February 09, 2016, 09:34:20 »
I'd say it's more like the Australia-NZ relationship; with no fighter aircraft of their own, Australia (in effect) protects NZ's airspace.

See! Perfect example! No one hates New Zealand (unless you're a Rugby fan; Go All Blacks!). Why can't we be more like our Kiwi brethren?
"Aboard his ship, there is nothing outside a captain's control." - Captain Sir Edward Pellew

“Extremes to the right and to the left of any political dispute are always wrong.”
― Dwight D. Eisenhower

Death before dishonour! Nothing before coffee!

Offline Halifax Tar

  • Army.ca Veteran
  • *****
  • 47,883
  • Rate Post
  • Posts: 1,906
  • Ready Aye Ready
Re: Canada's New, Liberal, Foreign Policy
« Reply #217 on: February 09, 2016, 09:54:44 »
See! Perfect example! No one hates New Zealand (unless you're a Rugby fan; Go All Blacks!). Why can't we be more like our Kiwi brethren?

Even then no one hates the ABs, except of course the Aussies lol And maybe the chicken people errr... French.
Lead me, follow me or get the hell out of my way

Offline Dimsum

    West coast best coast.

  • Mentor
  • Army.ca Fixture
  • *
  • 177,735
  • Rate Post
  • Posts: 5,221
  • I get paid to travel. I just don't pick where.
Re: Canada's New, Liberal, Foreign Policy
« Reply #218 on: February 09, 2016, 10:15:29 »
See! Perfect example! No one hates New Zealand (unless you're a Rugby fan; Go All Blacks!). Why can't we be more like our Kiwi brethren?

Because we'd start saying "fush und chups" instead of "fish and chips"?   ???
Philip II of Macedon to Spartans (346 BC):  "You are advised to submit without further delay, for if I bring my army into your land, I will destroy your farms, slay your people, and raze your city."

Reply:  "If."

Offline cavalryman

    Done with the demented bureaucracy.

  • You can't put a pricetag on patriotism
  • Army.ca Subscriber
  • Full Member
  • *
  • 35,135
  • Rate Post
  • Posts: 416
Re: Canada's New, Liberal, Foreign Policy
« Reply #219 on: February 09, 2016, 10:17:41 »
See! Perfect example! No one hates New Zealand (unless you're a Rugby fan; Go All Blacks!). Why can't we be more like our Kiwi brethren?
We'd need about 340 million sheep for starters (10:1 ratio in NZ)...

Online milnews.ca

  • Info Curator, Baker & Food Slut
  • Directing Staff
  • Army.ca Relic
  • *
  • 417,225
  • Rate Post
  • Posts: 21,962
    • MILNEWS.ca-Military News for Canadians
Re: Canada's New, Liberal, Foreign Policy
« Reply #220 on: February 09, 2016, 10:20:57 »
I'd say it's more like the Australia-NZ relationship; with no fighter aircraft of their own, Australia (in effect) protects NZ's airspace.
That is an interesting comparison - any idea how much "arm twisting" there is in that relationship with one country about 5 times bigger than the other (as opposed to our approximate 10:1 difference with our big American neighbour)?
“The risk of insult is the price of clarity.” -- Roy H. Williams

The words I share here are my own, not those of anyone else or anybody I may be affiliated with.

Tony Prudori
MILNEWS.ca - Twitter

Offline Oldgateboatdriver

  • Army.ca Veteran
  • *****
  • 140,695
  • Rate Post
  • Posts: 3,646
Re: Canada's New, Liberal, Foreign Policy
« Reply #221 on: February 09, 2016, 11:50:45 »
It is not a good comparison.

First of all, there is no agreement between the two nations for Australia to defend the air space of New Zealand.

Second, New Zealand is alone, in the middle of nowhere (and not at the centre of the action - they are not really "middle-earth") with minimum 1000 km of water from its nearest neighbour - which happens to be Australia. It does not stand astride any air routes (save when you are actually going there) and in particular, does not stand astride any area that would be considered an air vector of advance for anyone trying to attack Australia (no one is coming over Antartica).

New Zealand is not a threat to Australia, and vice versa. With little in terms of natural resources (unless you are into sheep farming) that would attract invaders attention, thousands and thousands of Km of water protecting it, an Army with tactical transport and naval surveillance assets in sufficient number, New Zealand has enough to discourage any one who would be stupid enough to try something. As a result, Australia doesn't bother, nor does Australia keep any air assets - air or ground surveillance (radars - early warning systems, etc.) or fighters in New Zealand.

Canada, on the other hand stands astride all the major air routes to the US, and definitely astride the air vectoring corridors for any attack by likely enemies such as Russia or China.

Any absence of air defence in Canada, relying on the US umbrella would by necessity mean that the US would - without asking permission or negotiating any thing, trust me on that - move in where they see it required for their own protection to install radars, fighter bases and missiles sites. None of these would take into consideration what happens to the Canadian population if and when ...
At that point, we cease to be a sovereign country, and it would not surprise me in such circumstances to hear voices in the US that would raise a higher ruckus than the old battle cry of "Fifty-Four Forty or Fight".

Our independence as a country requires that we acknowledge the security needs of our neighbour to the South and do what is required to either address them or to participate to the extent necessary to ensure that our interests are heard and accommodated to the maximum extent possible. There is no such inter-relationship required between Australia and New Zealand as what happens to N.Z. does not affect the defence posture of Australia.

As for our relationship with the US in defence matter, its basis what very simply stated in two simple reciprocal political undertakings taken shortly before WWII, which encapsulate both the relationship and the mutual interests in the defence of North America:

In 1938, in a speech at Queen's University, F. D. Roosevelt simply stated: "I give to you assurance that the people of the United States will not stand idly by if domination of Canadian soil is threatened ... ", to which Mackenzie King replied a few days later at a speech in Woodbridge, ON: "our obligation as a good friendly neighbour ... is to see that ... our country is made as immune from attack or possible invasion as we can reasonably be expected to make it and that ... enemy forces should not be able to pursue their way, either by land, sea or  air to the United States, across Canadian territory".

IMHO, doing anything less for either country would be to abdicate its responsibilities to its own citizenship as these undertakings, in both cases, are in the superior interest of each nation.

 
« Last Edit: February 09, 2016, 11:54:52 by Oldgateboatdriver »

Offline Good2Golf

  • Directing Staff
  • Army.ca Legend
  • *
  • 210,710
  • Rate Post
  • Posts: 11,036
  • Dammit! I lost my sand-wedge on that last jump!
Re: Canada's New, Liberal, Foreign Policy
« Reply #222 on: February 09, 2016, 12:46:09 »
...In 1938, in a speech at Queen's University, F. D. Roosevelt simply stated: "I give to you assurance that the people of the United States will not stand idly by if domination of Canadian soil is threatened ... ", to which Mackenzie King replied a few days later at a speech in Woodbridge, ON: "our obligation as a good friendly neighbour ... is to see that ... our country is made as immune from attack or possible invasion as we can reasonably be expected to make it and that ... enemy forces should not be able to pursue their way, either by land, sea or  air to the United States, across Canadian territory".

IMHO, doing anything less for either country would be to abdicate its responsibilities to its own citizenship as these undertakings, in both cases, are in the superior interest of each nation.

...and recent Governments have all reviewed the "GoC - Lessons Learned" files, including this discourse between respective Heads of Government, and fully form policy and governance detail keeping these "agreements" in mind...   ;)

Cheers
G2G

 

Offline Oldgateboatdriver

  • Army.ca Veteran
  • *****
  • 140,695
  • Rate Post
  • Posts: 3,646
Re: Canada's New, Liberal, Foreign Policy
« Reply #223 on: February 09, 2016, 13:13:25 »
Actually, the statement of policy was formally turned into an Agreement, the Ogdensburg Agreement, which is still in full force and effect today.

Offline S.M.A.

  • Army.ca Fixture
  • *****
  • 132,380
  • Rate Post
  • Posts: 6,530
Obama hosts Trudeau in state visit
« Reply #224 on: March 10, 2016, 16:07:37 »
Relevant for this thread: Let's see if Trudeau's visit actually yields progress on cross-border issues such as information sharing and trade (e.g. Lumber etc.)

Canadian Press

Quote
Trudeau, Obama share warm moments during PM's official visit to U.S.

Alexander Panetta, The Canadian Press
The Canadian Press
March 10, 2016

WASHINGTON - A warm moment in Canada-U.S. relations unfolded on the White House lawn Thursday, one marked by small talk, big fanfare and a plan to see President Barack Obama address Canada's Parliament before he leaves office.

The day began with a elaborate bit of bilateral cinematography: a military brass band, a cannon salute and hundreds of flag-waving onlookers greeting Prime Minister Justin Trudeau, in town for the first state dinner involving a Canadian in 19 years.

The leaders greeted the crowd along the rope line while their wives chatted nearby. A relaxed, wisecracking Obama make some jokes about American hockey dominance while noting how long it had been since a similar Canada-U.S. event.

(...SNIPPED)
Our Country
--------------------------------
"A leader is best when people barely know he exists, when his work is done, his aim fulfilled, they will say: We did it ourselves."   - Lao Zi (老子)
-------------------------------------------
"Courage is going from failure to failure without losing enthusiasm."
- Winston Churchill