Defence policy and the election

The country will elect a new federal government on Oct.19. As of this writing, the Conservatives, Liberals and NDP are within five or so points of each other in a number of polls. It’s worth considering what may change and what may not depending on who is Canada’s next prime minister.

Canadian defence policy is actually pretty simple; the main tenets have remained virtually the same since the end of the Second World War. The Canadian Armed Forces protect Canada, help the United States defend North America and are on call to be sent anywhere the Canadian government deems necessary as part of a coalition of like-minded nations to achieve common goals. Examples of the latter include acting under North Atlantic Treaty Organization command, serving the United Nations, or taking part in ad hoc operations such as the Multinational Force and Observers, which still operates in the Sinai Peninsula. Canada’s current air operations in Syria and Iraq were undertaken as part of a so-called “coalition of the willing.”

None of these missions will change no matter who is elected, but the means by which they are undertaken may vary widely. 

The best example is in the third area. Liberal and Conservative governments have sent the Canadian military to take part in both UN-sanctioned and non-UN-sanctioned missions. The first was the Kosovo air war of 1999, when Jean Chretien’s Liberals sent Canadian jets to bomb Serbian forces in Kosovo. The Liberals also sent Canadian ground forces to Afghanistan in late 2001, sent them back to Kabul in 2003 and sent them to Kandahar province in 2005. These missions were sanctioned by the UN, by NATO, or both. The Conservatives continued the Afghan mission to 2011 and mounted a training operation away from Kandahar province for an additional year.

At face value, the only real differences militarily between Liberal and Conservative governments in the past have been rhetorical and symbolic. Tories sound more hawkish, but were no less willing to cut the defence budget in the wake of the 2008 financial crash than the Liberals were to cut it as part of their fight against the mounting federal debt in the early 1990s.

Today’s Liberals sound far more dovish than the Liberals of yesteryear, but if Justin Trudeau becomes prime minister, he will find himself under the same strictures, pressures and influences at home and abroad that his father did when he tried to steer Canada toward a more non-aligned defence and foreign policy in the late 1960s and early 1970s. Pierre Trudeau did succeed in reducing Canada’s military footprint in Europe, but Canadian defence policy changed little under his leadership as Canada bought new tanks and fighter aircraft and approved U.S. cruise missile testing in the Mackenzie River valley. Justin Trudeau says he will end Canada’s air campaign in the Middle East and so he might, but he also aims to improve Canada-U.S. relations generally and bringing the CF-18s home won’t help in achieving that goal.

Canada has never had an NDP federal government, but former NDP candidate and Canada Research Chair Michael Byers of the University of British Columbia published a policy paper in June 2015 which may hold clues to the defence policy of an NDP government in Ottawa. The plan claims it will save Canadians $10 billion, but it is far from a scheme to disarm Canada. For example, it calls for 12 new naval surface combatants instead of the 15 now planned and the replacement of the F-35 with the purchase of F-18 Super Hornets. 

If the Tories are returned, indications are they will speed up current acquisition projects, and pump a few more dollars into defence, but not undertake the full-blown review that Canadian defence policy really needs. Of course, world events could change that stance rapidly, as happened on Sept. 11, 2001.

When the election is over and a new government gets back to the business of defending Canada, it will find that decades-old constraints, current geopolitical realities and at least a century of tradition will leave little wiggle room for any major changes to Canada’s current defence posture.