Canada's Misdirected Defense Splurge

Instead of focusing on the materiel our troops need most, Canada is squandering the limited defense budget on equipment that may never be used.

Perhaps the silliest justification for the proposed spending of C$16 billion defense dollars for 65 yet-unbuilt F-35 stealth fighter jets, is that they’ll deter Russian bombers from approaching our air space in the Arctic.

Yet that’s a reason issued by Prime Minister Stephen Harper’s office.

Think about it for a moment. We all know that Russian aircraft routinely come close to our air space in the north -- and equally routinely our present CF-18s fly close, to let the Russkies know that we know they’re there.

What will the costly F-35s do that the CF-18s don’t do? Shoot at the bombers? Blast them down? Of course not. They won’t do anything.

To say these new fighters will enhance our sovereignty or security is simply rhetoric. Feel good stuff that is short on substance. It’s all cosmetics.

The Parliamentary Opposition frets that the deal to buy these planes was negotiated without bidders. And the Opposition has a point. The Boeing Company feels its Super Hornet, used by the U.S. Navy and Australia, is a worthy contender to replace the aging CF-18. But the Canadian government has apparently made up its mind.

Nothing personal, but Harper feels there are Canadian jobs and contracts if we buy the F-35 (and, apparently, the contract has not yet been signed). Spending $16 billion on this stealth fighter may make some sense for providing jobs in Canada for the aircraft industry, but it makes no sense when it comes to security and sovereignty.

The CF-18 that the F-35 Lightning II would replace is coming to the end of its use-before date. So what? It has been used operationally in war twice – briefly, and unnecessarily in the first Gulf war, then in the fabricated air war against Serbia on behalf of Kosovo that U.S. Secretary of State Madeleine Albright stage-managed.

If Canada is ever in a crisis where F-35 stealth fighters are essential to our survival, you can bet we’ll be in the middle of a world war. With 2,500 of these aircraft, the Americans will be involved on our behalf – as they already are in NORAD and NATO.

While it’d be nice to be able to afford a state of the art air force, it is not (or shouldn’t be) a top priority for a country with a limited military budget. The same goes for our navy and submarines – we don’t need them. The four subs we got from Britain at a supposedly bargain basement price in 1998 have been something of an embarrassment.

Supposedly to enhance our sovereignty, the damn things have had no end of trouble -- submerging, leaking, dangerous fires, and so on. We haven’t heard much about them of late. For the record, no Canadian submarine has ever fired a torpedo in anger. Do they even go underwater these days (perhaps too expensive or too risky)?

Canadian Forces will need new mechanized vehicles after Afghanistan, our navy and land forces need helicopters. We have no real supply ships and we need warships, plus boots on the ground.

It’s easier to document what our military needs in order to stay world class (which has been established in Afghanistan when it comes to fighting and doing the job), than it is to decide what should take priority with a limited budget.

Put bluntly, the F-35 is a luxury item that will never be needed.