Canada's commitment to NATO, and what of the possible new target of 3 % of GDP

[BeaverFever]

5 hours ago, WestCanMan said:

That's odd because all the politicians that you named were Libs and Dems.

You would think I would get tired of repeating myself by now. I’ve repeatedly said that Clinton, Chretien and Martin were economic conservatives. Those three PLUS every Republican and Conservative were neoliberals, obsessed with globalization, deregulation, privatization, tax cuts for the wealthy, and gutting public services. The Conservative/Republican criticism of Clinton/Chretien/Martin was that they weren’t doing these things fast enough; mostly the political battles were over non-economic issues like war-on-terror, Monica Lewinsky and the sponsorship scandals, and conservative lost-cause culture war social battles like gay marriage and marijuana, which conservatives lost. Neoliberalism was the accepted ideology of every North American political party except the NDP. 

 

 

6 hours ago, WestCanMan said:

Canada will never create anything under a lib gov't. 

Most things “created by Canada”  were done “under a lib gov’t.”  Canada has been “under a lib gov’t.” for most of its history. 

[WestCanMan]

1 hour ago, BeaverFever said:

You would think I would get tired of repeating myself by now. I’ve repeatedly said that Clinton, Chretien and Martin were economic conservatives.

I'd think that you'd be tired of repeating platitudes by now but you don't. 

Those guys are leftists, and leftists are sellouts by nature. They pretend to support "the little guy" but bringing in cheap labour and raising the cost of energy both hurt poor people disproportionately.

If you analyze the policy decisions of leftists you'll see that their net effect is to screw poor people.

Quote

Most things “created by Canada”  were done “under a lib gov’t.”  Canada has been “under a lib gov’t.” for most of its history. 

Which is why we're on the downward trajectory that we're on. 

[ExFlyer]

9 hours ago, WestCanMan said:

That's odd because all the politicians that you named were Libs and Dems.

Canada will never create anything under a lib gov't. 

Canada never created anything under Conservative government either.

[Army Guy]

15 hours ago, BeaverFever said:

Well we signed the pledge but I doubt we will live up to it, especially not over the long term. There are just no votes to be gained in Canada for any party by increasing the defence budget. 
 

In the meantime they also announced this week that there will be an “enduring” deployment of 2,200 CDN troops in Latvia (up from current 800)  starting in 2026 which for Canada is major, major commitment but I expect that they will cancel/ drawdown that number first chance. 2026 is far enough away that this Ukraine conflict could resolve before then or a regime change occurs in Moscow. It also looks like 16 P-8 Poseidons will be purchased in the next few years plus they say some day they’ll replace the leopards sent to Ukraine but doubt any of that will move the needle. 

Does that not bother you at all, that we made a big deal about signing on to a high level defense agreement, agreeing to spend up to 2 % and then flys home and announces to the world nah we will never spend 2 % ever....in fact bragged to other countries shortly after signing he is never going to increase spending...My question is how does that make Canadians look on the inter national stage, what does that do to our reputation, not that we have much of one today...Do you our allies trust us ? Here is what some media sources outside of Canada are saying right now... They are at the end of their rope, step up or step off, will be the next message...and while that will bring smiles to some Canadians faces, i don't think they know of the consequences of stepping off really means...

LILLEY: Wall Street Journal right to say Justin Trudeau belongs at NATO's kid's table (msn.com)

Well 800 troops was suppose to be a Battle group, that is one of the smallest battle groups I've seen...normally a Battle group , is what we had in Afghanistan, that was more than 2200 soldiers.... So now we announce we are going to expand to a brigade group...and 2200 is all we could muster..* it should be noted that we only have 3 very under manned Brigade groups in Canada each should have approx 5 to 7000 troops... But it does sound good in the media...mean while NATO is left scrambling to fill out the other half of the brigade group that we promised we will fill out..

P-8 have no contracts as of yet, and once again Bombardier is planning to stop all of that becasue they think they have a aircraft that can do it faster, longer and better....it will be months from now before the government says what it is going to do...The liberals are investing in our military , they don't have much of a choice, do they, as the equipment they have right now is well over 40 years old and can't really be upgraded anymore...and if they don't buy anything they will loose that capability...seeing how we are a coastal country, it would be really say if we could not track subs...

As for the leopards why even bother, we can't even afford to maintain the ones we have now...considering we have 3 different types, that have very little in common with each other making parts and maintenance a nightmare...

As for who is ready to spend more on the military the last study done says 2/3 of Canadians are ready to increase spending...now i get it it was a poll and does not represent all Canadians but i think we as a nation see that the military is in need of rebuilding and will not wait for another 10 years or so, it might not be viable by then...

[Army Guy]

20 hours ago, August1991 said:

In 1989, the Wall fell. In 1991, the Soviet Union collapsed.

You good ordinary Americans won.

Kuwait?

Since then, the US has more or less f* up everything.

===

The world needs a counterweight. And the US constitution is not sufficient.

 

Look August i'm sure mother Russia is full of nice people, that just want to have babies, drink vodka and dance all night long,  and live their own lives in peace. But since the wall fell Mother Russia has been involved in 14 conflicts i think we can rule out they are a peaceful people...Russia and China are the reasons we have inter national laws in the first place...

NATO is grown since the wall fell and has taken on many NEW responsibilities and have grown into a Global entity that deals in global issues, that include Russia, China middle east, and many more...

The worlds counter weight is the US, with out them the would would be a much more violent place. And here is the rub August they don't really care what you or i say, they are not doing it to become popular they do it becasue no one else will...  all they ask if your not going to help stay the fuc* out of the way...

[BeaverFever]

9 hours ago, Army Guy said:

Does that not bother you at all, that we made a big deal about signing on to a high level defense agreement, agreeing to spend up to 2 % and then flys home and announces to the world nah we will never spend 2 % ever....in fact bragged to other countries shortly after signing he is never going to increase spending...My question is how does that make Canadians look on the inter national stage, what does that do to our reputation, not that we have much of one today...Do you our allies trust us ? Here is what some media sources outside of Canada are saying right now... They are at the end of their rope, step up or step off, will be the next message...and while that will bring smiles to some Canadians faces, i don't think they know of the consequences of stepping off really means...

LILLEY: Wall Street Journal right to say Justin Trudeau belongs at NATO's kid's table (msn.com)

Well 800 troops was suppose to be a Battle group, that is one of the smallest battle groups I've seen...normally a Battle group , is what we had in Afghanistan, that was more than 2200 soldiers.... So now we announce we are going to expand to a brigade group...and 2200 is all we could muster..* it should be noted that we only have 3 very under manned Brigade groups in Canada each should have approx 5 to 7000 troops... But it does sound good in the media...mean while NATO is left scrambling to fill out the other half of the brigade group that we promised we will fill out..

P-8 have no contracts as of yet, and once again Bombardier is planning to stop all of that becasue they think they have a aircraft that can do it faster, longer and better....it will be months from now before the government says what it is going to do...The liberals are investing in our military , they don't have much of a choice, do they, as the equipment they have right now is well over 40 years old and can't really be upgraded anymore...and if they don't buy anything they will loose that capability...seeing how we are a coastal country, it would be really say if we could not track subs...

As for the leopards why even bother, we can't even afford to maintain the ones we have now...considering we have 3 different types, that have very little in common with each other making parts and maintenance a nightmare...

As for who is ready to spend more on the military the last study done says 2/3 of Canadians are ready to increase spending...now i get it it was a poll and does not represent all Canadians but i think we as a nation see that the military is in need of rebuilding and will not wait for another 10 years or so, it might not be viable by then...

So long story short it does bother me that Canada isn’t playing the role oversees that I believe it should and I DND should procure accordingly. I am more interested in funding relative to requirements rather than to gdp. 
 

The problem is Canada hasn’t really defined what exactly the Canadian military should be doing and 

[Army Guy]

16 hours ago, BeaverFever said:

So long story short it does bother me that Canada isn’t playing the role oversees that I believe it should and I DND should procure accordingly. I am more interested in funding relative to requirements rather than to gdp. 
 

The problem is Canada hasn’t really defined what exactly the Canadian military should be doing and 

Fair enough, The problem that creates short term is almost everything needs to be replaced or updated, once everything starts to ge t replaced on a time table, then that would be a great plan...but it needs a government that can be trusted not just shut the door and pass it on to another government, like what has been happening for decades... 

It is spelled out in the last white paper that was drafted, add all of those defense agreements we keep signing on to and filing in the closet and it paints a pretty good picture on what we should be doing...however the government really does a bad job conveying that to Canadians, or for that matter keeping their word ....And DND is also part of that problem, the military should be more involved in everything the community does, it could be sending troops and equipment to places that never get to see it, we use to do a lot of that "dog and pony shows" let them show off the gear, and talk to soldiers...

[Dougie93]

2 hours ago, Army Guy said:

Fair enough, The problem that creates short term is almost everything needs to be replaced or updated, once everything starts to ge t replaced on a time table, then that would be a great plan...but it needs a government that can be trusted not just shut the door and pass it on to another government, like what has been happening for decades... 

It is spelled out in the last white paper that was drafted, add all of those defense agreements we keep signing on to and filing in the closet and it paints a pretty good picture on what we should be doing...however the government really does a bad job conveying that to Canadians, or for that matter keeping their word ....And DND is also part of that problem, the military should be more involved in everything the community does, it could be sending troops and equipment to places that never get to see it, we use to do a lot of that "dog and pony shows" let them show off the gear, and talk to soldiers...

it doesn't matter how much you spend

it will all be siphoned off by the bureaucracy & associated entrenched interests 

you could double the defence budget, triple it, and still it would not trickle down to the troops

this is inherent to Canada, the Canadian disease

[BeaverFever]

2 hours ago, Army Guy said:

Fair enough, The problem that creates short term is almost everything needs to be replaced or updated, once everything starts to ge t replaced on a time table, then that would be a great plan...but it needs a government that can be trusted not just shut the door and pass it on to another government, like what has been happening for decades... 

It is spelled out in the last white paper that was drafted, add all of those defense agreements we keep signing on to and filing in the closet and it paints a pretty good picture on what we should be doing...however the government really does a bad job conveying that to Canadians, or for that matter keeping their word ....And DND is also part of that problem, the military should be more involved in everything the community does, it could be sending troops and equipment to places that never get to see it, we use to do a lot of that "dog and pony shows" let them show off the gear, and talk to soldiers...

Yeah it’s a terrible situation I don’t realistically expect things will ever change in my lifetime 

[BeaverFever]

Why Canada keeps missing its NATO spending target — and why Conservatives aren't promising to meet it

Trudeau has pushed back against suggestions that Canada is a 'free-rider' in the alliance
 

OTTAWA – NATO allies are twisting Prime Minister Justin Trudeau’s arm to step up and invest more in defence. The Wall Street Journal on Thursday slammed Canada as a “military free-rider in NATO”in a scathing editorial, calling its contribution to the alliance, currently estimated at 1.29 per cent of its GDP, “pathetic.”

They all might be surprised to learn that the man who hopes to replace him, Conservative leader Pierre Poilievre, hasn’t committed to achieving NATO’s spending targets of two per cent of GDP if he replaces Trudeau as prime minister.

Trudeau has rebuffed the criticisms against his government, insisting the ratio has improved from where it was under the previous Conservative government.

“We’re now behind only the U.S. and Germany in terms of real new dollars invested in defence since 2014, according to NATO’s own calculations,” he said at the NATO summit this week in Vilnius, Lithuania. “Canada continues to step up, continues to invest more and Canadians are there to contribute to the world in meaningful ways.”

Conservatives have attacked the Liberals for letting NATO down, with MPs Michael Chong and James Bezan stating in a press release this week “Last year, the Trudeau government spent 1.29% of our GDP on defence, putting Canada 25th out of 29 NATO members. A year after the war in Ukraine began, this borders on negligence.” They added: “As Conservatives, we support the commitments Canada has made to NATO and we must make an effort to meet them.” 

Poilievre’s office declined to clarify the party’s position on defence spending, saying that their MPs’ statement stood “as is.”

What the Tories haven’t committed to is when their promised efforts would actually meet NATO’s two-per-cent spending target. In a debate during last year’s leadership race, Poilievre was the only candidate to refuse to commit to the benchmark, instead insisting that Canada needs to “work towards hitting that goal” and “know the money we spend gets results.”

He argued that there’s only so much spending increase that government departments can handle before it gets wasted. “It will take a progressive move,” he elaborated during the debate. “If you up the budget in one year, then you’re going to have a bunch of bureaucrats in the department trying to shovel the cash out the door without getting proper results.”

Poilievre’s position is consistent with a report issued last year by the Office of the Parliamentary Budget Officer (PBO), which calculated that the federal government would have needed to spend an additional $18.2 billion on the military to reach NATO’s targets just last year, over and above the $36.3 billion it did spend — and increase budgeted spending by an additional $75 billion by 2027. 

This advertisement has not loaded yet, but your article continues below.

The PBO said that the target of two per cent of GDP would remain “out of reach over the medium term” but that Canada is on course to reach 1.59 per cent by 2026–27.

Canada’s reputation as a NATO laggard is the legacy of several governments over decades. For example, Liberal Prime Minister Jean Chrétien and Conservative Prime Minister Stephen Harper both prioritized deficit reduction over defence spending.

And that has only made the gap harder to close, because of a critical lack of personnel in the Canadian Armed Forces (CAF) and a broken and cumbersome procurement system, say military observers.

“The department is having difficulty spending its budget on new equipment and infrastructure and other things of that nature as it is,” said Philippe Lagassé, an associate professor who studies defence policy and procurement at Carleton University. 

“So increasing the budget to two per cent, let’s say over the next three, three to five years, would be a big injection of funds that the defence establishment and the system would have difficulty absorbing (it).”

NATO’s strategic relevance has been boosted lately due to Russia’s invasion of Ukraine. But until now, Canadian politicians simply haven’t had to pay a price for missing NATO targets, said Justin Massie, professor of political science at the University of Quebec in Montreal and co-director of the Network for Strategic Analysis.

It doesn’t seem to be a priority like the return to balanced budgets or the fight against inflation are.

Justin Massie, professor of political science at the University of Quebec in Montreal

Massie noted there has not been significant pressure from the Conservatives, under Poilievre’s leadership, to promise more defence spending, despite the party positioning itself as the most supportive of the military.

“They’ve been a lot more moderate,” he said. “They have spoken very little on defence issues in the past year, despite a high-intensity war in Europe. It doesn’t seem to be a priority like the return to balanced budgets or the fight against inflation are.”

A former member of the Harper cabinet, who only agreed to be interviewed on the condition of anonymity, said Poilievre has embraced the same mindset as that of Harper and of the former Reform Party, which is “just balance the effing books and forget about everything else.”

The last time Canada went on a military spending spree, said Massie, was during the Afghanistan war. Canada has over the last year been sending Ukraine some of the tanks and ammunition it purchased back then.

Massie said there is a “window of opportunity” that is closing for Ottawa to significantly ramp up defence spending and domestic production, given Canadians’ general support for Ukraine — before deficit-slashing efforts take priority again.

“The real challenge for any Canadian government, let’s say a future Conservative government that is interested in returning to a balanced budget or to reduce the debt, is that the defence expenditures are the biggest source of discretionary spending,” said Lagassé.

“So that is always a difficult balance to achieve. How do you maintain a more capable Canadian Armed Forces while also trying, in a Canadian context, to reduce spending? That’s a tough sell to Canadians overall.”

[email protected]

https://nationalpost.com/news/politics/why-canada-keeps-missing-its-nato-spending-target-and-why-conservatives-arent-promising-to-meet-it/wcm/d6ba89fc-6242-4d47-98b8-5964c2a4bcda/amp/

 

Edited July 15, 2023 by BeaverFever

[Army Guy]

On 7/15/2023 at 10:59 AM, BeaverFever said:

They all might be surprised to learn that the man who hopes to replace him, Conservative leader Pierre Poilievre, hasn’t committed to achieving NATO’s spending targets of two per cent of GDP if he replaces Trudeau as prime minister.

Trudeau has rebuffed the criticisms against his government, insisting the ratio has improved from where it was under the previous Conservative government.

“We’re now behind only the U.S. and Germany in terms of real new dollars invested in defence since 2014, according to NATO’s own calculations,” he said at the NATO summit this week in Vilnius, Lithuania. “Canada continues to step up, continues to invest more and Canadians are there to contribute to the world in meaningful ways.”

 

Quote

 

 

Thats a huge deflection , since we have not really heard a whole lot on what PP is going to do with all the issues that plague Canada, are we to assume that he is not going to do anything to correct them, we are now punishing him for things he has not done yet, as to what Justin has not done in his 8 plus years in power....

Lets also look at Justins record for military spending , he has included in those numbers RCMP budget, Emergency preparedness budget, Veterans affairs budget, Veterans pensions, coast Guard pensions, Coast Guards budget...and there was a few others that NATO just shot down and said no to...when deducted from over all military spending your really looking at maybe 1 % of over all GDP...now since our GDP is growing every year, that 1 % is only going to shrink every year... 

It is laughable to say we are behind only Germany and the US in real new dollars... when the UK, Australia, spend and are spending more new dollars than Canada could dream of...considering Australia just invested last year over 300 billion, Germany plans 100 Bil new dollars... Canada is all talk and no walk... 

Quote

He argued that there’s only so much spending increase that government departments can handle before it gets wasted. “It will take a progressive move,” he elaborated during the debate. “If you up the budget in one year, then you’re going to have a bunch of bureaucrats in the department trying to shovel the cash out the door without getting proper results.”

Who ever takes power one thing that will have to be done first is to fix the procurement system, stream line it or sole source a lot of stuff... with out it he is right you can shovel money into DND all you want they will not be able to spend it...Justin promised to fix that years ago, I pray one day someone will keep this promise...

Quote

 

The real challenge for any Canadian government, let’s say a future Conservative government that is interested in returning to a balanced budget or to reduce the debt, is that the defence expenditures are the biggest source of discretionary spending,” said Lagassé.

“So that is always a difficult balance to achieve. How do you maintain a more capable Canadian Armed Forces while also trying, in a Canadian context, to reduce spending? That’s a tough sell to Canadians overall.”

 

No it is not a tough sell... polls have already shown Canadians are ready to spend more on their military... if Canadians were really concerned about how much funding our government has already spent why have we not stood up and told Justin to close the banks vault, after spending more than 700 bil in 2 and half years...with very little to show for it...one would think their would have been atleast a peep...nope, just a small blip on the radar...

And if reelected do you really think Justin is going to balance the budget or continue spending like a drunken sailor...I'd bet my retirement fund on adding tens if not hundreds of billions more to the deficit...Someone some where is going to have to spend some money on defense or it will soon be a moot point...and not just defense, but really almost every Department atleast in the security apparatus. We can do both but there is going to have to be some fat cutting thats for sure... I think liberals are going to have to pick which social programs they can live without...becasue the cost cutting is going to effect both sides of the political spectrum... There is going to be a reality check for a lot of Canadians...on both sides of the bench...