July 8, 2024 | Local, Land, C4ISR, Security

Intelligence artificielle

NATO, Canada, and the Demands of the New Battlefield

Prime Minister Justin Trudeau with then-Latvian Prime Minister Krisjanis Karins at the Adazi Military base in Latvia, where Canada leads a NATO battle group, Monday, July 10, 2023/Adam Scotti

By Elinor Sloan; Policy Magazine

July 4, 2024

As we approach the July 9-11 NATO 75th anniversary summit in Washington, it is useful to recall that today, as in 1949, Canada’s primary security interest in NATO is to help prevent a general war on the European continent. Such a war, we know, would directly impact Canadian lives and prosperity.

An important part of preventing war is deterrence. Ever since Russia invaded Crimea, NATO has focused on using conventional military capabilities to deter potential Russian aggression against a NATO member. At first, the Alliance chose a tripwire approach. It deployed a small military force to the Baltics with the idea that Russia would be deterred by a recognition of the Article 5 implications of that deployment – that military action against a NATO member along its border would directly impact other members, triggering a larger Allied response.

NATO deployed battle groups to each of the Baltic countries, as well as Poland, with the Latvian one led by Canada. There was no thought that this tripwire force could actually repel Russian military action.

Russia’s invasion of Ukraine in February 2022 gave pause to the tripwire approach. Within four months, NATO abandoned it in favor of a combat force that could face off against any potential Russian aggression. It ordered the conversion of the battle groups into full brigades; Canada has committed to transforming the one it leads in Latvia to a multinational brigade by 2026. The combat brigades are meant to be equipped for warfighting. In this regard, the war in Ukraine has given some indicators as to our new conventional military requirements.

Physical mass still matters. Far from the small, high-tech military forces that were at one time seen as the way of the future, the war in Ukraine has revealed that industrial-scale mass has returned to relevancy on the modern battlefield. Traditional combat platforms remain relevant. NATO’s new defence plans indicate the collective defence of Europe demands many familiar things: fighter jets, tanks, artillery, air defence, and long-range missiles. In the Ukraine war, old-fashioned artillery has inflicted the majority of casualties, and fighting without armour has proven costly.

The battlefield has become transparent. Sensors can detect almost any movement, while drones provide continuous battlefield reconnaissance. Forces must be dispersed, constantly on the move, and equipped with digital networks that can connect them across the battlefield and back to headquarters. Technology and access to sensor data enable decision-making at lower levels. Platoon-level forces can see and strike at targets with information that at one time would have been only available at the higher echelons.

Drones are forming an increasingly important and effective complement to traditional military platforms. Ukraine has used thousands of first-person view drones with small payloads to supplement larger artillery barrages against Russian forces. It has crippled Russian air defences by deploying decoy drones that make Russia light up its radars and instantly send targeting data back to larger ground-launched tactical missiles. It has coordinated the use of maritime drones and cruise missiles to take out a large portion of Russia’s Black Sea fleet.

Examples of the electromagnetic spectrum being exploited and blocked in electromagnetic warfare/NATO Joint Air Power Competence Centre

Electronic warfare (EW) remains salient at every high-tech juncture. Advanced sensors, robotics, precision munitions, and battlefield connectivity are all at risk of EW disruption—and are a target of adversary EW disruption—as each side seeks the electromagnetic advantage.

Seeping into all of these elements is artificial intelligence (AI). AI is highlighting the importance of mass and industrial strength – since the ability to pick out thousands of targets points to the necessity of having thousands of weapons to strike them. It is processing and disseminating data to battlefield commanders at superhuman speed, blurring the line between intelligence, surveillance, and reconnaissance on the one hand, and command and control on the other. And AI is being developed as a solution to EW jamming, by enabling a drone to home-in on its target even if the signal connection to its pilot operator is cut.

The combination of traditional military requirements, cutting-edge technology, and fledgling but advancing AI is creating what some have called a “new kind of industrial war.”

Canada will be challenged to respond to these military requirements. On the personnel side, it struggles to maintain its existing recruitment levels, much less to field a larger force. Our North, Strong and Free, Canada’s defence policy released in April 2024, states a priority of modernizing the Canadian Armed Forces’ recruitment process to rebuild the military by 2032.

In the area of military capabilities, the policy includes acquiring long-range missiles for the Army; modernizing its artillery; upgrading or replacing its tanks and light armoured vehicles; and acquiring both strike drones and counter-drone assets that can neutralize adversary drones. The Army is in the early stages of modernizing its electronic warfare capabilities, as well as acquiring command and control systems at the tactical and operational levels for digital connectivity on the battlefield. The Department of National Defence and Canadian Armed Forces have launched their first Artificial Intelligence Strategy, stating AI will be foundational to defence modernization. Yet they have just begun to identify the AI-enabled capabilities that our military will need.

The challenge with respect to acquiring military capabilities is not so much in securing funding. Rather, it lies in recruiting and retaining personnel with advanced technological skills, and in navigating a defence procurement system which, through the accumulation of bureaucratic steps over many years, is now layers deep and overly time consuming. For good reason, the recent defence policy includes a review of Canada’s defence procurement system.

Ensuring there is no general war on the European continent endures as Canada’s key security interest in NATO. Central to this is credible conventional military deterrence. People and equipment are the core elements. A streamlined, effective personnel recruitment system, and defence procurement process, are the critical enablers.

Elinor Sloan is a Professor of International Relations in the Department of Political Science at Carleton University. She previously served as a defence analyst in the Department of National Defence. Prior to completing her PhD at Tufts University, she was a logistics officer in the Canadian Armed Forces.

NATO, Canada, and the Demands of the New Battlefield

On the same subject

October 27, 2020 | Local, C4ISR, Other Defence

Bombardier Recreational Products suspends delivery of aircraft engines used on military drones
Canadian company says it only recently became aware the engines were powering military UAVs Levon Sevunts Bombardier Recreational Products (BRP) says it has suspended the delivery of aircraft engines to "countries with unclear usage" in the wake of reports that some of those engines are being used on Turkish combat drones deployed by Azerbaijan in fighting against Armenian forces in Nagorno-Karabakh. The Quebec-based company — better known for its Ski-Doo and Lynx snowmobiles — said it became aware late last week that some of the recreational aircraft engines produced by its Austrian subsidiary, Rotax, are being used on Turkish Bayraktar TB2 unmanned aerial vehicles (UAVs). "We have recently been made aware that some Rotax engines are currently used in military UAVs, and have started a thorough investigation immediately," Martin Langelier, BPR's senior vice president and the company's spokesperson, told Radio Canada International in an email statement. "In the meantime, we are suspending delivery of aircraft engines in countries with unclear usage." Export controls and 'civilian' tech Langelier said that all Rotax aircraft engines are designed and produced in Austria exclusively for civilian purposes and are certified for civilian use only. Canada suspended most exports of defence technology to Turkey in October of 2019 following the Turkish invasion of northwestern Syria. Michel Cimpaye, a spokesperson for Global Affairs Canada, said exports of items on the country's Export Control List require a permit only when exported from Canada. Controlled goods and technology exported from another country, however, are subject to the export controls of that country, Cimpaye added. Gabriele Juen, a spokesperson for the Austrian Ministry of Foreign Affairs, said the Rotax engines are used in various motorsports and drones could be used "for a multitude of solely civilian purposes." "The European Union Control List of Dual Use Items does not list the drone engine in question as a dual use good item," Juen said. "As a consequence, no approval permit is required under Austrian legislation that regulates the export of defence-related goods." A loophole in arms control regimes Kelsey Gallagher is a researcher with the disarmament group Project Ploughshares who has studied Canadian exports of drone technology to Turkey. Gallagher said the matter of BRP recreational aircraft engines ending up on Turkish combat drones exposes a serious flaw in international arms control regimes. "I think this speaks to the fact that components such as engines should more frequently fall under regulations that we see for what we deem to be more conventional weapons," he said. "Frequently, engines are not controlled as weapons systems even though they are integral, like other components, to the operation of a vehicle." The Bayraktar TB2 drones also feature optical sensors and target designation systems produced by L3 Harris WESCAM in Burlington, Ont. On Monday, defence officials in Armenia displayed what they claimed are parts of a Bayraktar TB2 drone and its Canadian-made optical and target acquisition systems, as well as its Rotax engine. A spokesperson for the Armenian Ministry of Defence said another Turkish Bayraktar TB2 drone was shot down by Armenian air defence units during fighting in Nagorno-Karabakh on Thursday. Armenian Prime Minister Nikol Pashinyan has called on countries that supply components for the Turkish drone program to follow Canada's example and suspend all exports of such components to Turkey. Fighting in the breakaway Nagorno-Karabakh region of Azerbaijan, which is populated by ethnic Armenians, began on Sept. 27. It's the most significant outburst of violence since a Russian-brokered ceasefire paused hostilities in 1994. Armenia has repeatedly accused Turkey of supplying Azerbaijan with arms — including drones and F-16 fighter jets — as well as military advisers and jihadist Syrian mercenaries taking part in the fighting. Armenian officials also have accused Azerbaijan of using the Turkish drones to not only target military forces but also to conduct strikes against civilian infrastructure across Nagorno-Karabakh and in Armenia proper. Turkey and Azerbaijan have denied these reports. The Turkish embassy did not respond to a request for comment Officials at Global Affairs Canada said they are investigating allegations regarding the possible use of Canadian technology in the Nagorno-Karabakh conflict and "will continue to assess the situation." Foreign Affairs Minister François-Philippe Champagne suspended the export permits for WESCAM optical sensors and target acquisition systems on Oct. 6. However, senior Global Affairs officials speaking at Thursday's briefing for MPs on the situation in Nagorno-Karabakh could not explain why an exemption was made for these exports in the first place, given the embargo announced in 2019 and renewed in April of this year. Appearing before the standing committee on foreign affairs and international development, Shalini Anand, acting director general for export controls at Global Affairs Canada, said she could not discuss the issue of the permits because of "commercial confidentiality." Prime Minister Justin Trudeau specifically discussed the issue of WESCAM exports to Turkey with President Recep Tayyip Erdogan during a phone conversation in April, according to sources who spoke with Radio Canada International on condition of anonymity. The issue was discussed again during their phone conversation on Oct. 16, according to the Prime Minister's Office. https://www.cbc.ca/news/politics/turkey-armenia-azerbaijan-drones-bombardier-1.5775350
November 15, 2018 | Local, Land

Saudi Arabia and the Canadian Arms Lobby
by Yves Engler Will they cancel the contract or won't they? In order to understand Ottawa's decision making process regarding General Dynamics' massive arms deal with Saudi Arabia one must look closely at industry lobbyists. While the Trudeau government is under substantial public pressure to rescind the $15 billion Light Armored Vehicle sale, to do so would challenge the company and the broader corporate lobby. Last week a senior analyst with the GD-financed Canadian Global Affairs Institute boldly defended the LAV sale. "There has been no behavior by the Saudis to warrant canceling this contract", said David Perry to the London Free Press. Perry must have missed the Kingdom's violence in Yemen, repression in eastern Saudi Arabia and consulate murder in Istanbul. Two weeks ago Perry told another interviewer that any move to reverse the LAV sale would have dire consequences. "There would be geopolitical implications. There would be a huge number of economic implications, both immediately and in the wider economy... canceling this, I think, would be a big step because as far as I understand the way that we look at arms exports, it would effectively mean that we've changed the rules of the game." Amidst an earlier wave of criticism towards GD's LAV sale, the Canadian Global Affairs Institute published a paper titled "Canada and Saudi Arabia: A Deeply Flawed but Necessary Partnership" that defended the $15-billion deal. At the time of its 2016 publication at least four of the institute's "fellows" wrote columns justifying the sale, including an opinion piece by Perry published in the Globe and Mail Report on Business that was headlined "Without foreign sales, Canada's defense industry would not survive." Probably Canada's most prominent foreign policy think tank, Canadian Global Affairs Institute is a recipient of GD's "generous" donations. Both GD Land Systems and GD Mission Systems are listed among its "supporters" in recent annual reports, but the exact sum they've given the institute isn't public. The Conference of Defence Associations Institute also openly supports GD's LAV sale. Representatives of the Ottawa-based lobby/think tank have writtencommentaries justifying the LAV sale and a 2016 analysis concluded that "our own Canadian national interests, economic and strategic, dictate that maintaining profitable political and trade relations with ‘friendly' countries like Saudi Arabia, including arms sales, is the most rational option in a world of unpleasant choices." Of course, the Conference of Defence Associations Institute also received GD money and its advisory board includes GD Canada's senior director of strategy and government relations Kelly Williams. Full article: https://original.antiwar.com/yves_engler/2018/11/13/saudi-arabia-and-the-canadian-arms-lobby/
March 5, 2019 | Local, Aerospace, Naval, Land, C4ISR, Security, Other Defence

Feds to invest billions less in new military equipment, may fall short on NATO spending target
By Lee Berthiaume The Canadian Press The federal government will invest billions of dollars less in new military equipment than promised this year, raising concerns about the readiness of the Canadian Forces and the prospect that Canada will fall short on another NATO spending target. The Trudeau government in 2017 released a defence policy that included dramatic increases in the amount of money to be spent on new aircraft, ships, armoured vehicles and other military equipment each year for the next two decades. The investments are considered vital to replacing the Canadian Forces' aging fighter jets, ships and other equipment with state-of-the-art kit. Yet while the government is on track to invest more in new equipment for the second year in a row, budget documents show the Defence Department will still fall short more than $2 billion on the government's plan to spend $6.5 billion. The government spent $2.3 billion less than planned last year, largely because of delays in projects such as the government's huge plan to buy new warships, though also because some things ended up costing less than expected. The department's top civil servant, deputy minister Jody Thomas, told a House of Commons committee last week that about $700 million was because some projects came in under budget and other “efficiencies, so we didn't need that money.” But Thomas acknowledged the department was to blame for some of the other underspending and industry has also faced challenges in delivering on projects – though she said it shouldn't be a surprise there have been some problems given the number of projects underway. “There are going to be some slowdowns by us,” she said, adding: “If money isn't moving quite quickly enough because of a problem with a particular supply chain, a particular supplier, a contract, the way we've defined a project, we work with industry to try to resolve that.” While the fact the department saved money on some projects was seen as a positive development, Conservative defence critic James Bezan said he is nonetheless concerned that hundreds of millions of dollars in promised new investments aren't being realized. “Despite the explanation that was given by officials at committee, we still feel projects are falling behind, promises are going to be broken and ultimately the Canadian Armed Forces will not get the equipment that it needs in a timely manner,” Bezan told The Canadian Press. “The whole idea that they're finding efficiencies is good news. But at the same time, those dollars should be getting re-invested in other capital projects that aren't off the books yet.” Thomas did not say which projects will be affected by the underspending. And the underspending doesn't just mean delivery of some promised equipment will be delayed, said defence analyst David Perry of the Canadian Global Affairs Institute; it also threatens Canada's ability to meet a key NATO spending target. All members of the military alliance agreed in 2014 to spend two per cent of their gross domestic products on the military within a decade – a commitment that has since taken on new importance with U.S. President Donald Trump's demanding all NATO allies spend more. While Canada has long resisted that target and the Liberal defence policy shows spending only reaching 1.4 per cent of GDP by 2024-25, the Liberal government has said it will achieve another NATO target to direct 20 per cent of defence spending to new equipment. “So the military is not getting re-equipped as fast as intended when the defence policy was published,” Perry said in an interview. “And we had basically reassured NATO that we were going to really do a good job at spending on recapitalization, and we're not nearly as far ahead as we should be on that.” https://globalnews.ca/news/5018310/federal-government-military-spending-nato/

All news