Canada/United States Defence Co-operation

By RAdm (Ret) Ken Summers

This message was presented before the Standing Committee on National Defence and Veteran Affairs (SCONDVA) on Oct. 28, 2003

In light of my involvement with NOAC and my experiences with the US military during the 1990 Gulf War, and as defence attaché at the Canadian Embassy in Washington and later at SACLANT in Norfolk, Virginia, I was asked to appear before the Committee as part of their study on Can/US Defence Co-operation. It was evident that the Committee was seeking a “way ahead” for Canada, one that could be adopted following the forthcoming leadership change in Government.

Many ideas were explored during the two hours of testimony and questioning that hopefully, will be part of their final report. The Committee shortly will embark on a fact- finding visit to Washington and Norfolk and, as such, the appearance was timely and should lead to further discussions with their US counterparts.

Essentially, my opening comments set the scene for questions by addressing the following four questions:
•  What does the US seek from CAN/US Defence Agreements?
•  What should Canada want to achieve from these mutual Agreements?
•  What could/should Canada additionally contribute to mutual defence burden sharing?
•  What steps should Canada take in the near term?

What does the US seek from Can/US Defence Agreements? First of all, defence-wise Canada is now more important than ever to the US following 9/11 as the threat of an attack through Canadian territory has returned. Recall that it was the threat of the manned bomber attack in the 1950/60s that spawned NORAD. The subsequent threat change to ICBMs that was countered by the US based defensive missile shield that reduced the actual importance of Canada’s defence co-operation. But after 9/11, once again Canada’s involvement is considered vital for defensive burden sharing against this new terrorist threat that can attack US cities/targets from air, sea and land. The US doesn’t understand why we are not more concerned and why we are not putting a priority effort into defence and security.

So what does the US seek from Canada? Above all else, the US desires a high-level sign of a substantial Canadian government commitment to defence and security. Specifically, the United States is looking for:

a. a substantial and directed increase in defence and security spending;

b. a comprehensive defence review (not another update) that includes and addresses the post 9/11 terrorist threat;

c. a real commitment to continental surveillance and operations co-ordination involving air, sea, land forces as well as civil agencies;

d. a government undertaking to move forward in BMD planning talks notwithstanding that there are certain philosophical differences of opinion. Involvement does not imply complete commitment.

The bottom line is that if we don’t do the above, the US will do it unilaterally. The Canadian military will be considered irrelevant and insignificant and probably beyond recovery. As a direct result, Canada won’t find itself in the tent, let alone have a seat at the table on matters of National Security that are vital to Canadians.

What should Canada want to achieve from these mutual Agreements?

Canada already benefits so much from present day arrangements, most of which are not widely known. Foremost of course, is the protection umbrella provided largely by the US, for any threat to Canada is seen as a threat to the US itself. The relationships between the militaries features an unparalleled closeness that benefits us in nearly all military operations, in access to training facilities, in intelligence-sharing, in technology transfer, and in equipment procurement and industrial co-operation.

Nevertheless, there are several key goals we should seek in our discussions with the US.

a. A joint involvement in the protection and reaction to traditional continental and post 9/11 threats.

b. An active, respected & equal voice in consultations on continental defence issues and a seat at the table for global defence and security issues like the Middle East/Iraq/Iran.

c. A mutual, robust & rapid response to disasters – natural or otherwise.

d. Assistance, advice/guidance, and understanding as our military evolves under a Transformation to a modern, more effective threat and mission oriented force.

e. A quid pro quo in economic issues. In US government prioritization, Security trumps Trade. This cannot be emphasized strongly enough.

f. It follows then that strong Canadian support in defence and security should bear economic dividends to Canada, especially for R&D and access to US defence contracts, as well as assisting in the resolution of several high profile trade issues.

What could and should Canada additionally contribute to defence burden sharing?

Talks are underway with the US to consider a NORAD expansion and define our relationship with US Northern Command. Both are key to the future of Canada’s defence and security posture. We should participate actively and energetically, with strong Government-wide support, in the Planning Team’s efforts in Colorado with an expectation of near term decisions on increased air, land, and maritime mutual co-operation. Those decisions should be immediately followed by national assignment, albeit separately controlled, of resources available for continental surveillance and reaction.

Canada could easily contribute to increasing coordinated surveillance of continental North America. Canadian space programs under consideration could be accelerated and implemented to complement and augment projected US systems and space programs. Moreover, Canada could and should integrate with the US the present day “Recognized Maritime Operational Picture” on both coasts. This would include the modern High Definition Surface Warning Radars surveillance on both coasts that extend beyond our Economic Zones and significantly cover blind spots in US surveillance of the approaches to our continent. This is already being passed between our navies; why not fuse it with the NORAD aerospace picture?

Complementary to the mutually coordinated surveillance would be the designation of Air and Naval forces as being available, at appropriate readiness states, to respond when directed nationally to continental threats. Essentially, this is simply a dual tasking of national forces at the ready today for national operations/emergencies.

As a priority, Canada should provide additional soldiers to the Army so that today’s land operations would not have to depend on 20 per cent augmentation from the Militia. This would permit the Army to re-orient the Militia to be primarily an “Aid to the Civil Power” force.

The militia Units could then specialize by providing such badly needed capabilities as elements of a Disaster Assistance Response Team (DART) that have been so effective in disaster relief operations such as the recent DART response to the earthquake in Turkey.

In today’s threat environment, Canada and the US need many such teams spread throughout the two nations. The militia could also provide NBC Monitoring Teams and teams specifically

capable of providing assistance and co-ordination capabilities to national/provincial/local authorities.

This is not unlike the Naval Reserves who can today provide Port Security through dedicated teams for Control of Shipping, Harbour Defence, Mine Warfare and Diving Operations. For the Militia, this re-orientation would be an important contribution to a continental threat reaction capability – a capability that today is sadly lacking.

What steps should Canada take in the near term?

The ball is in our court if we wish to better our relationship with the US. As mentioned earlier, the US views all issues including diplomatic, economic and trade through the lens of security. We must acknowledge this linkage and fact and act accordingly.

The one single action we can and must take is to send, as soon as possible after a change in national leadership, a high level (PM led?) well publicized delegation (perhaps even bipartisan) to Washington with a clear message of commitment to:

a. undertake an immediate and comprehensive defence and security review that takes into account the world and our continent post 9/11;

b. substantially increase defence and security funding in parallel with the review and direct it towards prioritized capabilities consistent with the review;

c. seek the advice and guidance of the US and undertake closer co-operation on continental and other defence and security issues;

d. indicate willingness to progress, as a priority, Planning Team discussions in Colorado, the CF Transformation, and BMD/TMD talks.

Should we do so, I would expect a very warm reception in Washington and a new and positive direction in Canadian/US defence, security, diplomatic and economic relations. Surely this is in our best interests. _

      top
 previous article   |   News 1/04 index   |   next article