Canada’s Liberal regime see no need to defend against DPRK nuclear ballistic missile threats that can strike Canadian cities like Vancouver, Ottawa, Montreal, Halifax, or Toronto causing millions of Canadian casualties by 2020.
A nuclear attack on Canadian cities will impair the Trudeau regime’s quest to support and create opportunities for the middle class and Canada’s ability to offer asylum to refugees, not to mention create non tariff barriers to free trade with the United States.
North Korea was not mentioned or regarded as relevant in the Trudeau regime’s strident defense of Canada’s pitiful spending on defense in Berlin.
Canadian defense spending is lower than the level that embarrassed German Chancellor Angela Merkel.
The refusal to admit to the North Korean threat included failure to join the US, South Korea, and Japan in a joint statement (Feb. 16) condemning DPRK’s missile test and violations of UN resolutions.
Exclusion from the joint statement against DPRK while the Trudeau regime campaign for election to a seat on the UN Security Council is rather puzzling unless Canada is seeking a US veto along with nays from every US ally.
But it might help secure the DPRK and PRC votes for Prime Minister Trudeau.
Global Affairs Canada’s spokesperson Jocelyn Sweet belatedly issued a statement late on Feb. 17 demanding: “North Korea to cease these destabilizing and provocative actions and verifiably abandon its nuclear weapons and ballistic missile programs”.
These overt acts ipso facto suggest Canada is at best, indifferent and nearly sitting idly by in the face of DPRK threats to annihilate Canadians.
Contrary to the Trudeau regime’s allegations about Canada’s “strong” commitment to NATO, Canada is in violation of self-defense obligations under Article 3 of the NATO treaty and thus, disqualify Canada from assistance under Article 5.
Likewise, Canada is disqualified from receiving aid from US allies like Japan and South Korea by failure to minimally contribute to their collective security with a joint statement.
Canada cannot expect any aid and assistance from US and allies like South Korea and Japan in shooting down ballistic missiles aimed at Canada without being a full, credible partner for their defense.
Access to sensor data, targeting information from sensors deployed by allies in Northeast Asia, let alone their willingness to use scarce interceptors, is conditional on Canada reciprocating in supporting allies defense and having the expeditionary force capability on hand when called upon to defend allies in Northeast Asia.
Suppose the Trudeau regime took the threat from North Korea seriously and decided to participate in a credible defense against DPRK?
To start, Canada will have to be a full member of the Missile Defense program like Japan or Israel. That will require participation in the sensor network, interceptors, R&D and also being ready and able to join and play a major role in an expedition to the Korean peninsula.
An agenda that easily cost tens of billions USD annually starting 2017.
Given the short timeframe, there is no time for traditional / conventional procurement. The fastest way Canada can field a missile defense is to request from the US transfer of at least 2, preferably 3 existing Arliegh Burke Destroyers that can be upgraded for missile defense and anti-submarine patrols and delivered by 2018.
That, together with possibly some Aegis Ashore batteries, selective deployment of Patriots, would greatly enhance the likelihood of Canadians deterring, and failing that, surviving a nuclear attack by North Korea by 2020.
Acquisition of a substantial expeditionary air strike capability on short notice will be difficult. That may be done by acquiring used aircraft potentially from allies like F-16s from Norway, F/A-18s from Finland, Australia or US surplus inventory.
Beyond immediately upgrading the existing CF-18 fleet, there is little available that can be delivered by early 2019 even if the order was placed today.
Increased demand anticipated for F-35s will mean little spare capacity and a long wait unless allies like Japan or UK ramped up production. Not being able to field F-35s will effectively exclude Canada from the opening of any air campaign when stealth and network warfare capabilities are critical, and also from using F-35s as part of missile defense of CONUS.
The Trudeau regime needs to act now and do whatever it takes to defend Canada.
The 2017 Federal Budget is expected to be unveiled shortly for Canada. The budget will not have what is required to finance a major increase in defense expenditures required just to deal with the DPRK nuclear missile threat – let alone NATO or other commitments. Doing so will likely require tens of billions in 2017, and much more annually going forward.
Thus, the budget will likely be obsolete on presentation if Canada intend to put forward a credible plan for the May NATO Summit.
When will the Trudeau regime reveal to Canadians that a Goods and Services (GST/HST) tax increase of 5 to 8 cents (10-13% total) with half of the increase for defense, can be expected in their near future?