Today, in the Economist, Adam Robert’s spoke about time, and how little the West has, if it intends to resist Russian aggression in the near future. What is, ‘the near future’? Some would say that Russia is too embroiled with Ukraine to even consider an expansion of hostilities, yet others, like those in Estonia, Latvia and Lithuania, aren’t so sure.
The residents of the Baltic states all have living memories of life under Russian rule, and the vast majority of those populations do not ever want its return. The west has provided Lithuania, Estonia and Latvia with forces that are little more than a tripwire for NATO’s follow-on forces, even though since 2022 troop deployment strength has gone from battalion size to brigade size. Realistically, adding four brigades, while sounding impressive, actually constitutes four understrength forces each comprised of approximately 2,800 personnel. Since North Korea is now actively at war with Europe, it would seem fair for NATO to become actively involved in the defence of Ukraine.
The only way to stem aggression is through strength. While diplomacy can help, by itself it will never be the counter balance to a an aggressor’s action. But Europe has a very short memory of what a no-hold’s-barred fight will look like in Europe, and unless Europeans take the lead in their own defence, the pressure by Russia will simply continue, waiting for the right moment of perceived appeasement to launch an ambitious full-scale attack.
And while the addition of four brigades is welcomed, it can hardly be perceived as the means to blunt a Russian aggressor. At the present time, the West does not have the will or economic desire to assemble forces in strength. Peace requires commitment or war will require everything. NATO has neither the supplies, ammunition or logistical capacity necessary to maintain a sustained defence against a determined aggressor that may well now include a force of 100,000 plus North Koreans.
There is never a ‘good’ time for a war, but it is much better to prepare for war, and swallow the additional economic ramifications for doing so, before your enemy is banging on the gate. Whether in Europe or elsewhere, the future looks to become even less stable and more violent.
Which brings me to my home country of Canada and its apparent lax approach to defence. When I was a young man, fifty plus years ago, I was a part of Canada’s military force, which was essentially twice the size it is today. And while the equipment was becoming obsolete, Canadian men, myself included, had the awareness through our fathers of what war and sacrifice requires and would require in the future.
Today it strikes me that the youth of Canada have little sense of the sacrifice their grandfathers and great-grandfathers made in order to provide their generation with opportunity; and a world, that for Canada has remained essentially free from internal fear of war for the past 80 years.
Now that the world has changed from a bipolar or unipolar world, to one of a multi-power world, the balance that kept a lid on interventionist forays by dictators like Putin, has come off. It is now time for Canadians to remember that sovereignty comes at a price and freedom is not a given. It must be defended.
My hope is that the next Government of Canada will double its military commitments, including force strength and the necessary investment in technological superiority to enable the Canadian Armed Forces to maintain its commitments in an evermore dangerous world.
This includes bringing conscription back for eighteen year old youth to serve a one year commitment to the country they call home and to acquire the necessary skills and training to make a non-volunteer force that is a credible threat to would-be aggressors, — not to mention providing Canada with sovereignty protection in the years to come.
The clock is indeed, ticking.
Leave a Reply