- Reaction score
- 0
- Points
- 410
Here is Lew Mackenzie wading in again....
http://dgpa-dgap.mil.ca/NewsCanada/0403/040301/npt/040301cq.htm
PUBLICATION : National Post
DATE : 2004.03.01
EDITION : National
SECTION: News PAGE: A1 / Front COLUMN: Lewis MacKenzie BYLINE: Lewis MacKenzie SOURCE: National Post
during the Bosnian civil war of 1992.
HEADLINE: Get used to this kind of mission: Canada can build a role in dealing with small, chaotic wars
Canadian soldiers can forget about that ‘‘rest‘‘ that
everyone‘s been talking about. Haiti‘s back in crisis, and everyone knows that for soldiers, a regime change is as good as a ‘‘rest.‘‘
Yesterday, our troops were standing guard at Port-au-Prince airport. A small contingent of Canadians, of the JTF-2 variety, is on the ground in Haiti, and more soldiers are likely on their way.
Little known to most Canadians, we have been intimately involved in the basket case known as Haiti off and on during the past 13 years.
While commanding a UN mission in Central America in 1990, I was tasked with sending a small number of Canadian francophone officers from our mission to Haiti to act as UN observers. Since then, Canadian soldiers, Canadian ships, Canadian police, both military and civilian, NGOs and government representatives have pretty well maintained a constant Canadian presence on the island.
In truth, it‘s doubtful Haiti deserves another chance to waste our goodwill; however, that fact will not preclude our participation.
You knew that ‘‘rest‘‘ was a bad joke anyway. We have found another mission for you, even before we had a chance to get out of Bosnia after 13 years, 25 dead and more than 100 seriously injured.
Why?
Well, Haiti is in our hemisphere; we are a member of the Organization of American States (OAS); also a member of the ‘‘Friends of Haiti,‘‘ a collection of 13 countries including the United States, France and most of the nations comprising the Caribbean community (CARICOM); we have a significant Haitian community in Canada, with 150,000 calling Montreal home; and to cap it off we have a small professional military that continues to do us proud no matter how often we over-task and take advantage of its members.
The United States would like to ignore this new crisis,
particularly with the dirty work that needs to be done in Iraq and Afghanistan with limited support from its allies. However, with visions of a continuous wave of refugees in overcrowded and non-seaworthy boats heading for the Florida beaches and George W. Bush standing firm with his decision to deny them landing on U.S. soil, any advisor worth his pay scale would be pleading with the President to keep the problem in Haiti.
For once, the UN Security Council will have an easy decision. The resolution, currently being drafted, will merely give UN authority to a subcontractor, in this case the United States, to lead a stability mission to the island (after the fact, as the Marines are already there) with Chapter 7 rules of engagement (maximum use of force authorized). France is onside, Russia and China could care less and the U.K. will be happy to go along.
Canadians should note that under such a resolution the UN will not be paying the bills. That task will fall to the Canadian taxpayer -- and be advised the Canadian Forces are already projecting a $500-million deficit for this year.
OK, so we have no choice -- so what? Well, this is merely a tiny part of a trend that will continue for the lifetime of every Canadian alive today. Wars of the magnitude that blackened the previous century are blessedly history. Unfortunately, today and tomorrow‘s internal wars involving factions hellbent on violent, sometimes genocidal campaigns that offer no stability even when they are stopped are the new norm. And guess what? The demand for Canadian participation will continue to grow, and our political leaders will find it increasingly impossible to say no.
That being the case, the forthcoming holistic foreign/defence policy review had better avoid tinkering with the status quo and recognize the need for a larger (not large, but larger -- approximately 80,000 to 85,000 souls) and restructured Canadian Armed Forces. A light, lethal and strategically mobile force with one or more battalion groups (1,000 soldiers) deployable by air and at least four more trained and equipped to arrive by sea would fit the bill.
With such a force we could have had a battalion group on board a Canadian assault ship standing off Haiti for the last week waiting to land the moment the UN gave the word. Without that ability, it would take weeks if not months to get an equivalent sized unit with all its kit to the island -- an island in our own hemisphere.
Much has been written lately regarding the need for our Armed Forces to return home from their overseas operational tours for a ‘‘rest.‘‘ I hate the term; what is really required is a period of training, essential to maintain the level of professionalism necessary to carry out those very overseas missions. If anything, a military works harder at home regenerating itself than it does in an operational theatre, albeit under less dangerous circumstances.
Anyway, the practicality of a ‘‘rest‘‘ can be debated to death but it won‘t happen. Like it or not, we have an important role to play on the world‘s stage so let‘s stop talking about a ‘‘rest‘‘ and give the Forces the tools and the numbers to do the tasks we ask of them without burning them out.
We are not even back from Bosnia yet, and we‘re debating if we will be in Afgahn, or Haiti within 12-14 months time.
http://dgpa-dgap.mil.ca/NewsCanada/0403/040301/npt/040301cq.htm
PUBLICATION : National Post
DATE : 2004.03.01
EDITION : National
SECTION: News PAGE: A1 / Front COLUMN: Lewis MacKenzie BYLINE: Lewis MacKenzie SOURCE: National Post
during the Bosnian civil war of 1992.
HEADLINE: Get used to this kind of mission: Canada can build a role in dealing with small, chaotic wars
Canadian soldiers can forget about that ‘‘rest‘‘ that
everyone‘s been talking about. Haiti‘s back in crisis, and everyone knows that for soldiers, a regime change is as good as a ‘‘rest.‘‘
Yesterday, our troops were standing guard at Port-au-Prince airport. A small contingent of Canadians, of the JTF-2 variety, is on the ground in Haiti, and more soldiers are likely on their way.
Little known to most Canadians, we have been intimately involved in the basket case known as Haiti off and on during the past 13 years.
While commanding a UN mission in Central America in 1990, I was tasked with sending a small number of Canadian francophone officers from our mission to Haiti to act as UN observers. Since then, Canadian soldiers, Canadian ships, Canadian police, both military and civilian, NGOs and government representatives have pretty well maintained a constant Canadian presence on the island.
In truth, it‘s doubtful Haiti deserves another chance to waste our goodwill; however, that fact will not preclude our participation.
You knew that ‘‘rest‘‘ was a bad joke anyway. We have found another mission for you, even before we had a chance to get out of Bosnia after 13 years, 25 dead and more than 100 seriously injured.
Why?
Well, Haiti is in our hemisphere; we are a member of the Organization of American States (OAS); also a member of the ‘‘Friends of Haiti,‘‘ a collection of 13 countries including the United States, France and most of the nations comprising the Caribbean community (CARICOM); we have a significant Haitian community in Canada, with 150,000 calling Montreal home; and to cap it off we have a small professional military that continues to do us proud no matter how often we over-task and take advantage of its members.
The United States would like to ignore this new crisis,
particularly with the dirty work that needs to be done in Iraq and Afghanistan with limited support from its allies. However, with visions of a continuous wave of refugees in overcrowded and non-seaworthy boats heading for the Florida beaches and George W. Bush standing firm with his decision to deny them landing on U.S. soil, any advisor worth his pay scale would be pleading with the President to keep the problem in Haiti.
For once, the UN Security Council will have an easy decision. The resolution, currently being drafted, will merely give UN authority to a subcontractor, in this case the United States, to lead a stability mission to the island (after the fact, as the Marines are already there) with Chapter 7 rules of engagement (maximum use of force authorized). France is onside, Russia and China could care less and the U.K. will be happy to go along.
Canadians should note that under such a resolution the UN will not be paying the bills. That task will fall to the Canadian taxpayer -- and be advised the Canadian Forces are already projecting a $500-million deficit for this year.
OK, so we have no choice -- so what? Well, this is merely a tiny part of a trend that will continue for the lifetime of every Canadian alive today. Wars of the magnitude that blackened the previous century are blessedly history. Unfortunately, today and tomorrow‘s internal wars involving factions hellbent on violent, sometimes genocidal campaigns that offer no stability even when they are stopped are the new norm. And guess what? The demand for Canadian participation will continue to grow, and our political leaders will find it increasingly impossible to say no.
That being the case, the forthcoming holistic foreign/defence policy review had better avoid tinkering with the status quo and recognize the need for a larger (not large, but larger -- approximately 80,000 to 85,000 souls) and restructured Canadian Armed Forces. A light, lethal and strategically mobile force with one or more battalion groups (1,000 soldiers) deployable by air and at least four more trained and equipped to arrive by sea would fit the bill.
With such a force we could have had a battalion group on board a Canadian assault ship standing off Haiti for the last week waiting to land the moment the UN gave the word. Without that ability, it would take weeks if not months to get an equivalent sized unit with all its kit to the island -- an island in our own hemisphere.
Much has been written lately regarding the need for our Armed Forces to return home from their overseas operational tours for a ‘‘rest.‘‘ I hate the term; what is really required is a period of training, essential to maintain the level of professionalism necessary to carry out those very overseas missions. If anything, a military works harder at home regenerating itself than it does in an operational theatre, albeit under less dangerous circumstances.
Anyway, the practicality of a ‘‘rest‘‘ can be debated to death but it won‘t happen. Like it or not, we have an important role to play on the world‘s stage so let‘s stop talking about a ‘‘rest‘‘ and give the Forces the tools and the numbers to do the tasks we ask of them without burning them out.
We are not even back from Bosnia yet, and we‘re debating if we will be in Afgahn, or Haiti within 12-14 months time.
