Mission: Remaking the military
Canada must act decisively on the new defence paper. Our security depends on it
By LEWIS MACKENZIE
Thursday, April 21, 2005 Updated at 8:42 AM EST
From Thursday's Globe and Mail
For the past decade, a long line of prime ministers, ministers of foreign affairs and ministers of defence have promised ad nauseam a new and relevant white paper on defence to replace the dated and unsupported 1994 edition. While the Senate and various think tanks across the country filled the policy vacuum with excellent research and recommendations, the Canadian Forces were left to react as best they could to day-to-day crises without a clear understanding of what their political masters wanted from them. The military, forced to sacrifice more of its budget than any other government department in the battle to slay the deficit dragon, became seriously distrustful of its political masters.
Tuesday's release of A Defence Policy for the 21st Century reflects a realistic reaction to an increasingly dangerous world. The proposed changes are modest in scale, but decades overdue; if implemented, they'll make Canada a safer place and will permit our forces to once again play a meaningful role on the international stage.
There are those who see our country as a peaceful Eden inhabited by morally superior people with no axe to grind with anyone. Surely no terrorist would want to attack us when there are so many truly offensive people in the world more deserving of being targeted?
Fortunately, the review sees through this myth and assigns as the Canadian Forces' highest priority the defence of Canada and North America in close co-operation with the United States.
The command structure needed to respond quickly to any and all threats will be simplified from coast to coast. Personnel from the navy, army and air force will find themselves serving cheek by jowl in the same headquarters in the pursuit of operational synergies.
The review acknowledges that Canadians are now under greater threat than during the Cold War. To cope, the Canadian Forces will be restructured to enhance operational readiness.
Canada's well-earned reputation as a major player in the world's trouble spots has taken a beating in the international arena. When I retired in 1993, Canada had major contingents serving in Cambodia, Cyprus, Somalia, Bosnia, Croatia, Sinai, and the Golan Heights, not to forget the more than 5,000 Canadians still serving with NATO forces stationed in Germany. All in all, close to 10,000 Canadian service personnel were helping to maintain international peace and security. Reduced budgets, 30,000 fewer personnel and serious sustainability problems resulted in our "exit stage left." Now a modest contingent in Afghanistan is our only major deployment. As far as UN deployments go, we have gone from No. 1 in 1993 with close to 5,000 souls deployed, to No. 36 with a mere 300 Canadians wearing the blue beret.
The review confirms that Canada intends to build its capacity to take the fight against terrorism offshore, rather than wait for terrorism's practitioners to show up in our own backyard. To do this, we must be capable of getting to the source of the problem -- to failed states, for example -- without begging a lift from someone else. Last year, it took Canada a full month to move just 300 soldiers to Haiti -- which is in our own hemisphere -- not exactly what you'd call rapid reaction.
The review prompted an audible sigh of relief from retired dinosaurs like myself who have been pleading for the creation of an expeditionary capability based on ships designed to lift the army and its kit to the world's trouble spots. It foresees the creation of two new joint formations (of all three services working together). The formation with the shortest fuse will be the special operations group based on Joint Task Force 2, with supporting helicopter, army and navy forces as required. When these folks go to work in the morning, without prior warning they just might not make it home for a few months or so. The second formation, on 10 days' notice to deploy, will be the Standing Contingency Task Force, made up of designated navy, army, air force and special operations personnel. Overseeing and commanding these formations will be a national command structure with operational efficiency as its first priority.
The defence review confirms the promise of increasing the regular force by 5,000 and the reserves by 3,000. Fortunately, the ill-founded and impractical idea promised in the last election to create a "peacekeeping brigade" has been dropped. Constabulary peacekeepers are unemployed these days; what the world needs to sort out the thugs in places like Darfur are well-trained, well-equipped combat soldiers who show up in a timely manner.
Regrettably, the review's implementation faces major hurdles. Under current procurement procedures, it will take more than a decade to bring new major equipment on line, even if the cash is available. In the interest of national security, we must change procurement procedures. I'm also concerned that the esprit de corps that exists in formed regiments will be difficult to foster if the new special forces are based largely on temporary organizational structures. U.S. experience in Iraq confirms that homogeneous formed units with regimental spirit and élan are superior to those created for the event.
The plan to restructure the Canadian Forces in order to meet the demands of the review has yet to be written. I hope that Chief of Defence Staff General Rick Hillier revisits the option of bringing already formed units up to strength and using them as stable building blocks in the creation of the new formations.
The 1994 white paper on defence gathered dust and ridicule. In the interests of our security and our reputation, let's hope this current review has a better fate.
Retired major-general Lewis MacKenzie was the first commander of UN peacekeeping forces in Sarajevo.
