Great interview. What matters most is how we respond to various risks to the survival of countries and our economies.... The slope is very slippery right now, and until we know more of the particulars we just give politicians a pass without questions. Not good enough.
I think what Canada has to do with its extra defence billions is sorting out the Arctic, build a couple of bases, start deploying naval and air assets up there permanently and participating with our Nordic cousins in the exercises and planning in the region. It is our one unique patch that we have neglected for decades. It would also be a meaningful contribution to NATO and to the stymying of Russia. Getting onboard with AUKUS would be helpful in the submarine department as a related thought.
Just catching up to this excellent interview. I've been reading Minna's work on Philips O'Brien's Substack and appreciated her direct and clear-eyed, yet still positive and solutions-oriented, analytic approach.
I was particularly struck by her observation that the "Coalition of the Willing" potentially represents a first step away from calcified postwar institutions like NATO that have aged out of fitness for our current circumstances. You could say the same for other such institutions, including the World Bank, the IMF, and even the UN, that were useful solutions to old problems in their time but aren't as relevant or responsive as they used to be.
I suspect that a major contributor to much of our current chaos and misery is this slow-motion collapse of old and increasingly fragile institutions. Our American friends have long sustained an almost religious belief in the resilience of institutions like Congress, the Supreme Court, and the Constitution itself, all of which have proven ineffective against Trump and MAGA. You could plausibly construct a case that Parliament has become equally calcified here in Canada, and that we need institutional renewal just as much as anyone else.
But new political institutions arise from great social movements and historical events, and we're only part way through this process, which is why I think we feel stuck in this middle place between the end of old institutions in the arrival of new ones; "the new world struggles to be born" and all that.
If the Europeans are serious about defending themselves, then they need to set up one unified system of defence as opposed to a hodgepodge of countries all duplicating each other. It is scandalous that after the Eastern Bloc countries like Poland joined NATO, they were allowed to keep the Warsaw Pact equipment they inherited from the USSR. A condition of their acceptance into NATO should have been to upgrade to military equipment that was interoperable with other NATO countries. I am dubious about the sincerity of (some of) the European countries in actually spending this money. I feel the same way about Canada. We have a lot of catching up to do, and once tough financial choices have to be made (i.e., ones that will be politically unpopular), we'll see how serious we are about meeting our commitments.
This was an insightful interview with a young analyst who has clearly thought through the issues. I hope that the federal government (politicos and senior public servants alike) are open-minded enough to accept that throwing piles of money at expensive weapons systems alone will not improve Canada’s national defence capabilities.
It seems clear to me that we need to have a grown-up discussion about what a sovereign state must do to ensure that it remains sovereign (by being capable of securing our borders, exerting effective control over our waterways and ensuring that we also are able to live up credibly to our alliance commitments).
Exerting effective and consistent control over our vast Arctic archipelago is clearly crucial to all that.
Having an effective and well-supported diplomatic corps, supported by well-funded Canadian intelligence analysis services, should also be seen as crucial in this context.
Great interview. So happy to “meet” the so very well informed and practical Minna Alexander.
This was an insightful interview, Paul. Thanks.
Thank you for this interview, including the spot-on questions about the coalition of the willing and the current view of Canada’s role.
Great interview. What matters most is how we respond to various risks to the survival of countries and our economies.... The slope is very slippery right now, and until we know more of the particulars we just give politicians a pass without questions. Not good enough.
I think what Canada has to do with its extra defence billions is sorting out the Arctic, build a couple of bases, start deploying naval and air assets up there permanently and participating with our Nordic cousins in the exercises and planning in the region. It is our one unique patch that we have neglected for decades. It would also be a meaningful contribution to NATO and to the stymying of Russia. Getting onboard with AUKUS would be helpful in the submarine department as a related thought.
I would be so proud to see the CAF in Finland. Let’s go!
People are watching and listening and if like me.......not happy with the craziness!
"Blessed are the peacemaker". You can’t bomb your way to peace.
Just catching up to this excellent interview. I've been reading Minna's work on Philips O'Brien's Substack and appreciated her direct and clear-eyed, yet still positive and solutions-oriented, analytic approach.
I was particularly struck by her observation that the "Coalition of the Willing" potentially represents a first step away from calcified postwar institutions like NATO that have aged out of fitness for our current circumstances. You could say the same for other such institutions, including the World Bank, the IMF, and even the UN, that were useful solutions to old problems in their time but aren't as relevant or responsive as they used to be.
I suspect that a major contributor to much of our current chaos and misery is this slow-motion collapse of old and increasingly fragile institutions. Our American friends have long sustained an almost religious belief in the resilience of institutions like Congress, the Supreme Court, and the Constitution itself, all of which have proven ineffective against Trump and MAGA. You could plausibly construct a case that Parliament has become equally calcified here in Canada, and that we need institutional renewal just as much as anyone else.
But new political institutions arise from great social movements and historical events, and we're only part way through this process, which is why I think we feel stuck in this middle place between the end of old institutions in the arrival of new ones; "the new world struggles to be born" and all that.
If the Europeans are serious about defending themselves, then they need to set up one unified system of defence as opposed to a hodgepodge of countries all duplicating each other. It is scandalous that after the Eastern Bloc countries like Poland joined NATO, they were allowed to keep the Warsaw Pact equipment they inherited from the USSR. A condition of their acceptance into NATO should have been to upgrade to military equipment that was interoperable with other NATO countries. I am dubious about the sincerity of (some of) the European countries in actually spending this money. I feel the same way about Canada. We have a lot of catching up to do, and once tough financial choices have to be made (i.e., ones that will be politically unpopular), we'll see how serious we are about meeting our commitments.
This was an insightful interview with a young analyst who has clearly thought through the issues. I hope that the federal government (politicos and senior public servants alike) are open-minded enough to accept that throwing piles of money at expensive weapons systems alone will not improve Canada’s national defence capabilities.
It seems clear to me that we need to have a grown-up discussion about what a sovereign state must do to ensure that it remains sovereign (by being capable of securing our borders, exerting effective control over our waterways and ensuring that we also are able to live up credibly to our alliance commitments).
Exerting effective and consistent control over our vast Arctic archipelago is clearly crucial to all that.
Having an effective and well-supported diplomatic corps, supported by well-funded Canadian intelligence analysis services, should also be seen as crucial in this context.