Canada’s First National Security Policy

By LCol (Ret) J. Cecil Berezowski

“Given the responsibility to address new threats, such as non-state terrorism, and to ensure effective emergency management, the Government will develop, with its domestic partners, Canada’s first national security policy. This will publicly set forth the principles that will guide the Government’s actions and serve as a blueprint for effectively securing Canada in a way that strengthens the open nature of our society.”
—Speech from the Throne – 03 Feb/04

Having laboured over a number of national security briefs for the Federation of Military and United Services Institutes of Canada (FMUSIC) that were presented to government over the past decade, one could only exclaim, “Remarkable,” upon hearing the above penultimate promise of the throne speech.

During the FMUSIC Biennial Meeting Oct 18-19, 2003 in Edmonton, we affirmed that our brief “CANADA’S STRATEGIC SECURITY XXI” remains as germane and valid today as it was in February 2001 when our then national Chairman, MGen Clive Addy of Ottawa, so eloquently presented our brief to both the Commons and the Senate National Security and Defence committees.

Moreover, it had but one recommendation and it finally seems to be echoed in the words of the Throne Speech. We had advised:

“The first step is for government to charter an independent blue-ribbon panel of experts to quickly craft a national security strategy for the 21^st century. The panel would represent different political viewpoints and varied kinds of professional experience. Its mandate would be to find maximum, feasible convergence on issues of paramount importance to the security of Canada. This strategy would guide and coordinate our future foreign, defence and economic policies, plans, programs and resources over the next 10 to 15 years. The panel should report to Parliament.”

And, perhaps persistence does pay off, because in our 1994 FMUSIC Brief “CANADA’S DEFENCE DILEMMA: BACK TO THE FUTURE” presented to the Special Joint Committee on Canada’s Defence Policy by then national chairman, MGen Clive Milner of Kingston, we stated:

“The current public review by the Special Joint Parliamentary Committees on foreign policy and defence will, ideally, also become the strategy formulation process for national leaders. As a minimum, it should result in national agreement on the three most fundamental underpinnings of any nation-state. National leaders must re-affirm our National Purpose and all those enduring national values that are uniquely Canadian. Next, they must confirm our broad National Vital Interests that are fundamental to Canada’s very survival. Finally, government leaders and parliamentarians must translate those national interests into an expression of National Goals. Parliamentarians...must now update national strategy for achieving future foreign policy and defence policy goals.”

And earlier, in our 1993 FMUSIC Brief “CANADA’S DEFENCE DILEMMA: A SHRINKING DEFENCE CAPABILITY”briefed to government by then national chairman, the late LGen Reg Lane of Victoria, we stated:

“Today’s rather explosive world can anticipate ‘wars of national-interest’ and ‘wars of conscience’. The first is all out high-intensity, high technology warefare. The latter involves peacekeeping / peace-making anywhere in the world. ...To get through the next two decades safely, a global coalition of the democracies must be capable of rapidly responding to sudden regional threats, either as part of the UN or outside it depending upon the ‘VETO.’ ...Facing this global challenge, Canada’s defence planning and force development should be based on national security objectives. Defence must be seen as a discrete structure designed to evolve future defence and related external policies...It must not be driven by short-term partisan politics. A new Parliamentary Joint Standing Committee on External Affairs and National Defence could be a useful instrument here.”

And even earlier, in our 1991 FMUSIC brief “WHAT SHOULD CANADA’S DEFENCE POLICY BE THROUGH THE 1990s?” briefed to government by then national chairman, the late LGen Reg Lane, we stated:

“Most Canadians do not want neutrality nor do they want to leave our defence to another nation no matter how friendly it may be. Canadians want our sovereignty to be respected and to be listened to on the world stage.... However, we are probably unique amongst mature, middle-power countries in not having a well-defined and integrated national security policy in which the political, economic and military dimensions find their proper place. .... It is imperative for the government to annually update its appraisal of the national security strategies, defence policies and spending priorities. These are the basis for forecasting long-term expenditures.”

Gosh, it seems I did draft a few briefs about our national security over the past decade as chairman of the FMUSIC Defence Committee. To finally hear in the Throne Speech that the government is to produce Canada’s first national security policy, what else can one say but, “Reassuringly REMARKABLE!”

Now, all that remains is to find the right folks with the right stuff to sit on the Blue Ribbon Panel (and it is imperative it be a broad Panel) to craft a national security strategy for Canada. This will be the trick - to leave off the eager bureaucrats with their agendas, the political sycophants and the social activists with their political correctness.

As in all things strategic, the over-riding need for leadership remains crucial. And national leadership will be the most important single factor in creating the Panel. These chosen few will need courage, conviction, historic reach, infinite judgement and an enduring sense of the Canadian condition. WHO MIGHT THEY BE ? _

      top
 previous article   |   News 2/04 index   |   next article