Unlike CanCon, everything’s not on the table in defence review

[Defence Minister Harjit Sajjan/Canadian Press Videos]

As the first of six defence policy review meetings gets underway in Vancouver, Defence Minister Harjit Sajjan has acknowledged that the undertaking won’t be as sweeping as another parallel review of Canadian content rules — one that made headlines this week as an “everything’s on the table” exercise.

Off limits, for example, seems to be Canada’s relationship with the United States through the North American Aerospace Defence Command (Norad), the air defence body that Canadians might know best for its annual Santa tracker.

Some say that’s a good thing: Canada gains a great deal from being under Norad’s watchful eye, while paying relatively little for the privilege, argues Adam Chapnick, who teaches defence studies at Canadian Forces College.

Yet others question the relevance of a review process that could be seen as less than fully comprehensive.

“The problem is, they’re going to get the same answers they always get from the same usual suspects,” says Rideau Institute vice-president Steven Staples.

The D.C. connection

Early this month Sajjan launched public consultations on a new defence policy for Canada, the first of its kind in over 20 years. The Liberal government is asking Canadians, allies and Parliament what they think the military’s appropriate role, size, structure and capabilities should be.

The discussion is being framed around three themes: threats to Canada’s security; the military’s role in addressing threats; and questions about resources and capabilities. It will all lead to a new policy to be released in “early 2017,” Sajjan’s office says.

In addition to those themes, Sajjan has already made it clear to local Halifax radio, his office said, that certain elements of Canadian defence policy won’t be changing.

“I don’t want to try and limit the conversation, but having said that, there are certain staples we have put into our consultation paper which will not change,” Sajjan told the ‎Sheldon Macleod Show on April 6.

“The defence of Canada and the safety of Canadians will always be a priority; our relationship with the U.S. through our binational relationship through Norad and our commitments to [the North Atlantic Treaty Organization (NATO)], some of those are the staples that remain,” he said.

“How we conduct ourselves on international operations with a coalition, that is open to [review], but at the same time we as a government have committed to certain things as well.”

There’s a logic to staying in Norad, said Chapnick. Canada’s middle power status and geographic location on the northern border of the U.S., with the two countries’ economies as integrated as they are, puts a limit on what Canada can aspire to be militarily.

“The limitations are consistent with the national interest I think, because it’s the Americans who largely built the system in which we are living today,” he said.

The U.S. pays over 90 per cent of the cost of Norad, he added, and in exchange Canada benefits from security and a co-operative relationship with Washington.

“You’re limited in that you aren’t going to withdraw from Norad, but withdrawing from Norad wouldn’t make any sense in the first place. The limitations aren’t necessarily a negative, they are more of a simplification.”

Canada and the U.S. also have several other joint defence bodies, including the Permanent Joint Board on Defence, Military Cooperation Committee, Combined Defence Plan, Tri-Command Framework and Canada-U.S. Civil Assistance Plan.

Chapnick said it was this strong relationship with the Pentagon that should be a central question in Canada’s defence review.

“Do we go anywhere without our most significant ally? Are we going to conduct missions when the Americans are not involved? If we are, we will need certain pieces of [equipment] that might not be necessary if we know the Americans will always be involved when we are operating,” he said.

“So how we determine what we purchase is affected by who we are engaging with when we are engaging abroad.”

Challenging beliefs and practices

In seeking input, the government is holding six meetings across the country through July, and is also accepting online submissions at canada.ca/defence-consultations until July 31.

Wednesday’s event in Vancouver will be followed by one on May 20 in Toronto and May 24 in Yellowknife, the defence minister’s office told Yahoo Canada News.

Edmonton, Montreal and Halifax have also been pegged as locations over the next three months. Press secretary Jordan Owens said that as the remainder is scheduled, the defence office will provide dates.

Sajjan’s office initially said it wasn’t releasing the list of invitees because it was trying to respect the wishes of those invited.

“As some invited individuals may end up not wishing to participate, we do not believe it is fair to invitees to publicize a list of possible attendees before the event takes place,” Owens responded in an email. “If individuals or organizations do not wish to be associated with the review, we respect that choice.”

However, she added, “as openness and transparency are cornerstones for our government, we have asked attendees to provide a 1-2 page summary of their views prior to attending the roundtable. These summaries will be posted online, and attributed to their authors.”

On Wednesday afternoon, Sajjan’s office informed Yahoo Canada News that the following people attended Wednesday’s event: Allen Sens; Brian Job; Taylor Owen; Joseph Caron; Vice-Admiral (Ret’d) Bruce Donaldson; Jennifer Allen Simons; Cmdr. (Ret’d) King Wan; Christyn Cianfarani; Leslie Meingast; Col. (Ret’d) Keith Maxwell; Farid Rohani; Derek Gregory; Alexander Moens; Rear Admiral (Ret’d) Ken Summers; Carl Sidney; and Maj.-Gen. (Ret’d) Cameron Ross.

The discussion surrounding who is being invited is important from the standpoint of challenging beliefs and practices, Staples believes.

“They’ve got to go outside and open it up…maybe other people or other organizations will emerge that want to have a discussion about it, that the people at National Defence headquarters hadn’t thought of,” he said.

“There is the opportunity to have new players, new views added in.”

Erika Simpson, associate professor in the department of political science at Western University, suggested that it can be expensive and time consuming for smaller civil society organizations to participate in consultations such as this.

“We need to bear in mind that many [non-governmental organizations] are under the gun financially, and so it’s hard for them to testify and to send the resources that are needed in order to question everything from the top down or the bottom up,” she said.

One person on the list of attendees at Wednesday’s event, Cianfarani, is president of Canada’s defence industry lobby, the Canadian Association of Defence and Security Industries (CADSI).

CADSI’s position on the defence review is that the military cannot implement any new defence policy effectively without first getting the required equipment.

“Improving the process of defence procurement is therefore an essential part of developing an effective defence policy,” a CADSI news release states.