Archive for June, 2008

Canada Drawn Into War Over Pipeline?

                                       
June 20, 2008
Canada is being drawn into U.S.-backed plans to build a massive natural gas pipeline through the heart of war-torn Afghanistan. This incredible story was revealed Thursday in Ottawa.

I joined international energy economist John Foster and CCPA director Bruce Campbell in Parliament for the release of Foster’s report on the proposed trans-Afghanistan natural gas pipeline, published by the Canadian Centre for
Policy Alternatives.

In my introduction in the report, A Pipeline Through a Troubled Land: Afghanistan, Canada and the New Great Energy Game,  I wrote,

“This study is an important contribution to the public debate over Canada’s policy regarding our involvement in Afghanistan. International energy economist John Foster lays out the case that Canadians may be unwittingly dragged into the New Great Game for control of energy. It is essential that Canadians consider these issues when determining our nation’s role in Afghanistan and NATO.”

I urge you to read the report and share it with friends.

Best,
                                                                                       
Steve Staples
                                                                   

Advertisements

June 20, 2008 at 5:04 pm 1 comment

Response to Sen. Colin Kenny in the Globe and Mail

http://www.theglobeandmail.com/servlet/story/LAC.20080611.LETTERS11-6/TPStory/Opinion/letters
 
Fix the policy, then spend
STEVEN STAPLES
Rideau Institute
June 11, 2008
Ottawa — Senator Colin Kenny is right in that what most ails the Canadian Forces is a matter of misplaced, or absent, policy direction. But his solution of throwing even more billions of dollars at the problem would only make matters worse (Our Military Badly Needs Repair – June 10). The last white paper on national defence was written in 1994, and Paul Martin’s International Policy Statement lasted as long as his minority government. Under Stephen Harper, special interests have lobbied for their own interests rather than the Forces as a whole.
For instance, infighting over whether to buy a small fleet of long-range transport aircraft or a large fleet of medium-range aircraft ended with the Conservatives buying both at a total cost of $5-billion. A debate over wheeled or tracked tanks ended with an $800-million order for new Canadian-built Stryker vehicles being cancelled in favour of buying 100 Cold War-era Leopard tanks from the Netherlands.
Mr. Kenny’s notion that pumping billions more tax dollars into National Defence will solve the policy crisis is wishful thinking. Let’s get Canada’s defence policy straightened out first to ensure that the $19-billion we spend on the military every year is used to meet the real needs of our armed forces.
 

June 11, 2008 at 8:45 am 1 comment

Reaction to Natynczyk as Canada’s new Chief of Defence Staff

+++++++
Steven Staples of the Rideau Institute on the appointment of Lt.-Gen. Walter Natynczyk as Canada’s new Chief of Defence Staff:

Comparisons to Hillier:

“Prime Minister Harper should be looking for a CDS with a new style, and new ideas. But it was no secret that General Natynchuk was General Hiller’s preferred candidate to take over the job. The concern is that Natynczyk may have difficulty separating himself from Hillier.”

“General Walter Natynczyk will not be able to avoid comparisons to his high-profile predecessor, and former boss, General Rick Hillier. Natynczyk will have to show that he is bringing his own ideas and approach to the job.”

Charting a new course on Afghanistan:

“Hiller got Canada into the war in Kandahar, now it will be Natynczyk’s job to get Canada out by 2011.”

“The security situation is getting worse, the region is being flooded with U.S. troops, and under his watch, Canada’s fatalities will likely pass 100 deaths.”

“Natynczyk’s past role with U.S. troops in Iraq raises concerns that he will bring a U.S. war-fighting approach to Afghanistan.”

“The reality is that General Natynczyk will have to chart a new course for Canada in Kandahar that will involve making hard choices to bring the war to an end.”

Contact:

Steven Staples

President of the Rideau Institute

O. 613 565-9449 C. 613 290-2695

June 6, 2008 at 12:54 pm 1 comment

MDA sale caused unlikely alliance of opponents

Esprit de corps military magazine. June 2008, Vol 15 Issue 5. p 12.

MDA sale caused unlikely alliance of opponents
by Steven Staples

Members of the Canadian Forces have a lot to celebrate in the government’s decision to block the sale of a large part of Canada’s space industry to a U.S. firm last month. The government’s intervention ensured that crucial satellite technology, vital to the conduct of CF missions at home and abroad, will remain in Canadian hands.

 

On April 10, 2008, Industry Minister Jim Prentice announced that he would use his authority under the Investment Canada Act to disallow the acquisition of the MacDonald, Dettwiler and Associates Ltd. (MDA) space division by U.S. arms maker Alliant Techsystems (ATK).

 

The $1.3 billion deal would have handed over to ATK ownership of the iconic Canadarm and Canada’s remote sensing radar satellite RADARSAT-2, a satellite that can take very high resolution images of any place on Earth through clouds or even at night. 

 

“I don’t get it,” proclaimed a clearly perplexed Daniel Friedmann, CEO of MDA, after being grilled by Members of Parliament concerned about the deal. Indeed, MDA completely underestimated the amount of controversy the sale would generate when, in January this year, it was announced, and began to move through the government’s approval process for foreign take-overs of Canadian firms.

 

Looking back over the debate of the past few months, one can feel some sympathy for MDA, given the rather unusual positions taken on the deal by those inside and outside government.

 

First, let’s consider opponents of the deal. The sale of MDA’s space division to ATK was opposed by an unlikely group of people: MPs from all parties, editorialists, former military leaders, employees, scientists and space experts, nationalists and peace advocates.

 

The Rideau Institute, for instance, which has been accused of being “anti-defence” by Jack Granatstein and others, argued that the sale should be opposed on the basis of national security.

 

“The sale of MDA assets to ATK will seriously weaken or defeat Canada’s ability to achieve the objectives of the Remote Sensing Space Systems Act which are explicitly to ‘ensure national security, the defence of Canada, the safety of Canadian Forces, Canada’s conduct of international relations, and Canada’s international obligations,’” I wrote to Industry Minister Jim Prentice and Foreign Affairs Minister Maxime Bernier in March.

 

UBC Professor Michael Byers is a frequent critic of defence policy. Writing with Liberal Industry Critic Scott Brison in the National Post, Byers argued, “What could be more important to Canada’s national security than our ability to monitor all of this vast country, especially in emergencies? What foreign investment could be of less net benefit to Canada than selling our eyes?”

 

Second, and just as unusual as defence policy critics decrying the loss of sovereignty and defence capability, traditionally small government, free-enterprise Conservative Party members were urging that the government block the sale.

 

“It is a waste of your money and a betrayal of the public interest,” Calgary MP Art Hanger wrote regarding the hundreds of millions of tax dollars invested in RADARSAT-2 that would be lost through the sale. “It’s about time Canada stop playing the nice guy at the expense of our own security and sovereignty – not to mention our own research and development capacity.”

 

The prospect of losing control of Canada’s premier land-monitoring satellite was untenable for the government. Blocking the sale conflicted with the Conservative Party’s traditional free enterprise principles, but the satellite played a key role in fulfilling the government’s priorities of defending Canada’s national security and Arctic sovereignty.

 

Third, and more unusual still, was the silence from organizations and commentators who typically advocate strongly for maintaining and greatly expanding defence capabilities. There were no opinion articles in the Globe and Mail from Jack Granatstein, and no press releases from the Conference of Defence Associations. Even the Canadian Council of Chief Executives, which is always concerned with improving relations with the White House, said nothing.

 

The political significance of this decision is hard to overstate. It ranks among the most important decisions made by the Canadian government, including the decisions not to join the U.S. missile defence system or the U.S.-led invasion of Iraq.

 

Minister Prentice’s decision marks the first time that a minister has used the Investment Canada Act to prevent a foreign take-over of a Canadian firm. Out of 10,000 foreign take-overs since 1985, nearly 1,600 have been reviewed and approved. None have ever been denied – until now.

 

Supporters of Canada’s space industry and capabilities are now rallying to win more government attention and support to their cause. Canadians have been reminded how important our satellites are for our national interests; now it is up to the government to respond in kind.

 

Steven Staples is President of the Rideau Institute on International Affairs, an independent research, advocacy and consulting group based in Ottawa. He is a researcher, writer, frequent commentator on defence matters, and author of Missile Defence: Round One (Lorimer: 2006).

 

June 6, 2008 at 8:36 am Leave a comment


Recent Posts

Feeds

Blog Stats

  • 27,085 hits