Political Crossfire Forums

[ChaseNorth]

Below is an article someone emailed to me about Canada's contribution to peace keeping and war. Its about two years old but I found it to be an interesting read and would be curious to hear other people's take on it. I hope, however, that the comments will focus attention on Canadian involvement in the world - not American.

Do you think Canada should take a more or less active role in military campaigns?
Would there ever be an instance when Canada would be justified in fighting without a UN mandate?
Would you ever consider serving in the Canadian armed forces?

What is the mission of Canada's armed forces and how should Canada lead in the world? - Or should it follow?


The Country the World Forgot - Again
By Kevin Myers
The Daily Telegraph, London, April 21, 2002

UNTIL the deaths last week of four Canadian soldiers accidentally killed by a US warplane in Afghanistan, probably almost no one outside their home country had been aware that Canadian troops were deployed in the region. And as always, Canada will now bury its dead, just as the rest of the world as always will forget its sacrifice, just as it always forgets nearly everything Canada ever does.
It seems that Canada's historic mission is to come to the selfless aid both of its friends and of complete strangers, and then, once the crisis is over, to be well and truly ignored. Canada is the perpetual wallflower that stands on the edge of the hall, waiting for someone to come and ask her for a dance. A fire breaks out, she risks life and limb to rescue her fellow dance-goers, and suffers serious injuries. But when the hall is repaired and the dancing resumes, there is Canada, the wallflower still, while those she once helped glamorously cavort across the floor, blithely neglecting her yet again.

That is the price which Canada pays for sharing the North American Continent with the US, and for being a selfless friend of Britain in two global conflicts. For much of the 20th century, Canada was torn in two different directions: it seemed to be a part of the old world, yet had an address in the new one, and that divided identity ensured that it never fully got the gratitude it deserved.

Yet its purely voluntary contribution to the cause of freedom in two world wars was perhaps the greatest of any democracy. Almost 10 per cent of Canada's entire population of seven million people served in the armed forces during the First World War, and nearly 60,000 died. The great Allied victories of 1918 were spearheaded by Canadian troops, perhaps the most capable soldiers in the entire British order of battle.

Canada was repaid for its enormous sacrifice by downright neglect, its unique contribution to victory being absorbed into the popular memory as somehow or other the work of the "British". The Second World War provided a re-run. The Canadian navy began the war with a half dozen vessels, and ended up policing nearly half of the Atlantic against U-boat attack. More than 120 Canadian warships participated in the Normandy landings, during which 15,000 Canadian soldiers went ashore on D-Day alone. Canada finished the war with the third largest navy and the fourth largest air force in the world. The world thanked Canada with the same sublime indifference as it had the previous time. Canadian participation in the war was acknowledged in film only if it was necessary to give an American actor a part in a campaign which the US had clearly not participated - a touching scrupulousness which, of course, Hollywood has since abandoned, as it has any notion of a separate Canadian identity.

So it is a general rule that actors and film-makers arriving in Hollywood keep their nationality - unless, that is, they are Canadian. Thus Mary Pickford, Walter Huston, Donald Sutherland, Michael J Fox, William Shatner, Norman Jewison, David Cronenberg and Dan Aykroyd have in the popular perception become American, and Christopher Plummer British. It is as if in the very act of becoming famous, a Canadian ceases to be Canadian, unless she is Margaret Atwood, who is as unshakeably Canadian as a moose, or Celine Dion, for whom Canada has proved quite unable to find any takers. Moreover, Canada is every bit as querulously alert to the achievements of its sons and daughters as the rest of the world is completely unaware of them. The Canadians proudly say of themselves - and are unheard by anyone else - that 1 per cent of the world's population has provided 10 per cent of the world's peace-keeping forces. Canadian soldiers in the past half century have been the greatest peace-keepers on earth - in 39 missions on UN mandates, and six on non-UN peace-keeping duties, from Vietnam to East Timor, from Sinai to Bosnia.

Yet the only foreign engagement which has entered the popular non-Canadian imagination was the sorry affair in Somalia, in which out-of-control paratroopers murdered two Somali infiltrators. Their regiment was then disbanded in disgrace - a uniquely Canadian act of self-abasement for which, naturally, the Canadians received no international credit.

So who today in the US knows about the stoic and selfless friendship its northern neighbour has given it in Afghanistan? Rather like Cyrano de Bergerac, Canada repeatedly does honourable things for honourable motives, but instead of being thanked for it, it remains something of a figure of fun. It is the Canadian way, for which Canadians should be proud, yet such honour comes at a high cost.

This weekend four shrouds, red with blood and maple leaf, head homewards; and four more grieving Canadian families know that cost all too tragically well.

[thundertaker]

I agree, Canada's contributions in both world wars are shamefully overlooked. Unlike the americans, the Canadians (along with the Australians, New Zealanders and the British Empire) were with us from the very start helping us to fight the Germans........

[Nico]

We in New Zealand suffer from the same fate [ like the Fijians, for example, who served the UN in Lebanon for so long and so well without a word], but we are well aware of the fine abilities and contributions of the Canadian armed forces.

Sometimes I think all that one can do is to remember your own and forget about the kudos that rarely comes from taking up someone else's struggle.
It's a bitter pill but it makes you the better people for it. :-|

[Nico]

Canada needs no mandate to defend its own land from any invader.

[ChaseNorth]

Anaximander wrote: Canada needs no mandate to defend its own land from any invader.

Amen!

I'm just curious to know what Canadians feel about how/when their nation should serve in the world.

[timmtc]

Well, I think our peacekeepers are noble, no question. However I feel we need to play more of a role internationally. Following WWII our contributions in both WWI and WWII made us a major player in the UN and politically. We had the 3rd largest navy if I am correct. Our soldiers have always been brave and among the best. However, our army has faced large cutbacks and we can no longer play any role internationally.

Canadians do not like to go and start war, but we will generally support our allies for the most part (except in Iraq, because our prime minister was retarded). One of the main reasons we did not go to Iraq which is never discussed was because we had planned on doing a major overhaul of our military, which started about a year ago. This also has caused us to turn down help to the americans with Bush's most recent visit, and Canada wanted to help out.


I feel that we need to re-establish our role and have a well trained and moderately sized military that can offer assitance to our allies when they are in a time of need.

[Mercqv62]

its my opinion canada should modernize and strengthen its military because it is a rather alrge country and should be able to help its allies and protect its people without depending on anyone.

[Saviz]

Canada is a large nation, yes, however Canada does not have the manpower to become a super power. Whats great about Canada is the size of our army. Yes, yes it is small, but Canada is a peace keeping nation, if our army was a large one then we would not be a peace keeping nation anymore, we would be among the Brits, Russians and Americans, and none of those nations are seen great noble nations by others around the world.

[Canada_Rocks]

I feel at home.
Interesting questions.
rather than writing a huge essay on the matter I will jsu simply answer them in order.

Do you think Canada should take a more or less active role in military campaigns?
Yes...If it's justified
We helped in Afganistan. We did not find Iraq justified, but then again that wasn;t peace keeping.

Would there ever be an instance when Canada would be justified in fighting without a UN mandate?
No, I think Canada respects the discision of the UN.
By the way a Canadian General now cmmands the UN forces.

Would you ever consider serving in the Canadian armed forces?
If Canada went to was I'd go, You find that amoungst most Canadians. In America it is more like the poor go. Her I think rich and poor would fight side by side if need be to protect our country.

What is the mission of Canada's armed forces and how should Canada lead in the world? - Or should it follow?
Canada arm forces basically rely on the UN and Canada can't lead the world. I truely peaceful country could never.

[timmtc]

Quote: Do you think Canada should take a more or less active role in military campaigns?
Yes...If it's justified
We helped in Afganistan. We did not find Iraq justified, but then again that wasn;t peace keeping.

That is not entirely correct. When Bush went to Canada, he asked martin to help with peacekeeping efforts in Iraq - like Japan, South Korea etc have been doing. Martin declined because our military is in such horrible condition.

Quote: Canada is a large nation, yes, however Canada does not have the manpower to become a super power. Whats great about Canada is the size of our army. Yes, yes it is small, but Canada is a peace keeping nation, if our army was a large one then we would not be a peace keeping nation anymore, we would be among the Brits, Russians and Americans, and none of those nations are seen great noble nations by others around the world.

Saviz you make some very valid and good points. However, afer the fall of the cold war (really starting in the 1980's) the Canadian military shifted into a "peacekeeping" force. The reasons are debateable, but it was primarily because the world was no longer bi-polar, and all threats were pretty much gone. Times are changing, and our military is not. Countries like Iran, North Korea, Syria, Egypt and even China are starting to cause some worry. I'm not saying there is going to be a war, but what if North Korea decided to randomly invade the south. It is a VERY good possibility this will happen and unfortunately we would be s**t out of luck. We have nothing to contribute, and trust me that war would be UN led.

Canada does not have the ability to become a military "superpower". We do however have the ability, especially since we bring in a huge budget surplus to make our military the best for its size. We need the best planes, ships and equipment for our troops. We are able to expand our forces also, which is currently being done. I would like to see our forces like Israel or Switzerland, small but well trained and well equipped.

I hate to even say this, but the size or quality of a countries military earns them a degree of respect in international relations. We cannot be expected to be taken seriously with what we have. We need to toughen up and modernize with the changing world.

[ChaseNorth]

These are great response - and I hope there are more.

I first posted the article/questions in a general discussion area of a Canadian Sci Fi board. People were furious with me and had various conspiracy theories as to why I would post such a thing.

I'm a conservative American and after so many threads that bashed the US, I wanted to know what people in Canada wanted and valued, not what they hated.

The friendly fire deaths involving Canadian troops were covered by the US press and if memory serves me correctly, they were on the front page of the New York Times.

I know people have very passionate views about the US. I'm curious to see how Canadian board members view their own country and what they wish for the future.

Where do you see Canada going in the next 50 years?

Should Canada fight for values? Or practical concerns?

What if UN resolutions (or lack there of) contradict both the values and practical concerns of Canada?


There were a few good responses though on the other forum.
Here is what one poster wrote:

***************

the premise of your article is flawed in that you assume that the prevailing attitude is that Canadians see themselves as a cohesive unit. They don't.

Part of it is political. It has been political with various levels of government pitting the different provinces against each other for political gain.

The province I live in is always 'at war with the East' with enough rhetoric on both sides to sink a battleship.

Part of it is with the official government policy of multiculturalism where each new group new immigrant group is allowed to keep its own identity and is encouraged to do so.

You can ask a large number of Canadians what nationality they are and they will tell you that they are 'whatever nationality'-Canadian.

If you ask an American with their melting pot doctrine they will tell you they are American. No hyphen.

This leads to a society that has no distinct idea of nationality and one that defines itself by what it is not.

This is why you get so many slams at Americans. It sets us apart from them even though we are not really sure why.

You also have to remember that many of the Canadian provinces were settled at different times by different populations and have created identities that are much stronger than those between American states.

There are even vast differences ideological differences between Alberta and Saskatchewan because of this.

Saskatchewan was settled earlier by peoples from the British Empire and as a result is much more socialist.

Alberta on the other hand, and this is a dirty little Canadian secret, was settled by a large number of Americans and is much more free enterprise as a result.

Before people start screaming about this ask yourself why American immigrants were classified according to the nationality of their last names and not the nationality of the nation they were born in.

Also remember that in vast areas of Southern Alberta are predominantly Mormon and they are not recent converts. Their ancestors who moved here were Mormon.

The Mounties were also created not to protect the Native American population. They were created to make sure that American settlers in the West, Saskatchewan, B.C. and Alberta, did not create another Texas.

You keep referring to Canada's great war record but have to remember we only entered the Boer War, World War 1 and World War 2 because we saw ourselves as part of the British Empire and we had to do our part for them.

We got involved in Korea because the UN was new and the old WW2 alliances were still fresh.

We got into peacekeeping because it helped set us apart from the Americans who were involved in another war at the time.

To be fair there were various attempts to try to establish ourselves as an independent middling power but those pushing it often became lazy when trying to implement it and just gave it lip service.

The fact that it allowed the governments of the time to divest themselves of expensive things like aircraft carriers and tanks and spend that money on social programs didn't hurt.

You ask what makes a Canadian a Canadian but the problem is that most Canadians don't know what the answer is.

******************

Any comments, ideas, thoughts on it?

Was his response accurate?

[Canada_Rocks]

That is not entirely correct. When Bush went to Canada, he asked martin to help with peacekeeping efforts in Iraq - like Japan, South Korea etc have been doing. Martin declined because our military is in such horrible condition. "

accually we did
cbc.ca/story/canada/national/2004/07/25/canada_afghanistan040725.html
highbeam.com/library/doc0.asp?docid=1P1:49366105&refid=ink_puball tnews

[timmtc]

Canada_rocks wrote: That is not entirely correct. When Bush went to Canada, he asked martin to help with peacekeeping efforts in Iraq - like Japan, South Korea etc have been doing. Martin declined because our military is in such horrible condition. "

accually we did
cbc.ca/story/canada/national/2004/07/25/canada_afghanistan040725.html
highbeam.com/library/doc0.asp?docid=1P1:49366105&refid=ink_puball tnews

That is Afghanistan, not Iraq.

[Crazy_Canuck]

Wow...look at all the Canadians here :-)

Guys, I believe that part of the problem is that some American policies make it difficult for us to act independandly.

For instance: The Arrow and American Pressure leading to the de-nationalozation of the oil industry (imagine the money royalties would be giving the gov)

[timmtc]

Man...I did a project on the Arrow and that pissed me off :(

Canuck you have a good point though, the Americans at times do make it difficult for us to act independently. Perhaps it is because our lack of support for their policies for the past 40 or so years. Not to mention, we have absolutely no military might which goes back to one of my posts where I pointed out that these days respect primarily is formed through military power which translates to foreign influence. Back in the day, even when Mulrunoy was our Prime Minister we had significant increases in military spending and we were a respected foreign power. At the time, Mulrunoy and Reagen had similar (not identical) opinions, and they worked together wll. It seems that since the end of WWII both the Canadian Prime Ministers and the American Presidents have had different opinions, and bitter exchanges. This isn't all the Americans fault and it isn't the fault of Canada. It's more of a mutual thing, neither side is willing to do any favors for the other country.

[Nico]

Canada might not be a superpower, but where is the line between military might and military need? Does Canada 'pulling it's weight' mean that it has to be burdened with a military that can't be justified other than to keep other nations happy?

[Crazy_Canuck]

Timmtc,

"...Americans at times do make it difficult for us to act independently. Perhaps it is because our lack of support for their policies for the past 40 or so years."

So they make it difficult for us to act indipendently cause they dont like it when we do?

Do you not see a problem wth that position?

As for military might, Canada bult up it's army to the 4th largest in WWII. There is NO LOGISTICAL REASON why this cannot be done again. Building an army is easy, building international credability is not. We have far more of the latter than do the Americans and the prior can be done easily.

[timmtc]

Anaximander wrote: Canada might not be a superpower, but where is the line between military might and military need? Does Canada 'pulling it's weight' mean that it has to be burdened with a military that can't be justified other than to keep other nations happy?

It isn't at all about keeping other nations happy, otherwise we would have drasitcally increased our military. It is about practicing what we preach so to say. We preach justice, equality, human rights etc all around the world. A prime example of our commitment to this is the NATO action against Bosnia, or even the second world war. How can we remain credible or even a foreign influence if we cannot back anything we say up?

For example, if we threaten Sudan to stop slaughtering thousands of people, do you really think we can DO anything about it if all other options have been exhausted? What if North Korea invades South Korea and starts using WMD's against the S.Koreans killing millions. We think of ourselves as a righteous and noble nation, is it noble sitting back and watching even though it is against what we've been preaching?

I don't think anyone in Canada wants a huge military, it certainly isn't needed. We want a good sized military with top training and equipment so people know we can walk the walk, and talk the talk if it comes down to it.

[cap'n queasy]

If I was Canadian I would be worried about losing my national sovereignty.
Why do you guys seem to hold the UN in such high regard?

[timmtc]

Crazy_Canuck wrote: Timmtc,

"...Americans at times do make it difficult for us to act independently. Perhaps it is because our lack of support for their policies for the past 40 or so years."

So they make it difficult for us to act indipendently cause they dont like it when we do?

Do you not see a problem wth that position?

As for military might, Canada bult up it's army to the 4th largest in WWII. There is NO LOGISTICAL REASON why this cannot be done again. Building an army is easy, building international credability is not. We have far more of the latter than do the Americans and the prior can be done easily.

Not a bad point Canuck. However I will disagree with you. Sure, it was easy to bring up 1,000,000 troops for WWII, but hell that was back in the 1930's when war was pretty static - for the most part. War back then consisted of teaching a soldier how to shoot, and equipping him with a good pair of boots, a ross rifle (that s*cked) and basic equipment. Today, having an effective military consists of techonologically advanced equipment. Bullet proof vests, tanks that work, airplanes (we have like 30 planes) and a modern navy. All those things cannot be drawn up in a matter of months or even years. Perhaps to expand on your point, maybe it would make sense to have a larger reserve force like Switzerland? I think that would be more feesable.