Canada spends 1 per cent, which puts us at the back of the pack: Nineteen member nations spend more than we do, two spend the same, and six spend less.
To be fair, Canada doesn’t get the ‘bang for the buck’ that many other countries get for their military spending. Unlike Europe, Canada has no international military bases; with the United States right next door, and no hostile nation directly on our borders, there is simply no need to park thousands of troops, and their wallets, in our backyard. With regard to procurement contracts, it’s a similar story: Canada boasts no Boeing or Lockheed Martin because the U.S. does, and no Airbus Defence and Space because there is no need to collaborate like the Europeans do.
Ironically, if you believe in big government — but not a big military — Canada lives the dream. Ottawa gets to spend our tax dollars on social programs, including state health care, while we snuggle under our southern neighbour’s defence umbrella. You’d think the NDP would kiss Uncle Sam’s cheeks, instead of decrying his warrior ways.
In the next few years, however, the U.S. shelter may start to fray. Since 2008, American defence spending has fallen by $100 billion, to just under $400 billion. In contrast, Russia will increase its defence spending by 44 per cent over the next three years, making it the third-largest military spender in the world. China is predicted to outspend the UK, France and Germany on defence by 2015. While European defence spending is projected to decline by 5 per cent between 2009 and 2016, emerging markets are expected to boost their budgets by 40 per cent over the same period.
Overall, defence spending by non-NATO countries is predicted to exceed that of NATO allies by 2021. This situation opens a window of opportunity for countries with expansionist ambitions — like Russia — as well as terrorist groups such as Islamic State. With the United States literally and figuratively tapped out after years of war in the Middle East and costly anti-terror measures, and with Europe still struggling to generate economic growth, the money for defence simply isn’t there — unless NATO nations are willing to borrow or sacrifice other budget priorities.
Which, of course, is the last thing the Conservatives want to hear in an election year. Spending the surplus on the military likely wouldn’t buy as many votes as splashing out on middle class incentives like tax breaks for families — especially if there aren’t domestic jobs tied to the spending.
And those domestic employment perks are getting harder to find as the competition for contracts gets fiercer. In a 2013 paper entitled Canada First: Leveraging Defence Procurement Through Key Industrial Capabilities, the Special Advisor to the Minister of Public Works and Government Services reported that the United States is shifting its emphasis to cyber and electronic warfare. That puts American firms in direct competition with Canadian companies with specialized expertise in these areas.
At the same time, some emerging markets, such as India, represent opportunities for Canadian defence companies. But traditionally, these companies have relied on government involvement for a kick-start. Going down that road would open the federal Conservatives up to charges of corporate welfarism, without any guarantee of procurement success.
Problem is, if you’re going to talk the talk on defence, people will expect you to walk the walk. Statements bashing Vladimir Putin, condemning Islamic State and supporting Israel all start to sound pretty hollow if you don’t have the muscle to back up your words. And that costs money.
If Prime Minister Stephen Harper wants to really assert Canada’s presence on the world stage, he’ll have to pony up — not weasel out.
Original Article
Source: ipolitics.ca/
Author: Tasha Kheiriddin
No comments:
Post a Comment