I'll believe it when I see it.
I'd rather see this occur:
1) Protect the north
2) Bring defense spending up to around 2.25-2.30% of GDP
3) Do not integrate nor court China above what the current status is
4) Integrate into the EU defense armament process
5) Maintain current 5i status
6) Greater involvement within NATO, with 'like minded' Allies
7) Grow and support internal CDN defense capabilities - grow 'inhouse' ability to provide critical armaments (arty. arty barrels, arty shells, AD, drones, ballistic missile capability, IFV, etc)
8) Participate in the UK/Italy/Japan 6th fighter programme
I view it as the Carrot and Stick approach. Do a bit more than what the Americans are 'asking' us but actively look to integrate/participate with our other allies. If Americans say, please do 'X' amount, we do 'X+ 8-10%' more and then go about doing what we need to do for our own needs.
Trade should,still happen with China. But not with the BS things they want to tack on.I think your approach is reasonable. Here is where I would tweak:
3) there is a problem here. Plenty of open source information on it. Canada will need to fix this problem in a big way and not allow status quo. I'm not talking trade, which could remain status quo.
Recent events have shown how easy it can be disrupted, treaties be damned.4) it would make better sense to integrate more with US, supply chain is better/closer
Not if the US is going at things alone.8) American might still be better due to NORAD integration
If Canada does it's duty by being a good neighbor
We will probably do better with some friendly help.Or, you know, put on our Big Boy pants and build up our own defense industry...
I don't think we'll see double digit unemployment. Last time that happened in Canada was 1994. Hight of COVID it briefly went to 9.6%. Even the financial crisis it didn't hit 9% and that was a full meltdown of the economy. However there will be massive supply chain re-adjustments because the US is hitting everyone.I think everybody here should brace for substantial changes in procurement decisions after the election. I'm not even sure the winner makes a difference. If we start seeing double digit unemployment in different parts of the country, due to tariffs, it will be untenable to hand multi-billion dollar contracts to American firms. And there will be a political preference to use procurement dollars to cement new trading relationships. American kit out. European, Japanese and Korean kit in.
Last time America seriously engaged in a trade war with the world was 1930... I think we all know how that went for everybody.I don't think we'll see double digit unemployment. Last time that happened in Canada was 1994. Hight of COVID it briefly went to 9.6%. Even the financial crisis it didn't hit 9% and that was a full meltdown of the economy. However there will be massive supply chain re-adjustments because the US is hitting everyone.
As far as mulitbillion dollars to US firms, that depends if its Lockheed Martin Canada (US firm but Canadian employees like Ford). My only concern really isn't the F35, its the River Class Destroyer Program. That program is headed up by LMC on the combat management side, and we're billions into the radar and combat management systems. So Canadians, if for political reasons are going to screw us so bad if they can't make that differentiation. Army projects are a joke compared to this one. Not to mention the LMC makes the Canadian proprietary CMS 330, owned by us and its world class.
I think a good process would be to examine new projects, not currently running ones. Cost would be terribly prohibative for changing a lot of our own projects at this time. But new things like the Indirect Fires Modernization could easily be Euro. If its from a US company but built in Canada we can probably get away with it. I mean are we going to ditch the LAV because it's built by a US company? No that's crazy. We'll keep building and using them.That said, I'm with you in worrying that people will throw the baby out with the bath water... The RCD, P-8. and F-35 programmes are critical to our defence, and we need to keep them on track. Beyond those... Maybe we should be shopping elsewhere, if only to remind American defence contractors that our dollars matter too.
There are obviously a few folks in the White House who don't know.Last time America seriously engaged in a trade war with the world was 1930... I think we all know how that went for everybody.
Realistically do they have much choice?Do we actually expect the winner of the election to spend 2% at a sustained rate.
We can learn a lot from China and their supply chain management, manufacturing and their processes. We need to be careful not to share specific processes, hardware and tactics with them, but we should be exploring further trade with both China and India.I think your approach is reasonable. Here is where I would tweak:
3) there is a problem here. Plenty of open source information on it. Canada will need to fix this problem in a big way and not allow status quo. I'm not talking trade, which could remain status quo.
We are already so integrated with the US supply chain that we will have a hard time getting away from it. But that chain works both ways. We supply lots of components that the US requires to make the bigger things operate4) it would make better sense to integrate more with US, supply chain is better/closer
I think Canada needs to remain part of NORAD but we need to get more detection and intervention equipment of our own. If the US wants in or information from that equipment they can pay for it. Afterall I would not want us to have a information surplus with the US.8) American might still be better due to NORAD integration
Personally, I think Canada will not meet 2%, and even if we did it would be a short period of time with no actual intention of a general build up in defence capability. Our politicians will say many blustery things, allocate a lot of money, and spend as little of it as possible. Just cynical old me though.If the US loses focus and ceases to hold Canada to account, does the rest of NATO have enough sway or attention span to hold Canada to 2%?
Will Canada care if a few NATO countries like Poland and Finland complain about Canada not meeting 2%?
I am not sure of the answers. It’s likely 50/50 on whether Canada meets 2% or not if the US loses focus. It’s also likely 50/50 on whether Canada keeps striving for 2% if there is any apparent easing of geopolitical pressures.
Yes. We owe NATO nothing. Defending Europe is voluntary for us, in theory. They should be saying “Thank you” to Canada, oh and pay us back.Realistically do they have much choice?
Yes. Because the US is now a regional competitor. If they don't know what's going on in the Arctic because we aren't able to tell them they will go there themselves (as an example). And that no longer looks quite so friendly or helpful.Do we actually expect the winner of the election to spend 2% at a sustained rate.
I think everybody here should brace for substantial changes in procurement decisions after the election. I'm not even sure the winner makes a difference. If we start seeing double digit unemployment in different parts of the country, due to tariffs, it will be untenable to hand multi-billion dollar contracts to American firms. And there will be a political preference to use procurement dollars to cement new trading relationships. American kit out. European, Japanese and Korean kit in.
Yes. We owe NATO nothing. Defending Europe is voluntary for us, in theory. They should be saying “Thank you” to Canada, oh and pay us back.![]()
Yes. Because the US is now a regional competitor. If they don't know what's going on in the Arctic because we aren't able to tell them they will go there themselves (as an example). And that no longer looks quite so friendly or helpful.
Carney has been pretty blunt about that. And it is looking like some action is being done to start aligning to the new reality. Now that the rest of the world is subjected to what we have been for a few months I suspect we’ll start seeing an acceleration of those things.You know that and I know that. My concern is an LPC Gov will bank on hope. The will just try to ride out the storm and hope that DJT loses the next election, the Dems return to power and we can go back to spewing empty words and being an economic and military leech.