- Reaction score
Read this a week ago when it came out and wrote it off as nonsense. An poorly researched, superficial opinion piece with no persuasive facts.
This on the other hand is a good piece that looks at three fundamental trade-offs that lie at the behind all force structure considerations.
I tend to think that "reach" is not what we should be aiming for. Remember that the way Tusa defines it is as "Global reach is as it looks: it would be the ability to deploy and sustain forces near-indefinitely (almost) anywhere in the World."
I don't support the concept of Canada having "global reach".
I think that our reach should be much more limited. The concept, for example, of having a fly-over brigade in Latvia would be more in the nature of "scale" than "global reach". If that was in the nature of having a quick reaction brigade for deployment anywhere in the world then yes, it would be an element of "global reach". Similarly, a navy structured for Canada's coastal defence with a North Atlantic capability is not "global reach" but rather a limited reach more in the nature of scale.
From the above you can conclude that I'm a scale and capability type of guy.