A Cdn national security strategy must be developed. There is none now. From that a Cdn defence strategy must be drawn up. There is none now. From that a Cdn defence procurement strategy that includes from the get-go all relevant Cdn industry. That does not exist.
Lots of work to do. Especially since the three things mentioned all used to exist decades ago. They were thrown over as unnecessary by both Lib and Con Govt’s. This caused almost irreparable institutional loss the likes of which will be difficult to replicate or renew.
Have faith. If Sweden can sustain a defence industry, so can Canada. My experience in defence industry is that Canadian SMBs can be world beaters, technologically. But the big challenge was getting DND interested. Without their support, it was difficult to export because the first question a potential foreign customer asked was how many did the CAF have. It was a Catch 22. With a Buy Canadian policy, I’m certain we can succeed.
Sweden sustains a defence industry because Swedes agree that it must. Canadians are nowhere near as solid on this point, as Phil rightly notes. He is right to argue that the govt must move quickly, while the support is there. A consensus can be built but it won’t build itself.
The crucial step for Canadian defence industrial strategy is to abandon interoperability with the US. If the current leadership of the CAF still sees its role as supporting Trump and his likely successors, they need to be replaced by people who see the role of Canada's defence forces as defending Canada.
This applies in spades to Australia, where I live. We are stuck with the appalling AUKUS deal, which makes no sense except tying us to a country that is sure to leave us in the lurch if we ever need help, and subsidising the submarine industry in our former colonial ruler.
A great article that provides Canadians, business and our political class something to think about. I would truly love to see all the above-mentioned parties take the Canadian Defence Industrial sector seriously going forward. This is what a serious country that insists on its own independence and sovereignty would do. Recent history suggests that such a move would unfortunately be out of our national ‘character’.
The military ‘brass’ knows this all too well well. So in addition to all the valid points raised, you need to have buy in from the military brass. They are rightly risk averse. They don’t like to take risks on the battlefield, nor do they wish to accept risks with their personnel, training or equipment. They grew up and had their careers in a time of austerity. Experience has taught them that they can count on US and other foreign suppliers, provided they can convince government to acquiesce to the necessary expenditures.
While I think that regrowing our defence industrial base is a necessary and laudable objective, the path has many obstacles, as you rightly pointed out.
The biggest change required would be cultural. This requires sustained (for a generation) leadership, effort and investment from the top.
A Cdn national security strategy must be developed. There is none now. From that a Cdn defence strategy must be drawn up. There is none now. From that a Cdn defence procurement strategy that includes from the get-go all relevant Cdn industry. That does not exist.
Lots of work to do. Especially since the three things mentioned all used to exist decades ago. They were thrown over as unnecessary by both Lib and Con Govt’s. This caused almost irreparable institutional loss the likes of which will be difficult to replicate or renew.
Time is a-wasting. We must get on with it now.
This is absolutely bang in Phil. Time is ticking. Canadians will move on quickly and the moment is not being seized.
This is absolutely bang on Phil. Time is ticking. Canadians will move on quickly and the moment is not being seized.
remember the AVRO. a great canadian story that fizzled due to a lack of long term canadian government support.
Have faith. If Sweden can sustain a defence industry, so can Canada. My experience in defence industry is that Canadian SMBs can be world beaters, technologically. But the big challenge was getting DND interested. Without their support, it was difficult to export because the first question a potential foreign customer asked was how many did the CAF have. It was a Catch 22. With a Buy Canadian policy, I’m certain we can succeed.
Sweden sustains a defence industry because Swedes agree that it must. Canadians are nowhere near as solid on this point, as Phil rightly notes. He is right to argue that the govt must move quickly, while the support is there. A consensus can be built but it won’t build itself.
The crucial step for Canadian defence industrial strategy is to abandon interoperability with the US. If the current leadership of the CAF still sees its role as supporting Trump and his likely successors, they need to be replaced by people who see the role of Canada's defence forces as defending Canada.
This applies in spades to Australia, where I live. We are stuck with the appalling AUKUS deal, which makes no sense except tying us to a country that is sure to leave us in the lurch if we ever need help, and subsidising the submarine industry in our former colonial ruler.
A great article that provides Canadians, business and our political class something to think about. I would truly love to see all the above-mentioned parties take the Canadian Defence Industrial sector seriously going forward. This is what a serious country that insists on its own independence and sovereignty would do. Recent history suggests that such a move would unfortunately be out of our national ‘character’.
The military ‘brass’ knows this all too well well. So in addition to all the valid points raised, you need to have buy in from the military brass. They are rightly risk averse. They don’t like to take risks on the battlefield, nor do they wish to accept risks with their personnel, training or equipment. They grew up and had their careers in a time of austerity. Experience has taught them that they can count on US and other foreign suppliers, provided they can convince government to acquiesce to the necessary expenditures.
While I think that regrowing our defence industrial base is a necessary and laudable objective, the path has many obstacles, as you rightly pointed out.
The biggest change required would be cultural. This requires sustained (for a generation) leadership, effort and investment from the top.