Partisanship and Patriotism

Vincent J. Curtis

9 Dec 2016

There have been occasions when I questioned the patriotism of certain political parties in Canada.  But I never thought that scoring small, temporary political points could outweigh patriotism in the Conservative party.

The Bloc Quebecois was a party committed to patriotism all right – to an independent Republic of Quebec, and the extinction of the Canada I know.  A party committed to International Socialism is not patriotic because it is committed to a class struggle across national borders – class over country is their order of priority.  In general, any party committed to some ideology or other is committed to that Idea – and whether that Idea is good for this country or not is not even an examined question with them.  A Conservative party ought to have the good of the country - patriotism - as its highest priority – country over party, one would think.

But the temptations of political partisanship can sometimes outweigh the greater good that is implicit in patriotism.

So it was for me when Conservative defense critic James Bezan attacked the government over its quietly angling to buy a small number of F/A-18 E/F Super Hornets to tide the RCAF over until a decision was reached on the purchase of replacements for the F/A-18 A/B Hornets that are currently flown.

Bezan got big headlines.  He got the Liberal government to look defensive, and he may have weakened the government’s resolve to go ahead with the purchase.  He certainly made the Liberal government look bad to the left-wing of its political base.  Score a minor triumph for critic Bezan.

But let’s look at the larger picture.  In the first place, there is no doubt of our crying need for new fighters, and we are going to need something real soon to fill a capability gap that will grow between now and 2025.  The Super Hornet is particularly well adapted to fill that gap because it is interoperable with the current fleet.  So, unless Mr. Bezan is representing another defense supplier, what is the point of opposing the quiet purchase of Super Hornets except to make a partisan splash at the expense of the government?

These are Liberals we are talking about, and they need all the encouragement we can give them to spend money on more defense capability.

But look further.  In recent history, when have defense purchases gone quickly and well?  When Canada needed strategic lift capability right then, MND Gordon O’Connor just went out and bought three Globemasters from Boeing.  When we needed heavy lift helicopters, we just went out, cut a deal with the U.S., and bought fifteen Chinooks.  When we saw a deal for Leopard II tanks, we bought 100 of them, slightly used, from the Netherlands, more than we needed at the time.  But we got them.  When we needed artillery for Afghanistan we cut another deal and acquired a battery of M777 guns direct from the U.S. Marine Corps.  These proved so effective that we’re on track to receive a total of 31 more from the manufacturer, BAE Systems.

When the Canadian military really needs something, the government just goes out and gets it.  No fuss, no muss.

When the standard procurement process is employed, it means that the government wants to put off deciding.  It doesn’t want to spend money on defense.  The procurement process is a means of creating a massive smoke screen so that nobody gets blamed for nothing getting done.

Look at the process announced for determining what the replacement for the CF-18 is going to be.  It’s going to take five years.  World famous suppliers have been asked to fill out a pile of insulting paperwork to prove their capability, and they are supposed explain to experts in the RCAF precisely how to suck eggs.  Do you really believe that fighter pilots in the RCAF need to have explained to them the ins and outs of a Saab Gripen, the Eurofighter Typhoon, the Dassault Rafale, the Super Hornet, and the F-35 JSF before they can make an informed choice about which one they want?

Look at the Surface Combatant Ship replacement process.  This is another acquisition being bogged down in counting angels on the head of a pin.  The government doesn’t want to spend big money on warships, and so the path to acquisition is littered with red herrings.

When the Prime Minister decides he needs to spend money on defense, money on defense will get spent.  Don’t discourage the man.  Shut-up already.  Patriotism over partisanship!

-30-