Government hints at boosting Canada’s military spending

I have long said that you could fund the CAF to 4 percent of GDP, but we would still lag behind in NATO and be much the same where we are.

It's never the money, it's politics. It's procedures. It's the pork-barreling in our defence spending that makes us a paper tiger in NATO.

My only hope in all of this for the CAF and the GoC, whatever the political stripe that may be, is that it will rouse them out of the "Peace Dividend" slumber. The world has been unstable since 1945. We have used geography, proximity, and association as a Defence Policy ever since. ICBMs don't care how close to the U.S. or how far from Russia/China we are.

Don't give us a dime more, but let us spend money on defence like it matters. The fact we follow the same rules for purchasing a fighter aircraft as we do for buying office furniture for a Service Canada office is disgraceful. Don't treat defense procurement as a stimulus package for Canadian Industry. There I said it.

We spend so much money, time, and effort trying to get that money to stay in Canada; be it by awarding contracts to companies with no capability to produce items without first "retooling" and"developing the production lines", or by hamstringing perfectly competent and competitive bidders by forcing the project to be made in St. Margaret de Poutain de Champignon, QC because the ruling government either lost the seat in the election, or won it with promises.

We spend so much money and staff hours jumping through TBS regulations that are great for other departments, but are terrible for defence procurement. Some items you have to sole source, because there are technologies and capabilities no one else makes. By doing the bid process, you get companies clamoring for a project they can't deliver on, but because they tick the bright boxes on the score sheet....

I truly and honestly belief we need to split from PSPC and legislate that its not beholden to TBS, only to the PBO/PCO. The guiding principles of this new Defence Procurement department should be "Off the shelf, from somewhere else" if there isn't an industry in Canada.

BOOTFORGEN has demonstrated how well we do when we are able to actually get what we need, instead of lining the pockets of a Canadian company that got lucky.

That, but with tanks, fighters, ships, weapons systems....

 

[Good2Golf]

Nice Free Trade Agreement you have there. Be a shame if anything happened to it.

???

Far more than that, Kirkhill. Mostly focused at the moment on investing in things that put money into the US industrial defense structure…

 

[Kirkhill]

Far more than that, Kirkhill. Mostly focused at the moment on investing in things that put money into the US industrial defense structure…

Gotcha.

So they want cash for aircraft, missiles and radars.

But is that new?

They wanted cash for Sabres, Bomarcs, F5s, F104s, M113s, Hercs, Radars, M101s, F18s, even helmets.

I continue to believe that the Quid pro Quo was trade deals. In the era of Hellyer's M113s and Hercs it was the Autopact. In Mulroney's Era it was the Can US FTA for the arctic and the North Warning System.

Currently the Autopact is dead - there goes Southern Ontario. The oil industry is under threat - Venezuela and Saudi Arabia get better consideration. And the FTA, honoured in the breach more often than not.

They want cash. We need their business. We will buy their weapons. We get to keep doing business.

Oh, and we should forget about all that Trudeau Sr silliness about non-alignment and playing footsie with China. France and Germany are not our friends.

I think that Kevin isn't far off the mark with the 5 Eyes commentary. Canada and New Zealand have both been drifting into the Franco-German orbit.

And Ukraine has put the cat among the pigeons.

My sense of the situation is that the UK is taking advantage of the situation to generate a new alliance within the OECD/NATO/EU system. One that diverges from Carolingian Europe and restores Varangian Europe. And one that delivers customers to US defence industries.

BAE among them.

UK - Denmark - Iceland - Norway - Sweden - Finland - Estonia - Latvia - Lithuania - Poland - Ukraine - Slovakia - Czechia - Slovenia.

And perhaps a good portion of the fence-sitters in the Balkans.

The UK also maintains good relations with Turkey.

Another country that finds itself in the same position as Canada and New Zealand, torn between the 5 Eyes alliance and the Franco-German EU, is the Netherlands. It is a member of the UK led Joint Expeditionary Force, the Dutch-German Brigade and co-operates closely with the UK Royal Marines.

I agree that the effort is "mostly focused at the moment on investing in things that put money into the US industrial defense structure". But as you say, that is a matter of the moment.

I think long term alliances and trade are bigger things.

And I think we are being told to get business done or get off the pot.

 

[Good2Golf]

Kirkhill, yes cash to some degree, but the greater value is committing to a long-term industrial reparté.

 

[Kirkhill]

Kirkhill, yes cash to some degree, but the greater value is committing to a long-term industrial reparté.

Agree - Long term commitment, and a demonstration of intent to pay membership dues. (And be an upstanding, supportive, member of the community).

 

[Underway]

US won't do anything but proceed without us as a partner. They may bitch a little but they don't link issues (aka trade + defence) usually despite what many may think as that has a tendency to spiral. Linking issues in foreign policy is rarely in anyone's favour. It's like arguing with a family member who then brings up historical grievances that are completely not related to the issue you are discussing. You end up getting nowhere because instead of talking about NORAD you end up arguing about trade, softwood lumber, water issues, immigration, law enforcement, fisheries instead.

The US proceeding without us as a partner is enough of a stick/carrot on its own. I'm confident NORAD will be modernized can Canada will be involved.

 

[KevinB]

@Underway Canada will be a partner, the question is how much duress has to be applied.

 

[Underway]

@Underway Canada will be a partner, the question is how much duress has to be applied.

Honestly right now I don't see too much anymore. The Defence Minister has in multiple speeches now referred to modernizing NORAD, including at CANSEC. I think that we'll see funding to do that. I expect that there are a number of backroom meetings going on right now with regards to how to best go about it.

For other spending that isn't NORAD related, its probably back to pulling teeth .

 

[dapaterson]

Remember that any announcement is preceded by months of staff work to identify, estimate costs, and explain to central agencies and cabinet what options are and what should be done.

 

[KevinB]

Remember that any announcement is preceded by months of staff work to identify, estimate costs, and explain to central agencies and cabinet what options are and what should be done.

Or a scramble after a short face to face explaining what needs to be done

 

[Kirkhill]

Honestly right now I don't see too much anymore. The Defence Minister has in multiple speeches now referred to modernizing NORAD, including at CANSEC. I think that we'll see funding to do that. I expect that there are a number of backroom meetings going on right now with regards to how to best go about it.

For other spending that isn't NORAD related, its probably back to pulling teeth .

Are we talking about NORAD?

Or NORTHCOM?

North American Aerospace Defense Command (NORAD)

Problem Statement​

Over the last three decades, our nations’ competitors and potential adversaries have watched Canada and the United States and our way of deterring, competing, and conducting war. They have adapted and developed advanced capabilities in all domains challenging us at home and across the competition continuum, and holding at risk our people, our critical infrastructure, and our power projection capabilities.

NORAD conducts aerospace warning, aerospace control, and maritime warning in the defense of North America. ----

USNORTHCOM defends our homeland - deters, detects, denies, and defeats threats to the United States, conducts security cooperation activities with allies and partners, and supports civil authorities.

Enduring Condition #1​

Homelands (Note the Plural) defended from threats and adversary influence countered.​

• NORAD's and USNORTHCOM's primary missions are to defend the United States and Canada against aggression. To be successful, we continue to globally integrate our defense with supporting CCMDs, CJOC, allies, and mission partners across all domains throughout competition and into crisis. A central aspect of our capable defense is a ready, credible deterrence to dissuade adversaries from threatening North America. NORAD's and USNORTHCOM's combined deterrence posture is part of a globally integrated approach, incorporating deterrence by denial at home, deterrence by punishment coordinated with our partners, and strategic application of all instruments of multi-national power through our governments.

Compete and deter aggression.​

• Our primary role in the globally integrated layered defense is deterrence by denial. Our competitors know that we are always prepared to defend our nations. The central effect in our deterrence by denial strategy is to make our potential adversaries understand that the advancing capabilities of the United States and Canada will deny their ability to achieve their objectives.

If deterrence fails, detect, then deny and defeat threats.​

• We must defend our nations should deterrence fail and our adversaries attack. Our surest path is through a globally integrated and resilient all-domain awareness infrastructure that is processed, synchronized, and presented to create information dominance, resulting in decision superiority over adversaries. Embracing these strategic principles requires a fundamental change of culture for NORAD and USNORTHCOM and our mission partners.

Enhance National resiliency.​

• Equally as important as defeating threats is the hardening of critical infrastructure and promoting domestic resilience in order to mitigate the consequences of attacks, both kinetic and non-kinetic. Our demonstrated ability to respond to diverse attacks with a whole-of-government response is a strong deterrent to our adversaries. Protecting our nations is a prerequisite to projecting power abroad.

There is much more at the link.

This is no longer just about monitoring the skies for incoming ICBMs and ancient bombers. All Domain. And I have a feeling the 11th Airborne Division, and Arctic Patrol ships pay key roles.

 

[SupersonicMax]

We’re not part of NORTHCOM, just NORAD.

 

[FJAG]

Are we talking about NORAD?

Or NORTHCOM?

As stated above, they are separate, but the commander of USNORTHCOM is the same person (General VanHerck) as the commander of NORAD and the two commands share a headquarters at Peterson Space Force Base near Colorado Springs.

 

[rmc_wannabe]

We’re not part of NORTHCOM, just NORAD.

Regardless of if we're part of it or not, I think the Americans know how little they can depend on Canada to do SFA outside a token commitment to NORAD in defense of our own territory. The language they use above is indicative of that belief.

If we want more of a say in our own defense, we need to be able to demonstrate that independence by ponying up when the time comes.

 

[Good2Golf]

We’re not part of NORTHCOM, just NORAD.

And Burkino Faso isn’t PART of AFRICOM, but it is in AFRICOM’s AOR.

For your NORTHCOM non-analogy, we have LOs in NORTHCOM, so at least technically there are some CAF members seconded to NORTHCOM, and thus, some of Canada is “part of” NORTHCOM.

 

[Kirkhill]

We’re not part of NORTHCOM, just NORAD.

My perception is that while we may just be a part of NORAD, and the NORAD commander has a duty to the PM of Canada, the NORAD commander is also the USNORTHCOM commander.

The USNORTHCOM commander is an American charged with defending America by Commander-in-Chief of the Americans. He is a Joint commander.

United States Northern Command (USNORTHCOM)[7] is one of eleven unified combatant commands of the United States Department of Defense. The command is tasked with providing military support for non-military authorities in the U.S., and protecting the territory and national interests of the United States within the continental United States, Puerto Rico, Canada, Mexico, The Bahamas, and the air, land and sea approaches to these areas. It is the U.S. military command which, if applicable, would be the primary defender against an invasion of the U.S.

From my perspective NORAD is one tool available to the commander to accomplish his primary mission - the defence of the American Homeland.

He has his marching orders from the POTUS. He has clearly stated them in public. He has invited Canada to get on board under the terms stated.

An additional 50 million a year is not going to meet his objectives. That is half an F35. He is looking for something like a 0.5% of GDP commitment to the defence of North America. If we are at 21 BCAD now to achieve 1.5% of GDP he is looking at something closer to an increase of 7 BCAD, or 5 BUSD, as an ongoing annual commitment to the mutual defence of North America.

Otherwise I could anticipate a 5-10 BUSD tariff to magically appear on Canadian milk, gas, grain and lumber.

 

[rmc_wannabe]

An additional 50 million a year is not going to meet his objectives. That is half an F35. He is looking for something like a 0.5% of GDP commitment to the defence of North America. If we are at 21 BCAD now to achieve 1.5% of GDP he is looking at something closer to an increase of 7 BCAD, or 5 BUSD, as an ongoing annual commitment to the mutual defence of North America.

Otherwise I could anticipate a 5-10 BUSD tariff to magically appear on Canadian milk, gas, grain and lumber.

Or conversely, increasing the cost on anything and everything crossing the border Northward.

Like I said, we can pay to be our own masters within defense, or we can pay the U.S. to do it for us (one way or another); there's no free lunch.

 

[Kirkhill]

In relation to the development of Force 2025/2030, Northcom, NORAD and Canada's Defence Budget - the importance of the Gray Zone and, among other responses, the military response. And the Gray Zone extends into both Canada and the US.

https://www.realcleardefense.com/articles/2022/06/13/the_future_of_us_security_depends_on_owning_the_gray_zone_biden_must_get_it_right_836998.html

 

[Spencer100]

My perception is that while we may just be a part of NORAD, and the NORAD commander has a duty to the PM of Canada, the NORAD commander is also the USNORTHCOM commander.

The USNORTHCOM commander is an American charged with defending America by Commander-in-Chief of the Americans. He is a Joint commander.



From my perspective NORAD is one tool available to the commander to accomplish his primary mission - the defence of the American Homeland.

He has his marching orders from the POTUS. He has clearly stated them in public. He has invited Canada to get on board under the terms stated.

An additional 50 million a year is not going to meet his objectives. That is half an F35. He is looking for something like a 0.5% of GDP commitment to the defence of North America. If we are at 21 BCAD now to achieve 1.5% of GDP he is looking at something closer to an increase of 7 BCAD, or 5 BUSD, as an ongoing annual commitment to the mutual defence of North America.

Otherwise I could anticipate a 5-10 BUSD tariff to magically appear on Canadian milk, gas, grain and lumber.

Most Canadians would gladly have businesses have to pay more in US tariffs. It won't directly affect them and most importantly it can all be blamed on the "evil" Americans. Do not underestimate the power of Canadians to feel smug. Canadian's smug and "better" than Americans feelings is probably the largest national ethos we have as a country. The Liberals have built their party around it.

 

[daftandbarmy]

Most Canadians would gladly have businesses have to pay more in US tariffs. It won't directly affect them and most importantly it can all be blamed on the "evil" Americans. Do not underestimate the power of Canadians to feel smug. Canadian's smug and "better" than Americans feelings is probably the largest national ethos we have as a country. The Liberals have built their party around it.

Not when the businesses pass on the costs to them.

 

[Kirkhill]

Exports to the United States represented 71.8% of Canada's exports to the world in 2020, down from 74.6% in 2019

• Canada was the United States' 3rd largest supplier of goods imports in 2019.
• U.S. goods imports from Canada totaled $319.4 billion in 2019, up 0.3% ($906 million) from 2018, and up 41.2% from 2009. U.S. imports from Canada are up 187% from 1993 (pre-NAFTA). U.S. imports from Canada account for 12.8% of overall U.S. imports in 2019.

• Canada was the United States' largest goods export market in 2019.
• U.S. goods exports to Canada in 2019 were $292.7 billion, down 2.4% ($7.1 billion) from 2018 but up 43.0% from 2009. U.S. exports to Canada are up 191% from 1993 (pre-NAFTA). U.S. exports to Canada account for 18% of overall U.S. exports in 2019.

Canada

U.S.-Canada Trade Facts U.S. goods and private services trade with Canada totaled $707 billion in 2012 (latest data available). Exports totaled $354 billion; Imports totaled $354 billion. The U.S. goods and services trade surplus with Canada was $40 million in 2012.

ustr.gov

The US market is worth 319 BUSD to us each year or about 20% of our 1643 BUSD GDP
That market represents 72% of our total market.
We turn a profit on that trade of 25 BUSD each year or about 1.5% of our GDP

Or our entire defence Budget,
half of which goes to hire Canadians to defend Canada.

To ensure access to that market the US is asking that Canada add 0.5% of GDP to the defence budget and make the Americans feel that they are more secure in their own homes.

That equates to a 30% tax on our profits from trade with the US

Or

That equates to a 2.5% tariff on all the exports we supply to the US.


We can spend the money and preserve a modicum of our self-worth as a sovereign state.

Or

The US will do what it feels it needs to do and send us the bill.