In The Media

What does Arctic defence really mean?

by Adam Lajeunesse

The Hill Times
May 25, 2015

Last March, the Russian military launched a massive exercise across its Arctic lands and waters. Over five days, Moscow demonstrated its northern capabilities by deploying over 80,000 troops, 220 aircraft, 41 ships, and 15 submarines. Explaining the activity, Russian Defence Minister Sergei Shoigu said “new challenges and military threats require further increase of the Armed Forces’ capabilities.”

Canada faces many of these same challenges, but it normally sends no more than 800 participants to its annual Operation Nanook, and nothing like the arsenal the Russians enjoyed showing off. This disparity of forces and capabilities has led many to question the seriousness of Canada’s commitment to the North and the ability of our military to fulfill its sovereignty and security missions.

While the Russians appear to be preparing for a new Cold War-style standoff, the Canadian military has spent years pursuing a policy based on a more realist assessment of the dangers and challenges present, and likely to develop, in the Arctic. Few in Ottawa anticipate a conventional threat and, instead, defence plans consistently focus on threats from criminals, polluters, trespassers, and the like.

When asked what his response would be if the Canadian Arctic was ever invaded, the former chief of the Armed Forces, general Walt Natynczyk, said that “if someone was foolish enough to attack us in the High North, my first duty would be search and rescue.”

With this in mind, Canada has foregone large-scale preparations for combat and instead built small, versatile, and cost-efficient units designed to move into the North in response to a wide variety of unconventional safety and security scenarios (such as a cruise ship running aground or a plane crashing).

In fact, the military is not even the government agency with the mandate to respond to most of the threats that it foresees. In the Arctic, the Armed Forces are really just a back-up force that, in a pinch, might have to step in to support other civilian agencies— something that the Forces not only recognize but are training for.

Behind the photo-ops of CF-18s flying over icebergs and armed men on snowmobiles, Canada’s biggest northern exercises (the Nanook series) is what’s called a “whole of government operation.” That means that it’s not about learning how to fight or manoeuver, as the Russians are increasingly doing; instead, it’s about the military and other agencies learning to communicate and work together to meet unconventional security situations. While this approach doesn’t produce the same image of strength and resolve, it’s far more grounded in reality and just as effective at guarding Canadian sovereignty.

The nature of Canada’s sovereignty position, and the challenges to it, are such that no amount of military presence is going to secure foreign recognition. Canada claims the Northwest Passage to be internal waters while the United States (and others) feel that an international strait runs through our Arctic islands. Strengthening our position means demonstrating that the waters of the archipelago are historic internal waters, a status that requires the exclusive and effective exercise of Canadian jurisdiction.

Demonstrating that effective jurisdiction is best accomplished by ensuring that Canadian laws and regulations are consistently adhered to. This, in turn, is something that the military encourages by supporting the RCMP’s Arctic activities and those of other departments exercising Canadian authority. The number of ships and soldiers we deploy is entirely irrelevant, except insofar as they are accomplishing this mission.

For those admiring Russia’s Arctic capabilities the question must be asked: what of substance are those forces actually accomplishing that could not be achieved by a small fraction of the numbers being trained and exercised? The answer is very little. They are an expensive exercise in political messaging, guarding a coast and resources that no one is threatening. Canada’s approach to Arctic security is far more subdued (and far cheaper) and more closely aligned with reality.

We may lack the big battalions, however, what we have built up over the past decade—and are continuing to build—is actually a far more appropriate response to the challenges facing the Arctic region and likely to develop in the years ahead.

Adam Lajeunesse, PhD, is a SSHRC postdoctoral fellow at St. Jerome’s University and a co-investigator on a SSHRC Insight grant examining northern defence activities and Canadian-American relations. Lajeunesse’s most recent paper, ‘The Canadian Armed Forces in the Arctic: Purpose, Capabilities, and Requirements’ was released in collaboration with the Canadian Defence and Foreign Affairs Institute.

 


Be the first to comment

Please check your e-mail for a link to activate your account.
SUBSCRIBE TO OUR NEWSLETTERS
 
SEARCH
PODCAST

An Update on the NAFTA Renegotiations

May 21, 2018


On today's Global Exchange Podcast, we touch base with CGAI's North American trade experts in light of a busy week on the NAFTA file in Washington. After months of hard-pressed negotiations, and 6 weeks of 'perpetual' discussions in Washington, the deal has reached its next turning point, with Congressional leadership signalling that they'd need a new deal by May 17th in order to have it passed before U.S. mid-term elections in the Fall. With no deal in sight, and the Congressional deadline now in the rear-view mirror, we sit down with Sarah Goldfeder, Laura Dawson, and Eric Miller to ask where we go from here.


IN THE MEDIA

Between Trump, Iran and North Korea, Canada’s G7 has a high potential for chaos

by Chris Hall (feat. James Trottier & Colin Robertson), CBC News, May 18, 2018

The struggle Trudeau could face if Kinder Morgan walks away from Trans Mountain

by Robert Tuttle & Michael Bellusci (feat. Dennis McConaghy), Bloomberg News, May 18, 2018

Canada 'a laughing stock': Experts react to Trans Mountain indemnity

by April Fong (feat. Dennis McConaghy), BNN Bloomberg, May 18, 2018

AUDIO: NAFTA update

with Danielle Smith (feat. Sarah Goldfeder), Global News Radio, May 18, 2018

VIDEO: NAFTA Deadline Day (@ 3:00)

with Don Martin (feat. John Weekes), CTV Power Play, May 17, 2018

VIDEO: Deal or no deal on NAFTA: Canada and U.S. send mixed messages

with Rosemary Barton (feat. Colin Robertson), CBC The National, May 17, 2018

Trump’s 'submission' strategy is not working so expect NAFTA talks to drag on

by Kevin Carmichael (Feat. Eric Miller), Financial Post, May 17, 2018

Backstop deal may be last hope for TransMountain pipeline, says former oil executive

by CBC News (feat. Dennis McConaghy), CBC News, May 17, 2018

Stuck with limited oil export options, Liberals may regret B.C. tanker ban

by John Ivison (feat. Dennis McConaghy), National Post, May 17, 2018

Feds OK early start to construction of navy’s new supply ships

by Lee Berthiaume (feat. Dave Perry), The Canadian Press, May 17, 2018


LATEST TWEETS

HEAD OFFICE
Canadian Global Affairs Institute
Suite 1800, 421-7th Avenue SW
Calgary, Alberta, Canada T2P 4K9

 

OTTAWA OFFICE
Canadian Global Affairs Institute
8 York Street, 2nd Floor
Ottawa, Ontario, Canada K1N 5S6

 

Phone: (613) 288-2529
Email: contact@cgai.ca
Web: cgai.ca

 

Making sense of our complex world.
Déchiffrer la complexité de notre monde.

 

© 2002-2018 Canadian Global Affairs Institute
Charitable Registration No. 87982 7913 RR0001

 


Sign in with Facebook | Sign in with Twitter | Sign in with Email