Great Britain Offers to help Canada defend its Arctic (CBC)

Britain offers Canadian military help to defend the Arctic

Experts say that concerns about sovereignty have made Ottawa reluctant to let allies operate in the region

Murray Brewster - CBC News

Posted: September 24, 2021
Last Updated: 5 Hours Ago

Britain is signalling its interest in working with the Canadian military in the Arctic by offering to take part in cold-weather exercises and bring in some of its more advanced capabilities — such as nuclear-powered submarines — to help with surveillance and defence in the Far North.

In a recent exclusive interview with CBC News, the United Kingdom's top military commander said his country is "keen to co-operate" and learn more about how to survive and fight in a cold, remote setting.

Gen. Sir Nick Carter said Britain would also like to "cooperate in terms of helping Canada do what Canada needs to do as an Arctic country."

More at link:

https://www.cbc.ca/news/politics/britain-uk-canada-arctic-defence-submarines-russia-china-1.6187347

 

[Czech_pivo]

Harris is not highly regarded for policy competency. Nor, really, for political acumen. She didn't earn her current position; she was picked because of characteristics assigned at birth.

Did you just describe VPOTUS or our current PM because I swear to God that you were talking about our current PM.

 

[Brad Sallows]

Sure, but Harris isn't the deputy PM. I suppose the PM could emulate Biden and select one based on gender and skin colour.

 

[Brad Sallows]

our current PM

With 3 election victories, his political competency at least meets standard.

 

[Good2Golf]

With 3 election victories, his political competency at least meets standard.

…in a kind of scraping just as little plurality as the rules require, sure.

 

[Brad Sallows]

Yes, but the silence from the left on the small matter of the popular vote outcome of the past two elections is some consolation.

 

[CBH99]

Britain offers Canadian military help to defend the Arctic

Experts say that concerns about sovereignty have made Ottawa reluctant to let allies operate in the region

Murray Brewster - CBC News

Posted: September 24, 2021
Last Updated: 5 Hours Ago

Britain is signalling its interest in working with the Canadian military in the Arctic by offering to take part in cold-weather exercises and bring in some of its more advanced capabilities — such as nuclear-powered submarines — to help with surveillance and defence in the Far North.

In a recent exclusive interview with CBC News, the United Kingdom's top military commander said his country is "keen to co-operate" and learn more about how to survive and fight in a cold, remote setting.

Gen. Sir Nick Carter said Britain would also like to "cooperate in terms of helping Canada do what Canada needs to do as an Arctic country."

More at link:

https://www.cbc.ca/news/politics/britain-uk-canada-arctic-defence-submarines-russia-china-1.6187347

I suppose the universe does have a sense of humour in so many, yet subtle ways. Irony seems to be a favourite.

The UK decides to rid itself of any MPA capability - despite being an island nation, with Russian naval vessels transiting nearby on a regular basis.

So, other countries - including Canada - deploy MPA to fill the gap until the UK takes possession of it’s P8 fleet it quickly purchased once realizing their folly.



Canada, being an Arctic nation, hasn’t bothered to invest in capabilities that will make a truly meaningful contribution to Arctic security, minus the AOPs coming online. (Still waiting on commitment & timeline to replace or upgrade radar systems and underwater sensor networks, etc).

**Canada’s satellite network above the Arctic being the exception - and quite the useful tool.

So the UK offers to assist us, and Arctic nation, in an area where we shouldn’t need assistance, the same way we did for them being an island nation.



I suppose that’s why allies are important, in all seriousness.

 

[Kirkhill]

I think D&B pretty much had it with this link. Trump's offer to buy Greenland was laughed at. China's attempt to buy Greenland is taken seriously.

And trading Akvavit for Rye on Hans Island could turn into something entirely different if China actually becomes a circumpolar nation with more of the world's Rare Earths (and fresh water) in hand. And a very transactional view of Greenpeace and The Environment.

Defending Canadian Arctic Sovereignty

Meanwhile US Navy is really interested in European NATO's "high north" off Norway, not in North American Arctic: BTW the Vice Commander of US 2nd Fleet is an RCN Rear-Admiral: https://www.c2f.usff.navy.mil/Leadership/Article/1961644/rear-adm-steve-waddell/ Mark Ottawa Mainly because they...

www.army.ca

"Do you want a lawn mower? Or do you want AUKUS to cut your grass?"

I've made this link before:

DEW line - Autopact
North Warning Line - Free Trade

What is it going to cost to re-open the borders post-Covid? The Yanks seem to be in no hurry to normalize relations. Trudeau is.

 

[Kirkhill]

Somebody, I think it was Kissinger, once said something to the effect that the problem with the EU was that he didn't know who to call.

Perhaps we have the same problem with the US these days. I hear reference to POTUS and VPOTUS. Milley has been talking to the Chinese without reference to his bosses. Nancy Pelosi had just returned from a visit to Downing Street a couple of days before the AUKUS announcement.

Who is the ringmaster?

Same problem in Canada - Trudeau Minor, Butts, Telford? Or Freeland?

 

[daftandbarmy]

Britain offers Canadian military help to defend the Arctic

Experts say that concerns about sovereignty have made Ottawa reluctant to let allies operate in the region

Murray Brewster - CBC News

Posted: September 24, 2021
Last Updated: 5 Hours Ago

Britain is signalling its interest in working with the Canadian military in the Arctic by offering to take part in cold-weather exercises and bring in some of its more advanced capabilities — such as nuclear-powered submarines — to help with surveillance and defence in the Far North.

In a recent exclusive interview with CBC News, the United Kingdom's top military commander said his country is "keen to co-operate" and learn more about how to survive and fight in a cold, remote setting.

Gen. Sir Nick Carter said Britain would also like to "cooperate in terms of helping Canada do what Canada needs to do as an Arctic country."

More at link:

https://www.cbc.ca/news/politics/britain-uk-canada-arctic-defence-submarines-russia-china-1.6187347

Timeo Danaos et dona ferentes​

Beware of Greeks bearing gifts - Wikipedia

en.wikipedia.org

 

[FJAG]

Yes, but the silence from the left on the small matter of the popular vote outcome of the past two elections is some consolation.

I sometimes wonder about that. The most recent popular vote outcomes are:

CPC - 5,742,605
LPC - 5,556,491
NDP - 3,036,030
Bloc - 1,301,831
Green - 398,775
PPC - 844,122

Of those CPC and PPC form right of centre for - 6,586,727
while LPC and NDP and Green form left of centre - 8,991,296

The Bloc is unique in that it comes from both a PC and Liberal base, espouses mostly left of centre ideals but has a particular focus that makes it difficult to typify the membership. I've left it out of the equation.

In short the popular vote goes left of centre at 8,991,296 out of 15,578,023 or 57.72%

What government is formed in any given election is entirely dependent on the vote per riding split as between left leaning parties and the right leaning parties. The CPC forms governments primarily when it doesn't split the vote with another right leaning party at a time when the NDP pulls votes away from the LPC. This used to happen because there is a stratification as between the less left LPC and a more left NDP with a middle group that can be swung from a moderate left to a more extreme left depending on the circumstances.

In the past, before the 1980s, there was less of a stratification amongst the right leaning elements which were mostly fiscal conservatives. After that, however, social conservative issues rose to the surface that created a division between mostly fiscal conservatives and mostly social or populist conservatives which ended up in the Reform party and its permutations and uneasy assimilation into the CPC. The PPC seems to be drawing that populist conservatism to its banner with its share of the vote having risen since 2019 from 294,092 to 844,122, a significant increase of 550,030 which undoubtedly came from the CPC which dropped from 6,239,227 in 2019 to 5,730,515 a loss of 508,712.

I think that if anything can be drawn as a conclusion from this election it's that the CPC is in trouble. It's leader wants to map a direction towards the left and gather the central "fiscally concerned" vote which is staying with the LPC because it is "scared" of the CPC's social conservative elements. Meanwhile a large portion of the CPC wants a stronger social conservative voice and is pushing hard against O'Toole's agenda. Calls for a leadership review are already happening. This does not bode well for the party which may very well fragment with people escaping both to the left and the right.

The issue is that essentially, Canada is a mostly left leaning country with a very strong rural v urban divide. We're all in for a bumpy ride.

 

[dapaterson]

When the writ was dropped, the prognosis was dire for the CPC. O'Toole kept them from getting clobbered, kept things moving forward, and retained the party's position, while making some inroads into places without CPC representatives.

The greatest beneficiary from the CPC deposing O'Toole and going hard to the SoCon side... would be the LPC.

 

[SeaKingTacco]

I sometimes wonder about that. The most recent popular vote outcomes are:

CPC - 5,742,605
LPC - 5,556,491
NDP - 3,036,030
Bloc - 1,301,831
Green - 398,775
PPC - 844,122

Of those CPC and PPC form right of centre for - 6,586,727
while LPC and NDP and Green form left of centre - 8,991,296

The Bloc is unique in that it comes from both a PC and Liberal base, espouses mostly left of centre ideals but has a particular focus that makes it difficult to typify the membership. I've left it out of the equation.

In short the popular vote goes left of centre at 8,991,296 out of 15,578,023 or 57.72%

What government is formed in any given election is entirely dependent on the vote per riding split as between left leaning parties and the right leaning parties. The CPC forms governments primarily when it doesn't split the vote with another right leaning party at a time when the NDP pulls votes away from the LPC. This used to happen because there is a stratification as between the less left LPC and a more left NDP with a middle group that can be swung from a moderate left to a more extreme left depending on the circumstances.

In the past, before the 1980s, there was less of a stratification amongst the right leaning elements which were mostly fiscal conservatives. After that, however, social conservative issues rose to the surface that created a division between mostly fiscal conservatives and mostly social or populist conservatives which ended up in the Reform party and its permutations and uneasy assimilation into the CPC. The PPC seems to be drawing that populist conservatism to its banner with its share of the vote having risen since 2019 from 294,092 to 844,122, a significant increase of 550,030 which undoubtedly came from the CPC which dropped from 6,239,227 in 2019 to 5,730,515 a loss of 508,712.

I think that if anything can be drawn as a conclusion from this election it's that the CPC is in trouble. It's leader wants to map a direction towards the left and gather the central "fiscally concerned" vote which is staying with the LPC because it is "scared" of the CPC's social conservative elements. Meanwhile a large portion of the CPC wants a stronger social conservative voice and is pushing hard against O'Toole's agenda. Calls for a leadership review are already happening. This does not bode well for the party which may very well fragment with people escaping both to the left and the right.

The issue is that essentially, Canada is a mostly left leaning country with a very strong rural v urban divide. We're all in for a bumpy ride.

The Liberals are not, naturally, a left leaning party. Only since Trudeau the elder in 1968. And even in the 1990s under Chretien, there was nothing particularily “left“ about them.
The Liberals are about power. They will move in whatever direction on the political spectrum gets them the most votes. Well, seats.

 

[Kirkhill]

I sometimes wonder about that. The most recent popular vote outcomes are:

CPC - 5,742,605
LPC - 5,556,491
NDP - 3,036,030
Bloc - 1,301,831
Green - 398,775
PPC - 844,122

Of those CPC and PPC form right of centre for - 6,586,727
while LPC and NDP and Green form left of centre - 8,991,296

The Bloc is unique in that it comes from both a PC and Liberal base, espouses mostly left of centre ideals but has a particular focus that makes it difficult to typify the membership. I've left it out of the equation.

In short the popular vote goes left of centre at 8,991,296 out of 15,578,023 or 57.72%

What government is formed in any given election is entirely dependent on the vote per riding split as between left leaning parties and the right leaning parties. The CPC forms governments primarily when it doesn't split the vote with another right leaning party at a time when the NDP pulls votes away from the LPC. This used to happen because there is a stratification as between the less left LPC and a more left NDP with a middle group that can be swung from a moderate left to a more extreme left depending on the circumstances.

In the past, before the 1980s, there was less of a stratification amongst the right leaning elements which were mostly fiscal conservatives. After that, however, social conservative issues rose to the surface that created a division between mostly fiscal conservatives and mostly social or populist conservatives which ended up in the Reform party and its permutations and uneasy assimilation into the CPC. The PPC seems to be drawing that populist conservatism to its banner with its share of the vote having risen since 2019 from 294,092 to 844,122, a significant increase of 550,030 which undoubtedly came from the CPC which dropped from 6,239,227 in 2019 to 5,730,515 a loss of 508,712.

I think that if anything can be drawn as a conclusion from this election it's that the CPC is in trouble. It's leader wants to map a direction towards the left and gather the central "fiscally concerned" vote which is staying with the LPC because it is "scared" of the CPC's social conservative elements. Meanwhile a large portion of the CPC wants a stronger social conservative voice and is pushing hard against O'Toole's agenda. Calls for a leadership review are already happening. This does not bode well for the party which may very well fragment with people escaping both to the left and the right.

The issue is that essentially, Canada is a mostly left leaning country with a very strong rural v urban divide. We're all in for a bumpy ride.

The Bloc, doesn't that owe some of its genealogy to the SoCreds or Real Caouette? Which also, I believe, helps to explain the CPC success in Bernier's back yard around Quebec City and La Beauce. For some " Le ciel est bleu, l’enfer est rouge " Encore.

Le ciel est bleu, l’enfer est rouge

POINT DE VUE / Il en manquait peu pour que le premier ministre Legault prononce cette phrase que nos parents ont entendu des curés du haut de leur chaire le dimanche, en appui à l’Union nationale, le parti bleu de Maurice Duplessis.

www.lesoleil.com

What is defined as populist now used to be popular all the way from BC to Quebec.

 

[Oldgateboatdriver]

The Bloc has no ties whatsoever to the old Social Credit of Camille Sansom or Real Caouette.

It was born from the Quebec wing of the Progressive Conservative Party (and that wing was always on the more centrist/progressive side of the Party) after the rejection of the Meech Lake Accord by some English provinces. Bouchard slammed the door on Mulroney's cabinet and took a large portion of the Quebec PC caucus and even some LPC member from Quebec. At the next election, it basically garnered large number of votes and MP's as a result of Quebec looking at the election as a protest vote against all Federal parties. It's been going downhill since. and may have lost its appeal to Quebecers if it hadn't been for that stupid interviewer who was more interested in making herself look smart and politicians look stupid to inflate her own ego.

BTW, going back to the original theme of this thread, I don't believe that the British government's offer is disinterested. Gaining access to support facilities and intel in the Arctic is in their interest: Looking at the world from a globe instead of a map (one of my favourite perspective, which I try to get more people to use) you can see that should the PRC want to make trouble for the UK (something the UK expect, I assume, in view of it's current clear opposition to Beijing), the best way is to send some of the PLAN nuclear boats to the UK under the polar ice route.

P.S.: "L'enfer est rouge, le ciel est bleu" related to the Union Nationale party in Quebec, not the Social Credit. The Union Nationale was both conservative and nationalist, but not "separatist", and was basically the Quebec Conservative party while it existed.

 

[Kirkhill]

Thanks for the corrections OGBD - been a while since you stood me up.

I think I could phrase my point another way. Where did all those SoCred/Union Nationale voters go? In BC and Saskatchewan they turned into the Provincial Liberals. In Alberta they became the Provincial PCs and then the United Conservative Party. In Ontario they moved out of the GTA. Where did they end up in Quebec?

And I agree. The British government always considers its interests. Especially these days. They are looking to make the odd quid here and there.

 

[Oldgateboatdriver]

Social Credit has basically disappeared in Quebec. Its primary source of recruiting was the Franco ultra-orthodox wing of the Catholic Church (people who still think mass should be in latin in the pre-Vatican II format) and French Quebec has become the single most secular place in North America.

The Union Nationale crowd was first absorbed into the Party Quebecois as a result of the choice they had to make for the first referendum (under our Referendum Act, any issue put to a referendum has to be fought under two umbrella groups, basically the yes and the no sides, so political parties have to decide which side to take. Thus multiple parties can end up in one side and that creates pressure to renounce certain aspect of their platform. In our case, it led to the UN being absorbed in the PQ to become its right/centre wing balancing out the more left elements).

After the failure of the second referendum, the multiple internal pressures of the "umbrella" that was the PQ started to explode it. The more right wing elements became the Action Democratique du Quebec, a nationalist right wing party that renounced seeking independence, while the more left wing part became Quebec Solidaire, a socialist party that still embraces independence. This greatly weakened the PQ. Some time after, M. Legault decided that there was no future in seeking independence and that we just had to stop talking about another referendum. He split from the PQ and created the Coalition Avenir Quebec as an umbrella party willing to take any centrist willing to join a group that just wanted to govern, without reference to any "national question". It quickly absorbed the Action Democratique.

All this to say that the old Union Nationale - minus the cozy relationship with the Catholic church - can probably be found today in the CAQ of premier Legault.

 

[ballz]

I think that if anything can be drawn as a conclusion from this election it's that the CPC is in trouble. It's leader wants to map a direction towards the left and gather the central "fiscally concerned" vote which is staying with the LPC because it is "scared" of the CPC's social conservative elements. Meanwhile a large portion of the CPC wants a stronger social conservative voice and is pushing hard against O'Toole's agenda. Calls for a leadership review are already happening. This does not bode well for the party which may very well fragment with people escaping both to the left and the right.

I have a very different take on this and it's why I hope the CPC doesn't turf O'Toole.

People seem to be making hay about the fact that they lost some votes in Alberta... who cares? Michelle Rempell went from 70% to 50% and people are acting like this is a catastrophe... Sorry but 50% in our system is a walloping of your opponents.

Meanwhile, in Ontario, the Liberals in 2019 had a ~15% lead in popular vote over the CPC which as has been reduced to 5%.... for the last two years the Liberals have been handing out free money, hogging all the air time, O'Toole has had zero chance to actually become a known quantity, and managed to to reduce the Liberals lead in the popular vote in Ontario by 67%, and positioned them in many many ridings within a hair of the win, could easily translate into a big flip in the next election, in particular after a few more Trudeau et al scandals.... one of which, the Chinese scientists, is looming and the Liberals can't run from it this time.

The fact that he shifted the party to a national party, being considered by all Canadians and not just overwhelmingly supported by the West, is a huge step in the correct direction for a plurality next time around. Sure he didn't gain seats, but they were so far behind in most of the ridings they lost that gaining seats was a tall order. They're positioned to win a bunch more next time... when he's a more well-known quantity and more experienced (getting played by the gun control scare card is an inexcusable rookie error that I doubt he'll make again).

 

[Brad Sallows]

The BC "Social Credit" party had a short life as what it was originally intended to be. It very quickly became a merger of conservatives and liberals to oppose the CCF.

 

[The Bread Guy]

It wasn't. Somewhere on another thread I opined that the VP is the weakest part of the US system of government ...

Just ask Julia Louis-Dreyfus ...

 

[daftandbarmy]

The BC "Social Credit" party had a short life as what it was originally intended to be. It very quickly became a merger of conservatives and liberals to oppose the CCF.

The Socreds dominated BC politics for decades. Interestingly, mainly by winning the seats outside of Vancouver it seems. They collpased into obscurity after 1991.

The BC Liberals absorbed some of their people and alleginaces and, like their predeccesor, are most popular in BC's rural areas.

British Columbia Social Credit Party - Wikipedia

en.wikipedia.org