[A-List] Canada: In Service To Pentagon And NATO At Home And Abroad

[Tony B.]

http://groups.yahoo.com/group/stopnato/message/38745

Stop NATO
April 16, 2009

Canada: In Service To The Pentagon And NATO At Home And Abroad
Rick Rozoff

Canada is the only nation in the world whose mainland borders three of the 
world's five oceans: The Arctic, The Atlantic and the Pacific.

The United States only secured access to the Arctic Ocean with the 
acquisition of non-contiguous Alaska from Russia in 1867 and Russia can only 
access the Atlantic through the Barents and Norwegian Seas.

The three oceans in question are exactly those in and over which Russia has 
recently resumed strategic air patrols and naval and submarine deployments 
starting in late 2007 after a hiatus of almost twenty years.

Should East-West tensions parallel - or exceed - those of the Cold War era 
Canada will be on several frontlines and is now being actively prepared for 
just such an eventuality.

The campaign to employ Canada as a spearhead against Russia in the Arctic 
and generally in furtherance of NATO's plans for the Northwest Hemisphere 
will have little to do with the word that has become a shibboleth for 
Canadian Conservative Prime Minister Stephen Harper and his Liberal opposite 
numbers alike, sovereignty, and still less with defense.

Instead the nation's role, given its unique geographical location, will be 
as the West's advance guard in a geostrategic showdown in the northern 
latitudes.

Not that Canada's service to the United States and NATO collectively is 
limited to its own coasts and the oceans they abut.

Despite rhetoric to the contrary by two of the country's last three prime 
ministers, Liberal Jean Chretien and Tory Stephen Harper, aimed at domestic 
audiences and for votes in parliamentary elections, about the nation's 
supposed proud tradition of independence, if there has ever been a nation 
that never truly possessed a foreign policy of its own - particularly in 
respect to military conflicts - that country is Canada.

>From supplying its former colonial master Britain with a disproportionate 
amount of troops in both world wars to following the lead of Britain and the 
United States in wars from Korea in 1950 to Yugoslavia in 1999 to 
Afghanistan at present, Canada has rarely balked at demands for political 
acquiescence and military complicity from its Anglo-Saxon big brothers and 
the NATO alliance of which it is a founding member.

If in early 2003 Ottawa refused to supply troops for the invasion of Iraq it 
aided that effort in other ways beforehand, including supporting NATO's 
deployment of Patriot missiles to Turkey on the eve of the war, and 
afterward by assigning personnel to the NATO Training Mission - Iraq.

Many suspect that then prime minister Jean Chretien's government avoided 
potential fallout on the home front by reaching a quid pro quo with 
Washington whereby Canada would avoid the Iraqi quagmire by stepping into 
the Afghan crevice. It took over the International Security Assistance Force 
(which had been officially turned over to NATO) mission in the capital of 
Kabul in 2003 and two years later deployed over 2,000 troops to the southern 
province of Kandahar, Afghanistan's main battlefield from that time onward. 
The initial 1,950 troops Canada assigned to ISAF was the largest single 
contingent at the time.

Canada signed both a Faustian pact and a fool's bargain. Most all 
non-American troops have been pulled out of Iraq or will be soon, with the 
majority of the contributing nations focused on increasing deployments to 
Afghanistan for an expanding South Asian war, while Canadian forces have 
been bogged down in Afghanistan for almost seven and a half years and 
notwithstanding claims by Ottawa officials to have them withdrawn by 2011 
may well be there indefinitely.

117 Canadian soldiers have been killed in the Afghan war, about 10 per cent 
of total Western military deaths, the number and ratio out of proportion to 
Canada's population of a little over 33 million.

The death toll is the highest the country has experienced since the Korean 
War (when 516 soldiers were killed) and the first combat fatalities in over 
half a century. The Korean War was the prototype for almost sixty years of 
US and NATO military campaigns fought far from North America and Europe by 
self-defined coalitions of the willing. Direct Western military involvement 
began in July of 1950, fifteen months after the formation of NATO, and Korea 
was the testing ground for the new alliance with, in addition to US forces, 
troops from NATO allies Canada, Belgium, Britain, France, Luxembourg and the 
Netherlands participating. All seven nations lost troops, as did Greece and 
Turkey, themselves having just been first subjected to the sanguinary 
effects of the Truman Doctrine and for whom participation in the Korean War 
was the precondition for their induction into NATO in 1952.

The model was replicated in the post-Cold War period with the two wars 
against Iraq in 1991 and 2003, the 78-day air war against Yugoslavia in 1999 
and the endless war in Afghanistan that commenced in October of 2001.

Canada contributed 4,500 troops to the first Persian Gulf War, including 
2,700 stationed in the area, and ran its own national complement to the 
US-led Operation Desert Storm, Operation Friction.

In 1999 Ottawa, without a parliamentary resolution or declaration of war, 
provided eighteen warplanes for the merciless terror bombing of Yugoslavia 
and stationed 800 troops in neighboring Macedonia for a possible land 
invasion.

(It joined most of its NATO allies in recognizing Kosovo's secession from 
Serbia in February of last year, a detestable act of duplicity given the 
Canadian federal government's ruthless use of all means fair and foul to 
stifle the independence drive in its province of Quebec.)

With the expanding war in Afghanistan, though, Canada has returned to combat 
in Asia, ground operations and casualties for the first time since Korea.

Late last year it deployed six Mi-8 helicopter gunships, its first combat 
wing deployment, the significance of which was described by Brig.-Gen. Denis 
Thompson, commander of Task Force Kandahar: "Now we're not talking about an 
individual unit which would be the army equivalent of a battalion. This is 
the equivalent of committing a brigade to overseas operations. I don't think 
this has occurred since the Korean time (war)." (1)

At the beginning of this year with the addition of "six Chinooks, newly 
retrofitted with heavy machine guns...eight hefty, even more heavily-armed, 
Griffons to act as backup" the escalation was "Canada's biggest air force 
presence in a combat zone since the end of the Second World War." (2)

Attack helicopters weren't the only addition to the deadly arsenal. In the 
summer of 2007 Canada leased 20 Leopard tanks from Germany for the erstwhile 
ISAF "peacekeeping mission" in Afghanistan and signed a deal with the 
Netherlands to purchase 100 more.

In March of this year Canada started flying Israeli-made Heron drones 
capable of carrying weapons, bombs and guided missiles. The head of the 
Canadian Air Force, Lt.-Gen. Angus Watt, said on the occasion: "Armed UAVs 
[Unmanned Aerial Vehicles] with air to ground weapons are a valuable 
capability and it's a good option to have." (3)

Drones have been used expensively by the United States over the past year 
not only in Afghanistan but in Northwest Pakistan, resulting in the deaths 
of over 500 suspected militants and Pakistani civilians. The estimated 2,800 
Canadian troops in Afghanistan are stationed in Kandahar Province which 
borders Pakistan's Baluchistan Province. Threats of US missile attacks in 
Baluchistan have been sounded over the past several weeks and the prospect 
of Canada following up on them is more likely than not.

Military hubris has its limits: Pakistan has a population more than five 
times that of Canada and nuclear weapons into the bargain.

Not that dangers of that magnitude are likely to deter a government whose 
recently retired but then just appointed Chief of the Defence Staff General 
Rick Hillier, who a year earlier was in command of NATO's ISAF, referred to 
his intended targets in Afghanistan as “detestable murderers and scumbags” 
and who said of the Canadian armed forces he was in charge of: “We’re not 
the public service of Canada. We’re not just another department. We are the 
Canadian Forces, and our job is to be able to kill people.”

Afghanistan - South and Central Asia in general - is Canada's largest 
current military operation but hardly its only one. In fact it has forces 
deployed throughout what Western government officials and their policy think 
tanks for years have dubbed the Broader Middle East and the arc of 
instability - from Mauritania on the Atlantic Ocean to Kazakhstan on 
Russia's and China's borders - and beyond. Far beyond.

Canadian military forces are among those scheduled to be evicted from the 
Manas Air Base in Kyrgyzstan shortly along with armed forces from the United 
States, the Netherlands, New Zealand, Denmark, Spain, France, Australia, 
South Korea, Italy, Turkey and Norway.

Last autumn Minister of National Defence Peter MacKay, in a news dispatch 
with a title containing an optimistic preposition, "After Afghanistan, 
Canada will still have military obligations: MacKay," was quoted as follows:

"I hope that we have elevated in the hearts and minds of people in our own 
country just how important having a robust military is. That includes 
peacekeeping but it also includes to do the business when called upon,
whether it's been in Afghanistan, or as it has been in past conflicts in 
Korea or Yugoslavia or in places around the world like Haiti." (4)

As with its American mentor, for the Canadian political establishment one 
war is never enough.

This February the Canadian frigate HMCS Winnipeg the joined the Standing 
NATO Maritime Group 1 (SNMG1) in the Alliance's first penetration of 
Southeast Asia "through areas such as the Strait of Malacca, Java and the 
South China sea, an area of the world that is not frequented by NATO 
fleets." (5)

"[T]he SNMG1, a squadron primarily of destroyers and frigates from Alliance 
nations, [will enter] the Indian Ocean.

"The warships provide rapid intervention capability for a broad spectrum of 
NATO operations. However, on this mission they’ll operate outside their 
usual theatre of operation, which is the Mediterranean Sea and east Atlantic 
Ocean.

The flotilla included destroyers and frigates from Canada, Portugal, 
Germany, the United States, Spain and the Netherlands and its commander, 
Portuguese Rear Admiral Jose Domingos Pereira da Cunha, said of the mission 
that “We will be operating from the Red Sea to the coast of Australia.” (6)

In addition to NATO's maiden voyage through the strategic Strait of Malacca, 
the HMCS Winnipeg's itinerary includes a "six-month deployment to the 
Arabian Sea, Indian Ocean and Pacific Ocean." (7)

NATO spokesman James Appathurai announced in March that "NATO governments - 
ambassadors - have approved the operational plan for the deployment of the 
Standing NATO Maritime Group 1 (SNMG1) to conduct counter-piracy operations 
off the coast of Somalia." (8)

In early April the HMCS Winnipeg had wended its way to the Somali coast with 
the Standing NATO Maritime Group 1 where it "ward[ed] off suspected pirates" 
and "dispatched its Sea King helicopter to check out several skiffs."

"Being able to perform a variety of functions for NATO in the Gulf [of Aden] 
is satisfying," Commander Craig Baines summarized. (9)

The Canadian military action prefigured and preceded by three days the 
American commando attack on a vessel off the Somali coast which resulted in 
the deaths of three men holding an American hostage.

Last year the HMCS Ville de Quebec deployed on Operation SEXTANT, Canada's 
maritime contribution to the Standing NATO Maritime Group 1, "to participate 
with the NATO fleet in a series of naval exercises to maintain a high degree 
of readiness capability should SNMG1 be tasked to engage in directed 
operations" and completed "a very successful mission in the Mediterranean 
Sea with Standing NATO Maritime Group 1 (SNMG1) and an anti-piracy escort 
mission in the Indian Ocean...." (10)

A year before that the Canadian HMCS Toronto joined the Standing NATO 
Maritime Group 1 - "an integral part of the NATO Response Force (NRF), a 
highly ready and technologically advanced force made up of land, air, sea 
and Special Forces components that can be deployed quickly" - in a 
five-month deployment to "conduct operations in the Mediterranean and 
conduct an historic 12,500 nautical mile circumnavigation of Africa."

"It is historic in the sense that it’s the first time the task group is 
going to circumnavigate Africa," said Cmdr. Stephen Virgin, Toronto’s 
captain. (11)

When the HMCS Toronto reached Africa's southern tip it and its fellow NATO 
warships engaged in exercises with the South African navy. "I don’t think it’s 
been done before, certainly not a combined NATO-South African exercise," 
Cmdr. Virgin said.

At the same time then Defence Minister Gordon O'Connor announced that the
Canadian frigate HMCS Toronto and six CF-18 aircraft would be made available 
to the NATO Response Force until January of 2008.

Earlier in the year Canadian Commodore Denis Rouleau, prefacing his comments 
with "I speak as a NATO officer," stated, "Canada is at the top of the heap 
when it comes to contributions to this NATO [maritime] force." (12)

Alleged defense of Canadian sovereignty over the past two years, then, has 
included dispatching warships to the Mediterranean Sea with NATO's six and a 
half year long Operation Active Endeavor interdiction efforts, and on other 
NATO missions to the Indian Ocean, the South China Sea, the Arabian Sea, the 
Horn of Africa, the Gulf of Aden, the Red Sea and the Suez Canal, the Strait 
of Malacca, the Indonesia archipelago, the coast of Australia and along the 
entire perimeter of Africa.

Patrolling the world's seas and oceans, and note that none of the 
deployments listed above were in the Western Hemisphere, with military 
vessels provided with artillery and combat helicopters for live engagements 
in pursuit of commercial and geopolitical objectives is the furthest thing 
in the world from protecting one's borders and sovereign rights.

Policies and terminology, rationales and contrived crises can be adopted, 
adjusted and applied as required by imperial powers bent on intruding 
themselves into and gaining domination over vast tracts of the world. 
Canada's integral involvement in naval operations in several seas and all 
five oceans may be attributed to the supposed exigency of the day, but it is 
a practice going back centuries and has little to do with whatever officials 
in Washington, Ottawa and Brussels proclaim it to be.

The US rescue operation in the Gulf of Aden this last Sunday, where Navy 
snipers killed three abductors of the captain of an American-Danish 
commercial vessel, is being celebrated in the American press and that of the 
West in general as a purgative, expiatory and redemptive milestone in 
undoing the blight of a US military helicopter shot down in the capital of 
Somalia sixteen years ago and a demonstration of American resolve - even the 
first blood rite of the new administration (though Pakistan was the location 
of its initial bloodletting in a zone outside of those charted by its 
predecessor) - is nothing unprecedented.

"There is but one language which can be held to these people, and this is 
terror."

The above is not a threat by al-Qaeda or any other targeted group. It was 
issued by American General William Eaton in 1799 in reference to the 
so-called Barbary pirates of North Africa, described in a US journal four 
years ago as "arguably the first international terrorists the United States 
ever faced." (13)

In 1785, only nine years after the founding of the American republic, an 
American commercial vessel was seized in the Mediterranean Sea by what 
Washington labeled as pirates, in the words of the same source cited above, 
"initiating events that would lead to America's first war on terrorism -the 
Tripolitan War of 1801."

The same General Eaton quoted above, at the time US consul in Tripoli, 
recruited an armed mercenary force of "several hundred Arabs, 24 Greeks, 8 
U.S. marines, and a former Army officer (who led the campaign). The force 
crossed 600 miles of desert to the 'shores of Tripoli,' as recited in the 
Marine Corps hymn, and captured Derna, Tripoli's second-largest city." (14)

If the above sounds eerily similar to current demands by US elected 
officials to expand anti-piracy operations in the Horn of Africa and the 
Gulf of Aden into amphibious and helicopter assaults on the Somalia 
mainland, it should. The model is the same.

There is nothing new in warships from North America conducting operations in 
off the coast of northeast Africa or in the Mediterranean. What is novel is 
their current scope. On October 4, 2001 NATO for the only time in its sixty 
year history activated its Article 5 mutual military assistance provision 
and one of eight measures implemented - support for the invasion and 
occupation of Afghanistan being another - was the establishment of Operation 
Active Endeavor, a comprehensive naval surveillance and interdiction program 
continuing to this day and one that will never end until NATO itself does.

The bloc's warships police the entire sea and control access to and from the 
Mediterranean at all its main choke points: The Strait of Gibraltar, the 
Suez Canal and the Dardanelles Strait leading into the Atlantic Ocean, the 
Red Sea and the Sea of Marmara and the Black Sea, respectively.

NATO ships have monitored over 100,000 ships and boarded over a hundred. As 
part of Operation Active Endeavor and related operations Canadian and US 
military vessels are active in the Mediterranean.

In February of this year Canada participated in NATO's two week Noble Manta 
'09 exercise in the Ionian Sea, the purpose of which was to "demonstrate 
NATO's determination to maintain proficiency and improve interoperability in 
coordinated anti-submarine, anti-surface and coastal surveillance operations 
using a multinational force of ships, submarines and aircraft. The exercise 
also provided operational training in potential NATO Response Force (NRF) 
tasks/roles and missions, exercising the procedures for possible NRF 
operations...." (15)

Canada also contributes to the United Nations Interim Force in Lebanon 
(UNIFIL) operation, which after Israel's sustained military assault on 
Lebanon in the summer of 2006 was expanded to include increased NATO states 
infantry, armor and naval deployments to secure the country's border with 
Israel for the protection of the latter, patrol the border with Syria and 
enforce a select naval blockade of the nation's Mediterranean coast.

A Canadian was among four soldiers killed by an Israeli air strike on a UN 
observation post in July of 2006.

The US has provided over $400 million in military aid in the interim and 
Canada, Britain, Germany and Belgium are also instrumental in rebuilding the 
Lebanese armed forces as a Western proxy institution in the nation and the 
region.

The European Maritime Force (EUROMARFOR) that effects the blockade of 
Lebanon's coast has approached more than 22,000 ships and referred 240 to 
Lebanese authorities.

In February of this year the Danish foreign ministry announced that a 
two-day meeting had been held with representatives from the US, Canada, 
Britain, Germany, France, Spain, Italy, the Netherlands and Norway "on how 
to prevent arms smuggling to Gaza." (16)

In March a British diplomat stated that nine NATO members, "The United 
States, Canada and seven European states" had agreed in a London meeting "to 
stop alleged weapons smuggling to the Gaza Strip by campaigns of information 
sharing, diplomatic pressure and interception at sea." (17)

That is, a replication of the naval blockade of Lebanon is being planned for 
the Gaza Strip's Mediterranean coastline, one which may be presented as a 
European initiative but, as noted above, as it will include Canadian and US 
participation will be a NATO operation in all but name.

In the middle of Israel's 22-day onslaught against Gaza early this January 
new Canadian Liberal Party leader and prospective future prime minister 
Michael Ignatieff, a "humanitarian bomber" when it came to the Balkans, 
stated: "Canada has to support the right of a democratic country to defend 
itself."

Canadian warships have also participated in US-led patrols of the Persian 
Gulf near Iranian waterways. The frigate HMCS Charlottetown last year 
deployed with a 50-ship USS Harry Truman aircraft carrier strike group for a 
seven month Gulf deployment.

In addition, in March it was announced that "The Canadian navy is deploying 
three war ships to the Persian Gulf, one of the largest single naval 
contributions to the war against terrorism since the attacks of Sept. 11, 
2001."

The three warships - the HMCS Calgary, HMCS Protecteur and HMCS Iroquois - 
met up with counterparts from US, Britain, France, Germany, Pakistan and the 
Netherlands in Task Force 150, To "run missions in the Arabian Sea, the Red 
Sea and the Indian Ocean. The Canadians plan to take a Sea King helicopter 
detachment with them." (18)

Days after Georgia launched an armed assault against South Ossetia last 
August 7-8, triggering a five-day war with Russia, former New Democrat and 
current Liberal Party Foreign Affairs critic Bob Rae urged the Conservative 
minority government of Stephen Harper to open a Canadian embassy in Georgia 
for the first time, stating:

“Russia's invasion of Georgia clearly demonstrates the strategic importance 
of the region. We need to make it clear, both to the countries of the region 
and to Russia, that we take their sovereignty and independence seriously, 
and that we deeply support their quest for international respect.” (19)

The very next day the Russian General Staff revealed that a Canadian warship 
was entering the Black Sea (with US and Polish ships) for a two-week NATO 
deployment, as act Russia viewed as a dangerous provocation as it has 
deployed its own warships off the Black Sea coast of Abkhazia, north of 
Georgia.

Prime Minister Harper, whose government had pushed Georgia's and Ukraine's 
full NATO membership at the Alliance's summit in Romania earlier in the 
year, was in accordance with Rae:

"I think if we had taken a stronger position on the membership of (Georgia 
and the Ukraine), we would not have had the Russian aggression. I think that 
showing weakness or hesitation encourages this type of behaviour on the part 
of Russia." (20)

Slightly afterward Foreign Affairs Minister David Emerson said "the 
government views the recent actions of Russia in Georgia and in the Far 
North 'with great concern,' and this is helping drive the Conservatives' 
Arctic strategy." (21)

In October of last year Canadian military personnel participated in the 
annual NATO Cooperative Longbow/Lancer-2008 South Caucasus exercises, held 
in Armenia in 2008.

The yearly exercises aim at building up NATO presence in the Caucasus and 
integrating the militaries of former Warsaw Pact, Soviet and Yugoslav 
nations as well as Persian Gulf state and Gulf Cooperation Council/Istanbul 
Cooperation Initiative member the United Arab Emirates. In addition to 
Canada, nations involved were the US, Hungary, Lithuania, Poland, Greece, 
Macedonia, the Czech Republic, Austria, Albania, the United Arab Emirates, 
Switzerland, Moldova, Ukraine, Kazakhstan and Bosnia.

On May 6 of this year the Cooperative Longbow 09/Cooperative Lancer 09 
exercises will be held in Georgia, will again include Canadian forces and 
will last for almost four weeks. Today the Russian foreign minister and 
other officials condemned the exercises as a provocation and urged they be 
cancelled.

In a press report of early October of last year titled "NATO chief seeks 
defence plan for allies near Russia," NATO Supreme Allied Commander US 
General John Craddock, speaking after what was characterized as "Russia's 
invasion of Georgia," affirmed "The foundation of the NATO alliance is a 
collective defence promise known as Article 5, stating an attack on one is 
an attack on all. The Article 5 discussion is very much front and centre." 
In the same report it was noted that "U.S. Defence Secretary Robert Gates, 
with Canada and Britain, will try this week in Budapest to mediate among 
European allies while supporting defence planning that reaffirms the Article 
5 pledge." (22)

Article 5 is not only a mutual defense but a potential war clause.

In November the Canadian military attache to Georgia, Colonel S. R. 
Lescoutre, "visited the Ministry of Defence and the Joint Staff of
Georgia" and "expressed the readiness of the Canadian side for further close 
collaboration in providing military training for Georgian military
servicemen." (23)

Employing the Caucasus conflict of late last summer as pretext, the Pentagon 
and NATO brandished its Article 5 - a dangerous remnant of the Cold War's 
prospect of armed conflict in and the possible nuclear destruction of 
Europe - to accelerate already existing plans in the Northwest Hemisphere.

Following up on last September's 2008 Northern Viking NATO exercise in 
Iceland staged to "reinforce the resolve of the U.S. and its NATO partners 
in assisting in the defense of Iceland" (24) - although Iceland is 
geographically isolated in the North Atlantic and not threatened by any 
nation - with US, Canadian, Danish and Norwegian air and naval forces, it 
was announced this February that "NATO members Denmark, Spain and the US 
will be deploying fighter planes to Iceland. Germany and the US have 
confirmed that they will deploy aircraft in 2010. Other countries that have 
shown an interest in taking part in air patrols include Canada, Italy and 
Poland." (25)

During the January 23, 2006 Canadian federal elections since Conservative 
Party leader and new Prime Minister Stephen Harper made repeated demagogic 
vows to defend Canada's Arctic claims and in particular to maintain 
exclusive control of the Northwest Passage which connects the Atlantic and 
Pacific Oceans through the Canadian Arctic region.

The unavoidable implication - on the surface - is that Harper was pledging 
to prevent the transformation of the Northwest Passage into a recognized 
international territory, the US position. As the American ambassador to 
Canada in 2006, David Wilkins, stated, "the U.S. position has not changed 
and the passage is international territory as far as the Bush administration 
is concerned." (26)

The image that Harper was projecting - or rather the pose he was adopting - 
was, much like Jean Chretien in 2003, demonstrating that he was no neutered 
foreign policy poodle like Britain's Tony Blair but a virile husky able to 
pull its own weight and mark its territory. In fact he was already planning 
to prove himself a docile lapdog loyal unto death to his masters: The United 
Kingdom residually, the United States primarily and NATO for a sixth decade.

The above-quoted statement by the US ambassador, reflective as it was of the 
greatest threat to Canadian territorial claims and integrity since the 
pre-independence invasion of its land by the US in 1812, didn't appear to 
have fazed Harper overly much.

Harper's wasn't, and isn't, concerned about Canada's territorial claims; 
he's been enlisted to challenge Russia's.

He didn't waste any time in fulfilling his true pledge, the expansion of 
Canada's military into its northern frontier and into contested waters.

In his second year in office Harper "announced plans to build a new army 
training centre in the Far North at Resolute Bay and to outfit a deep-water 
port for both military and civilian use at the northern tip of Baffin 
Island.

His trip to the Arctic earlier this month was accompanied by the biggest 
military exercise in the region in years, with 600 soldiers, sailors and air 
crew participating.” (27)

By this time anyone who had gained the impression that Harper's jingoistic 
fulminations were in any manner directed at his neighbor to the south should 
have been disabused of that illusion.

The Financial Times reported that "a past land dispute over 12,000 sq km of 
seabed elsewhere in the Beaufort Sea is being put aside in the name of 
defending against Russia’s Arctic claims, which clash with those of the US, 
Canada, Denmark and Norway.” (28)

Shortly after the Caucasus war had ended, while a Canadian warship was only 
miles away from Abkhazia's and Russia's Black Sea borders, Ottawa conducted 
a week-long military "sovereignty exercise" in the Arctic, a full spectrum 
affair including "In addition to the army, navy and air force, several 
federal agencies and departments are participating, including the Coast 
Guard, RCMP, CSIS, Canada Border Services Agency, Transport Canada and 
Health Canada.

"Military officials say this year's exercise involves the most number of 
departments and agencies ever."

Invoking recent events in Georgia - half the world away - Defence Minister 
Peter MacKay "made it clear that asserting Canada's Arctic sovereignty, and 
sending a message to circumpolar neighbours such as Russia, is also a key 
objective of the exercise."

Harper a week before "accused Russia of reverting to a 'Soviet-era 
mentality'...." (29)

Later the same month, August of last year, both Harper and MacKay visited 
the Northwest Territories to inspect "four CF18 Canadian military jets sent 
to Inuvik in response to what officials said was an unidentified aircraft 
that had neared Canadian air space." (30)

Two weeks later defense chief MacKay outdid himself with swagger and 
braggadocio in stating, "When we see a Russian Bear [Tupolev Tu-95] 
approaching Canadian air space, we meet them with an F-18." (31)

The F-18 is an American multirole fighter jet.

He would never dared to issue such a blunt statement unless, to employ the 
street vernacular (or underworld argot) appropriate to the circumstances, he 
could count upon a bully with enough muscle to back him up.

In a further indication of who Canada was not "defending its sovereignty" 
against, days after MacKay's comment his ministry launched "Operation NANOOK 
2008, a sovereignty operation in Canada's eastern Arctic. Not only that, but 
Harper also voiced support for plans to build a military port and a military 
base beyond the Polar Circle."

The same reports adds, "The United States has joined the race, too, teaming 
up with Canada to map the unexplored Arctic sea floor." (32)

Never relenting, on September 19 Stephen Harper is paraphrased in a news 
report with the title "Canada boosts frontier troops as Russia eyes Arctic" 
as saying "Canada is stepping up its military alertness along its northern 
frontier in response to Russia's 'testing' of its boundaries and recent 
Arctic grab."

Harper in his own words:

"We are concerned about not just Russia's claims through the international 
process, but Russia's testing of Canadian airspace and other 
indications...(of) some desire to work outside of the international 
framework. That is obviously why we are taking a range of measures, 
including military measures, to strengthen our sovereignty in the North." 
(33)

In a December story with the headline "Tory bid to bolster Arctic presence 
must get 'back on track': MacKay," Canada's Minister of National Defence 
"singled out possible naval encroachments from Russia and China, saying, 'We 
have to be diligent.'" (34)

On January 12, 2009 the outgoing Bush White House issued National Security 
Presidential Directive 66, the first section of which reads:

"The United States has broad and fundamental national security interests in 
the Arctic region and is prepared to operate either independently or in 
conjunction with other states to safeguard these interests. These interests 
include such matters as missile defense and early warning; deployment of sea 
and air systems for strategic sealift, strategic deterrence, maritime 
presence, and maritime security operations; and ensuring freedom of 
navigation and overflight."

The fifth point is just as stark and unequivocal:

"Freedom of the seas is a top national priority. The Northwest Passage is a 
strait used for international navigation, and the Northern Sea Route 
includes straits used for international navigation; the regime of transit 
passage applies to passage through those straits. Preserving the rights and 
duties relating to navigation and overflight in the Arctic region supports 
our ability to exercise these rights throughout the world, including through 
strategic straits."

Ottawa was, predictably enough, mum.

On January 28-29 NATO held a euphemistically named Seminar on Security 
Prospects in the High North in the capital of Iceland, attended by "the 
Secretary General of NATO, its two top military commanders and the Chairman 
of the Military Committee 'as well as many other decision-makers and experts 
from Allied countries.'" (35)

NATO chief Jaap de Hoop Scheffer's address included the reminder that "At 
our Summit in Bucharest last year, we agreed a number of guiding principles 
for NATO’s role in energy security....NATO provides a forum where four of 
the Arctic coastal states can inform, discuss, and share, any concerns that 
they may have. And this leads me directly onto the next issue, which is 
military activity in the region.

“Clearly, the High North is a region that is of strategic interest to the 
Alliance." (36)

The four states Scheffer alluded to are Canada, the United States, Denmark 
and Norway, frequently described at being in competition regarding Arctic 
claims but all subsumed under the NATO banner.

The four countries are partners in any number of projects from the NATO 
global SeaSparrow naval missile system to the war in Afghanistan.

The four also share air surveillance and defense facilities in the North 
Atlantic, Denmark through its Greenland island possession, and Norway is 
already tied into the US European missile shield project and according to 
Air Force Gen. Victor Renuart Jr., head of both the North American Aerospace 
Defense Command and the U.S. Northern Command "We are in discussions with 
the MDA [Missile Defense Agency] on alternatives if the discussions in 
Europe do not continue,” and the FTG-05 - Ground-based Midcourse [Missile] 
Defense-05 - "involve[s] both operational commands, Norad and NorthCom, and 
'operationally sound execution,'" he added. (37)

NORTHCOM is the United States Northern Command and NORAD is the North 
American Aerospace Defense Command, run jointly by the US and Canada since 
1958.

This march, months after Washington proclaimed its right to use the Arctic 
region for missile defense and strategic sea and air systems and after NATO 
rallied its members in pursuit of strategic military objectives there, 
Russia announced plans to prepare a military force by 2020 to defend its 
Arctic claims.

The turn for saber rattling passed from Canadian Defense Affairs Minister 
MacKay to Foreign Affairs Minister Lawrence Cannon, who said "Let's be 
perfectly clear here: Canada will not be bullied.” (38)

To quote the Canadian military at some length on this April's Operation 
Nunalivut 2009, the first of three "sovereignty operations" scheduled in the 
Arctic this year:

"'In keeping with the Canada First Defence Strategy, we are placing greater 
emphasis on our northern operations, including in the High Arctic. This 
operation underscores the value of the Canadian Rangers, our eyes and ears 
in the North, which at the direction of the Government are growing to 5,000 
in strength.'

"In addition to air and ground patrols, this operation calls on a range of
supporting military capabilities-communications, intelligence, mapping, and 
satellite imaging.

"[T]his year's operation will involve an exchange visit with the Commander 
of Greenland Command, Danish Rear-Admiral Henrik Kudsk, to discuss military 
collaboration in the North.

"The North represents 40 per cent of Canada's land mass and is Canada 
Command's single biggest region," said Vice-Admiral Dean McFadden, Commander 
of Canada Command.

"'This operation is a golden opportunity to expand our capabilities to 
operate in Canada's Arctic,' said Brigadier-General David Millar, the 
Commander of Joint Task Force North." (39)

As Operation Nunalivut 2009 was underway, US Secretary of State Hillary 
Clinton hosted a joint Arctic-Antarctic summit in Washington while Canadian 
Foreign Affairs Minister Cannon was also in Washington "giving a speech 
about Canada's Arctic strategy amid rising tensions with Russia over its 
northern military ambitions.

"A Canadian research aircraft is expected to fly over 90 North this month as 
part of a joint Canada-Denmark mission to strengthen the countries' claims 
over the potentially oil-rich Lomonosov Ridge." (40)

The Lomonosov Ridge is named after the 18th century Russian scientist 
Mikhail Lomonosov, which should provide some indication even to US and 
Canadian government officials as to who first charted and claimed it.

A few days ago Canadian Colonel Greg MacCallum, commander of 37 Brigade 
Group, in claiming that "should an incident occur in the Arctic...soldiers 
would be available to respond," was quoted as saying:

"Over the course of the next five years, this capability is going to build 
right across the country....You do that, at least in part, by being able to 
project military forces into that region to show a presence and to show a 
capability and intent to exercise ownership of it.

"[W]ith Afghanistan deployments and the Arctic announcement, reservists are 
being given chances to apply their talents....'That gives the local unit 
that extra exciting reason to exist. Basically, before you were at the base 
training for a war in northwest Europe and kind of going through the 
motions. But this is something useful, something you can reach out and 
grasp.'" (41)

A sentiment echoed by Canada's opposition party: "Liberals meeting in 
Vancouver this month will debate a tough Arctic policy that calls on the 
government to 'actively and aggressively' enforce Canada's sovereignty in 
the North, including expanding its military role." (42)
....
In the months before the US-led invasion of Iraq in March of 2003 the cruder 
type of American war hawk and chauvinist reviled and condemned Canada for 
its perceived lack of loyalty.

These critics were rank ingrates. The US - and NATO - have never had more 
blindly, stubbornly obedient allies than Canada's ruling and governing 
elites.

(1) Canadian Press, December 7, 2008
(2) Canadian Television, January 10, 2009
(3) Canwest News Service, March 5, 2009
(4) Canwest News Service, November 23, 2008
(5) Victoria News, January 30, 2009
(6) Victoria Lookout, February 2, 2009
(7) Victoria News, January 30, 2009
(8) Xinhua News Agency, March 11, 2009
(9) Canadian Press, April 6, 2009
(10) NATO International, December 12, 2008
(11) Chronicle Herald, July 21, 2007
(12) The Chronicle Herald, January 27, 2007
(13) Military Review, November-December, 2005
(14) Ibid
(15) United States European Command, March 2, 2009
(16) Deutsche Presse-Agentur, February 5, 2009
(17) Ma'an News Agency (Palestine), Agencies, March 14, 2009
(18) Canwest News Service, March 1, 2008
(19) Liberal, August 18, 2008
(20) Chronicle Herald, September 22, 2008
(21) Canadian Television, August 24, 2008
(22) Reuters, October 6, 2008
(23) Georgia Ministry of Defence, November 3, 2008
(24) United States Air Forces in Europe, September 4, 2008
(25) EUobserver, February 9, 2009
(26) Canadian Press, November 1, 2006
(27) Canadian Press, August 19, 2007
(28) Financial Times, August 18, 2008
(29) Canwest News Service, August 19, 2008
(30) Reuters, August 28, 2008
(31) Canwest News Service, September 12, 2008
(32) RosBusinessConsulting, September 18, 2008
(33) Agence France-Presse, September 19, 2008
(34) Canwest News Service, December 15, 2008
(35) NATO International, January 29, 2009
(36) Ibid
(37) Aviation Week, December 17, 2008
(38) Globe and Mail, March 27, 2009
(39) Department of National Defence, Canada Command, April 2, 2009
(40) Canwest News Service, April 5, 2009
(41) Daily Gleaner, April 11, 2009
(42) Edmonton Sun, April 13, 2009

===========================
Stop NATO
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/stopnato

To subscribe, send an e-mail to:
Rick Rozoff at
rwrozoff at yahoo.com
or
stopnato-subscribe at yahoogroups.com

Daily digest option available.

Archives:
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/stopnato/messages
==============================


__._,_.___
Messages in this topic (1) Reply (via web post) | Start a new topic
Messages | Database | Polls
MARKETPLACE
Car insurance too expensive? The average driver pays $69/Month. Get New 
Payment at LowerMyBills.com


I'm happy I lost my Job. Now I make $12,000/mo online! See how I do it: 
WealthResource.org.



Mom Power: Discover the community of moms doing more for their families, for 
the world and for each other

Change settings via the Web (Yahoo! ID required)
Change settings via email: Switch delivery to Daily Digest | Switch format 
to Traditional
Visit Your Group | Yahoo! Groups Terms of Use | Unsubscribe Recent Activity
 9New Members
Visit Your Group
Y! Groups blog
the best source
for the latest
scoop on Groups.
Yahoo! Groups
Mom Power
Discover doing more
for your family
Weight Management Group
on Yahoo! Groups
Join the challenge
and lose weight..

__,_._,___