- Reaction score
- 1
- Points
- 430
Who needs a navy? Canada does
The nation's sovereignty is at risk if our fleet is not upgraded, and soon
Sen. Colin Kenny
Special to Times Colonist
Friday, June 08, 2007
At the end of the Second World War it was almost impossible to find a Canadian who didn't understand the importance of our navy. Six decades later, it is difficult to find a Canadian who does.
The ships go out. The ships come back. What was that all about? No guns or torpedoes were fired; what were they doing out there? And those ships are expensive. They're always getting refitted. Who needs them?
We do, and we're going to for a long time. Which is becoming a problem, because the politicians who control Canada's purse strings are neglecting our navy.
What kind of country needs a strong navy?
How about Canada, which has one of the longest coastlines in the world, with an economy largely built around exports, a high percentage of which are shipped by sea -- even to the United States.
Canada's ports are gateways to more than 100 economies. Twenty per cent of our trade with the United States goes by sea. Ninety-seven per cent of Canada's exports to all other countries travel over ocean trade routes.
Many of Canada's frontier oil reserves are offshore, and our fisheries still generate more than $4 billion in export income annually.
How about Canada, a country big enough to play a significant role in world politics, but not big enough to do that unless it makes major contributions to its alliances and joint activities, such as NATO naval exercises and missions.
Navies can protect coastlines and littoral waters. Navies can act in concert with like-minded countries to protect shipping lanes threatened by pirates or hostile states. Navies can blockade renegade states.
Well-equipped navies can also transport troops and military equipment over long distances. For land operations, it is usually less expensive to transport troops and equipment by ship than it is to fly them in.
Navies often offer the best means of projecting power against a hostile country -- the presence of an aircraft carrier surrounded by support vessels and loaded with fighter planes can convince a hostile country to change its behaviour. Canada doesn't have an aircraft carrier, but it has frigates and destroyers that have helped protect allies' aircraft carriers.
Canadians have a vested interest in protecting our coasts and having a presence on the high seas. Canada must have a robust navy to protect territory and interests abroad, and also to help forge relationships with like-minded countries.
But that navy, which is an afterthought to most Canadians, is beginning to disintegrate.
Only frigates and destroyers are large enough to allow our navy to operate in Canada's most severe sea conditions. Beyond our waters, frigates and destroyers are the basic building blocks of the navies of medium-sized countries like Canada.
To refit and replace such ships on a timely basis requires starting years in advance.
Our three destroyers will rust out by 2012, when they will be 40 years old. There are no approved plans to replace these destroyers. Such plans would flow from an overall defence-capability plan. That has been due for more than a year, but the government seems to have shunted it aside as it focuses on surviving Afghanistan.
If Canada were to purchase destroyers from other countries, the ships would have to be reconfigured to fit into Canadian operational systems.
Canada has 12 frigates. They were commissioned between 1992 and 1996, which means the early ones are now due for mid-life refits, and the later ones soon will be. These ships need to be modernized.
If something isn't initiated soon, a future government is going to find itself without a frigate fleet. Naval sources predict the possibility of a future gap of several years without these essential vessels if re-ordering is not done immediately.
Submarines excel at defending, surveillance and intelligence gathering. Even with modern technology, submarines are difficult to detect. The mere presence of submarines defending Canada's coasts is a deterrent to potentially hostile vessels.
Canada's four submarines, purchased from the British nine years ago, are being refitted so they can fire Canadian-designed torpedoes. By 2009, three should be ready. A fourth -- the Chicoutimi -- is supposed to gain this capacity at some later date. There will need to be orders in place to replace these subs by 2015, or Canada will lose its submarine capacity.
Canadian naval vessels are so old that in many cases spare parts are no longer available. Many ships are in such a poor state that every time one puts to sea, the navy must invest time and energy transferring parts from other ships remaining in port.
The political consideration is that there is no immediate political payoff in rebuilding Canada's navy. The benefits would accrue to Canadians long after the current government is gone.
Whatever the reason, Canadians should be paying attention. A maritime nation without a navy is like a king not wearing any clothes: sovereignty undressed.
Sen. Colin Kenny is chairman of the standing Senate committee on national security and defence.
© Times Colonist (Victoria) 2007
The nation's sovereignty is at risk if our fleet is not upgraded, and soon
Sen. Colin Kenny
Special to Times Colonist
Friday, June 08, 2007
At the end of the Second World War it was almost impossible to find a Canadian who didn't understand the importance of our navy. Six decades later, it is difficult to find a Canadian who does.
The ships go out. The ships come back. What was that all about? No guns or torpedoes were fired; what were they doing out there? And those ships are expensive. They're always getting refitted. Who needs them?
We do, and we're going to for a long time. Which is becoming a problem, because the politicians who control Canada's purse strings are neglecting our navy.
What kind of country needs a strong navy?
How about Canada, which has one of the longest coastlines in the world, with an economy largely built around exports, a high percentage of which are shipped by sea -- even to the United States.
Canada's ports are gateways to more than 100 economies. Twenty per cent of our trade with the United States goes by sea. Ninety-seven per cent of Canada's exports to all other countries travel over ocean trade routes.
Many of Canada's frontier oil reserves are offshore, and our fisheries still generate more than $4 billion in export income annually.
How about Canada, a country big enough to play a significant role in world politics, but not big enough to do that unless it makes major contributions to its alliances and joint activities, such as NATO naval exercises and missions.
Navies can protect coastlines and littoral waters. Navies can act in concert with like-minded countries to protect shipping lanes threatened by pirates or hostile states. Navies can blockade renegade states.
Well-equipped navies can also transport troops and military equipment over long distances. For land operations, it is usually less expensive to transport troops and equipment by ship than it is to fly them in.
Navies often offer the best means of projecting power against a hostile country -- the presence of an aircraft carrier surrounded by support vessels and loaded with fighter planes can convince a hostile country to change its behaviour. Canada doesn't have an aircraft carrier, but it has frigates and destroyers that have helped protect allies' aircraft carriers.
Canadians have a vested interest in protecting our coasts and having a presence on the high seas. Canada must have a robust navy to protect territory and interests abroad, and also to help forge relationships with like-minded countries.
But that navy, which is an afterthought to most Canadians, is beginning to disintegrate.
Only frigates and destroyers are large enough to allow our navy to operate in Canada's most severe sea conditions. Beyond our waters, frigates and destroyers are the basic building blocks of the navies of medium-sized countries like Canada.
To refit and replace such ships on a timely basis requires starting years in advance.
Our three destroyers will rust out by 2012, when they will be 40 years old. There are no approved plans to replace these destroyers. Such plans would flow from an overall defence-capability plan. That has been due for more than a year, but the government seems to have shunted it aside as it focuses on surviving Afghanistan.
If Canada were to purchase destroyers from other countries, the ships would have to be reconfigured to fit into Canadian operational systems.
Canada has 12 frigates. They were commissioned between 1992 and 1996, which means the early ones are now due for mid-life refits, and the later ones soon will be. These ships need to be modernized.
If something isn't initiated soon, a future government is going to find itself without a frigate fleet. Naval sources predict the possibility of a future gap of several years without these essential vessels if re-ordering is not done immediately.
Submarines excel at defending, surveillance and intelligence gathering. Even with modern technology, submarines are difficult to detect. The mere presence of submarines defending Canada's coasts is a deterrent to potentially hostile vessels.
Canada's four submarines, purchased from the British nine years ago, are being refitted so they can fire Canadian-designed torpedoes. By 2009, three should be ready. A fourth -- the Chicoutimi -- is supposed to gain this capacity at some later date. There will need to be orders in place to replace these subs by 2015, or Canada will lose its submarine capacity.
Canadian naval vessels are so old that in many cases spare parts are no longer available. Many ships are in such a poor state that every time one puts to sea, the navy must invest time and energy transferring parts from other ships remaining in port.
The political consideration is that there is no immediate political payoff in rebuilding Canada's navy. The benefits would accrue to Canadians long after the current government is gone.
Whatever the reason, Canadians should be paying attention. A maritime nation without a navy is like a king not wearing any clothes: sovereignty undressed.
Sen. Colin Kenny is chairman of the standing Senate committee on national security and defence.
© Times Colonist (Victoria) 2007
