Democracy Gone Astray

Democracy, being a human construct, needs to be thought of as directionality rather than an object. As such, to understand it requires not so much a description of existing structures and/or other related phenomena but a declaration of intentionality.
This blog aims at creating labeled lists of published infringements of such intentionality, of points in time where democracy strays from its intended directionality. In addition to outright infringements, this blog also collects important contemporary information and/or discussions that impact our socio-political landscape.

All the posts here were published in the electronic media – main-stream as well as fringe, and maintain links to the original texts.

[NOTE: Due to changes I haven't caught on time in the blogging software, all of the 'Original Article' links were nullified between September 11, 2012 and December 11, 2012. My apologies.]

Thursday, May 10, 2012

As U.S. cuts, Canada pressed to ramp up its defence spending

Canada is finding itself stuck between efforts to slash federal spending and fresh pressure from the United States to ramp up its defence budget and pick up the slack in the wake of deep cuts south of the border.

Prime Minister Stephen Harper will join other NATO leaders in Chicago later this month to discuss missile defence, Afghanistan - and the future of the military alliance itself.

The meeting comes as some members, notably the U.S. and the United Kingdom, are planning to scale back defence spending due to significant austerity measures in the aftermath of the economic recession.

Following a decade of war in Iraq and Afghanistan, the U.S. is looking to cut more than $50 billion from its defence budget next year and $600 billion over the next decade as the country tries to find $1.2 trillion in spending cuts.

U.S. Defense Secretary Leon Panetta and others have warned the measures will have dramatic effects on the country's military capabilities, and that the U.S. will no longer automatically lead the way on overseas missions or look out for its allies' security.

As a result, there have been mounting calls from the U.S. for other NATO members to step up their defence spending to ensure the alliance doesn't suffer.

Some have seen NATO's mission in Libya last year as a harbinger of the problems that could be on the horizon.

While declared a success by Canada and other nations, a confidential NATO assessment obtained by the New York Times found that the alliance had an extremely difficult time conducting the mission without U.S. support.

Canada's defence budget has grown from $15 billion in 2005 to $23 billion last year, but that number as a share of gross domestic product has never topped 1.3% - despite the fact NATO members have agreed to spend 2% of GDP on defence.

Last month's federal budget, meanwhile, forecast more than $1.1 billion in spending reductions by 2014-15. This is over and above the $1.1 billion the government already had planned to slash from the department's budget this fiscal year.

An official in Defence Minister Peter MacKay's office, Jay Paxton, rejected suggestions that the U.S. has broached the topic of Canada's military spending in private meetings.

"Canada spends the sixth most of all NATO allies on their defence and has done heavy lifting in Afghanistan, Libya and Haiti," Paxton added in an email. But in an online media conference held Tuesday in advance of the Chicago meeting, U.S. Ambassador to NATO Ivo Daalder noted that Canada is among the majority of alliance members that are placing an "unfair burden on those who spend the resources."

"Of the 28 (NATO members), only five countries spent 2% of GDP and Canada, unfortunately, is not one of those five," Daalder said.

"Our view, strongly believed in the United States, a country that after all spends 4% of GDP on defence, is that NATO members, when they haven't reached the 2% mark, should do what they can to try and reach that mark as soon as possible."

American complaints about Canadian defence spending reached a head during the last decade when then-U.S. ambassador Paul Cellucci raised the issue publicly in 2003. However, the rhetoric largely subsided as Canadian troops found themselves fighting in Kandahar.

University of Ottawa defence expert Philippe Lagasse said Kandahar bought Canada a reprieve, "but as these types of operations slow down, there is the possibility of that kind of rhetoric coming back."

We want to hear from you. Send comments on this story to letters@nanaimodailynews.com. Letters must include daytime phone number and hometown.

Original Article
Source: canada.com
Author: Lee Berthiaume

No comments:

Post a Comment