[size=12pt] Does Bob Rae endorse lawful desertion from the Canadian Forces?
National Post
July 16, 2008
Douglas Bland
In a comment published in the Toronto Star (Why U.S. war resisters deserve refuge in Canada, 11 July 2008), Bob Rae pleads for Canada to accept any member of the United States armed forces who decides to desert his comrades and country and seek sanctuary in Canada. He argues that because a solider might believe that the war in Iraq is unpopular he or she therefore “faces a conflict of values and loyalties” and thus has a right to desert. Further, Canadians ought to honour this assumed right without question. Mr. Rae puts the "all-volunteer army" in a whole new light — volunteer to enlist and volunteer to leave at any time and on any whim.
If this concept is sound enough for the US armed forces, is Mr. Rae recommending it for the Canadian Forces too?
Before he answers that, Mr Rae ought to consider these questions. As foreign minister or justice minister in a future Liberal government, what would he do if a member of the Canadian Forces deserted on the grounds that in his or her opinion Canada was conducting an unpopular war in Afghanistan (as some say is the fact today)? What would Mr. Rae do if Canadian soldiers deserted their unit because they believed that they could not be compelled to serve on any mission not authorized by the UN, as the Liberal government ordered them to do in Kosovo, for example? Would Mr. Rae support the desertion of aboriginal members of the Canadian Forces who refused to follow orders to support the civil authority in a conflict with an aboriginal community as at Oka? More generally, what amendments would Mr. Rae make to the National Defence Act to provide the rules for the lawful desertion by members of the Canadian Forces during government-ordered active operations?
The fundamental principle of civil-military relations in Canada is that members of the Canadian Forces are obliged under threat of severe punishment to obey all lawful commands issued by the government. In cases were the lawfulness of a command is in question members have several avenues of redress inside and outside the Canadian Forces. To allow, as Mr. Rae suggests, soldiers to simply decide for themselves in every instance what orders to obey and which to disobey and when to report for duty and when not to do so would not only lead to disorder in the armed forces, but might put Canada at risk in times of emergency or conflict inside and outside the country. If Canadians were to accept Mr. Rae’s concepts, no government could trust the Canadian Forces to carry out its orders or to support its foreign policies or defence commitments. Every situation would depend on the voluntary co-operation of individual members of the Canadian Forces; as history shows, a government and a nation in that position is always in grave danger.
Finally given the very New Democratic Party feel of Mr. Rae’s comments, it is fair to ask him if he is speaking for the Liberal Party of Canada. Moreover, is he implicitly promising that if the Liberals form the next government, the prime minister will not pursue or otherwise take legal action against any member of the Canadian Forces inside or outside Canada who for whatever personal reason decides to desert his or her comrades during preparations for or while deployed on military operations authorized by the Canadian government?
Mr. Rae surely understands that members of the Canadian Forces, other Canadian, and our allies, especially in Afghanistan, will be asking him these serious policy questions during the coming federal election. So to forestall confusion, it might be useful if he were to issue a Liberal Party policy paper — perhaps entitled "The Liberal Party Position on Lawful Desertion From the Canadian Forces" — to answer them in advance.
Professor Douglas Bland is Chair of the Defence Management Studies Program at The School of Policy Studies, at Queen's University. [/size]
)
Canada. ;D
