We are helping 🇺🇸 protecting there boarder protecting the Arctic and disarming law abiding gun owners all in the same week I would say the Government is protecting the Nation
There's a simple response to this issue that would have considerable benefits to a northern community and to CAF as well. A reserve training facility near Arctic Bay, train artillery and Infantry reserves there put it predominantly under reserve command to allow for command experience, Run regular force and reserve force arctic training. The Airport could be utilized and partially maintained by CAF. Artic Bay is very close to the North West Passage. This would establish a permanent presents, provide a useful training facility provide some local jobs, increase command experience for reserve officers, and help secure our north. Could be all done with artic trailer systems for housing and so on.
I agree with this idea! I think they haven’t done this yet because they don’t want to decide on what/how to govern/give power to indigenous people up there, and it’s just plain easier and cheaper to keep your head in the sand.
Policy doesn't mean shit. If a country doesn't have the will or ability to defend itself it is no longer a country. Right now we have politicians who have ensured we have neither.
Policy doesn't mean shit....if you don't have one. When you establish a coherent policy, and back it up with dollars and action, suddenly it starts to mean something. The lack of policy sucks so hard for our country.
@@captivatethem Well Canada has a "policy" for defence. It's called a Defence White Paper. It hasn't ever been followed because there is no political will to defend Canada.
This average Canadian thanks you for this podcast; also really appreciate the transcript to re-read. I particularly appreciate Prof Huebert's comments regarding 'three oceans' at 13.48: "..we may think that the three oceans and the US protect us but given the type of weapon systems that we now see associated with both Russian and the Chinese with the intent and actions that they have had [and] the statements of Russia threatening nuclear war on an increasingly, one could almost say, shrill tone, all of this portrays a very dangerous environment..." Prof Huebert has highlighted a key source of many Canadians complacency about all things conflict/military-related and cant be repeated enough. In terms of what we Canadians can do....while I realize we may also not have the next election based on policy -- at all -- Im still prepared to try and ask people like Polievre, and Singh, what their positions on the issue of arctic foreign policy are...i suspect they wont have a position at all but average Canadians need to start talking about it and asking, where other average Canadians see us asking, might at least be a start?
I think the private sector may have some creative and practical solutions for the arctic. Looking at the example of Roshel Brampton produced armoured vehicles rapidly identifying and fulfilling a need in Ukraine. We have the ingenuity and industrial capability within Canada to address the challenges of defending Canada and our allies, but industry needs leadership and incentive. Great podcast, thanks for putting it out there.
Wait, I was trying to think of things that citizens could do, but it just occurred to me that Arctic research presence also defends our claim up there. So literally by supporting some research projects, I'm paying someone to go up there and wave the flag
This new Arctic plan sounds good, but as always we'll have to see if this government (or the next, or the next after that) will actually execute the plan properly. It will require a lot of resources, and no budget whinging that Arctic activity is all subsidized and expensive. It will require a lot of sustained genuine effort from every aspect of government (military & civilian; political, civil service, and scientists; federal, territorial, and indigenous.) And - this might be the hard part - it would require the current crop of petty & sometimes demented political leaders to lay off the dirty tactical bullshit and empty optics, and actually work towards the greater good for once.
Just the military / strategic "must do" list will be long and expensive - nothing in the Arctic is not expensive. Obviously resources are not infinite. Might have to prioritize this over more "expeditionary" concerns.
Obviously Russia is the most serious Arctic power (which makes sense) and in an acutely aggressive frame of mind (as the west is re: them), but they have their arctic sea route, so I am skeptical of the supposed Russian threat to our Northwest Passage. Under normal circumstances, I think a great point of agreement for all Arctic nations (including Russia) would be a pact to keep all non-Arctic nations out of the Arctic, at least militarily. No tolerance of any military forces in the Arctic from China, India, not even Japan or the UK. (The list of true Arctic nations is a small one.) However, the very open hostilities with Russia and their increasing strategic dependence on China means that idea of Arctic solidarity is unlikely to take place, and the Russians are increasingly likely to be an enabler of Chinese mischief in Arctic waters, beyond just Chinese use of Russian waters for cargo shipping. Canada for its own part should stick hard to the idea of defending what we claim, even against neighbours like Denmark and especially the USA. Historically, it is the USA which denies our exclusive sovereignty over the northwest passage, trying their usual gambit of declaring someone else's waters "international" to give themselves an excuse to make themselves the arbiters of what goes on in it, claiming their "freedom of navigation" is in peril. It's an absurd position they have, trying to claim that waters which run entirely between Canadian islands are not Canadian also, doubly so when one considers that all it means is they would need to ask our permission first and we are not likely to deny it. But that is the Americans' nature whether a D or R is in power; they do not think they should ever have to ask permission from anyone, and they treat allies more like servants. Guys like Trump "muse" about taking over Greenland or Canada or whatever, but behind the rhetoric is the deeper meaning that the Americans are testing to see how much they can take from Canada before we forcefully push back. Canada needs to play the hardest of hardball on this one, and that means even to our allies, making our military and intelligence alliance participation contingent on them agreeing with us on what portion of the Arctic is ours. If they want us as allies they had damn well better act like allies to us first. If we are not getting some tangible benefit out of our alliances and out of our allies, why are we even in such associations? Normal countries give to alliances because there is something that they get, beyond silly rhetoric about a "defense umbrella" or "rules based international order". We have to have an iron will when it comes to defining and defending Canada's sovereignty and interests, without reference to what others might want. No more of this "go along to get along" mentality that has plagued our foreign policy establishment to the point where (as the CDA guest points out) Canada barely has any foreign policy of its own at all. Right now, we have have no common understanding of Canada's own strategic interests that can transcend the partisan circus in Ottawa; it is obscured by the NDP clutching pearls over human rights that no major power gives a damn about, Liberals trying to be everyone's friend and never be decisive about anything, and Conservatives always kissing Washington's ass because they cannot conceive of Canada as a separate country with different values or interests. If they cannot be counted on then someone independent of them, and independent of "alliance" agendas, needs to once and for all define Canadian national interests in a "continuity of government, continuity of policy" sort of way. What Canada needs is a serious injection of strategic clarity & civic nationalism, because how are we going to meet this or any other foreign policy challenge, unless we have a coherent sense of who we are and what we are defending. Once we do that and start to get more assertive about taking care of our own concerns above all, it may require us to get a bit nasty sometimes. Depending how we are challenged, that push-back might risk open conflict, but we must not rule that out (even if it means standing alone). That change in attitude would put the onus on them to respect our sovereignty, and lead to them treating us with more reciprocity. Adversaries will calculate that they cannot intimidate us, our REAL allies will understand our position and show mutual support, and it is only false allies who might grumble over us ending their "something for nothing" assumptions about us. This not about empire-building hubris, or going nuts and trying to godzilla-stomp the world. It is Canada simply refusing to be intimidated or conned anymore, signalling to everyone that we are not an easy mark and will ruthlessly defend our own sovereignty. Canada should be deciding our own policies autonomously, taking a more mercenary approach to dealing with others, and being ruthless and forceful when our sovereignty is challenged. It is not radical or weird to suggest that Canada should prioritize its own survival and interests, just as other nations already do.
Average 🇨🇦Canadians want national defence to be more important, more money spent on the military, less foreign I terfence etc. but the people in power don’t care and haven’t for years. Pierre may fix some of the issues but he definitely won’t fix all of them, especially with the NDP and Libs countering him anyway they can. We need to change the way things are decided, and involve our 🇨🇦indigenous leaders way more in Ottawa. I’m worried now and for the future. Let’s hope it doesn’t get worse.
Canada needs to get serious about National Defense.
We are helping 🇺🇸 protecting there boarder protecting the Arctic and disarming law abiding gun owners
all in the same week
I would say the Government is protecting the Nation
We'd have to ask Irving's permission though. I don't get the impression they like to work on weekends.
There's a simple response to this issue that would have considerable benefits to a northern community and to CAF as well. A reserve training facility near Arctic Bay, train artillery and Infantry reserves there put it predominantly under reserve command to allow for command experience, Run regular force and reserve force arctic training. The Airport could be utilized and partially maintained by CAF. Artic Bay is very close to the North West Passage. This would establish a permanent presents, provide a useful training facility provide some local jobs, increase command experience for reserve officers, and help secure our north. Could be all done with artic trailer systems for housing and so on.
I agree with this idea! I think they haven’t done this yet because they don’t want to decide on what/how to govern/give power to indigenous people up there, and it’s just plain easier and cheaper to keep your head in the sand.
Policy doesn't mean shit. If a country doesn't have the will or ability to defend itself it is no longer a country. Right now we have politicians who have ensured we have neither.
Policy doesn't mean shit....if you don't have one. When you establish a coherent policy, and back it up with dollars and action, suddenly it starts to mean something. The lack of policy sucks so hard for our country.
@@captivatethem Well Canada has a "policy" for defence. It's called a Defence White Paper. It hasn't ever been followed because there is no political will to defend Canada.
This average Canadian thanks you for this podcast; also really appreciate the transcript to re-read. I particularly appreciate Prof Huebert's comments regarding 'three oceans' at 13.48: "..we may think that the three oceans and the US protect us but given the type of weapon systems that we now see associated with both Russian and the Chinese with the intent and actions that they have had [and] the statements of Russia threatening nuclear war on an increasingly, one could almost say, shrill tone, all of this portrays a very dangerous environment..."
Prof Huebert has highlighted a key source of many Canadians complacency about all things conflict/military-related and cant be repeated enough.
In terms of what we Canadians can do....while I realize we may also not have the next election based on policy -- at all -- Im still prepared to try and ask people like Polievre, and Singh, what their positions on the issue of arctic foreign policy are...i suspect they wont have a position at all but average Canadians need to start talking about it and asking, where other average Canadians see us asking, might at least be a start?
Action.....no more words
I think the private sector may have some creative and practical solutions for the arctic. Looking at the example of Roshel Brampton produced armoured vehicles rapidly identifying and fulfilling a need in Ukraine. We have the ingenuity and industrial capability within Canada to address the challenges of defending Canada and our allies, but industry needs leadership and incentive. Great podcast, thanks for putting it out there.
Wait, I was trying to think of things that citizens could do, but it just occurred to me that Arctic research presence also defends our claim up there. So literally by supporting some research projects, I'm paying someone to go up there and wave the flag
it would help, but not alone.
@@Heatx79 I think it's a dire enough situation that the sum of many small things is also necessary in addition to the big moves.
AOPS ships don't have weapons. Coast Guard could patrol Artic with their ice breakers and should do search and rescue as well. All search and rescue.
With search and rescue helicopters 😊
2 AOPS ships will belong to the Coast Guard, at least that is the stated shipbuilding plan.
This new Arctic plan sounds good, but as always we'll have to see if this government (or the next, or the next after that) will actually execute the plan properly. It will require a lot of resources, and no budget whinging that Arctic activity is all subsidized and expensive. It will require a lot of sustained genuine effort from every aspect of government (military & civilian; political, civil service, and scientists; federal, territorial, and indigenous.) And - this might be the hard part - it would require the current crop of petty & sometimes demented political leaders to lay off the dirty tactical bullshit and empty optics, and actually work towards the greater good for once.
Just the military / strategic "must do" list will be long and expensive - nothing in the Arctic is not expensive. Obviously resources are not infinite. Might have to prioritize this over more "expeditionary" concerns.
🤦🏼♂️
Obviously Russia is the most serious Arctic power (which makes sense) and in an acutely aggressive frame of mind (as the west is re: them), but they have their arctic sea route, so I am skeptical of the supposed Russian threat to our Northwest Passage. Under normal circumstances, I think a great point of agreement for all Arctic nations (including Russia) would be a pact to keep all non-Arctic nations out of the Arctic, at least militarily. No tolerance of any military forces in the Arctic from China, India, not even Japan or the UK. (The list of true Arctic nations is a small one.) However, the very open hostilities with Russia and their increasing strategic dependence on China means that idea of Arctic solidarity is unlikely to take place, and the Russians are increasingly likely to be an enabler of Chinese mischief in Arctic waters, beyond just Chinese use of Russian waters for cargo shipping.
Canada for its own part should stick hard to the idea of defending what we claim, even against neighbours like Denmark and especially the USA. Historically, it is the USA which denies our exclusive sovereignty over the northwest passage, trying their usual gambit of declaring someone else's waters "international" to give themselves an excuse to make themselves the arbiters of what goes on in it, claiming their "freedom of navigation" is in peril. It's an absurd position they have, trying to claim that waters which run entirely between Canadian islands are not Canadian also, doubly so when one considers that all it means is they would need to ask our permission first and we are not likely to deny it. But that is the Americans' nature whether a D or R is in power; they do not think they should ever have to ask permission from anyone, and they treat allies more like servants. Guys like Trump "muse" about taking over Greenland or Canada or whatever, but behind the rhetoric is the deeper meaning that the Americans are testing to see how much they can take from Canada before we forcefully push back.
Canada needs to play the hardest of hardball on this one, and that means even to our allies, making our military and intelligence alliance participation contingent on them agreeing with us on what portion of the Arctic is ours. If they want us as allies they had damn well better act like allies to us first. If we are not getting some tangible benefit out of our alliances and out of our allies, why are we even in such associations? Normal countries give to alliances because there is something that they get, beyond silly rhetoric about a "defense umbrella" or "rules based international order". We have to have an iron will when it comes to defining and defending Canada's sovereignty and interests, without reference to what others might want. No more of this "go along to get along" mentality that has plagued our foreign policy establishment to the point where (as the CDA guest points out) Canada barely has any foreign policy of its own at all.
Right now, we have have no common understanding of Canada's own strategic interests that can transcend the partisan circus in Ottawa; it is obscured by the NDP clutching pearls over human rights that no major power gives a damn about, Liberals trying to be everyone's friend and never be decisive about anything, and Conservatives always kissing Washington's ass because they cannot conceive of Canada as a separate country with different values or interests. If they cannot be counted on then someone independent of them, and independent of "alliance" agendas, needs to once and for all define Canadian national interests in a "continuity of government, continuity of policy" sort of way. What Canada needs is a serious injection of strategic clarity & civic nationalism, because how are we going to meet this or any other foreign policy challenge, unless we have a coherent sense of who we are and what we are defending.
Once we do that and start to get more assertive about taking care of our own concerns above all, it may require us to get a bit nasty sometimes. Depending how we are challenged, that push-back might risk open conflict, but we must not rule that out (even if it means standing alone). That change in attitude would put the onus on them to respect our sovereignty, and lead to them treating us with more reciprocity. Adversaries will calculate that they cannot intimidate us, our REAL allies will understand our position and show mutual support, and it is only false allies who might grumble over us ending their "something for nothing" assumptions about us.
This not about empire-building hubris, or going nuts and trying to godzilla-stomp the world. It is Canada simply refusing to be intimidated or conned anymore, signalling to everyone that we are not an easy mark and will ruthlessly defend our own sovereignty. Canada should be deciding our own policies autonomously, taking a more mercenary approach to dealing with others, and being ruthless and forceful when our sovereignty is challenged. It is not radical or weird to suggest that Canada should prioritize its own survival and interests, just as other nations already do.
thank you for this perspective . may our govnt grow a pair
Ditto, thank you, really appreciate this commentary.
Average 🇨🇦Canadians want national defence to be more important, more money spent on the military, less foreign I terfence etc. but the people in power don’t care and haven’t for years. Pierre may fix some of the issues but he definitely won’t fix all of them, especially with the NDP and Libs countering him anyway they can. We need to change the way things are decided, and involve our 🇨🇦indigenous leaders way more in Ottawa. I’m worried now and for the future. Let’s hope it doesn’t get worse.
This policy is as useful as our Charter of Rights and Freedoms: something the PMO staff use in the lavatory.
Yup had your bank account frozen lately???election now 🇨🇦🌺🌺🌺🙏