Design by British firm BAE picked for Canada’s $60B warship replacement program

On the same subject

• 

  August 9, 2019 | Local, Aerospace

  Canadian, U.S. military leaders agree on framework to retool Norad

  By Murray Brewster Military leaders from the U.S. and Canada have come to an agreement on the nuts and bolts retooling of Norad, CBC News has learned. It is a milestone that could end up pitting the next government in Ottawa against both the Trump administration and perhaps even northern Indigenous communities at home. Now over six decades old, the bi-national air and maritime defence command — and its associated airfields, radar stations and satellite network — has been in need of a major overhaul in the face of emerging threats, such as North Korean ballistic missiles and rapidly advancing cruise missile technology. Word of the understanding comes as two Canadian CF-18s and two American F-22 Raptors intercepted two Russian Tu-95 Bear bombers, which pressed close to North American airspace, on Thursday. The agreement of "what's in and what's out" of the new North American Aerospace Defence Command was struck a few months ago, said a defence source in Ottawa, who was granted anonymity because of the sensitivity of the subject. Separately, the Canadian general who is the deputy commander of Norad confirmed the two countries are on the same page when it comes to the new framework needed to defend the continent, but cautioned there is still a lot of work and negotiation ahead over capabilities and what is affordable. "We have established the operational requirements," Lt.-Gen. Christopher Coates in an interview with CBC News. A bi-national panel is examining the specifications and make recommendations to both the Pentagon and the Department of National Defence in Ottawa. Eventually, Coates said, each government will have to "determine whether or not those capabilities will be provided — or some other option" will be pursued. And that is where things could potentially get messy, according to defence experts. James Fergusson, of the University of Manitoba, one of the pre-eminent researchers on Norad, said the price tag will be substantial. Replacing the North Warning System chain of radar stations, alone, could cost as much as $11 billion, he said. The Liberal government has made much of saying its defence plans are fully costed, but it deliberately did not include the calculation for Norad modernization in its policy. There will have to be some negotiation with Washington, even though the cost sharing formula (60-40 split between the U.S. and Canada) has long been established. Steve Saideman, a professor of international affairs at Carleton University in Ottawa, said he can't see any Canadian government being anxious to open negotiations with the Trump administration, regardless of how long standing the arrangements might be. U.S. President Donald Trump has long complained American allies do not pay their fair share of costs for the NATO alliance, and Saideman said it is not beyond the realm of possibility that government-to-government technical negotiations over Norad could devolve. Fergusson disagreed. If they argue over money, he said, it will likely involve environmental cleanup costs related to the existing, remote north warning radar stations. When Norad abandoned its first chain of early warning sites — known as the DEW line — in 1993, the cleanup took 21 years and Canada was stuck with the $575 million bill. More problematic, as far as Fergusson is concerned, is whether Norad's proposed new capabilities will affect northern indigenous communities, which — unlike the past — will rightfully expect to be consulted and have a say over what the military does with the land. "When they [the Canadian and U.S. military] go up there in Northern Canada, now, they can't simply ignore the Indigenous people," said Fergusson, "And that's a political issue." https://www.cbc.ca/news/politics/norad-canada-us-military-1.5240855

• 

  August 15, 2018 | Local, Aerospace

  MDA president notes opportunities, challenges for Canada’s next role in space

  MDA Press Release Canada's role and potential involvement in the growing new space economy requires a commitment from the Government of Canada for a new space strategy, the group president of MDA, a Maxar company, said in a speech to the Aerospace, Defence and Security Expo. “The most pressing question is whether Canada will participate, or not, in the international space community's next big exploration project,” said Mike Greenley, group president of MDA. “The United States, Europe, Japan and Russia are currently planning a return to the Moon in the 2020s. NASA will build a small space station that orbits the Moon, as a base for lunar exploration and as a gateway to explore deeper space. The international community expects Canada to participate in this mission and to provide advanced AI and robotics–our traditional and strategic role.” Greenley said the international community expects and wants Canada to participate. Full Article: https://www.skiesmag.com/press-releases/mda-president-notes-opportunities-challenges-for-canadas-next-role-in-space/

• 

  April 9, 2020 | Local, Security

  Pandemic equipment snarls will rewrite Canada's definition of national security needs, say experts

  When every country needs the same stuff to keep people safe, cost arguments seem less convincing The mad scramble to secure protective medical equipment and ventilators in the midst of a global pandemic has given some of the people who work in the usually tedious world of government procurement an unwelcome excuse to say, "I told you so." For years, there have been quiet but persistent demands coming out of the defence and acquisition sectors for successive federal governments to develop a list of "strategic industries" that do not have to rely on foreign supply chains — as insurance against the kind of procurement panic in play right now. Those calls were largely ignored. Now, defence experts are saying the COVID-19 crisis is a costly wake-up call. Canada needs — and has needed for almost two decades — a 21st century national security industrial plan that focuses on critical equipment and materials that should be produced at home, not abroad. 'Totally negligent' "We've been totally negligent on that and it is something I have articulated over and over again," said Alan Williams, the former head of the procurement branch at the Department of National Defence. "It's absolutely critical and if this doesn't wake us to that reality, I don't know what would." Williams devoted a substantial portion of one of his books, Reinventing Canadian Defence Procurement: A View from the Inside, to the absence of a national security vision of Canadian industry. "It frankly pisses me off because there's no reason for us not to have done that," he said. "That should be the kind of thing ministers, the leaders of the country desperately want to do. And why we seem to have avoided that kind of strategic thinking ... It just boggles my mind. It's inexcusable." 'Key' industries geared toward trade, not tragedies There was a faint glimmer of hope in the initial debate over the National Shipbuilding Strategy a decade ago, when the former Conservative government made a conscious decision to build future warships, Canadian Coast Guard and fisheries vessels in Canada, instead of outsourcing the work to other countries. At least in the context of defence procurement, Canada does have what are known as "key industrial capabilities", including shipbuilding, the production of certain types of ammunition and the construction of a range of aerospace and maritime electronic systems. Much of the work of those "key" domestic industries is, however, geared toward making high-end components for global supply chains. Critics have often said the policy focuses on high-tech innovation and business priorities, rather than hard-headed national security interests. Other countries, Williams said, have carved out a space for national security interests in industrial policy by not allowing other countries to build certain pieces of equipment. The Japanese, for example, have retained the capability to assemble their own warplanes. A shift in thinking The COVID-19 crisis, which has uncovered a potentially deadly shortage of ventilators and protective equipment for medical professionals, will push the federal government into a radical re-evaluation of what we need to be able to build at home to protect the country. In some respects, that work has already started. Earlier this week, reflecting on the Trump administration's moves to restrict exports of protective equipment, Ontario Premier Doug Ford expressed dismay over how the fate of so many Canadians had been taken out of the hands of the federal and provincial governments. Doctors, nurses demand government fill 'unacceptable' gaps in protective gear on front lines Canada working to produce up to 30,000 ventilators domestically: Trudeau "I am just so, so disappointed right now," he said. "We have a great relationship with the U.S. and all of a sudden they pull these shenanigans. But as I said yesterday, we will never rely on any other country going forward." Over the past two weeks, the federal government has announced plans to pour more than $2 billion into sourcing and acquiring protective medical equipment — masks, gowns, face shields, hand sanitizer — at home. On Tuesday, Ottawa unveiled a plan to get three Canadian companies to build 30,000 ventilators. Health equipment may have been outside the normal definition of national security needs until just a few weeks ago — but the shifting geopolitical landscape offered another warning sign that was ignored, said procurement expert Dave Perry. Leaning on China "This is pointing out the flip side of our globalized world and globalized supply chains," said Perry, an analyst and vice president at the Canadian Global Affairs Institute. "The cold, hard truth is that we're going to be relying on China for critical supplies." When the coronavirus outbreak ramped up, federal officials should have been aware of the potential peril involved in relying on Chinese factories for so many critical items. But in the absence of homegrown capability, Canada is at the mercy of panicked nations in the midst of panicked buying. "The entire world is trying to put through orders from the same sets of factories we're trying to source from," Perry said. "It might be accurate to criticize the Chinese for their response, but in the current context the government has to be cognizant of the impact on our potential ability to source stuff we really, really need right now from China — when there's not a lot of other options available in the short term and when the rest of the world is making the same phone calls." One of the critical arguments against a homegrown national security industrial strategy has been the cost. It's an argument familiar from the shipbuilding context: taxpayers pay a premium when we task Canadian industry with delivering solutions, instead of turning to cheaper foreign manufacturers. Elinor Sloan, a defence policy expert at Carleton University, said she believes the crisis will focus the public's attention on securing the critical industries and supplies the country needs in a global crisis. "The trade-off, as we know, is that it can be more costly to build or produce at home," she said. "This crisis may engender a perspective among the public that the extra cost is worth it." https://www.cbc.ca/news/politics/pandemic-covid-coronavirus-procurement-masks-ventilators-1.5525373