This week Alexander Stubbs the President of Finland, is in Canada, strategizing the reality of America’s radical shift to the right, and its actions that attest to the dramatic shift that Donald Trump’s administration has brought to almost every aspect of the relationships that existed prior to his arrival on the U.S. political scene.
Stubbs, an affirmed ‘transatlanticist’, believes that Trump, is not America, and that like a pendulum swinging, – politically America will return to the centre because the reality is that America’s hegemonic posture will prove to be too dysfunctional within America itself.
However, while Finland must deal with Russian aggression and the implications that this has on NATO and Finland as a physical neighbour to Russia, it is not only wishful thinking but important to Finland and Europe for America to remain in NATO.
The difference in relation to the verbiage used by Canada, as a ‘rupture’ vs a ‘transition’ is not a minor issue.
Canadians view the United States today, with a completely different lens than that of Europe. America’s actions have not simply been disrespectful, they have threatened Canada in a way that no other administration in modern history has done.
In turn, Canada’s response, unlike that of Finland, is to not simply seek to ameliorate the situation, and go on as was. Rather it is to as quickly as possible in an actual concrete manner, break with America in terms of its policies, hegemonic interests, and in relation to trade, foreign affairs, military alignment and military procurement.
America has done everything possible to dismantle the old order and its institutions, whether international or domestic. Such is the damage done to those institutions that Canada has decided to strike a new path, and new relationships, including the creation of new organizations of collective interest that will no longer entertain American dominance and/or the subservience of its members to American interests.
Finland is Unrepresentative of Europe and NATO
The vast majority of the EU’s members as well as the vast majority of NATO’s members are not aligned with Finland’s position vis-a-vis the United States.
Europe on the whole, has determined that the interests of the United States differ substantively from the EU’s, and in relation to Russia, even more so.
Developing a new defence structure for Europe, that may well be constituent of the majority of NATO’s membership is envisioned. One with a ‘standing EU army, airforce and navy’ that will act based on most, if not all of NATO’s articles including Article 5, providing for collective defence such that “an armed attack against one member is an attack against all, initiating collective self-defence.”
Canada, in addition, is rapidly increasing its military procurement, force size and strength, particularly in relation to sovereign self-defences that will see Canada develop a supplemental reserve force of approximately 300,000 personnel, a reserve force of 80,000 personnel who will have both the capability and necessary skills to actively assist and integrate into the CAF regular force structure, that will increase to approximately 120,000 personnel by 2035.
The intent, similar to that which has existed in Norway, Sweden and Finland, for almost 80 years, maximizes the creation of a ‘whole society defence’ structure. This will likely require conscription in order to provide the necessary manpower to deliver the necessary numbers of personnel required.
NATO’s major middle-powers, including France, Germany the U.K., Poland and Canada have all committed to increase military expenditures to 5% of GDP by 2035, which for Canada will mean an expenditure of 150 billion per year by 2035.
An amount comparable to that of Russia in its current war with Ukraine.
This will not be accomplished with ease, however, due to the reality of a hegemonic hemispheric power, being the United States of America next door, threatening economic destruction and military annexation, Canada must act.
Canadians have no interest in becoming American. Therefore, there is now a solid commitment by Canadian society to accept both the financial implications by constraints and by demands requisite for military force manpower commitments in order to keep Canada, sovereign and free. In addition, Canada as a member both of NATO and committed to the protection of the EU will provide the capability of divisional deployment of military forces in Europe if they should be so required.
The Only Real Option to Invasion or Attack by the U.S.
If America were to attack Canada, the intent would obviously be to bloody America to such an extent that an invasion would be deemed to be irrational.
Of course this assumes that the leadership within the U.S. is rational, intelligent and not fascist.
Based on what is being seen today, that is a bet many would not take.
Canadians are not naive. A country one ninth the size of the U.S. would not win a war of conquest. But what a ‘whole society defence’ would accomplish is an asymmetrical resistance, trained and capable of taking action against America for decades, if not generations.
Canada is a huge, inhospitable place in winter, that brings one to think of the conditions that every invader of Russia has faced historically.
Based on past history, it is obvious that a war of attrition, that would drag on interminably, costing American lives and domestic damage and destruction of everyday life in the United States, would be highly unpopular.
One need only look at Vietnam, Iraq, Afghanistan and the present ongoing conflict, to clearly see that a war, brought home to the U.S.A., would itself be the worst possible situation for those not favouring such action.
American families have a low tolerance for losing their sons and daughters, never mind actions that would take military acts into the U.S. and into its public meeting places, such as churches, stadiums, malls, etc.
The destruction of infrastructure, power, water, sewage, transportation, railways, airports and ports, as primary targets, would make interest in maintaining a war of conquest, not defence, – not just unpopular, but may well create the conditions for civil war in the United States.
Canada, unlike the U.S. neither seeks or welcomes warfare, however, Canadians are more than capable of defending themselves, and will do so without hesitancy.
Leave a Reply