A rchive Date
[ 11-10-2001 ]
Category
[ International Relations ]
sub-Categoy
[ Canada ]
|
[http://www.canoe.ca/Columnists/williamson.html
The sorry saga of the Sea Kings
A metaphor for Jean Chretien's entire regime and lack of vision for Canada's military
By LINDA WILLIAMSON -- Toronto Sun
October 11, 2001
War is all about mixed emotions, as many Canadians likely discovered the other day, watching Defence Minister Art Eggleton outline our military commitment to the U.S.-led war on terrorism.
For me, it began with an unfamiliar but undeniable surge of pride in our forces, however limited they may be. Followed by a little shudder of fear - yikes, we're really in this thing now, and like it or not, young Canadian lives are on the line. Then came the involuntary burst of bitter laughter - when Eggs explained we'd be sending along one-third of our ships (that is, six), complete with Sea King helicopters.
Such laughter is, of course, no reflection on the brave souls who operate the aging choppers, some of which are nearly twice as old as the people flying them. But given recent Ottawa history, Canadians can be forgiven if we're more likely to associate Sea Kings with political and mechanical breakdowns than with military might.
If anything, the sorry Sea King saga is a metaphor for Prime Minister Jean Chretien's entire regime and its vision for Canada's military - or lack thereof.
ELECTION PROMISE
Lest we forget, Chretien waltzed into power in 1993 on a promise to cancel a fleet of helicopters - replacements for the Sea Kings as well as Labrador search-and-rescue choppers - already ordered by the Mulroney government. Scrapping that so-called extravagance cost taxpayers a steep $500 million in penalties (some say as much as $725 million) - and left our forces stuck in the same old risky rattletraps, one of which exploded into flames one year later.
Two elections (and several years of military cuts) later, little has changed, except the Sea Kings are eight years older. The government has stonewalled on ordering new ones for no reason other than pure politics - simply put, the most suitable replacement choppers are just too similar to the ones ordered oh so long ago by big, bad Brian Mulroney.
The PM's brain trust seems to believe the political risk of buying them far outweighs any risk to a few sailors.
As the Sun's Greg Weston pointed out this past July, our various governments have now spent 21 years and almost $1 billion of our money dithering over helicopters. At last report, U.S. consultants had been called in to help sort out the mess.
Asked this week about whether the Sea Kings and Hercules aircraft now being pressed into service were up to the task, given recent troubles (in 1999, two Hercs destined for a peacekeeping mission in East Timor were grounded and useless due to mechanical problems), Eggleton stressed that a recent $50 million investment in parts and maintenance would keep them operational.
That's hardly comforting. As it stands, the Sea Kings we're sending off to war are up to 40 years old, can only fly for two hours at a time (down from three hours, due to their condition) and require 30 hours of maintenance for every hour of flying time.
As the Conference of Defence Associations warned two weeks ago in its annual report assessing our military capability (written before the Sept. 11 terrorist attacks): "The Sea King helicopters are well past the end of their lifespan, and are not able to provide the level of support to the (newer) surface ships needed to exploit fully the new technology."
Overall, the report said, our navy was in arguably better shape than either our air force or army, but it still suffered from a lack of sufficiently trained staff, as well as overall equipment and manpower shortages. "It is in its international role that the limitations of the Canadian navy are most visible," the report notes - ominously, considering our new war role is mostly a naval one.
YEARS OF CUTS
Citing years and years of cuts and neglect by successive governments, the report calls for an immediate multi-billion-dollar investment in our armed forces. (We've heard such calls before, but now they resonate as never before.)
"Today, the Canadian forces could not 'fight with the best, against the best, and win' beyond a restricted level, and without subjecting its members to undue risk," it says.
"The situation will not improve until Canadians are made to see that it impacts directly on domestic issues that affect their daily lives. They need to understand that effective armed forces are a price of doing business in the modern world."
Canadians are quickly coming to understand just that. Our government, however, with its focus on politics over protection, may take a good deal longer.
Just a year ago, remember, Chretien ridiculed his election opponents' demands for higher military spending, saying they would blow taxpayers' money on "a war that is not coming."
Well, the war - not that Chretien's Liberals are calling it that - has now come. Heaven help our chopper pilots.
Linda Williamson is the Toronto Sun senior associate editor. She can be reached by e-mail at linda.williamson@tor.sunpub.com
 World Fact Book (CIA)]
|