News   Mar 28, 2024
 178     0 
News   Mar 27, 2024
 1.9K     1 
News   Mar 27, 2024
 1.2K     2 

PM Justin Trudeau's Canada

There's an assumption here that organizations don't evolve. NORAD today is about about a lot more than watching for ICBMs coming from Russia.

Agreed, NORAD does look inward now. On 9/11 they were helping with the response within the US and Canada.

My point was that it is better to focus on internal security and the arctic directly rather than have a joint organization whose primary focus is on airborne threats from the north.

NORAD is more of a US organization with Canada playing a minor role.

If you think Canada would not be dragged into a war in Europe, I don't know what to say...

Honestly, it should be our choice if we want to go to war, not the choice of an international organization. Article 5 when invoked, brings about a joint response to an attack on a member state.

Let's say Russia went and seized Ukraine. Hungary (a NATO member) borders Ukraine and was formerly occupied by the USSR. It was not a member of the Soviet Union but Soviet Troops, Flags and Influence were part of Hungary from WW2 to 1991.

Border skirmishes between Hungary and Russian troops would likely result in Article 5 being invoked. That in turn would mean Canada would be forced to join a military campaign against Russia.

The point I am trying to make is that we should not be getting involved in conflicts we have no business being involved in. NATO was intended to be a defense against the USSR.

NATO should be scrapped in favor of a EU defense force but that is another discussion for another day.
 
NORAD is more of a US organization with Canada playing a minor role.

The alternative to that is the US planning operations over Canadian territory, without Canadian input.

Honestly, it should be our choice if we want to go to war, not the choice of an international organization. Article 5 when invoked, brings about a joint response to an attack on a member state.

It is precisely the heft of NATO that makes it credible. Members start to leave and Russia gets emboldened, making serious conflict that could draw in Canada, or at least hurt our security and economic interests substantially.

You make a typical case for the isolationist point of view. And I've heard it before. I disagree that a G7 country can simply sit by and avoid any and all foreign conflict without any impact at all. But at least if that is the desire or viewpoint, I wish those espousing it were more honest about what it means for our global standing. We get stuff like "Canada is back" rhetoric while the rest of the world snickers or rolls their eyes anytime we walk into the room. We should stop strutting around and pretending we're a global player.
 
Agreed, NORAD does look inward now. On 9/11 they were helping with the response within the US and Canada.

My point was that it is better to focus on internal security and the arctic directly rather than have a joint organization whose primary focus is on airborne threats from the north.

NORAD is more of a US organization with Canada playing a minor role.
The alternative is building, maintaining, staffing, upgrading, etc. the surveillance infrastructure (land-based, space based, etc.), and then formulating whatever necessary response, completely on our own dime. Statements like 'Russia will never attack us' misses the point. There is a need to know and have a say in what goes on in the space we call ours; no different that why we lock our doors and have CBSA folks at the border.

Without sharing what we know about the goings-on in our space with US, they will take it upon themselves to find out because we are their entire northern flank that they will not leave unprotected, whether we like it or not.
 
Media is stupidly portraying our exclusion as a consequence of the Huawei non-policy. That's wrong. Australia actually brings resources to the table. Canada doesn't.

It'll be interesting when Canada is eventually pushed out of the G7 and Five Eyes and reduced to solely participating in NORAD, NATO and the OECD. Just like other medium sized European countries (like say Poland, a country of similar population).

We're not going out of the G7, assuming anything like it survives into the future.
We're the fastest growing country in the G7.
We'll overtake Italy in population in the next 25 years assuming status quo growth/shrink rates in those respective countries
Italy's official population projection for 2050 is 54M people (-6M from today)

Canada has a range (mid to high growth) that puts between 49M-56M based on 2019 numbers; but worth saying, we're tracking above the high number, even with the pandemic.
 
We're not going out of the G7, assuming anything like it survives into the future.

We just saw the US, UK and Australia create a new tier inside the Five Eyes.

I anticipate the same thing will happen to the G7. Some alternative will emerge where the actual players discuss issues. And the posers will keep attending the G7 to help their leaders at home.
 
This is a very interesting and enlightening discussion. An English friend of mine is really hoping that a 4 Eyes security pact will come to fruition with Canada playing a key role. Not a chance. I think the latest AUKUS agreement has side-lined us in the same fashion as NZ. We have the same dependent relationship with the US as NZ does with Australia and do not really bring any real capability - 'added value' - to the table. The fact that the RCN was left with no AORs and effectively became a coast guard by pure mismanagement (only saved by an Admiral who had the gumption to do something about it) must've been a wake up call to the serious players. We may never punch above our weight, but we should never punch below it.

I guess the key question is, what security arrangements do we require as a nation? OK, geo-politically we are safely tucked into America's side. But what of our wider interests, business and diplomatic across the globe? Cyber security?
 
I don't see a Trudeau resignation imminent. However, you have to think Mark Carney and Chrystia Freeland are measuring the drapes at 24 Sussex.

They need to tread very carefully - the last thing they need to telegraph is putting their own ambitions ahead of a government that had received a short leash from the electorate; they could easily lose the minority entirely. Stability and status quo is clearly the preference of the day.

AoD
 
Is anyone ever going to live there, or is the PM stuck in a cottage at the GG's place forever?
They have to repair/replace it first - it's literally not safe to inhabit (asbestos, mould, unsafe wiring, etc.). I haven't read anything recent on where the NCC is on that. It's no doubt 'under review'.
 
Big news developing.
It sounds like Meng Wengzhou is about to be released because US prosecutors have got a plea deal from her.
She will plead guilty and be fined. Presumably, I hope, this means the two Michaels will also be released from China.
 
Last edited:
Big news developing.
It sounds like Meng Wengzhou is about to be released because US prosecutors have got a plea deal from her.
She will plead guilty and be fined. Presumably, I hope, this means the two Michaels will also be released from China.

 

Back
Top