- Reaction score
- 0
- Points
- 410
Forces faces an exodus of officers
Richard Starnes
The Ottawa Citizen
Friday, September 27, 2002
The Canadian Armed Forces are on the verge of mass resignations because the government refuses to provide the cash required to maintain a relevant military force, according to one of the country‘s leading military historians.
Jack Granatstein is convinced the government has no intention of offering enough money to revitalize our military. "If there isn‘t real money in the coming budget, the baling twine and wire holding the military together is going to snap," he says.
Mr Granatstein admits he has no idea how senior officers will react when budget money is not provided.
"They were all shaken by the fact they didn‘t get money in the last budget when they expected it," he says. "If they don‘t get any this time, it will be the last straw for some, I suspect."
More important, he says, are the people who make the Forces run -- from majors to technicians. They are in the forces because they believe the work they do is important. But lack of government action makes them think what they do has no value.
"I think this will snap it for them and they will go in a flood."
Timing is ripe for a mass exodus, according to retired Maj.-Gen. Lewis MacKenzie, who was the United Nations‘ peacekeeping commander in Sarajevo in 1992.
Canada‘s difficulties in Afghanistan are a constant theme when Canada‘s military financial woes are discussed. Mr. Granatstein is particularly forceful.
"We had to beg a ride to get our people there," he says. "We didn‘t have the right uniforms. We had to borrow vehicles when we got there. We couldn‘t reinforce 800 men.
"I think that was the first time that any Canadian who could read realized there was a serious problem."
Alain Pellerin, executive director of the Conference of Defence Associations, agrees. "If you commit troops in crisis or war situations you have to be able to maintain them," he says. "If we can‘t, as we couldn‘t in Afghanistan, what message do we give to our allies? Canada has made freeloading its national policy."
The pressure on the government to significantly increase its annual $12 billion in military spending is coming from all directions.
Committee reports from the Commons and the Senate have been calling for more spending. David Pratt, the Liberal MP for Nepean-Carleton, and the Commons committee he chaired wants an increase to between 1.5 and 1.6 per cent of GDP -- about $1.5 billion a year over the next three years.
Right now Canada‘s military spending -- 1.1 per cent of GDP -- is half the average among NATO countries, leaving it third-last after Luxembourg and Iceland.
Canada, which has the world‘s 34th-largest population, has the world‘s 56th-largest military and is 77th in the size of its reserve force.
"We are living off our reputation," says Maj.-Gen. MacKenzie. "And it is eroding. We went from No. 1 peacekeeper in the world in 1992-93. Now we are somewhere around 36th or 37th, and the Nos. 1, 2 and 3 are Bangladesh, Pakistan and Nigeria -- not exactly industrial-strength examples among UN peacekeepers."
Even outsiders have joined the fray. Earlier this month, U.S. Ambassador to Canada Paul Cellucci said Secretary of State Colin Powell had instructed him to put pressure on Canada to increase defence spending.
"We think it‘s important for Canada; we think it‘s important for North America; we think it‘s important for the world," he said.
And only last Friday, Slovenian Foreign Minister Dimitrij Rupel said cutting back on military spending because more powerful neighbours will protect you is immoral.
"We should not rely on others," he said during a visit to Canada. "To say that somebody else will defend you willy-nilly is not a very moral position. This actually deprives you of your sovereignty."
Despite the mounting pressure and pleas for more funding, there has been no positive response from either Defence Minister John McCallum, who said earlier this month there would be no new money for the military, or Prime Minister Jean Chrétien.
"The bottom line is the prime minister is not really interested in defence," says Mr. Pellerin. "His approach is that the only possible threat to Canada is the U.S., and since that‘s not credible, why waste the money? If he is not interested, defence becomes an orphan."
Richard Starnes
The Ottawa Citizen
Friday, September 27, 2002
The Canadian Armed Forces are on the verge of mass resignations because the government refuses to provide the cash required to maintain a relevant military force, according to one of the country‘s leading military historians.
Jack Granatstein is convinced the government has no intention of offering enough money to revitalize our military. "If there isn‘t real money in the coming budget, the baling twine and wire holding the military together is going to snap," he says.
Mr Granatstein admits he has no idea how senior officers will react when budget money is not provided.
"They were all shaken by the fact they didn‘t get money in the last budget when they expected it," he says. "If they don‘t get any this time, it will be the last straw for some, I suspect."
More important, he says, are the people who make the Forces run -- from majors to technicians. They are in the forces because they believe the work they do is important. But lack of government action makes them think what they do has no value.
"I think this will snap it for them and they will go in a flood."
Timing is ripe for a mass exodus, according to retired Maj.-Gen. Lewis MacKenzie, who was the United Nations‘ peacekeeping commander in Sarajevo in 1992.
Canada‘s difficulties in Afghanistan are a constant theme when Canada‘s military financial woes are discussed. Mr. Granatstein is particularly forceful.
"We had to beg a ride to get our people there," he says. "We didn‘t have the right uniforms. We had to borrow vehicles when we got there. We couldn‘t reinforce 800 men.
"I think that was the first time that any Canadian who could read realized there was a serious problem."
Alain Pellerin, executive director of the Conference of Defence Associations, agrees. "If you commit troops in crisis or war situations you have to be able to maintain them," he says. "If we can‘t, as we couldn‘t in Afghanistan, what message do we give to our allies? Canada has made freeloading its national policy."
The pressure on the government to significantly increase its annual $12 billion in military spending is coming from all directions.
Committee reports from the Commons and the Senate have been calling for more spending. David Pratt, the Liberal MP for Nepean-Carleton, and the Commons committee he chaired wants an increase to between 1.5 and 1.6 per cent of GDP -- about $1.5 billion a year over the next three years.
Right now Canada‘s military spending -- 1.1 per cent of GDP -- is half the average among NATO countries, leaving it third-last after Luxembourg and Iceland.
Canada, which has the world‘s 34th-largest population, has the world‘s 56th-largest military and is 77th in the size of its reserve force.
"We are living off our reputation," says Maj.-Gen. MacKenzie. "And it is eroding. We went from No. 1 peacekeeper in the world in 1992-93. Now we are somewhere around 36th or 37th, and the Nos. 1, 2 and 3 are Bangladesh, Pakistan and Nigeria -- not exactly industrial-strength examples among UN peacekeepers."
Even outsiders have joined the fray. Earlier this month, U.S. Ambassador to Canada Paul Cellucci said Secretary of State Colin Powell had instructed him to put pressure on Canada to increase defence spending.
"We think it‘s important for Canada; we think it‘s important for North America; we think it‘s important for the world," he said.
And only last Friday, Slovenian Foreign Minister Dimitrij Rupel said cutting back on military spending because more powerful neighbours will protect you is immoral.
"We should not rely on others," he said during a visit to Canada. "To say that somebody else will defend you willy-nilly is not a very moral position. This actually deprives you of your sovereignty."
Despite the mounting pressure and pleas for more funding, there has been no positive response from either Defence Minister John McCallum, who said earlier this month there would be no new money for the military, or Prime Minister Jean Chrétien.
"The bottom line is the prime minister is not really interested in defence," says Mr. Pellerin. "His approach is that the only possible threat to Canada is the U.S., and since that‘s not credible, why waste the money? If he is not interested, defence becomes an orphan."
