By: Lee Berthiaume, The Canadian Press
The Trudeau government is planning to spend billions more on the navy's four wayward submarines to keep them operating into the 2030s.
The plan to extend the lives of the troubled vessels is included in the Liberals' new defence policy and comes following calls from senior naval officers to save the controversial ships from the scrap heap.
The actual price of the plan was not revealed in the policy document, which was released to much fanfare last week, and National Defence refused to provide a price tag following multiple requests.
That is despite assertions from the Liberal government that the defence policy was fully costed and following promises of full transparency when it came to the overall plan.
"Detailed costing will be provided in the Defence Investment Plan to be published in due course," National Defence spokesman Daniel Le Bouthillier said in an e-mail.
Defence sources, however, have told The Canadian Press that keeping the submarines in the water for another decade will cost upwards of $2.5-billion.
Without upgrades, the first of the submarines will reach the end of its life in 2022, according to documents obtained last year through Access to Information, with the last retired in 2027.
Some have questioned the wisdom of spending more money on the four vessels, which have been plagued with problems since Canada bought them used from Britain in 1998.
While the Chretien government said at the time that it was getting a bargain by paying only $750-million, the ships have required constant repairs and upgrades just to make them seaworthy for a limited time.
And while a number of experts have called for Canada look to purchase new submarines, rather than upgrading the ones it has, others have said the country doesn't need such expensive vessels.
Defence Minister Harjit Sajjan this week emphasized the Liberal government's view, previously expressed by senior naval officials, that subs are necessary for protecting Canada's security and sovereignty.
"No other platform in the Canadian Armed Forces can do what a submarine can do," Sajjan said during an event in Halifax on Monday.
"No other platform has the stealth, the intelligence-gathering, surveillance and reconnaissance capability and the deterrence to potential adversaries that a sub does."
Sajjan added that the government decided upgrading the existing subs – HMCS Chicoutimi, Victoria, Corner Brook and Windsor – was more "prudent" than purchasing new vessels.
The Liberals promised in their defence policy to invest an additional $62-billion in the military over the next 20 years, which includes increasing annual defence spending by 70 per cent over the next decade.
A large chunk of that new money will end up going towards replacing the navy's 12 frigates and three recently retired destroyers with 15 new warships at a cost of between $56-billion and $60-billion.
Previous estimates had pegged the cost of those vessels at $26-billion.
The four submarines continue to generate headlines for the wrong reasons, with the most recent Thursday when HMCS Chicoutimi was hit by another naval vessel while docked at CFB Esquimalt in B.C.
But Rob Huebert, an expert on maritime security at the University of Calgary, said the other three have been involved in a variety of tasks and mission in recent months – even if most Canadians don't realize it.
"The very nature of what they do means that (the military) can't talk about it," he said.
"They're actually exceeding what the navy was expecting them to do in terms of time at sea, interdiction of drugs and co-operation with the Americans. You can't talk about any of that, but it is occurring."
Rather than extend the lives of the submarines, Huebert said he would have liked to see the government start looking for replacements, but that wasn't possible given the huge costs of replacing the frigates.
"What we saw was the defence review was an intelligent decision to do what was necessary to lengthen the life of the subs while making sure the (new warships) are built," he said.
Friday, June 16, 2017
HMCS Chicoutimi Struck by Orca-Class Training Vessel
By: The Canadian Press
OTTAWA -- HMCS Chicoutimi, one of the navy's four submarines was hit Thursday by another naval vessel while docked at CFB Esquimalt in British Columbia.
A naval spokesman says HMCS Chicoutimi was docked in the harbour when an Orca-class training vessel that was moving at low speed bumped up against the sub.
Navy Lt. Greg Menzies says no one was injured, and that the two vessels sustained only minor scrapes, though a more detailed damage assessment of the submarine was being conducted.
The Orca-class are small vessels, about 33 metres long and displacing about 210 tonnes. The submarine is 70 metres long and displaces more than 2,400 tonnes.
Defence officials were investigating the cause of the crash.
The incident is the latest round of bad luck for Canada's submarine fleet, which has been plagued with breakdowns and other problems since the ships were bought from the United Kingdom in 1998.
The Liberal government says it plans to upgrade the subs so they can continue to operate into the 2030s, at which point the oldest will be more than 40 years old.
OTTAWA -- HMCS Chicoutimi, one of the navy's four submarines was hit Thursday by another naval vessel while docked at CFB Esquimalt in British Columbia.
A naval spokesman says HMCS Chicoutimi was docked in the harbour when an Orca-class training vessel that was moving at low speed bumped up against the sub.
Navy Lt. Greg Menzies says no one was injured, and that the two vessels sustained only minor scrapes, though a more detailed damage assessment of the submarine was being conducted.
The Orca-class are small vessels, about 33 metres long and displacing about 210 tonnes. The submarine is 70 metres long and displaces more than 2,400 tonnes.
Defence officials were investigating the cause of the crash.
The incident is the latest round of bad luck for Canada's submarine fleet, which has been plagued with breakdowns and other problems since the ships were bought from the United Kingdom in 1998.
The Liberal government says it plans to upgrade the subs so they can continue to operate into the 2030s, at which point the oldest will be more than 40 years old.
Thursday, June 15, 2017
Walkom: Canada Mulling a return to the Unwinnable Afghan War
By THOMAS WALKOM, Toronto Star
A return to the Afghan War is one step closer. Defence Minister Harjit Sajjan has confirmed that NATO has asked Canada to send police trainers to assist Afghanistan’s struggling government in the fight against Taliban insurgents. He said Ottawa is seriously considering the request.
The trainers, if sent, could be either soldiers or police officers.
The NATO request is part of an effort by the alliance to quietly beef up its role in the Afghan war without inflaming public opinion back home.
Technically, the roughly 13,000 troops under NATO command in Afghanistan do not engage in combat. Their role is to train, advise and assist local Afghan forces.
But the war in Afghanistan is going badly for the government in Kabul. It faces not only its traditional Taliban foes but the terrorist group Daesh, also known as ISIS.
High-profile suicide bombings have rocked Kabul. The Taliban effectively controls large swaths of the countryside. The central government is shaky.
American Gen. John Nicholson, who heads NATO operations in Afghanistan, says he needs at least 3,000 to 5,000 more “advisers” to meet his military needs there.
In Washington, President Donald Trump’s administration is mulling over the question of how many more American troops to commit to Afghanistan (it already has roughly 8,400 soldiers there).
But Trump has also made it clear that he expects other NATO countries to pick up part of the slack.
Currently, Canada and France are the only NATO countries without troops in Afghanistan.
Canadian troops entered the Afghan War in 2001 and stayed for just over 12 years. Over that period, 158 Canadian soldiers were killed and hundreds more wounded.
It was the longest-running war in Canadian history. By the end, it was also one of the most unpopular.
In 2014, with an election year looming, Stephen Harper’s Conservative government ordered the last Canadian troops home.
Prime Minister Justin Trudeau’s Liberal government is careful to couch any return to Afghanistan in minimalist terms.
Sajjan first raised the possibility in a CTV interview on Saturday, volunteering that NATO had made an “ask” for Canadian advisers to help train Afghan police and that Canada was actively considering the request.
He repeated this again Monday to reporters in Halifax. But he noted that Ottawa’s real military focus now is on the war against Daesh in Iraq and that, in any case, Canada’s military operations in Afghanistan ended three years ago.
Translation: Even if we accede to the NATO request, this will not be as bad as before.
But of course that’s the kind of optimistic thing governments always say at the outset of armed conflict.
When Canada first entered the Afghan War after the 9/11 attacks on New York and Washington, the stated aim was to honour its NATO obligations to the U.S. When Canada upped its military commitment in 2006, the stated aim was to ensure that Afghan girls could go to school.
Throughout, the experts told us that we had to take part in this war to maintain our credibility in NATO and to avoid irritating the U.S. In fact, what we became involved in was a complicated, vicious and ultimately unwinnable conflict where the line between friend and enemy was too often blurred.
So we shall see what the Trudeau Liberals have in mind this time. They have already expanded Canada’s role in the ground war in Iraq. Foreign Affairs Minister Chrystia Freeland talks glowingly of using Canadian “muscle” to promote Canadian values,
They plan to increase defence spending overall.
Perhaps they will remember how difficult it was to extricate ourselves the last time we involved ourselves in the Afghan War. Sajjan should. He fought in it.
Or perhaps they will calculate that the political benefits of satisfying a U.S. and NATO request are worth the risk.
After all, they could say, it’s just training. What’s so dangerous about that?
A return to the Afghan War is one step closer. Defence Minister Harjit Sajjan has confirmed that NATO has asked Canada to send police trainers to assist Afghanistan’s struggling government in the fight against Taliban insurgents. He said Ottawa is seriously considering the request.
The trainers, if sent, could be either soldiers or police officers.
The NATO request is part of an effort by the alliance to quietly beef up its role in the Afghan war without inflaming public opinion back home.
Technically, the roughly 13,000 troops under NATO command in Afghanistan do not engage in combat. Their role is to train, advise and assist local Afghan forces.
But the war in Afghanistan is going badly for the government in Kabul. It faces not only its traditional Taliban foes but the terrorist group Daesh, also known as ISIS.
High-profile suicide bombings have rocked Kabul. The Taliban effectively controls large swaths of the countryside. The central government is shaky.
American Gen. John Nicholson, who heads NATO operations in Afghanistan, says he needs at least 3,000 to 5,000 more “advisers” to meet his military needs there.
In Washington, President Donald Trump’s administration is mulling over the question of how many more American troops to commit to Afghanistan (it already has roughly 8,400 soldiers there).
But Trump has also made it clear that he expects other NATO countries to pick up part of the slack.
Currently, Canada and France are the only NATO countries without troops in Afghanistan.
Canadian troops entered the Afghan War in 2001 and stayed for just over 12 years. Over that period, 158 Canadian soldiers were killed and hundreds more wounded.
It was the longest-running war in Canadian history. By the end, it was also one of the most unpopular.
In 2014, with an election year looming, Stephen Harper’s Conservative government ordered the last Canadian troops home.
Prime Minister Justin Trudeau’s Liberal government is careful to couch any return to Afghanistan in minimalist terms.
Sajjan first raised the possibility in a CTV interview on Saturday, volunteering that NATO had made an “ask” for Canadian advisers to help train Afghan police and that Canada was actively considering the request.
He repeated this again Monday to reporters in Halifax. But he noted that Ottawa’s real military focus now is on the war against Daesh in Iraq and that, in any case, Canada’s military operations in Afghanistan ended three years ago.
Translation: Even if we accede to the NATO request, this will not be as bad as before.
But of course that’s the kind of optimistic thing governments always say at the outset of armed conflict.
When Canada first entered the Afghan War after the 9/11 attacks on New York and Washington, the stated aim was to honour its NATO obligations to the U.S. When Canada upped its military commitment in 2006, the stated aim was to ensure that Afghan girls could go to school.
Throughout, the experts told us that we had to take part in this war to maintain our credibility in NATO and to avoid irritating the U.S. In fact, what we became involved in was a complicated, vicious and ultimately unwinnable conflict where the line between friend and enemy was too often blurred.
So we shall see what the Trudeau Liberals have in mind this time. They have already expanded Canada’s role in the ground war in Iraq. Foreign Affairs Minister Chrystia Freeland talks glowingly of using Canadian “muscle” to promote Canadian values,
They plan to increase defence spending overall.
Perhaps they will remember how difficult it was to extricate ourselves the last time we involved ourselves in the Afghan War. Sajjan should. He fought in it.
Or perhaps they will calculate that the political benefits of satisfying a U.S. and NATO request are worth the risk.
After all, they could say, it’s just training. What’s so dangerous about that?
Resolve iAOR to be Unveiled July 20
By: David Pugliese, Defence Watch
Chantier Davie has issued invitations for the unveiling of the Resolve-class interim Auxiliary Oiler Replenishment (AOR) ship. That will happen July 20. All members of the public are welcome according to the invitation.
In November 2015, the Liberal government tried to derail the $669 million project for the supply ship but backed down after their attempt became public.
Project Resolve was approved by the previous Conservative government and involved Davie shipyards in Quebec quickly converting a commercial vessel into an AOR. The ship had already been delivered to Davie to begin the conversion process when James D. Irving, co-chief executive officer of Davie’s rival, Irving Shipbuilding, wrote a letter on Nov. 17, 2015, to then procurement minister Judy Foote and Defence Minister Harjit Sajjan. Irving requested its proposal for a similar vessel, already rejected by the Conservative government, be examined.
After receiving Irving’s letter the Liberal government put Project Resolve on hold.
Details about the Liberals’ decision to put Project Resolve on hold, as well as Irving’s letter and details of cabinet discussions about the matter, were leaked to the CBC in November 2015. The leak embarrassed the new Trudeau government and sparked outrage in Quebec about the potential loss of hundreds of jobs if Davie were to lose the ship deal. The Liberals beat a quick retreat and shortly afterwards, Project Resolve went ahead.
The RCMP has claimed that Vice Admiral Mark Norman was involved in leaking information on Project Resolve to Davie officials. Norman denies any wrongdoing. The RCMP have not laid any charges against the vice admiral who was suspended from his job in January by Chief of the Defence Staff Gen. Jon Vance. Norman’s supporters have raised questions about how the respected officer has been treated.
The ship will be leased to the Canadian government, which has an option to buy the vessel if so desired.
Davie has issued these photos of the vessel:
Chantier Davie has issued invitations for the unveiling of the Resolve-class interim Auxiliary Oiler Replenishment (AOR) ship. That will happen July 20. All members of the public are welcome according to the invitation.
In November 2015, the Liberal government tried to derail the $669 million project for the supply ship but backed down after their attempt became public.
Project Resolve was approved by the previous Conservative government and involved Davie shipyards in Quebec quickly converting a commercial vessel into an AOR. The ship had already been delivered to Davie to begin the conversion process when James D. Irving, co-chief executive officer of Davie’s rival, Irving Shipbuilding, wrote a letter on Nov. 17, 2015, to then procurement minister Judy Foote and Defence Minister Harjit Sajjan. Irving requested its proposal for a similar vessel, already rejected by the Conservative government, be examined.
After receiving Irving’s letter the Liberal government put Project Resolve on hold.
Details about the Liberals’ decision to put Project Resolve on hold, as well as Irving’s letter and details of cabinet discussions about the matter, were leaked to the CBC in November 2015. The leak embarrassed the new Trudeau government and sparked outrage in Quebec about the potential loss of hundreds of jobs if Davie were to lose the ship deal. The Liberals beat a quick retreat and shortly afterwards, Project Resolve went ahead.
The RCMP has claimed that Vice Admiral Mark Norman was involved in leaking information on Project Resolve to Davie officials. Norman denies any wrongdoing. The RCMP have not laid any charges against the vice admiral who was suspended from his job in January by Chief of the Defence Staff Gen. Jon Vance. Norman’s supporters have raised questions about how the respected officer has been treated.
The ship will be leased to the Canadian government, which has an option to buy the vessel if so desired.
Davie has issued these photos of the vessel:
Ottawa Quietly Expands CAF Footprint in Ukraine
By: Lee Berthiaume, The Canadian Press
The military has quietly expanded its footprint in Ukraine, giving commanders free rein to send their troops anywhere — except where they might run into Russian forces or separatist rebels.
Canada first deployed about 200 troops to Ukraine in the summer of 2015 to help train government forces in their fight against Russian-backed separatists in the eastern part of the country.
But the Canadians were required to stay in the western half of Ukraine, far from the conflict that has continued to rage over the intervening two years, leaving more than 10,000 people dead.
Those restrictions were eased in March when the government extended the mission for another two years, the mission’s commander, Lt.-Col. Mark Lubiniecki, said in an interview Wednesday.
While Canadian troops are still required to stay away from the border with Russia and the fighting in eastern Ukraine, he said, the rest of the country is now fair game.
The change, Lubiniecki added, has given welcome flexibility to the Canadian mission, which has so far trained nearly 4,500 Ukrainian troops, many of whom have since been sent into the conflict zone.
The number of Canadian soldiers in Ukraine remains the same.
Lubiniecki would not reveal how far his troops have to stay from the Russian border, except to say that it is far enough away to keep them safe and prevent anyone from misinterpreting they they are in Ukraine.
“We’re here to provide mentorship and training, we’re not here to be operating on the front line,” he said. “So making sure we maintain that buffer is extremely important for us.”
The training mission is set to expire in 2019.
The UN Office of the High Commissioner for Human Rights released a report this week on the conflict in eastern Ukraine, asserting that an end to the three-year-old war was nowhere to be seen.
Fighting continues to erupt despite the existence of a ceasefire, while more than 1.6 million people have been forced to flee their homes and another 3 million are struggling to make ends meet.
Canada’s presence in eastern Europe is actually set to expand over the next few months, as about 450 troops arrive in Latvia to lead a NATO force that will serve as a check on Russian aggression.
One of the concerns trumpeted by both Canadian and Latvian officials is that Russia, or at least pro-Russian agitators, will attempt to spread lies and false information about the mission there.
But Lubiniecki said his troops in Ukraine have so far been spared from any such information attacks, saying: “I’m just not seeing it (on the ground) right now.”
That applies to cyberattacks, as well.
Moscow and its separatist allies in eastern Ukraine aren’t the only threats that Kyiv is struggling to address: corruption is also one of several significant problems.
The Ukrainian military and its defence sector have not been spared, as outlined in recent months by various media reports as well as investigations by NGOs such as Transparency International.
Much of the concern has focused on whether Ukrainian government officials have been enriching themselves by skimming defence contracts or diverting equipment donated by countries like Canada.
Transparency International released a report last month saying improvements have been made, but more needs to be done to ensure foreign donations get to the Ukrainian troops who actually need it.
Canada has so far provided about $16-million in non-lethal equipment such as helmets, bulletproof vests and winter clothing to the Ukrainian military, and promised another $7.25-million by 2019.
Lubiniecki said he has not seen any evidence of corruption during his time in the country, and that the Ukrainian soldiers his troops are training are well equipped and motivated.
The military has quietly expanded its footprint in Ukraine, giving commanders free rein to send their troops anywhere — except where they might run into Russian forces or separatist rebels.
Canada first deployed about 200 troops to Ukraine in the summer of 2015 to help train government forces in their fight against Russian-backed separatists in the eastern part of the country.
But the Canadians were required to stay in the western half of Ukraine, far from the conflict that has continued to rage over the intervening two years, leaving more than 10,000 people dead.
Those restrictions were eased in March when the government extended the mission for another two years, the mission’s commander, Lt.-Col. Mark Lubiniecki, said in an interview Wednesday.
While Canadian troops are still required to stay away from the border with Russia and the fighting in eastern Ukraine, he said, the rest of the country is now fair game.
The change, Lubiniecki added, has given welcome flexibility to the Canadian mission, which has so far trained nearly 4,500 Ukrainian troops, many of whom have since been sent into the conflict zone.
The number of Canadian soldiers in Ukraine remains the same.
Lubiniecki would not reveal how far his troops have to stay from the Russian border, except to say that it is far enough away to keep them safe and prevent anyone from misinterpreting they they are in Ukraine.
“We’re here to provide mentorship and training, we’re not here to be operating on the front line,” he said. “So making sure we maintain that buffer is extremely important for us.”
The training mission is set to expire in 2019.
The UN Office of the High Commissioner for Human Rights released a report this week on the conflict in eastern Ukraine, asserting that an end to the three-year-old war was nowhere to be seen.
Fighting continues to erupt despite the existence of a ceasefire, while more than 1.6 million people have been forced to flee their homes and another 3 million are struggling to make ends meet.
Canada’s presence in eastern Europe is actually set to expand over the next few months, as about 450 troops arrive in Latvia to lead a NATO force that will serve as a check on Russian aggression.
One of the concerns trumpeted by both Canadian and Latvian officials is that Russia, or at least pro-Russian agitators, will attempt to spread lies and false information about the mission there.
But Lubiniecki said his troops in Ukraine have so far been spared from any such information attacks, saying: “I’m just not seeing it (on the ground) right now.”
That applies to cyberattacks, as well.
Moscow and its separatist allies in eastern Ukraine aren’t the only threats that Kyiv is struggling to address: corruption is also one of several significant problems.
The Ukrainian military and its defence sector have not been spared, as outlined in recent months by various media reports as well as investigations by NGOs such as Transparency International.
Much of the concern has focused on whether Ukrainian government officials have been enriching themselves by skimming defence contracts or diverting equipment donated by countries like Canada.
Transparency International released a report last month saying improvements have been made, but more needs to be done to ensure foreign donations get to the Ukrainian troops who actually need it.
Canada has so far provided about $16-million in non-lethal equipment such as helmets, bulletproof vests and winter clothing to the Ukrainian military, and promised another $7.25-million by 2019.
Lubiniecki said he has not seen any evidence of corruption during his time in the country, and that the Ukrainian soldiers his troops are training are well equipped and motivated.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)