Trafford Publishing: Oh, Oh Canada! Who Stands on Guard?

Here is the full reference card for this book...

If you'd rather place an order by talking to one of our cheerful order desk clerks, please call 1-888-232-4444 (USA and Canada only) or 250-383-6864. From Europe, ring our UK order desk clerk at local rate number 0845 230 9601 (UK only) or 44 (0)1865 722 113.

Oh, Oh Canada! Who Stands on Guard?

by Ronald Coleman

193 pages; quality trade paperback (softcover); catalogue #03-1396; ISBN 1-4120-1027-6; US$23.00, C$27.50, EUR18.20, £13.50

Ever wonder what happened to the Canadian Military? An exprienced airman explores and exposes foreign and defence policy inadequacies in our new uni-polar world. Improvements are imperitive and included.

Read more!

about the book about the author sample excerpts or Table of Contents catalogue info

About the Book

The Author examines the current state of the Canadian Forces, after what he describes as four decades of malignant neglect, and concludes that it is not capable of executing the roles and tasks assigned under the government's policy as outlined in the Defence White Paper 1994. Furthermore, he examines the Canadian foreign policy, from which defence policy is derived, and concludes that it does not address the current and future threats to Canada and Canadians.
The threats to Canada today and in the future are explored in detail and the means to counter them are examined. The author also explores the relationship the Canadian military has to the UN, NATO, and our closest ally the US. He finds that all of them need serious revision. However, to do so a complete and detailed analysis of our foreign policy is necessary in the new world of disorder following the tragic events of 9/11. Internal and external threats are revealed and discussed as well as how to deter them. Coleman explains why the current series of town hall meetings across the country is wholly inadequate and calls for a major foreign policy review. This is necessary in order to respond correctly and adequately to the US request for participation in the Missle Defense System. Also, in his view, our traditional interface with the UN, and NATO, particularly where peacekeeping is involved needs revision.
He calls for necessary changes in the Department of National Defence Headquarters (NDHQ) structure and the military organization across the country. He explains why NDHQ needs to be disintergrated and replaced with a dual reporting system to the minister. Further, he presents rational arguments for the "real" unification of the three military forces into a "marine" like structure in order to respond appropriately and adequately to international terrorism and international violence that is on the rise. He goes further and outlines a new organizational structure that reduces overhead, executives, commands, and management levels in order to truly make the military and headquarters more efficient, effective, and economical. He is clear that only by taking these measures will we regain the respect of our allies and our enemies as well as increase our influence in the international forums where it has been slowly eroding.
The transfer of search and rescue and VIP operations to private industry will free up military billets for military functions and generate jobs and profits for private industry in these roles. These tasks, in his view, are essentially non-military tasks. Military search and rescue and VIP flights can be handled by the Marines. Also, he believes that peacekeeping should be transferred to DFAIT where the responsibility lies with more emphasis on early intervention so that technical experts, humanitarian efforts, medical assistance, law, order, and justice can be maintained rather than re-constructed after civil war or worse has destroyed the infrastructure and institutions. Peacemaking, however, should remain the responsibility of DND where the new structure, the new equipment, and the new training will improve our current delinquent approach to the problem. The Reserve will be tasked with the role of the defence of Canada which will give it purpose, finances, training, equipment, and a structure to effect it which currently does not exist.
Coleman makes a compelling case for the review of foreign defence policy and the restructuring of the Canadian military. He exposes the problems and proposes solutions. He takes no prisoners! In his review it becomes clear that Canada and Canadians no longer "stand on guard".

About the Author

Ron Coleman spent 36 years in the RCAF and the CAF, primarily as a pilot on fighters and trainers. He completed an exchange tour with the USAF during the Viet Nam war and later a tour with the United Nations on the Golan Heights.
During his service, he earned a BComm from the Canadian Forces Military College and completed Command and Staff College, and rose to the rank of Colonel before retiring. He has an extensive background in Aviation Safety and spent 10 years as an investigator and manager with the Canadian Transportation Safety Board. He represented Canada in many international accident investigations.
The author is bilingual and currently works as an aviation safety consultant. He and his wife, Linda, live near Rideau Ferry, Ontario, Canada, and they have two sons. He is an avid outdoorsman and is training for his black belt in Karate. He is a member of the Manitoba Sports Hall of Fame.

Sample Excerpts or Table of Contents

Finally, in a lighter vein and in really closing, I must speak up for one more thing: Let's change the Canadian Forces badge. It is damn hard for an albatross to fly with two swords through it and an anchor around its neck. Perhaps back in the heady days of Expo 67 the badge was a harbinger of things to come; regardless, it has been downhill-lost altitude- for the albatross ever since. At the present time, it's a toss-up whether the bird will drown first or bleed to death...
While we are at it, let's either do what is necessary to ensure Canada's security or change the national anthem, because right now we mock ourselves everytime we sing it. We are not on guard, and everyone knows it!
No people in the world
ever did achieve their freedom
by goody-goody talk and moral suasion...
Mark Twain

Let's be clear: terrorism is not new and it did not appear in North America on September 11, 2001. It has been a means to achieve political aims for centuries and it will remain so as long as it succeeds. It is effective because we fear death and mutilation and will give in when we fear our loved ones are threatened. Terrorists are successful because they do not fear death or are convinced that something better awaits them in another life. Hence, they can hold us to ransom. And yes, there are terrorists who do fear death but rationalize that our laws will protect them or, if fortunate, they will get away with their act. They pose an immediate and present danger to Canadians and we have let it happen. If we wish to defeat it we will have to not only defend ourselves against it but must seek to eradicate it.

Meanwhile we are subject to both internal and external ridicule. "We go about congratulating ourselves for our over-exuberent acceptance of mostly bogus refugees, with the rest of the world snickering at us for the suckers we are."³
Canada's generous refugee system is open to abuse- and foreign crooks know it. Under the Charter of Rights and Freedoms, anyone who arrives claiming to be a refugee has the same legal rights as any Canadian. That can mean a lengthy sequence of hearings and appeals, while the newcomer remains in Canada, living on social benefits... or crime.⁴

There is currently a war underway that is global in scope. It was formally initiated by the terrorist group al-Qaeda, led by Osama bin Laden, on September 11, 2001, against the United States and its allies. Unofficially it has been going on for a long time; it is the war between Islamic fundamentalism and western democracies. Canada is one of the U.S.'s allies, therefore we are a target state and every Canadian is a target, regardless of where they live. Canada lost 23 citizens in the attack against the twin World Trade Center towers in New York. We should not forget them.
Is Canada itself threatened? Osama bin Laden says so! The attack on the twin towers has demonstrated that if the U.S. , with all of its defensive forces and intelligence apparatus, is vulnerable, then obviously we are. And it isn't just airports and airplanes and office buildings. Think for a moment about the ease with which things that move are vulnerable.

As a professional military officer I have struggled for years to understand the descriptive phrase for our military found in the Defence white paper of 1994: "Multi-purpose, combat-capable forces." This description represents the pinnacle of bureaucratic wordsmithing. I am sure that it took a corps of bureaucrats to coin this phrase. What it means really depends on the reader; it can mean everything or nothing. (It reminds me of the cause statement in the Gander Arrow Air accident report, but more about that later.) It permits the government and the department to do whatever they want and still be in compliance with the description. It leaves you wondering: What purposes, and how combat capable? The answer, as the past decade has shown,is primarily peacekeeping.

The most serious flaw in the paper is the attempt to go back, without any explanation as to why the Canadian people should return to the past. (As you will see later when I argue for a dis-intergrated headquarters, a really unified force, renewed basing and infrastructure, reformed roles, re-equipping, retraining and renewed support, there are justifiable reasons for doing so. The reasons relate to the threat which is barely touched upon in the CA policy.) The CA paper calls for reintroduction of the word "Royal" into the titles of the Navy and Air Force. This is unnecessary, as there should be no attempt to preserve three separate services. This should be a given. The call for retention of Search and Rescue and other tasks that should be privatized, along with VIP operations, demonstrates the lack of a fresh perspective, as does the call for another independent commission. This is exactly what the Commons and Senate committees on National Defence and Veterans Affairs are supposed to be. This proposal would just add more bureaucracy and political appointments to the already bloated and inefficient department.
Nostalgia is good, but the services must grow and adapt to the changing environment and threats. This paper calls for neither; it is a poor argument for the status quo plus more money. The people must be convinced, and this paper just doesn't score. Later in Oh, Oh Canada! I provide more specific proposals that shed light on this weak and encumbered policy statement.

The other side in this conflict is not so richly endowed. In contrast, the Palestinians are desperately poor and subsequently without influence in the U.S. or elsewhere. Without resources, especially land, and only primitive weaponry by Israeli standards, they fight with sticks and stones. Their patron is the UN, as no one else claims them. Their Arab neighbours claim to champion their cause but refuse any responsibility for them. On the contrary, they exploit the UN in their countries. Clearly the Palestinians are at the bottom of the pecking order in the Middle East. Mostly shunned by the media, they have few outlets for their grievances. Contained and constrained at every turn, they have resorted to terror in an effort to achieve some justice. They are clearly the "unchosen" and despite the UN, which is clearly acting as the world's conscience in this case, they have no hope. Being without hope, they are without fear. Being without fear, they believe that they are indestructible and that Allah will deliver them to their destiny- and thus that their cause is worth dying for. Therefore, unless the Palestinians' prospects change, there will be no peace in the Middle East.

So we in Canada have become neutralists without declaring our neutrality or taking the military steps to preserve it. We are totally reliant on the U.S. and our allies to secure our security. This voluntary avoidance of our responsibility cannot continue without dire consequences. Nor should it! Canada must face the facts and reassert herself in the toss and turn of internationalism. We must focus on what is going on in the shrinking world and do our part. We have been introverted too long. Trudeau's campaign to assert the French Fact led us into four decades, so far, of internal strife and conflict.
We seem consumed with regional or racial stress over any and all issues. We have lost our external focus and become consumed with an internal one. This has cost us dearly in the international forum. This persistent internal debate debases us and wastes emotional energy that in itself is a finite resource.

The organization of the Canadian Marines would be similar to that of the U.S. Marines. This is for three reasons. One, it would allow us to be interoperable with our nearest ally, who shares North American defense as well as NATO. Second, with similar equipment, training and support we would be able to dovetail into their logistics and borrow much of their training. Third, the doctrine, strategy and tactics already exist and have been tested under warfare. There are many additional reasons but those are the overriding ones.

Catalogue Information