Canadian Foreign Policy & Affairs II

[shreddog]

Originally Posted by Truenorth00

The Army really got shafted under Harper. They got the TAPV which is rather useless for near-peer. They got the G-wagon which is better than the Iltis. ...

Weren't the G-Wagons pre-Harper? Again, from the outside the reasons I heard that FLCV was neutered was that the Army got "loaded" during afghanistan. TAPV was never meant to be CCV, but the problem was if you don't get the full suite of capabilities you overstrech what you get.

Originally Posted by Truenorth00

Leaving a hole in defence and blaming their successor for it seems to the CPC version of LPC signing climate pledges they know their successors can't meet.

Which is always why incumbents plans the heavy lifting after their current term ... JIC.

[casper]

Originally Posted by shreddog

Actually, according to the PBO that would be a false arguement.

I have no idea what the CPC plan is (or if there is one), but the PBO has clearly said that the LPC plan will come no where close to the 2% ...


If I have to choose between the PBO or Blair, I know who I’d believe …

They can both be correct.

They published a plan in the policy statement that has a combination of budgeted items with some timeline and some more aspirational items that have no budgets or clear timelines. If they make some of those aspirational items (e.g., air defence, submarines, etc) more concreate then they will better than what the PBO is forecasting. Will we hit the 2%? Probably not. Can we get a lot closer with Liberals over CPC? Yes.

[YOWetal]

Originally Posted by casper

They can both be correct.

They published a plan in the policy statement that has a combination of budgeted items with some timeline and some more aspirational items that have no budgets or clear timelines. If they make some of those aspirational items (e.g., air defence, submarines, etc) more concreate then they will better than what the PBO is forecasting. Will we hit the 2%? Probably not. Can we get a lot closer with Liberals over CPC? Yes.

Don't forget the growth trajectory also matters. Conservatives turning off the immigration tap but also opening up resource development could mean higher or lower growth under them. Grow the economy by 10% and the target becomes that much harder to reach. There is a reason Greece can meet their goal easily.

[hipster duck]

Originally Posted by someone123

I don't like Trump and think he is a terrible choice for president (again) but this may be for the best in the long run. Europe can and should look after itself. This may be a self-defeating strategy for the USA; I'd rather see Europe defend against Russia and other countries than have them rely on incompetent American leaders to solve their security problems. And the timing is actually kind of nice since Russia and China have ruined their reputation so much now in the EU. I don't think WW2 era fears about Germany or Japan are relevant these days.

Canada needs its own proper military too and shouldn't be far behind a country like France on the world stage in this century.

This is exactly my pov.

While I think we, as Canadians, should throw our weight around a little more given our size, we can get away with abdicating our defense responsibilities to the States because we are firmly in their geographical orbit, separated from our adversaries by the same oceans, and we're self-sufficient in energy.

A country like Germany had the past twenty years to have its cake and eat it too. With no significant energy resources of its own, it relied on cheap Russian gas, let the Americans pick up its security tab, and propped up an artificially low currency that allowed it to have export advantages that destroyed the economies of its European partners - notably Mediterranean countries - that it then gave lectures to about austerity. Watching them fall apart gives me a sense of (no pun intended) schadenfreude.

[whatnext]

Originally Posted by hipster duck

This is exactly my pov.

While I think we, as Canadians, should throw our weight around a little more given our size, we can get away with abdicating our defense responsibilities to the States because we are firmly in their geographical orbit, separated from our adversaries by the same oceans, and we're self-sufficient in energy.

A country like Germany had the past twenty years to have its cake and eat it too. With no significant energy resources of its own, it relied on cheap Russian gas, let the Americans pick up its security tab, and propped up an artificially low currency that allowed it to have export advantages that destroyed the economies of its European partners - notably Mediterranean countries - that it then gave lectures to about austerity. Watching them fall apart gives me a sense of (no pun intended) schadenfreude.

I'm not sure how having a low Euro harms the European basket case countries, most who rely on tourism. It makes travel those places more popular. And German exports never competed at the bottom of the market anyway.

[YOWetal]

Originally Posted by hipster duck

This is exactly my pov.

While I think we, as Canadians, should throw our weight around a little more given our size, we can get away with abdicating our defense responsibilities to the States because we are firmly in their geographical orbit, separated from our adversaries by the same oceans, and we're self-sufficient in energy.

A country like Germany had the past twenty years to have its cake and eat it too. With no significant energy resources of its own, it relied on cheap Russian gas, let the Americans pick up its security tab, and propped up an artificially low currency that allowed it to have export advantages that destroyed the economies of its European partners - notably Mediterranean countries - that it then gave lectures to about austerity. Watching them fall apart gives me a sense of (no pun intended) schadenfreude.

Not sure about this theory though I know it's doing the rounds. Most of the past 20 years Canada (and the US) has had much cheaper gas and especially electricity and a cheap currency. Why didn't we steal all this fertlizlier, chemical and heavy manufacturing?

[1overcosc]

Originally Posted by Truenorth00

NBC News is reporting that Harris has more pledged delegates than needed for the nomination and a quarter of a billion dollars raised in less than a day and a half.

https://www.cnbc.com/2024/07/22/live...-campaign.html

They had a Zoom fundraising call for Black Women yesterday. Zoom calls have limits of 1000 participants. They had to get the CEO of Zoom to override the limits and accommodate 44 000 participants. Also reporting that her campaign has signed up 28 000 volunteers across battleground states.

Absolutely amazing to see. And she hasn't even picked a VP yet.

Still very much an uphill fight. But she has a real shot. Hopefully, this is good for Canada. That said, she is a lot more hawkish on foreign policy than Biden. Something which Canadians who think it will be back to the Obama era might find disconcerting.

Trump has forever changed American foreign policy and trade policy. If Harris wins that'll be the most enduring legacy of Trump's otherwise chaotic administration.

[YOWetal]

Originally Posted by Truenorth00

Still very much an uphill fight. But she has a real shot. Hopefully, this is good for Canada. That said, she is a lot more hawkish on foreign policy than Biden. Something which Canadians who think it will be back to the Obama era might find disconcerting.

Interesting I hadn't heard this before. In what 2024 way do you think she is more hawkish? Candians of all stripes are probably onside with a much more vigourous support of Ukraine and probably a more agressive stance with China. Or do you mean something like Houthi provacations is more likely to see American boots on the ground than under Biden?

[kwoldtimer]

Originally Posted by YOWetal

Interesting I hadn't heard this before. In what 2024 way do you think she is more hawkish? Candians of all stripes are probably onside with a much more vigourous support of Ukraine and probably a more agressive stance with China. Or do you mean something like Houthi provacations is more likely to see American boots on the ground than under Biden?

Boots on ground in the Middle East? Can't see it.

[casper]

Originally Posted by YOWetal

Interesting I hadn't heard this before. In what 2024 way do you think she is more hawkish? Candians of all stripes are probably onside with a much more vigourous support of Ukraine and probably a more agressive stance with China. Or do you mean something like Houthi provacations is more likely to see American boots on the ground than under Biden?

She lived in Montreal as a teen and understands Canada far better than any past American president would have.

While that could be good for us in some ways, it also means she could very well put more pressure on Canada.

Her in Washington and Freeland in Ottawa would make for an interesting dynamics on Ukraine.

[Dartguard]

Originally Posted by casper

She lived in Montreal as a teen and understands Canada far better than any past American president would have.

While that could be good for us in some ways, it also means she could very well put more pressure on Canada.

Her in Washington and Freeland in Ottawa would make for an interesting dynamics on Ukraine.

Freeland may be lucky but dread surviving the upcoming election. Where are the up side votes for a continuing Liberal Government?

[casper]

Originally Posted by Dartguard

Freeland may be lucky but dread surviving the upcoming election. Where are the up side votes for a continuing Liberal Government?

I would agree today, a Liberal win is highly unlikely. However we have a year to go. A lot can happen in a year. Just look at what happened to the Democrats in the US between the debate and now. We were looking at a likely Trump win and in 24-48 hours that have shifted dramatically.

I don't think Poilievre will do well with a Harris government. You only have to look as his assessment of the Biden's visit to Canada.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=gjhKUe18IyQ&t=324s

[acottawa]

Originally Posted by casper

I would agree today, a Liberal win is highly unlikely. However we have a year to go. A lot can happen in a year. Just look at what happened to the Democrats in the US between the debate and now. We were looking at a likely Trump win and in 24-48 hours that have shifted dramatically.

Concerns about Biden were significantly related to his age and obvious symptoms of senility and dementia. I think concerns about Trudeau are related to his polices. That is a harder hole to dig out of with a change of leader.

[acottawa]

Originally Posted by whatnext

I'm not sure how having a low Euro harms the European basket case countries, most who rely on tourism. It makes travel those places more popular. And German exports never competed at the bottom of the market anyway.

I think it is more the euro in general that hurt southern Europe. Italy's economic policy for decades was to devalue the lira to make Italian exports more competitive.

[Armchair Admiral]

For those interested in Canada's naval activities, the good news is the RCN sent three ships to this years RIMPAC exercise, while surprisingly in spite of the recent AUKUS deal, Australia only sent one. Nice to see some effort to show Canadian commitment to the Pacific theater.

The bad news is that one of the new arctic patrol ships sprung a leak..

https://www.msn.com/en-ca/news/canad...er/ar-BB1qv922

I hope Irving QA gets a good once over for this, the new ship designs are flawed enough without having an undocumented submarine mode!

[YOWetal]

Originally Posted by acottawa

Concerns about Biden were significantly related to his age and obvious symptoms of senility and dementia. I think concerns about Trudeau are related to his polices. That is a harder hole to dig out of with a change of leader.

Whatever you want to say about Polievre he is also not Trump. If you care about democracy and the US role in the world you have to vote Biden even if you blame him for inflation. The Liberals are also approaching 9 years in power so the blame is accumulating.

[Truenorth00]

Originally Posted by YOWetal

Interesting I hadn't heard this before. In what 2024 way do you think she is more hawkish? Candians of all stripes are probably onside with a much more vigourous support of Ukraine and probably a more agressive stance with China. Or do you mean something like Houthi provacations is more likely to see American boots on the ground than under Biden?

Her FP advisor has suggested glassing Assad in Syria. And she's been rumoured to be pressuring Biden to crack down on Netanyahu. I think she'll be much tougher on Russia and China than Biden. Far less reticent to send allies weapons. She definitely won't tolerate the Israelis turning Gaza into a shooting gallery beyond tactical necessity or facilitating settlers in the West Bank.

On Canada, I think a lot of Canadians massively overestimate the willingness to concede on burden sharing. She won't be as harsh as Trump. But she won't be as unfocused as Biden either. She will also continue and ramp up Biden's Energy Transition policies. There's a bipartisan consensus emerging on carbon tariffs. Aimed at China. Could sideswipe us. And lastly there's the border. She will not want to look weak. CBSA and RCMP budgets will have to go up. And there will have to be a lot more policy alignment on immigration.

[acottawa]

We have been watching a YouTube series on the Korean War with a week by week account. This week’s episode focussed on the heavy pressure Truman was pushing on allies to step up. One quote to Canadian articles arguing its 3 ships were not a token effort was something like “three tokens then.”

[Armchair Admiral]

Originally Posted by acottawa

We have been watching a YouTube series on the Korean War with a week by week account. This week’s episode focussed on the heavy pressure Truman was pushing on allies to step up. One quote to Canadian articles arguing its 3 ships were not a token effort was something like “three tokens then.”

Good quote! But it wasn't like they were just sent with thoughts and prayers, HMCS Haida did get into the train-busters club!

Truman's point does still stand though, while some positive moves have been made with the new ASW destroyers, and more seem to be on the horizon with the submarine talk, they are very defence-oriented. If Canada is serious about attaining a UN security council seat, we need to being more to the table than just taking care of our own yard. A country deserving of such status should be able to provide significant assistance to an ally in need as well.

While there are still ongoing UN missions, the political capital from Canada's peacekeeping heyday is pretty much gone.
I was wondering what the DART team had been up to lately, but according to the DND website they haven't deployed since 2015

https://www.canada.ca/en/department-...ployments.html

I know there are some DND/CF insiders that post here, was DART de-funded or disbanded after the 2015 liberal win?

As the Americans start transforming their amphibious marine expeditionary units into more air power heavy expeditionary strike groups in anticipation of Pacific theater 2, there may be a bit of a void in that always deployed disaster response role that the CF could move into.

I think that sort of role would be an easier way to sell the increased military spending to the Canadian public, the increased contribution would be appreciated by our allies, and Canada would start scoring some more good global citizen points with every new DART deployment.

[Dartguard]

Originally Posted by Armchair Admiral

Good quote! But it wasn't like they were just sent with thoughts and prayers, HMCS Haida did get into the train-busters club!

Truman's point does still stand though, while some positive moves have been made with the new ASW destroyers, and more seem to be on the horizon with the submarine talk, they are very defence-oriented. If Canada is serious about attaining a UN security council seat, we need to being more to the table than just taking care of our own yard. A country deserving of such status should be able to provide significant assistance to an ally in need as well.

While there are still ongoing UN missions, the political capital from Canada's peacekeeping heyday is pretty much gone.
I was wondering what the DART team had been up to lately, but according to the DND website they haven't deployed since 2015

https://www.canada.ca/en/department-...ployments.html

I know there are some DND/CF insiders that post here, was DART de-funded or disbanded after the 2015 liberal win?

As the Americans start transforming their amphibious marine expeditionary units into more air power heavy expeditionary strike groups in anticipation of Pacific theater 2, there may be a bit of a void in that always deployed disaster response role that the CF could move into.

I think that sort of role would be an easier way to sell the increased military spending to the Canadian public, the increased contribution would be appreciated by our allies, and Canada would start scoring some more good global citizen points with every new DART deployment.

So DART on a DeWolfe then? Apparently we sent extra Medical staff to RIMPAC aboard MAX.