DISCLAIMER: My intent is to generate an interesting and provocative debate on this subject. So let's debate in an honest, respectful manner.
In the next paragraphs I will try and build a case for why Canada should develop its own nuclear arsenal. I will layout the threats as I perceive them, the benefits of having a nuclear arsenal, and discuss why nuclear weapons are a viable option for the security of Canada.
Canada is surrounded by potential enemies, from the Americans to the south, to the Russians to the north. The Americans historically have launched wars and raids against Canada and other countries in North and South America. The Russians are the Russians, enemies from the cold war, no one in their right mind should trust them to be altruistic.
Currently, neither of these countries are our enemies, in fact, the Americans are our closest friends and allies. We enjoy the longest undefended border in the world, and our culture and economy are very tightly integrated. Despite this, I still can easily foresee a time when Canada and the United States will be enemies; the reason is resources and territory.
Canada is blessed in several key ways to be well positioned in the future as a global heavyweight. Canada has three key resources that could make it an attractive target for other countries:
- A large percentage of the world's remaining freshwater supply
- One of the largest and yet untapped oil and energy reserves in the world in our oil sands
- Territorial control of the vast majority of the Arctic, one of the last unexplored areas of the world.
Peak oil and peak water will start to rear its head in the near future. Oil is obviously a finite resource, and the way we use water makes fresh drinking water a finite supply as well. Canada has a large percentage of the world's available freshwater, and a very small percentage of the world's population. Soon, countries will start asking to buy our water. And when/if we say no, the relations between water rich and water poor countries will start to degrade. It doesn't seem too outlandish to envision a future where water rich countries square off with water poor countries.
I do not sure trust the US to look after our interests when their own interests collide. This is not a slight against the Americans by any means, but the first and foremost duty of any government is to look out for the welfare of their own people.
Furthermore, the vast majority of the Arctic falls within Canada's borders, though many countries wish to challenge our claim to the Arctic. The Americans, Russians, and Danes spring to mind most readily.
The Arctic is a natural resource of utmost importance. Not only is the Arctic the last unexplored area of Earth, it is believed to hold vast untapped reserves of oil, gas, and other important commodities. The wealth in the Arctic is unbelievable. In addition to all this natural wealth, should the shipping lanes in the Arctic clear; the amount of shipping that will pass through the Arctic waters will rival that of the Panama Canal.
Canada has a wealth of natural resources, strategic territory in the Arctic, and strong superpower or near superpower neighbours that will be more than happy to take what is ours if given the chance.
Given this reality, and these threats, Canada needs to do something to protect itself and maintain a strong bargaining position. Unfortunately, the cold hard facts dictate that Canada will not have the resources or the will to maintain a large standing army, navy, and air force to act as a deterrent to possible aggression. The investment required to act as a credible deterrent to the Russians and Americans will be much larger then we can afford without drastic cuts to social programs. These cuts to the social fabric may be desirable, but are simply not practical at this point in time. Canada could not sustain a CF with a budget of 50 billion a year.
A nuclear program will be much cheaper to startup and maintain over the long term then increasing DND's budget by 400% or more.
I don't really have any idea how much it costs to create, maintain, and enhance a nuclear arsenal, I do however feel it will be much less then the additional billions required to increase the size of the CF. Canada has the technological knowhow to quickly create effective nuclear weapons, likely within months. A ballistic missile program will take more time to put together, but is not as important as the bomb itself.
A strong Canadian Forces, backed with a strong nuclear deterrent will allow Canada to bargain from a position of strength, and help ensure that we don't get the short end of the stick.
9 comments:
One step in the right direction would be to adopt the Swiss or Israeli model of a citizen army.
This is where I'll take the con side of the arguement. My background is Aerospace Engineering and I am working in the energy research.
1. Our threats are the same as our allies the Americans, you cannot separate the sybiotic relationship between our two nations. We'll have more pressing problems wrt trade should our relationship becomes strained. I am optimistic that despite Obama's turn to the Left, clearly we are already seeing that the US electoral is already reacting in such a negative way that the next election (2010) cycle will weaken the Democrats and usher in more moderate trade policy. Basically the USA will revert back to the nice stable equilibrium position we enjoyed during the Clinton and Bush years with repect to our mutual trade agreements.
2. Peak oil & peak water conflicts with each other. Yes there is a demand for fresh water, but with rising energy costs prohibits the bulk exports. Water desalination and purification is a simple, but energy intensive process but in water parched states like Florida and California they already desalinate sea water to produce their fresh water. And wrt to our water if an agreement is made, then we certainly can make a profit on bulk water exports, as we have our energy card to use as a bargaining chip. SO I do not foresee too much controversy with respect to this issue, and the poorer nations would be wiser to use desalination than bulk exporting out water.
3. About the Russians and our north. Our energy resources require large capital in extracting it. It cannot be developed to any resonable capacity in the near future. Even so the north is an inhospitable region which if threatened by the Americans or Russians requires a very expensive and long supply route to maintain. It is reasonable to assume with our modest force can keep intruders off our artic land. Frankly the Russians have more accessable undeveloped energy resources in the central and Siberian regions, that underwater arctic extraction is still infessible. Also Russia has a bigger demographics problems than us, as their youth are leaving and not replacing their rapid population, such that the need for high arctic energy become irrelevants.
In summary our energy and water problems has been exaggerated. I am confident with the steady rise of crude oil costs, that it will open up the development of our planets rich natural gas, coal, nuclear, and entrepreneurial energy solutions.
What about the Nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty? Nuclear weapons are not an option. How about Aircraft carriers and nuclear submarines (Helps us patrol and keep hold of the Arctic).
not even going to put forward an argument. we will be part of something else because our population is small and we could not defend this massive country even if we had nukes and someone who would be prepaed to use them yea, like that would happen
We need to build a deep water arctic port, with the capabilities to host and field troops, fast air assets,and surface ships.I can't see the U.S. selling nuclear subs to us as it would be a conflict of interest if they had designs on the arctic.
Britain may be an option.
An excellent idea. Canada had nukes in Europe with Nato, but they were not our own. We have, or had, the technology to build them and we should do so. As for the non-proliferation treaty; rip it up.
NorthernRaven, thanks for the thoughts.
Regarding point 1, I am not sure what Democrats or Republicans have to do with anything. Its not about trade, its about water. Large sections of the mid-west are getting mighty dry. If water gets scarce, trade is the least of our worries.
Peak Oil and Peak Water don't conflict at all. Peak oil may well indeed push a lot of manufacturing and the production of consumer goods back on shore, but as long as there is still oil to be had, it would be used to ship water. Water more then oil is what economies run on. You need water to live. Also, many countries don't have access to sea water to desalinate.
Currently Canada doesn't allow any bulk water exports as such an action would move water under NAFTA. Canada doesn't want that, as then the Americans can get access to it.
Its not just about resources, there is also the shipping lanes that could open up. Neither the Russians nor the Americans have to occupy the North directly to take it from us. Also, the supply lines for the Americans aren't too long, coming from Alaska.
Very interesting topic, however I don't see going nuclear as the solution. I do think our military needs a major boost, and I do mean major. Nuclear submarines should be purchased for arctic patrol and elsewhere. Our navy and air force needs a lot of help, and bringing it up to date and increasing the numbers of ships and planes dramatically is not going to happen over night nor is it going to be cheap. Building these ships and planes should be done IN Canada. Re-start the ARROW program, fire up the Canadian shipyards and create jobs.
Maintaining a nuclear arsenal is expensive and im not sold on the deterrant theory.Any nation dumb enough to use nuclear weapons for attack will commit Hari Kari as a nation since the world would turn on them.
We do need to re-arm and re-equip our military forces.In 2011 we need to pull out of Afghanistan for rest and re-equip for our troops,for at least a year.We need our own navy to patrol our artic waterways and coastlines.A robust,practical and highly trained air force as well.
Finally though not in the order ive listed, we need a cyberintelligence force starting right here at home.The war in Georgia proved how an enemy can disrupt a country.
Israel has the number one anti-terrorist task force in the world.Why?because they use personnel to assess peoples actions with hi-tech.Technology alone will not deter terrorists.
Whats stopping us from achieving space travel technology?Nothing.Develop our own RESPONSIBLE space program that gets audited every year.
Post a Comment