• Thanks for stopping by. Logging in to a registered account will remove all generic ads. Please reach out with any questions or concerns.

Justin Trudeau hints at boosting Canada’s military spending

Justin Trudeau hints at boosting Canada’s military spending

Canada says it will look at increasing its defence spending and tacked on 10 more Russian names to an ever growing sanctions list.

By Tonda MacCharles
Ottawa Bureau
Mon., March 7, 2022

Riga, LATVIA—On the 13th day of the brutal Russian bid to claim Ukraine as its own, Prime Minister Justin Trudeau is showing up at the Latvian battle group led by Canadian soldiers, waving the Maple Leaf and a vague hint at more money for the military.

Canada has been waving the NATO flag for nearly seven years in Latvia as a bulwark against Russia’s further incursions in Eastern Europe.

Canada stepped up to lead one of NATO’s four battle groups in 2015 — part of the defensive alliance’s display of strength and solidarity with weaker member states after Russia invaded Ukraine and seized the Crimean peninsula in 2014. Trudeau arrived in the Latvian capital late Monday after meetings in the U.K. with British Prime Minister Boris Johnson and Netherlands Prime Minister Mark Rutte.

Earlier Monday, faced with a seemingly unstoppable war in Ukraine, Trudeau said he will look at increasing Canada’s defence spending. Given world events, he said there are “certainly reflections to have.”

And Canada tacked on 10 more Russian names to an ever-growing sanctions list.

The latest round of sanctions includes names Trudeau said were identified by jailed Russian opposition leader and Putin nemesis Alexei Navalny.

However, on a day when Trudeau cited the new sanctions, and Johnson touted new measures meant to expose Russian property owners in his country, Rutte admitted sanctions are not working.

Yet they all called for more concerted international efforts over the long haul, including more economic measures and more humanitarian aid, with Johnson and Rutte divided over how quickly countries need to get off Russian oil and gas.

The 10 latest names on Canada’s target list do not include Roman Abramovich — a Russian billionaire Navalny has been flagging to Canada since at least 2017. Canada appears to have sanctioned about 20 of the 35 names on Navalny’s list.

The Conservative opposition says the Liberal government is not yet exerting maximum pressure on Putin, and should do more to bolster Canadian Forces, including by finally approving the purchase of fighter jets.

Foreign affairs critic Michael Chong said in an interview that Ottawa must still sanction “additional oligarchs close to President Putin who have significant assets in Canada.”

Abramovich owns more than a quarter of the public shares in steelmaking giant Evraz, which has operations in Alberta and Saskatchewan and has supplied most of the steel for the government-owned Trans Mountain pipeline project.

Evraz’s board of directors also includes two more Russians the U.S. government identified as “oligarchs” in 2019 — Aleksandr Abramov and Aleksandr Frolov — and its Canadian operations have received significant support from the federal government.

That includes at least $27 million in emergency wage subsidies during the pandemic, as well as $7 million through a fund meant to help heavy-polluters reduce emissions that cause climate change, according to the company’s most recent annual report.

In addition to upping defence spending, the Conservatives want NORAD’s early warning system upgraded, naval shipbuilding ramped up and Arctic security bolstered.

In London, Johnson sat down with Trudeau and Rutte at the Northolt airbase. Their morning meetings had a rushed feel, with Johnson starting to usher press out before Trudeau spoke. His office said later that the British PM couldn’t squeeze the full meeting in at 10 Downing Street because Johnson’s “diary” was so busy that day. The three leaders held an afternoon news conference at 10 Downing.

But before that Trudeau met with the Queen, saying she was “insightful” and they had a “useful, for me anyway, conversation about global affairs.”

Trudeau meets with NATO Secretary General Jens Stoltenberg Tuesday in Latvia.

The prime minister will also meet with three Baltic leaders, the prime ministers of Latvia, Lithuania and Estonia, in the Latvian capital of Riga.

The Liberals announced they would increase the 500 Canadian Forces in Latvia by another 460 troops. The Canadians are leading a multinational battle group, one of four that are part of NATO’s deployments in the region.

Another 3,400 Canadians could be deployed to the region in the months to come, on standby for NATO orders.

But Canada’s shipments of lethal aid to Ukraine were slow to come in the view of the Conservatives, and the Ukrainian Canadian community.

And suddenly Western allies are eyeing each other’s defence commitments.

At the Downing Street news conference, Rutte noted the Netherlands will increase its defence budget to close to two per cent of GDP. Germany has led the G7, and doubled its defence budget in the face of Putin’s invasion and threats. Johnson said the U.K. defence spending is about 2.4 per cent and declined to comment on Canada’s defence spending which is 1.4 per cent of GDP.

But Johnson didn’t hold back.

“What we can’t do, post the invasion of Ukraine is assume that we go back to a kind of status quo ante, a kind of new normalization in the way that we did after the … seizure of Crimea and the Donbas area,” Johnson said. “We’ve got to recognize that things have changed and that we need a new focus on security and I think that that is kind of increasingly understood by everybody.”

Trudeau stood by his British and Dutch counterparts and pledged Canada would do more.

He defended his government’s record, saying Ottawa is gradually increasing spending over the next decade by 70 per cent. Then Trudeau admitted more might be necessary.

“We also recognize that context is changing rapidly around the world and we need to make sure that women and men have certainty and our forces have all the equipment necessary to be able to stand strongly as we always have. As members of NATO. We will continue to look at what more we can do.”

The three leaders — Johnson, a conservative and Trudeau and Rutte, progressive liberals — in a joint statement said they “will continue to impose severe costs on Russia.”

Arriving for the news conference from Windsor Castle, Trudeau had to detour to enter Downing Street as loud so-called Freedom Convoy protesters bellowed from outside the gate. They carried signs marked “Tuck Frudeau” and “Free Tamara” (Lich).

Protester Jeff Wyatt who said he has no Canadian ties told the Star he came to stand up for Lich and others who were leading a “peaceful protest” worldwide against government “lies” about COVID-19 and what he called Trudeau’s “tyranny.”

Elsewhere in London, outside the Russian embassy, other protesters and passersby reflected on what they said was real tyranny — the Russian attack on Ukraine. “I think we should be as tough as possible to get this stopped, as tough as possible,” said protester Clive Martinez.
 
Think small, be small.
Think big, be big.

I’d much rather be a smaller fish swimming in a large lake than be a big fish in a small pond.

This country could be so much more than an Australia if we only learned to have some self confidence, stop being so bloody cheap and constantly looking over our shoulder.
Couldn't agree with you more.

We have a larger GDP than S Korea and Russia. That makes us number 9 in the world. We're roughly 15% ahead of Australia which is number 13.

It may be that our next door neighbour (who is #1 and has 11 times the GDP) gives us an inferiority complex. Or maybe we're led by a government that has tremendous risk aversion and lives in a Pearsonian 1957s fairyland that we are the world's peacekeepers. We played with that role a half century ago and it has become such a strong part of our mythology that it has completely blotted out our actual warfighting history of the War of 1812-4, the Fenian affair, the 1st and 2nd World Wars and Korea and the fact that that role no longer carries any water.

Whatever it is, its resulted in a government that won't do anything but pay lip service to defence and a defence bureaucracy that is more concerned about administrating itself than creating credible defence capabilities.

If we want to carry weight to the table we not only need an effective military but be seen on the world stage (and at the very least by our allies) to be dependable and capable. Sure we play a role in Latvia, but there are NATO countries much smaller than us and with a tiny fraction of our GDP who are doing just as much.

We are seen as cheapskates and dilletants by our allies. What really hurts though is that what we are being seen as is exactly what we are.

🍻
 
We literally have the Russians on our Northern border. Our NATO buddies would be happier if we could take care of our own backyard first.

The Caribbean is a European creation. Let them take care of it.

So what you are saying is that there is enough work for us in our home hemisphere we don't have to go looking for trouble in Europe and Asia?
 
Couldn't agree with you more.

We have a larger GDP than S Korea and Russia. That makes us number 9 in the world. We're roughly 15% ahead of Australia which is number 13.

It may be that our next door neighbour (who is #1 and has 11 times the GDP) gives us an inferiority complex. Or maybe we're led by a government that has tremendous risk aversion and lives in a Pearsonian 1957s fairyland that we are the world's peacekeepers. We played with that role a half century ago and it has become such a strong part of our mythology that it has completely blotted out our actual warfighting history of the War of 1812-4, the Fenian affair, the 1st and 2nd World Wars and Korea and the fact that that role no longer carries any water.

Whatever it is, its resulted in a government that won't do anything but pay lip service to defence and a defence bureaucracy that is more concerned about administrating itself than creating credible defence capabilities.

If we want to carry weight to the table we not only need an effective military but be seen on the world stage (and at the very least by our allies) to be dependable and capable. Sure we play a role in Latvia, but there are NATO countries much smaller than us and with a tiny fraction of our GDP who are doing just as much.

We are seen as cheapskates and dilletants by our allies. What really hurts though is that what we are being seen as is exactly what we are.

🍻
For quite a number of years now, Pearson’s peacekeeping role for Canada has been as out-of-date as the U.N. itself. With our GDP we should be able to afford a much larger, better equipped army, navy and air force. I love my wife dearly, but even she is still in the mindset of Canada taking on a peacekeeper role.

One problem is that the people in DND as well as leading generals and admirals never really complain too much. Yes, they say we need more people and equipment but in the end roll over and say we’ll accept whatever crumbs you throw our way. I just hope that the situation in Ukraine convinces a growing number of Canadians that a strong military is more important in our lives than it has been in decades.

Finally, I may be both older and somewhat naïve but I still believe that it can make a difference for Canadians to not only vote but also write letters to their politicians to express their views. I have regularly sent emails to the prime minister, deputy prime minister, local MP and others in recent months. Some of my thoughts were also quoted in Strong Secure Engaged.
 
So why not offer another pole for the Caribbean to coalesce around. This world is rapidly becoming a matter of who you can bring to the party with you. Why not a Canadian coalition?
It’s an interesting thought, but we’d be potentially kicking a bit of sand on Uncle Sam, do we really need to be doing that right now?
I mean, maybe if we upped the CAF to around 80-82k FT and say another 30-35k in actual deployable reserves, coupled with a 1.9-2.0% defence spending and a full ante on NORAD they’d tolerate us fishing in the Carib.
Until then, we need to get our kit squared away before we start talking about anything else.
 
It’s an interesting thought, but we’d be potentially kicking a bit of sand on Uncle Sam, do we really need to be doing that right now?
I mean, maybe if we upped the CAF to around 80-82k FT and say another 30-35k in actual deployable reserves, coupled with a 1.9-2.0% defence spending and a full ante on NORAD they’d tolerate us fishing in the Carib.
Until then, we need to get our kit squared away before we start talking about anything else.

No, not kicking sand in Uncle Sam's face. Working with him the same way we are already working with Norad, Northcom and in Op Caribe. Perhaps there is a more local sale that can be made to the Canadian taxpayer.
 
No, not kicking sand in Uncle Sam's face. Working with him the same way we are already working with Norad, Northcom and in Op Caribe. Perhaps there is a more local sale that can be made to the Canadian taxpayer.
Convince the Turks and Caicos to become the 11th province? People might care then, air force and many would complain less come posting season too
 
Convince the Turks and Caicos to become the 11th province? People might care then, air force and many would complain less come posting season too
Grenada or some other place put that forward about 30 some odd years ago
 
Convince the Turks and Caicos to become the 11th province? People might care then, air force and many would complain less come posting season too
It was the other way around…T&C lobbied us to take them in as a protectorate and Canada said no formally in 2014 and nothing formal since then, as far as I can tell.

Pity.
 
I think Canada desperately needs to take care of our northern approaches first before we continue to boast and half commit as we have done in the last month. If you need to get to 2% GDP then 3 or 4 bases complete with naval and air capabilities will chew through billions pretty quick. However once established our southern neighbours shouldn't have to cover our asses. Developing northern warfare equipment and capabilities would place us in the niche where we should be. Right now we can't even be counted on to help fight or train in an arctic environment. I don't think Canada was invited to the land portion of NATO winter/arctic exercise in Norway. a winter exercise without Caanada!!!
 
RUMINT: DND (the MND's office) gave Freeland a fairly hefty proposal ~ several (something in excess of 60) Billion dollars ~ mostly for North American/Arctic defence ~ that was late coming in but that wasn't the problem. Very, very senior officials in Finance and TB and the PMO all agree that DND and Procurement and Supply cannot manage anything more than $6.1 Billion, and they are not sure they can even manage that.

The consensus amongst the bureaucratic grownups is that DND, especially, is totally ph_cked in so far as being able to actually put some muscle on to the bare bones of a "plan" is concerned. Procurement and Supply is said to be a) over-burdened, already; b) hide-bound; and c) technologically challenged.

Finance, it is suggested, will be happy to provide more money for defence when/IF both the procurement system and DND's management (civil and military) are reformed.

That's the smartest observation I've heard come out of the PMO in a long time.

Leslie doesn't pull any punches for his former party of choice..


I'm not sure that criticism is solely aimed at the LPC... the DND has turned in billions of dollars they were given because of it's incompetence.

Maybe what's needed are slightly different rules for really big "nationally important" projects when validated operational requirements, politics, industrial strategies and big money all collide.

We certainly do... one would think GOFOs would have been lobbying for this and putting an easy political win in the ears of our overlords. They aren't up to that level of thinking. We promote transactional leaders, not transformational leaders. This is a problem with most big organizations but likely none more than the CAF.... because other organizations stop growing, shrink, or cease to exist when they fail to get creative thinkers to the top.

My sense is that the first validated operational requirements is a HUGE problem. I think that some senior officials in the centre (PMO, Finance and TB) think that our admirals and generals want to buy "toys for the boys" rather than what the country actually needs. My sense, again and it's just that, not a fact, is that Wayne Eyre and Frances Allen and all the rest are, simply, not trusted to act in a responsible, professional manner.

I have a generally positive view of Eyre (despite his stupid remarks about people "retreating into retirement" which make me question just how out of touch he is) and know nothing of Allen so I have a neutral opinion of her.

But whether he likes it or not, his predecessors, and his former peers, made this bed for him and now he's got to lie in.

If he feels like he isn't trusted, perhaps he could look inwardly at that and ask why fully trained and experienced MM Techs (formerly known as Sup Techs) in the Canadian Army aren't trusted to let out more than a $5000 competitive contract. Everyone talking about how we don't have enough people/capacity? Well guess what, we're doing it to ourselves when we've got a trade for this and we won't let them do what we trained them to do because we don't trust them.... because some idiots in Division and Army HQs think that a "contracting irregularity" is some huge institutional risk (it's not) and so we should just hamstring ourselves so we don't have to staff a fucking form to get signed.

And I know everyone thinks I've got a one-track mind about money, but a lot of all the problems everyone is complaining about comes back to the obscene state of the Finance trade and no one wants to get serious about it, so have fun with that.
 
If he feels like he isn't trusted, perhaps he could look inwardly at that and ask why fully trained and experienced MM Techs (formerly known as Sup Techs) in the Canadian Army aren't trusted to let out more than a $5000 competitive contract. Everyone talking about how we don't have enough people/capacity? Well guess what, we're doing it to ourselves when we've got a trade for this and we won't let them do what we trained them to do because we don't trust them.... because some idiots in Division and Army HQs think that a "contracting irregularity" is some huge institutional risk (it's not) and so we should just hamstring ourselves so we don't have to staff a fucking form to get signed.

And I know everyone thinks I've got a one-track mind about money, but a lot of all the problems everyone is complaining about comes back to the obscene state of the Finance trade and no one wants to get serious about it, so have fun with that.
You know what's funny about this, my wife works for a Bank and her signing authority is now unlimited.

It was originally $1000.00 when she first started, then it gradually increased as she became more trusted.

It was $200,000 up until this past year and now it's unlimited. She doesn't even have a formal education in finance LOL other than through experience she has gained at work.

We make no sense 😁
 
Back
Top