• 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.
 
I found VAdm (R) Brock's book "The Thunder and the Sunshine Memoires of a Sailor" to have some good insight into the unification era and the resistance. Its been a while since I have read them but if memory serves me he is firm in his position the the RCAF were onside with it, the Army was ok with and it was the RCN who was the most in resistance.




Again, in the reading I have done that sense didn't seem to be dominant in RCN 1.0, but I am sure it existed to some extent. But I wasn't there...

HMC Dockyard in Halifax was lined with Civis and Sailor alike to wish Landymore fair seas when he was finally subdued.
Likely the Army and AF thought they'd be the big winners in this amalgamation. I think the RCN, as always being the smallest of the three, felt that the loss of it's unique identity would have the most impact on its future.
 
Not sure ‘OP HARRUMPH’ did much for the RCN’s cause. Sailors love to bemoan the ‘slight’ in disproportionately low number of Naval CDS…perhaps they brought it on themselves? Adms Hillborn-Falls (77-80), Anderson (12mos in 93) and McDonald (6wks in 2021) and VAdm Murray (Acting - 11 months 96/97)…so a command duty cycle of 11% (6/54yrs) since integration…is it because they ‘stood by their principles’ or because the Navy thinks it gets it, but doesn’t. McDonald and Baines probably won’t help that RCN-CDS duty-cycle for the next decade or so…
 
There was a short little story in Maclean's about the admirals revolt. But no, the country was swept up in the Flag debate and preparations for the Centennial Celebrations. Also there was the move to remove many of the trappings of being a colony, with Hellyer leading the Colonel Blimps into the brave new world.
A 100% clear, concise and accurate summary of the era ... and yeah, I was there, on regimental duty in Canada and then in Germany.
 
Not sure ‘OP HARRUMPH’ did much for the RCN’s cause. Sailors love to bemoan the ‘slight’ in disproportionately low number of Naval CDS…perhaps they brought it on themselves? Adms Hillborn-Falls (77-80), Anderson (12mos in 93) and McDonald (6wks in 2021) and VAdm Murray (Acting - 11 months 96/97)…so a command duty cycle of 11% (6/54yrs) since integration…is it because they ‘stood by their principles’ or because the Navy thinks it gets it, but doesn’t. McDonald and Baines probably won’t help that RCN-CDS duty-cycle for the next decade or so…

I'm not sure that has much to do with anything. Personally I don't know anyone who bemoans not having Naval CDS's. Honestly the CDS is rarely mentioned in conversation; but CRCN and RCN CPO, all the time.

A 100% clear, concise and accurate summary of the era ... and yeah, I was there, on regimental duty in Canada and then in Germany.

Was the Army and RCAF as compliant as Brock, and others, made them out to be ?

Id be interested to know your opinions and observations as you were in during that time. Admittedly that period in our history fascinates me.
 
Not sure ‘OP HARRUMPH’ did much for the RCN’s cause. Sailors love to bemoan the ‘slight’ in disproportionately low number of Naval CDS…perhaps they brought it on themselves? Adms Hillborn-Falls (77-80), Anderson (12mos in 93) and McDonald (6wks in 2021) and VAdm Murray (Acting - 11 months 96/97)…so a command duty cycle of 11% (6/54yrs) since integration…is it because they ‘stood by their principles’ or because the Navy thinks it gets it, but doesn’t. McDonald and Baines probably won’t help that RCN-CDS duty-cycle for the next decade or so…
Well the stink of being CDS (or not being CDS) hasn't been exclusively draped on the RCN has it? There is enough has-beens, near do wells, and boot lickers from all parts of the CAF to stink up all of Canada. In the end, what CDS has really moved the ball towards anything? We are hostages to the whims of the PMO and always will be.
 
Brock memoirs are by and large self serving ahh looking for a polite word .... Nope can't find one .
Let's just say you should take anything he says on almost any subject , especially if it concerns umm just about anything with a grain of salt.
It doesn't mean the two volumes aren't a great read they are. He had a marvelous grasp of the English language. Let's just say he may remember something's differently then some others.
 
A 100% clear, concise and accurate summary of the era ... and yeah, I was there, on regimental duty in Canada and then in Germany.
I was but a tyke waving my tiny Centennial Flag during the Dominion Day parade being led by the pied piper Bobby Jimbee (sic) during that time. But I had an inkling of what was happening. I vaguely remember watching the RCN gun run in Brandon, or could it just be figment of my imagination.
But you would of had a front row seat on the shenanigan's for sure!
 
I found VAdm (R) Brock's book "The Thunder and the Sunshine Memoires of a Sailor" to have some good insight into the unification era and the resistance. Its been a while since I have read them but if memory serves me he is firm in his position the the RCAF were onside with it, the Army was ok with and it was the RCN who was the most in resistance.




Again, in the reading I have done that sense didn't seem to be dominant in RCN 1.0, but I am sure it existed to some extent. But I wasn't there...

HMC Dockyard in Halifax was lined with Civis and Sailor alike to wish Landymore fair seas when he was finally subdued.
The perception was, in many places ~ especially where I was serving ~ that we were adopting the RCAF's organization and management principles. There was considerable angst in the Army about the centralization of many support functions into bases. The fear, which proved to be at least partially true, was that it would weaken unit cohesion.

The unified command structure ~ Mobile Command for me and most of my friends ~ was popular with the Army. We, officers and soldiers on regimental duty, liked the idea of organic aviation ~ including "our own" fighters ... OK, they were only CF-5s. but they were "our own" organic, close air support.

Some Air Force noses were out of joint because Air Transport Command and Air Defence Command were "lesser" in command ranks and status than were Maritime and Mobile Commands.

I guess I understood the Navy's feelings about the "jolly green jumper," I cannot recall any of my friends who actually liked Mr Hellyer's new uniform, but most of us didn't;'t understand all of the Navy's objections and I, at least, thought that Maritime Command was, like Mobile Command, a step in the right direction.
 
Not sure ‘OP HARRUMPH’ did much for the RCN’s cause. Sailors love to bemoan the ‘slight’ in disproportionately low number of Naval CDS…perhaps they brought it on themselves? Adms Hillborn-Falls (77-80), Anderson (12mos in 93) and McDonald (6wks in 2021) and VAdm Murray (Acting - 11 months 96/97)…so a command duty cycle of 11% (6/54yrs) since integration…is it because they ‘stood by their principles’ or because the Navy thinks it gets it, but doesn’t. McDonald and Baines probably won’t help that RCN-CDS duty-cycle for the next decade or so…
McDonald-Baines-Edmundson

The Axis of Weasels? 😀
 
Brock memoirs are by and large self serving ahh looking for a polite word .... Nope can't find one .
Let's just say you should take anything he says on almost any subject , especially if it concerns umm just about anything with a grain of salt.
It doesn't mean the two volumes aren't a great read they are. He had a marvelous grasp of the English language. Let's just say he may remember something's differently then some others.

Interesting. What draws you to these conclusions ?
 
The perception was, in many places ~ especially where I was serving ~ that we were adopting the RCAF's organization and management principles. There was considerable angst in the Army about the centralization of many support functions into bases. The fear, which proved to be at least partially true, was that it would weaken unit cohesion.

The unified command structure ~ Mobile Command for me and most of my friends ~ was popular with the Army. We, officers and soldiers on regimental duty, liked the idea of organic aviation ~ including "our own" fighters ... OK, they were only CF-5s. but they were "our own" organic, close air support.

Some Air Force noses were out of joint because Air Transport Command and Air Defence Command were "lesser" in command ranks and status than were Maritime and Mobile Commands.

I guess I understood the Navy's feelings about the "jolly green jumper," I cannot recall any of my friends who actually liked Mr Hellyer's new uniform, but most of us didn't;'t understand all of the Navy's objections and I, at least, thought that Maritime Command was, like Mobile Command, a step in the right direction.

Thanks for the info.

Looking back on it, do you maintain the same opinions and positions ? If not how have the changed and why ?
 
The perception was, in many places ~ especially where I was serving ~ that we were adopting the RCAF's organization and management principles. There was considerable angst in the Army about the centralization of many support functions into bases. The fear, which proved to be at least partially true, was that it would weaken unit cohesion.

The unified command structure ~ Mobile Command for me and most of my friends ~ was popular with the Army. We, officers and soldiers on regimental duty, liked the idea of organic aviation ~ including "our own" fighters ... OK, they were only CF-5s. but they were "our own" organic, close air support.

Some Air Force noses were out of joint because Air Transport Command and Air Defence Command were "lesser" in command ranks and status than were Maritime and Mobile Commands.

I guess I understood the Navy's feelings about the "jolly green jumper," I cannot recall any of my friends who actually liked Mr Hellyer's new uniform, but most of us didn't;'t understand all of the Navy's objections and I, at least, thought that Maritime Command was, like Mobile Command, a step in the right direction.
The East Coast Admiral (who was in charge of Maritime Command) was ecstatic that he was getting control of Greenwood. I guess there was a plethora of Flight Lieutenants (Capts) who weren't doing much and he went in there with a scythe and cut a lot of the deadwood. According to the publications I've read at least.
 
The initial iteration of Maritime Command would have been great, the Navy had been advocating for control of the MPA community for years. But as per all the other maneuvering and backstabbing post Hellyer, the Air Force mafia was able to wrest control of all the flying communities from the Army and Navy.

In the end, a whole lot of churn and burn for not much return.
 
I read them and did a wee bit of digging . I enjoyed them immensely to be honest . Like I said he's a great writer.
His biggest problems seems to be his ego tended to get in the way and the venom directed at all and sundry at those who opposed him
Well I guess that's what memoirs are for .
 
Thanks for the info.

Looking back on it, do you maintain the same opinions and positions ? If not how have the changed and why ?

I still remain 100% convinced that Mr Hellyer's unified (joint) commands are much, Much, MUCH better than anything that has come since.

I thought the formation of Air Command in 1975 was an act of policy vandalism perpetrated by a bunch of short-sighted, vainglorious military wannabes which was allowed to succeed only because the commanders of Maritime and Mobile Command (Turcot, Milroy and Waters) were weak, narrow-minded old men who never put their organic Army and Navy Aviation arms on an equal footing with their ships and guns and tanks.

Mr Hellyer was wrong about several things, but his organizational model, of "functional" (his word) unified commands was better than anything we've had before or since.
 
I read them and did a wee bit of digging . I enjoyed them immensely to be honest . Like I said he's a great writer.
His biggest problems seems to be his ego tended to get in the way and the venom directed at all and sundry at those who opposed him
Well I guess that's what memoirs are for .

How so though ? He defiantly help no punches in his distain for the politicians and officers who pushed the unification program. Feel free to PM is if you wish. The period of unification fascinates me so I tend to pick that subject when I get the chance.
 
I still remain 100% convinced that Mr Hellyer's unified (joint) commands are much, Much, MUCH better than anything that has come since.

I thought the formation of Air Command in 1975 was an act of policy vandalism perpetrated by a bunch of short-sighted, vainglorious military wannabes which was allowed to succeed only because the commanders of Maritime and Mobile Command (Turcot, Milroy and Waters) were weak, narrow-minded old men who never put their organic Army and Navy Aviation arms on an equal footing with their ships and guns and tanks.

Mr Hellyer was wrong about several things, but his organizational model, of "functional" (his word) unified commands was better than anything we've had before or since.

Would that have more to do with HQ bloat ?
 
I still remain 100% convinced that Mr Hellyer's unified (joint) commands are much, Much, MUCH better than anything that has come since.
Similar to the USN? Even though the Marines are a "separate" service, they are so integrated with the Navy that their operations are seemless.
 
Back
Top