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

Students view of Canadian military power changing?

ltmaverick25

Sr. Member
Inactive
Mentor
Reaction score
0
Points
210
I wasnt sure which sub forum to post this in so I figured I would give it a try here.  Feel free to move it if I have placed it in the wrong spot..

I have just finished marking papers for a first year university class in Canadian military history.  I noticed a pattern in the conclusions students were making.  The short of it is, the majority of the students felt that Canada was a growing military power.  I asked around among some friends that are also marking papers this term for different military history classes.  Alot of them were saying the same thing.  We asked a couple of professors that have taught these courses before, and for the most part, this seems to be a very new trend.  I may be over reacting a bit, but, the feedback I got from some of the professors was that words like Canada and power dont often get used together in the same sentence unless its to discuss Canada's lack thereof.  When we take up the marks of these papers we plan to ask students thoughts on this directly to see if we are reading this properly.

In the meantime, any thoughts?  Do you think that the mission in Afghanistan is somehow changing the way Canadians see their military and the relative strength it carries?  Is there anything else that could be behind this new line of thinking?
 
I think that the heightened awareness of things military has resulted in the change.  Russian "Bears" pushing the airspace envelope with CF18s responding, the issues regarding military spending, and the Arctic, and of course Afghanistan have all been in the news lately.
Just curious though.  Do the students see Canada being a growing military power a good thing or something that should be protested?  I wonder if this is a widespread trend or just among students who are more aware as indicated by their interest in taking courses in Canadian military history.
 
Yo ltmaverick. Very interesting topic...

In my view, and I could be wrong, "military power" is intrinsically linked to capability; has our capability increased? Yes, but somewhat marginally. Less than 20% increase in staff, some new choppers, a few new howitzers, "new" tanks, marginal purchases of new vehicles. I think what has changed more is the will to use, the will to exert, which has trickled down to the ranks under the form of a renewed professionalism and institutional pride, all of which could outwardly give the impression of "power".

Spanky add good points. But I think some of the issues mentionned here play nicely into that analytical trap (the name of which I forget), that tends to see otherwise unrelated factors as confirmation of one's own hypothesis, i.e. increase in power. Specifically I am talking about the Cf-18/Bear thingy, which has been a game both sides like to play (let's admit it) for 60 years, but just now happens to be publicly brandied about and thus seen to fit nicely in that "renewed power" scheme.

In the end though, I believe that even our will to use is in the spirits of the time more than an autonomous desire to increase capability and power. I mean let's face it: while some minor players deployed to Irak (Estonia and Georgia) clearly with a view to renewed military assertiveness, others players in Irak (i.e. Spain) or Germany (i.e. France and Germany) had their arm twisted before they deployed but eventually did, under constraint of alliances but also because it is the spirit of the time, i.e. war on terror.

Now, as long as the students don't rush and buy Samuel Huntington's Clash of Civilizations and blindly read the final civilization conflict into it (it clearly seems it is one, but his is not the almighty theory) we'll be fine...  :D

My two cents
 
ltmaverick25 said:
In the meantime, any thoughts?  Do you think that the mission in Afghanistan is somehow changing the way Canadians see their military and the relative strength it carries?  Is there anything else that could be behind this new line of thinking?
Maybe they have good teachers in high school  ;D

Seriously though, I think that your conclusions are correct. It's probably the fact that the military has been in the news and they are hearing our combat mission and the new equipment we've purchased in recent years.
Hmmm, I'll see what I can find out. I have some astute Gr.10's and Gr.12's this morning....I'll see what they have to say and report back.
 
Other factors could well be playing into their opinions and thoughts as well. Those recruiting ads have been bombarding the television and radio for years now. Words like "combat" and "war" are being used on the news regularly. That term "peacekeeping" is slipping to the outer periphery when it comes to describing Canadian troops and what they do. Perhaps... and most pertinent, although we'll never know this for sure..... is suppertime conversation with mom and dad. Suppertime was always a time in my family (and many others) for discussion on things going on in the world. Whether mom and pop are for this war or against it, it doesn't matter, if it is a topic that hits the supper table, young minds will be coming to grips that the Canadian military IS fighting an aggressive war and accordingly, they will begin to view their military has one of growing strength.
 
I think maybe this could be a good thing. Young Canadians will finally understand that it is good to deploy your military in the interest of peace (in the form of peacekeeping or in this case, fighting an oppressive group like taliban). In some instances, the missions are probably viewed as "clean" such as SFOR in Bosnia. Other missions require us to get "our hands dirty" like Afghanistan.

That is the reality of it in my view. Some people craved the "clean" missions only that they thought made us look so noble and politically correct. But at thend of the day, we are more than show poodles, have to show we are damn good dogs with a mean bite when required.
 
I do think there may be more of a shift in the Canadian public but I think the fact that it is a military history class introduces an inherent bias into the way the papers are written and maybe amplifies this more.
 
Spanky said:
I think that the heightened awareness of things military has resulted in the change.  Russian "Bears" pushing the airspace envelope with CF18s responding, the issues regarding military spending, and the Arctic, and of course Afghanistan have all been in the news lately.
Just curious though.  Do the students see Canada being a growing military power a good thing or something that should be protested?  I wonder if this is a widespread trend or just among students who are more aware as indicated by their interest in taking courses in Canadian military history.

Based solely on the papers I saw, I would say that its either a neutral feeling, or perhaps slightly to the positive.  Seemed more rather a statement of fact from their perception then a statement of evaluation.
 
ex-Sup said:
Maybe they have good teachers in high school  ;D

Seriously though, I think that your conclusions are correct. It's probably the fact that the military has been in the news and they are hearing our combat mission and the new equipment we've purchased in recent years.
Hmmm, I'll see what I can find out. I have some astute Gr.10's and Gr.12's this morning....I'll see what they have to say and report back.

That would be excellent, looking forward to it.
 
ltmaverick25 said:
That would be excellent, looking forward to it.
Sorry  :( The lesson took too long and I didn't have time today. I'll try and remember to do it tomorrow.
 
ltmaverick25 said:
The short of it is, the majority of the students felt that Canada was a growing military power.
I'd be interested to hear some of the arguments made in support of this theory.  What are the precieved metrics by which this growth in power has been measured?
 
They havent analyzed our military power in any kind of depth.  I would more characterize it as a general accepted state of being.

These papers are for the most part on topics relating to the first world war.  Its in the conclusions where the students will drift from their topic into current day activities.  This is where I am finding statements like "If it wasnt for our position in X conflict, Canada would not be the military power that it is today"  And thats about all were getting there.

We are going to ask them what they think of this and have a discussion about it in class as well, but the papers themselves werent about today, they were about yesturday, and then draw conclusions about today.
 
Well, we are where we are today due to our past. After WWII, we became the world's first "middle" power.  We have a history of consistently punching above our weight and continue to do so to this day. It isn't really a new thing with regards to our relative strength...... we just seem to be getting more of the spotlight these days. After years of cutbacks, the FRP and a string of peacekeepingm ops, we're emerging from those dark days and getting some recognition. I would be interested to hear feedback on these students thoughts though.
 
Look at battles like the Gothic Line, Passchendale, Vimy Ridge, Ypres, Amiens. Canadians fought those battles because either no one else would or no one else could get it done (maybe not so much Amiens and Ypres).

But between that time and now, things went downhill (cuts in funding, Diefenbaker, Liberals [Yes, I went there, sorry]).

Military funding has increased with Stephen Harper in office, but not a whole lot more (apparently) which has given the DND/Minister of National Defence an opportunity to expand the military and upgrade while they have this increased budget, plus with the media covering the operations in A-stan and books like Fifteen Days; more and more people are becoming involved with the military.

My father has even said that Canada is a growing military power (he thinks Canada is a larger/higher military power than the USA based on training, not on population or equipment [which the USA relies on]) and he likes to see the Army (Armoured regiments especially [he was a Strathcona]) growing.

Sure, there are parts of the Canadian Forces that are messed up and need serious makeovers but draw a united diagram, combine all of CF history... this country's military is hella amazing.
 
TimBit said:
Yo ltmaverick. Very interesting topic...

In my view, and I could be wrong, "military power" is intrinsically linked to capability;

I would say "assertiveness" is just as important as capability.
 
I would disagree with your base hypothesis.

From my point of view, Canada is returning to the military middle power it used to be, and not growing from its position it once held pre-1990.

But a student's perception would be post 1990, so to them, I suppose they would consider our country to be growing as a military power.
 
Yes I would say so. When I came to Canada my impression was of Canada being a soft power (and a leading producer of Canada Dry.. yeah go figure), very much like the Scandinavian countries. As time passed, I read more and more about the  country's military past and how badly it fumbled the ball in the post war era. 
(I am still a student, final year of Univ.)

In fact, only since the conservatives came to power, has my -perception- changed that Canada is becoming a greater military power. As a newcomer to Canada I had always found that the Canadian Forces were well respected, but badly neglected.

Maybe its the increased coverage of the Afghan conflict, the recent purchases of badly needed equipment, the intensified recruitment advt. campaign or even coverage of our vast oil reserves, my -perception- is that Canada's military is becoming stronger after the 80s-90s. What actual military status it might achieve, only time will tell.

Thats my $ CAD .02 as a student.
 
 
The way I see it, whether students view their perception of growth in Canadian military power as good or bad, I do appreciate teachers and professors like ltmaverick fostering open conversation on the topic. Worst case scenario, they learn something and form a solid opinion.
 
Back in Grade 12 history class, we spent nearly a month on Canada's roll in WWI and Rwanda, including writing essays on Vimy Ridge and Ypres. I'd bet now you couldn't convince a single student from that class that Canada was an insignificant military power then or now.
Maybe because of the war in Afghanistan Canada is deeply involved in, history teachers are placing more emphasise on Canada's military power, capabilities and significance now than before.
 
This is some good feedback, I would be interested in hearing from more students and or civilians on this matter.  My class is weekly on wed nights.  So I wont be able to report back what the students had to say until then.
 
Back
Top