Den Tandt: Why Trudeau should keep CF-18’s in the fight against ISIS

Michael Den Tandt outlines here a great argument for why the Liberal Majority should reconsider its withdrawal of RCAF CF-18s from the US-led coalition against ISIS in Iraq and Syria.

An RCAF CF-18 flies over Iraq during a sortie on OP IMPACT. November 7, 2015. Photo: CAF Combat Camera, OP IMPACT, DND 

By: Michael Den Tandt, National Post 

There is a straightforward way for the Liberal government to get beyond the tangle in which it now finds itself over its pledge to pull Canada’s CF-18 fighters from the air war against the Islamic State of Iraq and the Levant. That would be to break its promise, make a U-turn and keep them in the fight. This is not only the responsible thing to do; it is the politically smart thing to do, given the other options.

Since the Oct. 19 federal election, the debate has raged. Throughout the back and forth, the claims and counterclaims, Royal Canadian Air Force jets have continued to contribute to the U.S.-led campaign by, yes, dropping bombs on enemy targets. Late last week, Canadian forces took part in a battle that involved CF-18s and special forces ground troops.

In a year-end interview with the Huffington Post, Defence Minister Harjit Sajjan committed to withdrawing the fighters within six months, though a parliamentary resolution calls for the air-combat mission to end in March. The reason for not pulling out immediately, Sajjan has said, is that the government does not wish to contribute to a loss of capacity for its allies. Translation: The CF-18s are making a valuable contribution to the overall effort, albeit a small one. If this were not the case, withdrawing them would make no difference to anyone and would have occurred already.

The arguments for keeping the CF-18s in the fight, or not, fall loosely into three groupings: tactical/strategic, philosophical/moral and political. In every case, based on a careful and fair-minded reading of the facts, the case for keeping the previous Conservative government’s policy in place is unassailable.

In military terms, simply put, the Liberals in crafting their policy and sticking to it doggedly have misunderstood the role of aerial combat in modern warfare. Repeatedly, Prime Minister Justin Trudeau has spoken dismissively of “dropping bombs,” as though it’s indiscriminate carpet-bombing of residential areas, like something out of the Second World War or Vietnam.

That assumption is false. In this campaign, which even now is modest in scope compared with the rate of missions flown in both Gulf wars and in Yugoslavia in the late 1990s, air power is being used precisely by the allies to degrade and destroy ISIL’s capabilities and allow allied local ground troops to take back territory more easily.

To dismiss the air war as indiscriminate “combat” is shallow in the extreme. On the contrary, the aerial campaign is arguably the last, best hope for the North Atlantic Treaty Organization powers to avoid sending in their own ground troops in large numbers. It is an alternative to a ground war – not a necessary prelude to one. U.S. President Barack Obama, a lifelong pacifist, and French President François Hollande, a socialist, are not war hawks. They are advancing this strategy because they can see no other way of defeating ISIL, short of all-out war.

The philosophical and moral arguments essentially resolve into a discussion of failed foreign involvements in various Middle Eastern and South Asian wars extending centuries back. Many Canadians wonder what was achieved by 12 years of war in Afghanistan. The quagmire in Iraq and Syria, it is often noted, has its roots in president George W. Bush’s failed U.S. invasion of Iraq in 2003. Gen. Colin Powell’s famous admonition, “if you break it, you own it,” went unheeded. The result has been one catastrophe after another, one of which was the rise of al-Qaida in Iraq, which metastasized into ISIL. Yes. Point understood and accepted.


The fact remains that 2015 is not 2003. In 2003, Iraqi dictator Saddam Hussein, beyond being an annoying blowhard and a demented tyrant to his people, threatened no one beyond Iraq’s borders. He had no weapons of mass destruction. Had he had them, he had no will to use them.

ISIL’s self-anointed caliph, Abu Bakr al-Baghdadi, is no Saddam. He’s something much worse. He and his jihadists believe — and this is not opinion, but fact, available to anyone with stomach enough to do the research — that they are warriors for God on a sacred mission to bring about the end of the world. They believe that in the interim, it is their sacred obligation to wipe out all other iterations of Islam, re-introduce slavery and extend their caliphate worldwide. And they pose, as has been demonstrated repeatedly now, a clear and present danger to every pluralistic society, including Canada’s. Pearsonian Liberalism would opt for engagement.

That leaves the political argument, which is this: As long as withdrawing the CF-18s remains government policy, because it is incoherent, it will be a thorn in its side and a fundraising tool for the Conservatives. A flip-flop would cause short-term bruising. Longer term, it would validate the Liberals’ pledge to base policy on evidence, not ideology. And it would help establish them as responsible managers, rather than wishful thinkers.

National Post

Twitter.com/mdentandt

Canadian Defence Review - What Needs to be Reviewed

During the Speech from the Throne last Friday, Justin Trudeau's Liberal Majority Government had little to say on Defence - the few short sentences mentioned little to no specifics.

Here is the text relating to the CAF from the Throne Speech:

"...To contribute to greater peace throughout the world, the Government will renew Canada's commitment to United Nations peacekeeping operations, and will continue to work with its allies in the fight against terrorism.

To keep Canadians safe and be ready to respond when needed, the Government will launch an open and transparent process to review existing defence capabilities, and will invest in building a leaner, more agile, better-equipped military."

What does that all mean? 

We know that during the 2015 Federal Election the Liberals promised to withdraw from the Aireal Bombing Campaign against ISIS; scrap the F-35 Purchase; ensure the Navy got the Vessels it needs; and return to more Peacekeeping missions. Only one of these things was mentioned in the Throne Speech. As Rona Ambrose, the Leader of the Official Opposition pointed out following the reading, the Speech doesn't even mention ISIS. 

Let's take a look a a few things within the CAF that need a review; 

1. The Budget

Under the previous Liberal Government of Jean Chretien - the CAF called the 1990s the "Decade of Darkness." This is not all that far off from what is was. The Chretien Government cut defence spending 25% from $12 billion in 1993 to $9.4B in 1998; cut troop levels from 74,000 to below 60,000; while at the same time deploying CAF members on almost every UN Peacekeeping mission that came up. 

Some of these Missions were highly required; and were laden with heavy burdens for the CAF. One of these missions was the 2000-03 deployment to Ethiopia and Eritrea. Under OP ECLIPSE and OP ADDITION, CAF equipment was hit by a great tole of wear and tare. 

During the same time, Canada deployed to Afghanistan in 2002 - which led to a stretching of CAF personnel, when retention within the CAF became a huge problem.  All while the CAF was facing a nearly $15 billion equipment shortfall. 

This all helped the 2006 Conservative victory with their "Stand Up for Canada" campaign, followed by their Canada First Defence Strategy  (CFDS) in 2008. The Conservatives made jokes about the Liberal Parties management of the CAF; heavily called them out on deploying the CAF to arid (desert-like) climates in temperate (forest) camouflage.  The Conservatives also vowed to move beyond the operational "Tokenism" of peacekeeping, and allow Canada to make a substantial contribution to international security. 

Was the Conservative's decade all that much better? If we take a closer look; the period from 2006-2009 can almost be called "Golden Years" for the CAF. In 2006 the Conservatives quickly announced $17 Billion worth of procurement projects. The CAF would be shopping for: 

• 3 Joint Support Ships; 
• 6-8 Arctic Offshore Patrol Ships;
• 4 C-17 Strategic Lift Aircraft; and 
• 17 C-130 Tactical Transport Aircarft 

These were just to start the revitalization of the CAF. The Government at the time also announced  an increase to $14.5 Billion. 

Then came the CFDS - which outlined a 20-year funding formula that would increase defence spending 2% from 2008 until 2028. In real terms, the Budget would increase from $18 Billion (2008) to $30 Billion (*2028 Projection) - an increase of $490 Billion over two decades; of which nearly $50 billion would be for equipment acquisitions. The Government would increase the regular force back to over 70,000 and increase the reserves to 30,000. 

Added to the list of procurements for the CAF were: 

• 65 "Next-Generation" Fighter Jets to replace the CF-18s; 
• 100 Leopard-II Tanks;
• 17 Fixed-Wing Search and Rescue Aircraft to replace the Buffalo aircraft; 
• 15 Canadian Surface Combatant (CSC) Warships to revitalize the Royal Canadian Navy;
• 10 to 12 Maritime Patrol Aircaft; and
• A fleet (100+) close combat armored vehicles.   

Up until 2010-2011 the Conservative Government largely followed the CFDS - the budget had increased nearly 24%. The CAF had received: 

• 3 C-17 Aircraft; 
• Dozens of new C-130's;
• Numerous new or leased tanks;
• Numerous M-777 howitzers; and
• purchased Chinook Strategic Lift Helicopters 

While these successes seem all well and good - the other procurement plans; particularly the replacement of the entire Naval fleet was on hold. This was partly because of cost overruns in the planning, and development stage of the National Ship Building Plan (NSBP) - it was largely the fault of Afghanistan that everything else was put on hold.

With the Afghan War (2001-2014) the army rightly became the priority; meaning a vast majority of procurement funds were being diverted into its needs. $1.3 Billion was used for the Leopard II tanks; the Parliamentary Budget put the total coast of Afghanistan at $18 Billion through 2011.

At the closing of the stimulous spending in the 2012 Budget, 1/5 of all savings were to come from Defence; and by 2014, 1/4 of all savings came out of Defence. This effectively made CFDS unusable.

From its height in 2011, Defence spending was at $22 Billion, but by 2013, that had dropped to $19 Billion; and when adjusted for inflation it was approimatly the same as it was in 2005 before the Conservatives took power. As a percentage of GDP, it stood at 1.1% (the same level as it was during the "Decade of Darkness")

With these cuts, most projects are underfunded - and on the rails of collapse. The CSC Ships are at least $15 Billion short - and the Navy is estimating it will only get 8 Vessels instead of the needed 15. As a stopgap measure, the CAF is spending $4.2 Billion on upgrades to the Halifax-class frigates to keep them operational until the CSC Fleet is ready (between 2025-2035); another $1.2 Billion to upgrade its current light armored vehicles; and $100 million on a second round of upgrades to the 77 CF-18's still flying; and will spend $500 million to lease a retrofitted boxship that will be made into an interim auxiliary oil replenishment ship (iAOR).

So a major review of the overall Defence budget is required. The Liberal Government has said it will withdraw from the JSF F-35 program which was going to cost nearly $16 Billion for 65 Fighters (including life cycle management costs) and find a cheaper alternative, while moving the saved funds into the CSC Fleet program. The FWSAR aircraft contract has not yet been awarded, and neither has the Maritime Patrol Aircraft contracts. The Liberals will need to be willing to put enough money into Defence to restore the CAF to pre-Afghan War equipment readiness levels. The CAF gained a great deal of experience in Afghanistan, but its equipment got worn out and needs to be replaced.

A Defence review must show that Defence needs more Money; as the Parliamentary Budget Officer believes that just on Procurement, the CAF is short between $33-$42 Billion (November 2015 figures).

"This gap must be addressed if the government hopes to recapitalize the CAF, maintain the current force structure, and ensure defence sustainability. This paper will explore some of the short- and long-term challenges currently facing the CAF, from capability gaps to recapitalization, and assess some of the Liberal promises to fix these problems. It concludes with some thoughts on the need to recalibrate defence resource allocations." (McDonough)

From Maclean's Magazine Defence Issue during the 2015 Election. 

2. Procurement 

Procurement has largely been a joke in the CAF for many years, plagued by an over complex bureaucracy - projects have been started, and cancelled multiple time costing taxpayers millions of dollars. The Procurement process needs to be simplified while ensuring the correct and needed equipment is purchased in a timely manner at an appropriate cost.

Here is a list of current projects and their overruns:

• Arctic Off Shore Patrol Ships - Cost: $3.1 Billion for 6 to 8 Ships, the first delivery was expected in 2013 - it is now not expected until 2021; with the final ship in 2025. In all likely hood, only 6 will be built. 
• Maritime Patrol Aircraft - Cost: $7 Bullion for 10 to 12 Aircraft. Delivery was supposed to take place in 2020 - but current fiscal restraints has the contract date not until 2025, with delivery taking place between 2026 and 2035. Instead the RCAF is spending $2 Billion to upgrade its 14 CP-140 Aurora's. 
• Canadian Surface Combatant Fleet - Cost: $29 Billion (Estimated to be at least $14 Billion short). Original first delivery date was between 2016 and 2017; especially for the Joint Support Ships (AORs) but all dates now between 2021 and 2035. (This includes the JSS Contracts)
• CF-18 Replacement Program - Cost $17 Billion (Estimate based on F-35 Purchase). Fleet was supposed to be replaced by 2017. CF-18s currently undergoing 2nd Life extension plan to keep the fleet flying until at least 2020, with delivery of new aircraft not expected until between 2025 and 2035. 
• Close Combat Vehicles - Cost: $2.1 Billion - Project Cancelled in 2013 due to Financial Restraints. 
• FWSAR Aircraft - Cost: $1.4 Billion - Original Delivery Date was 2014-2015. There has been no contract awarded, it is expected in early 2016, with delivery between 2021 and 2025. 
•  UAV Program - Cost: $1.5 Billion - Original Delivery Date was 2011 - now not expected until between 2021 and 2025. 
• LAV III Life Extension Program - Cost: $1.2 Billion - Expected completion 2018. 
• Maritime Helicopter Program - Cost: $5.7 Billion - Replacement of the Sea King Helicopters. Program was started in 2004, with delivery in 2008. Was later cancelled and restarted. Now deliveries started in 2015 but full operational status not expected until 2018, and final delivery in 2020. 
• Medium Support Vehicles (1,500 Military Pattern Trucks) - Cost: $1.2 Billion. The Program has been cancelled twice since 2006. Original delivery was set between 2008 and 2010. Contract was due in 2015 and delivery between 2017 and 2018. 
• Medium Heavy Lift Helicopters - Cost: $4.9 Billion. 15 of 16 Planned were purchased; but 5 years later than originally scheduled. Last was delivered in 2014. 
• Tactical Armoured Patrol Vehicle - Cost: $708 Million for 500 vehicles. Contract was awarded in 2012 with deliveries expected in 2014. Problems with the design of the vehicle has post postponed deliveries until at least 2016. 

A Defence review must show that Defence to simplify the procurement process, and increase the amount of currency available for these projects. As delays run longer, it is inevitable these programs will cost even more. 

3. Peacekeeping and Staffing Levels

If the Liberal Government plans to return Canada to it's global Peacekeeping Role, both Procurement and the Budget need to be fixed first. The more missions you deploy on, the greater amount of the Defence budget is spent on Deployment costs (higher wages, shipping, and equipment). Equipment breaks in theater, and it is often cheaper to scrap the equipment in theater than ship it home to repair it. The more missions, the more equipment you need to have to deploy in the first place.

So before you can deploy on a greater number of UN mandated missions, you need to resupply and re-arm the CAF; which means more Money. You also need to work on increasing staffing levels, which inevitably, you guessed it - costs more money. The more deployment CAF personnel go on, the higher number of retirements from the CAF - so retention then becomes an issue.

These are the three things that I believe need a review in the Canadian Defence World. What do you think?

Sources: 

Collins, Jeffrey F. "Reviving and Revising the Canada First Defence Strategy." (November 2014) http://www.c2cjournal.ca/2014/11/reviving-and-revising-the-canada-first-defence-strategy/#

Maclean's Magazine: "Election Issues 2015:  A Maclean's Primer on Defence Spending" (August, 2 2015) http://www.macleans.ca/politics/ottawa/defence-primer/ 

McDonough, David. "Procurement Challenges for the New Liberal Government." CDA Institute Vimy Paper November 2015.  http://www.cdainstitute.ca/images/Analysis/McDonough_Analysis_November_2015.pdf 

Perry, David. "The Growing Gap Between Defence End and Means." CDA Institute Vimy Paper June 2014. https://www.cdainstitute.ca/images/PerryBudgetJune2014.pdf  

CAF Can House 12,000 Refugees

Published by CTVNews November 9, 2015.
http://www.ctvnews.ca/canada/canadian-military-can-already-house-12k-syrian-refugees-1.2649684

The Canadian military is already prepared to house 12,000 Syrian refugees -- nearly half of the 25,000 that the Liberal government has promised to bring to the country -- by the end of the year, CTV News has learned.

Chief of the Defence Staff Gen. Jon Vance ordered a review weeks ago so that the military could hit the ground running in case the government asked for his support.

Refugees could be housed in cadet summer camps and military training bases.

A View o CFB Valcartier, Qc Army Cadet (although it houses Navy and Air As well) Summer Training Centre. This camp houses 3,500 cadets at a time

"We've got the whole network of bases across Canada -- probably, though I’m just guessing at this stage of the game -- it could probably come back to (Canadian Forces Base) Trenton, where they could be processed and distributed out," said retired Major General David Fraser.

Earlier on Monday, Immigration, Refugees and Citizenship Minister John McCallum announced that a cabinet sub-committee has been tasked with bringing the Liberals’ goal to fruition.

The chair of the sub-committee will be Health Minister Jane Philpott. Other members include Heritage Minister Melanie Joly, Public Safety Minister Ralph Goodale, Foreign Affairs Minister Stephane Dion and Democratic Institutions Minister Maryam Monsef.

McCallum said each sub-committee member has a portfolio that touches on the refugee issue. He singled out Philpott, who has worked with refugees in Africa, and Monsef, who was herself a refugee from Afghanistan.

McCallum said the Liberal government is still committed to bringing the refugees in by the end of the year, but wants to do it “correctly.”

In a statement, NDP MP Jenny Kwan said her party "supports" the Liberals’ goal, but believes that McCallum's announcement was "short on details."

"We believe Canadians were looking for a concrete plan for getting vulnerable refugees out of harm's way, not hearing about new cabinet subcommittees," she said.

"This is the new government's first test on delivering the change they promised to Canadians. We hope that the next announcement on how they will achieve this goal is coming very soon."

McCallum said that Ottawa is relying on support from provinces, territories and municipalities, as well as groups and individuals who want to support refugees to accomplish its goal.

“As long as we do the job right, that is to say with speed but also with due attention to important considerations of health and security,” he said He acknowledged “time is limited” for the government to meet its goal, but said he will have a more detailed announcement “soon.”

In an appearance on CTV's Power Play on Monday, immigration lawyer Jennifer Bond said she believes the refugee target can be achieved and that so far the Liberals have taken the right steps forward.

"I think we should feel confident that a lot of senior people have been put on this portfolio, today's subcommittee is filled with people who have both good portfolios to be at the table but also a lot of good individual personal experiences," she said.

"We need to move quickly and I'm very hopeful that today's announcement is not a stall tactic, but actually a real commitment to actually work together to make this happen."

Bond added that refugees are "dying every single day and the increasing numbers of people are dying as conditions worsen overseas."

"As Canadians we can't only cry over the children that have died but we really have to do what we can do to help those that are still at risk, and I think that's where we’re heading," said Bond, who is also behind the University of Ottawa's Refugee Sponsorship Support Program.

Former Canadian ambassador to Syria Glenn Davidson, who also appeared on Power Play, agreed with Bond's assessment, saying that there's "no question (Canada) can handle" 25,000 refugees.

"I think that the steps that the government is taking -- that minister McCallum announced today -- are exactly right," he said.

"Put the focus of this new team firmly on this, put the resources behind it and move aggressively to make it happen."

When asked how the refugees will travel to Canada, McCallum said that “every option is on the table.”

He said involving the Royal Canadian Air Force, commercial planes, as well as ships, are possibilities.

"We would do what is the most efficient, cost-effective quick way to get those people here, and then we have to welcome them, and we have to accommodate and we have to help them settle into Canada," he said.

However, the air force likely won't have as large of a role as commercial airliners because of its limited capacity.

Air Canada has already offered to help the government transport Syrian refugees “to the fullest extent possible.” A company spokesperson told CTV News that the airline has so far only exchanged “preliminary information” with Ottawa.

McCallum said the government now has to figure out the fastest, most secure and cost-effective way to bring Syrian refugees from other countries that have taken them in. He said Ottawa will focus on Turkey, Jordan and Lebanon.

“We have to clearly liaise with the governments of those countries and with the United Nations.”

McCallum said the government has already deployed "dozens of additional immigration officials" to the region to handle the incoming case load.

Treasury Board President Scott Brison, who is also on the refugee sub-committee, will examine the related costs, McCallum said.

The exact cost of the mission has yet to be determined because all the "variables" have yet to be sorted out, but McCallum said it is going to cost a "penny or two."

"We've put aside some money in our platform for this, but it is not going to be cheap to bring 25,000 people to country and help them settle," he said.

"Don't forget these people come from the most dire of circumstances … this is probably the worst refugee crisis in decades," McCallum added.

The government will also have to find accommodations for all the refugees once they arrive. McCallum said that Canadian military bases are “one possibility” in the "short run," but working with provincial governments, as well as municipalities, non-governmental organizations and will be key.

McCallum said many groups, including the Syrian community, and individuals across the country have also offered to take in refugees.

McCallum said he also hopes to have refugee health care reinstated in line with the same end-of-year deadline.

"I don’t control the parliamentary calendar, and we will not have very much time before Christmas. But I certainly am hoping very much this will be the case," he said.

New Liberal Government Cabinet

Here is a full list of the New Liberal Government's Cabinet according to CBC.

The New Minister of Defence is Harjit Sajjan. The former CAF member, and was the first Shik member of the CAF, and was commander of the Vancouver based regiment.

The full list of Prime Minister Justin Trudeau's new 31-member cabinet, in order of precedene, being sworn in today at Rideau Hall in Ottawa:

Justin Trudeau - Prime Minister, Intergovernmental Affairs and Youth.
Ralph Goodale - Public Safety and Emergency Preparedness.
Lawrence MacAulay - Agriculture and Agri-Food.
Stéphane Dion - Foreign Affairs.
John McCallum - Immigration, Citizenship and Refugees.
Carolyn Bennett - Indigenous and Northern Affairs.
Scott Brison - Treasury Board President.
Dominic Leblanc - Leader of the Government in the House of Commons.
Navdeep Bains - Innovation, Science and Economic Development.
Bill Morneau - Finance Minister.
Jody Wilson-Raybould - Justice and Attorney General of Canada.
Judy Foote - Public Services and Procurement.
Chrystia Freeland - International Trade.
Jane Philpott - Health.
Jean-Yves Duclos - Families, Children and Social Development.
Marc Garneau - Transport.
Marie-Claude Bibeau - International Development and La francophonie.
James Carr - Natural Resources.
Mélanie Joly - Heritage.
Dianne Lebouthillier - National Revenue.
Kent Hehr - Veterans Affairs, and Associate Minister of National Defence.
Catherine McKenna - Environment and Climate Change.
Harjit Sajjan - National Defence.
MaryAnn Mihychuck - Employment Workforce Development and Labour
Amarjeet Sohi - Infrastructure and Communities.
Maryam Monsef - Democratic Institutions.
Carla Qualtrough - Sport, and Persons with Disabilities.
Hunter Tootoo - Fisheries and Oceans, and Canadian Coastguard.
Kirsty Duncan - Science.
Patricia Hajdu - Status of Women.
Bardish Chagger - Small Business and Tourism

Liberal Defence Plan: Lose/Move 1,000 NDQH "Managers"

Liberal MP Andrew Leslie (right) produced a study suggesting National Defence headquarters was top-heavy. He advised Liberal Leader Justin Trudeau (left) on defence matters. Photo: Canadian Press

Article by David Pugliese, Ottawa Citizen 
The Department of National Defence wants to eliminate the positions of around 1,100 managers in the Ottawa area as it tries to create what it calls a “lean headquarters.”

The initiative, based on recommendations from former Lt.-Gen. Andrew Leslie, now the Liberal MP for Orléans, is expected to take several years.

The managers in question, both public servants and those in uniform, aren’t expected to lose their jobs. Instead, they would be moved to front-line positions or employment in priority areas.

DND estimates it has 5,200 “managers” as part of its headquarters in the National Capital Region. Under the plan, that number would drop to 4,087.

DND spokesman Dan Le Bouthillier said that for the purposes of the initiative, the term “manager” was used in its most generic sense. It refers to any manager, military or civilian, at any level who supervises the work of subordinate staff, even a single person.

The “lean headquarters” initiative originally talked about reducing the managers starting in 2014, with the process ending in Spring of 2016. But no reductions have been made yet.

“No changes to personnel have been implemented from the Lean HQ initiative to date, as we are still completing the analysis phase of this initiative,” said Le Bouthillier.

A consulting firm is currently analyzing three headquarters-based groups as part of a pilot study for the initiative. It is unclear when decisions on the employee moves would be made.

But Le Bouthillier said the initiative is complex and is expected to take several years.

A 2011 report by Leslie found that the size of the military and DND had gone from 112,377 in 2004 to 132,870 in 2010. Most of the growth was in headquarters jobs.

Leslie also outlined how DND’s presence in the National Capital Region jumped from 13,199 in 2004 to 18,168 in 2010. That was a 38-per-cent increase, with most of that going to headquarters positions. Leslie went on to become an adviser to Liberal Leader Justin Trudeau.

Trudeau has said that his government will move ahead with the recommendations from Leslie’s report so the military will have “more teeth and less tail.”

“We will reduce the size of administration within the Department of National Defence and the Canadian Armed Forces,” notes the Liberals’ defence platform, released during the election.

DND launched its defence renewal process in the fall of 2013 as it followed up on some of Leslie’s recommendations.

“By rationalizing the number of managers at headquarters and modernizing management practices National Defence will become leaner, with fewer layers and bureaucratic blockages, the decision making process will be expedited and staff will be more empowered to accomplish their assigned tasks,” the department’s defence renewal plan says.

The employees affected by the renewal efforts would be moved to priority initiatives and new military capabilities. For instance, the department and military is interested in expanding its capabilities in cyber security and space operations.

In an October 2011 appearance before the Senate defence committee, Leslie, by then retired, explained the importance of reducing headquarters overhead.

“Just under 20,000 people are paid by DND in the National Capital Region,” he said. “The size of the Royal Canadian Navy is under 20,000. We have more people in Ottawa doing headquarters and headquarters-like activity than we have in the entire Royal Canadian Navy.”

He noted that the navy was short about 1,000 sailors. “We know where they are; they are here in Ottawa,” Leslie said. “They are working in staff jobs.”

The renewal initiative has caused unease among the department’s main union.

John MacLennan, national president of the Union of National Defence Employees, has pointed out that more than 1,000 civilian jobs have been eliminated so far because of cuts ordered by the Conservative government.

In 2012, Prime Minister Stephen Harper told then-defence minister Peter MacKay to further reduce overhead in the department and the Canadian Forces, while not affecting military readiness.

But union officials pointed out that many of the jobs that were cut were jobs needed to support military operations. They included firing range safety officers, defence scientists, weapons specialists, radiation safety advisers. In addition, jobs held by lower-paid workers such as clerks, cleaners and kitchen staff were also eliminated.

Trudeau to Obama: RCAF to Leave Bombing Campaign

Article written by CNN's Jethro Mullen 

Justin Trudeau, Prime Minister-Elect in a 2013 photo in
Washington D.C. 

(CNN)Canada's new leader-in-waiting says he intends to follow through on his campaign promise to pull the country out of the U.S.-led bombing campaign against ISIS militants in Syria and Iraq.

Justin Trudeau, who led the Liberal Party to a stunning victory in elections Monday, said he has already told U.S. President Barack Obama of his plans.

"He understands the commitments I've made around ending the combat mission," Trudeau told reporters Tuesday, without giving a time frame for when Canada's airstrikes would stop.

Trudeau is expected to take office in the coming weeks, replacing Conservative Prime Minister Stephen Harper, who sent Canadian warplanes to carry out airstrikes against ISIS.

Canada's bombing raids started hitting the Islamic extremist group's positions in Iraq in November 2014 and expanded into Syria in April.

As of last week, Canada's six CF-18 Hornet fighters in the region had flown 1,048 sorties in the anti-ISIS operation, according to the military, which didn't specify how many of the flights involved airstrikes. Other aircraft have conducted hundreds of refueling and reconnaissance missions.

For a full list of Canada's OPERATION IMPACT Airstrikes, see here. 

Canada to 'engage in a responsible way'

Trudeau said Tuesday that Canada would remain "a strong member of the coalition" against ISIS but would "engage in a responsible way."

His party wants to provide more humanitarian aid in Iraq and Syria and for the Canadian military to take part in a larger training  role rather than bombing missions, CNN partner CBC reported.

The White House statement on the phone call between Obama and Trudeau didn't mention the Canadian leader's intention to withdraw from the air campaign. It said the two leaders "committed to strengthening the countries' joint efforts" on combating terrorism and other issues.

Other nations that have taken part in the U.S.-led coalition's airstrikes against ISIS include Australia, France and Britain as well as Gulf nations like Saudi Arabia and Jordan.

As of early October, the coalition had carried out more than 7,000 strikes, nearly two-thirds of them in Iraq, according to the Pentagon. The U.S. military has conducted close to 80% of all the strikes.

Liberal Majority: What to Expect for the CAF

It is the morning after - and we now have another Majority government - no election until October 2020 (unless the fixed date election law changes)

So with a Liberal Majority will we see a return to the "Decade of Darkness" for the Canadian Armed Forces as was seen under the leadership of Jean Chretien? It is highly unlikely, as the world has changed a lot since the 2000, and the CAF is just as involved internationally now as we were then, albeit less involved in UN led missions. So what should we expect for the CAF under a Liberal government for the next 5 years?

The Liberals and Justin Trudeau pledge to boost Canada's support for International Peace and Security. The policy calls for a renewed commitment by Canada to Peacekeeping Operations. (I personally do not believe Peacekeeping exists, but Peace Enforcing, or Peace Making, but that is another rant all together)

The Liberals have said they will support Civilian Police Training Operations, particularly in French-Speaking nations where our highly Professional Military Police, RCMP and Civilian Police agencies can help developing nations maintain law and order.

They will lead an international effort to improve and expand the training of military and civilian personnel deployed on peace operations, and will insist that any peacekeepers involved in misconduct be held accountable by their own country and the United Nations.

They will recommit to supporting international peace operations with the United Nations, and will make the specialized capabilities – from mobile medical teams to engineering support to aircraft that can carry supplies and personnel  of the CAF available on a case-by-case basis.

For military spending, the Liberals will not let Canada’s Armed Forces be shortchanged, and we will not lapse military spending from year to year. They will also reinvest in building a leaner, more agile, better-equipped military, including adequate support systems for military personnel and their families. So perhaps no new money, but no new cuts, and current planned increases will take place. 

The Liberal Party will not by the F-35 Stealth Joint Strike Fighter. They will immediately launch an open and transparent competition to replace the CF-18 fighter aircraft. The primary mission of our fighter aircraft should remain the defence of North America, not stealth first-strike capability. (My vote would be for the Dassault Rafael, which Dassault has offered to build in Canada = JOBS; it is also faster, cheaper, and dual engines) The Liberals will reduce the procurement budget for replacing the CF-18s, and will instead purchase one of the many, lower-priced options that better match Canada’s defence needs.

The money saved from the F-35 purchase will be invested in the Royal Canadian Navy - which despite the ship building contracts awarded by the Conservatives has seen a "Decade of Darkness" under Harper. Many will claim that is because the Navy was not highly active in the War in Afghanistan (2001-2014); but I contest that they were deployed in the Arabian Peninsula almost entirely throughout the War.  The Liberals say they will have the funds that we need to build promised icebreakers, supply ships, arctic and offshore patrol ships, surface combatants, and other resources required by the Navy. These investments will ensure that the Royal Canadian Navy is able to operate as a true blue-water maritime force, while also growing the economy and creating jobs.

They will immediately begin an open and transparent review process of existing defence capabilities, with the goal of delivering a more effective, better-equipped military. The Canada First Defence Strategy, launched by Stephen Harper in 2008, is underfunded and out of date. The Liberals will review current programs and capabilities, and lay out a realistic plan to strengthen the CAF.

The Liberals plan to develop the CAF into an agile, responsive, and well-equipped military force that can effectively defend Canada and North America; provide support during natural disasters, humanitarian support missions, and peace operations; and offer international deterrence and combat capability. (The CAF already does much of this, but we can look forward to more domestic operations)

The Liberals plan to  continue to work with the United States to defend North America under NORAD, and contribute to regional security within the North Atlantic Treaty Organization.

They will do this by ensuring that equipment  is acquired faster, and with vigorous Parliamentary oversight; and  put a renewed focus on surveillance and control of Canadian territory and approaches, particularly our Arctic regions, and will increase the size of the Canadian Rangers.

The Liberals remain fully supportive of OPERATION REASSURANCE and OPERATION UNIFIER. However, they will make changes to OPERATION IMPACT. The RCAF involvement in the air campaign against ISIS will come to an end, but the Liberals plan to increase the number of trainers in Iraq (no specifics given yet) and will increase Canada's commitment to helping 25,000 Syrian refugees. Although no specif role for the CAF in the Syrian refugee crisis has been announced yet - the CAF can and will most likely play a role. 

The Liberals will restore funding for Canada’s four heavy urban search and rescue teams. Being able to respond swiftly and effectively to emergencies like ice storms, floods, wildfires, and building collapses is in our national interest. In the past, Canada’s four heavy urban search and rescue teams have proven invaluable in keeping Canadians and communities safe.To protect Canadians, our oceans, and our coastal economies, they will also re-open the Maritime Rescue Sub-centre in St. John’s, and the Kitsilano Coast Guard Base in Vancouver. No specifics yet on a new FWSAR for the RCAF.

The Liberals also plan to be much better to Veterans, who also seem to have been in a "Decade of Darkness" under the Conservatives, and invest in new career opportunities in a new Veterans Education Benefit program, at a  cost of $80 million per year. 

There is a lot here - so now we can sit back and watch for the next 5 years and see how things go. The CAF should be in good hands.

Feel Free to let me know what you think? Comment here or on Twitter, @Avro_ArrowRL201