• Thanks for stopping by. Logging in to a registered account will remove all generic ads. Please reach out with any questions or concerns.

Defending Canadian Arctic Sovereignty

LoboCanada

Full Member
Reaction score
66
Points
330
/rant

A lack of public news conference or a televised announcement on the above says a lot. This CCG-RN program is the best our gov't could come up with as a reaction to AUKUS? You've highlighted all of the coverage (I found at least) this agreement has received.

Our 'besties', the US, UK, and Australia were waiting for our gov't to react to AUKUS and this is what we came up with. Our reaction to a new 3-Eyes club that was created to respond to China and a potential WW3 and we announce... a personnel and knowledge exchange solely between the CCG and RN?

We have no interest in the arctic, the south Pacific, foreign policy, the CF, and indigenous peoples. The stuff we are doing IMHO are half-measures, and have similar results. We don't even have plans or strategies to begin to tackle the issues raised in this thread.

----------------

A thought keeps circling my mind that perhaps we may have not imagined a racial aspect to issues affecting the Arctic. Would we have done more for the Arctic and its people if they weren't racialized? Genuinely asking others here, but would we defend these people better, provide better QOL, infrastructure, communications, SAR capabilities (the list goes on) if they weren't indigenous?
 

Colin Parkinson

Army.ca Legend
Reaction score
1,745
Points
940
Absolutely, a combination of no one important living there, high costs and low vote harvesting.
 

Kirkhill

Army.ca Legend
Subscriber
Donor
Reaction score
703
Points
1,060
Or, if you can't grow wheat and raise cattle what good is the land?
 

Kirkhill

Army.ca Legend
Subscriber
Donor
Reaction score
703
Points
1,060
You mean build car parts or speak french right? Ontario and Quebec seem to be the only places that exist in Canada according to the liberals

More than just the Liberals though. For most of us Canada doesn't seem to extend much into the treeline. The only arable parts of Canada are the Annapolis Valley, the St Lawrence Lowlands, the Prairies and the Lower Mainland. A miniscule fraction of the country at large. All of our cities are located in those areas, the same areas that the original farmers settled.

Rupert's Land proper, the land of the HBC and its Orkneymen, the Cree, the Dene and the Inuit, that has never been developed to the same extent as the arable lands along the border.
 

Dana381

Jr. Member
Reaction score
30
Points
280
More than just the Liberals though. For most of us Canada doesn't seem to extend much into the treeline. The only arable parts of Canada are the Annapolis Valley, the St Lawrence Lowlands, the Prairies and the Lower Mainland. A miniscule fraction of the country at large. All of our cities are located in those areas, the same areas that the original farmers settled.

Rupert's Land proper, the land of the HBC and its Orkneymen, the Cree, the Dene and the Inuit, that has never been developed to the same extent as the arable lands along the border.

You are so right. United we stand, divided we fall. Everybody (Liberals) in Upper Canada preach multiculturalism but what they really mean is you better not be mean to immigrants. They forget about our own people of other cultures that helped to build and run this great country. Many people seem to think immigration is the answer to all of Canada's problems. I say lets empower the people here! we have many marginalized people in our country that given the chance can do a lot for Canada. I grew up in P.E.I. the federal politicians cared not about us, they just threw money our way whenever we got loud enough to make the news in upper Canada.
 

Kirkhill

Army.ca Legend
Subscriber
Donor
Reaction score
703
Points
1,060
Sorry but I'd sooner leave immigration and politics out of the discussion.

We have problems enough with Canadians living in the north not getting the benefits that Canadian citizenship should bring them. I would like to see them have the freedom to exploit their own resources to their own benefit in the manner that gives them a future they want.
 

Colin Parkinson

Army.ca Legend
Reaction score
1,745
Points
940
The down south environmentalist, kill off a northern project and pat themselves on the back while having a drink in the local pub. The guy up North who had been selected to work there and was looking forward to having more money to build another bedroom, buy a new snowmobile and possibly afford to fly south for a vacation with his family, is now wondering if he will be able to buy Christmas presents for his family this year?
 

Dana381

Jr. Member
Reaction score
30
Points
280
Sorry but I'd sooner leave immigration and politics out of the discussion.

We have problems enough with Canadians living in the north not getting the benefits that Canadian citizenship should bring them. I would like to see them have the freedom to exploit their own resources to their own benefit in the manner that gives them a future they want.
Yes I overstepped and got off topic, just a little vent I guess. My main point was that if everyone in Canada (including the arctic inhabitants) were treated the same Arctic sovereignty would be easier as we would have a good relationship with the locals and better development in the north.
 

GR66

Army.ca Veteran
Reaction score
334
Points
1,010
They are extremely unlikely to encounter either. What they could possibly face is incoming cruise missiles. Or even more likely swarming blackflies. The most effective "weapon" for infantry posted to northern radar sites would likely be DEET.

Defending the North realistically is a role for the RCAF and possibly the RCA if we ever get into the long range AD game, not infantry...no matter how you choose to arm them.
I made this somewhat tongue in cheek comment in the Force 2025 thread in response to Kirkhill's suggestion for 47 x Reserve Infantry Platoons tasked to defend 47 x North Warning Sites in the Arctic. While I don't think that particular idea is particularly practical or necessary, I do believe that there are important roles that the Reserves (including Reserve Infantry) can play in defending Canada's Arctic sovereignty.

However, rather than using the Army to provide point defence of specific military facilities, I'd instead use it as a core around which to provide an all of Government presence in the Arctic using an "ink spot" strategy similar to what is used in counter-insurgency operations. I'm envisioning something like this:

  • Each of the three current Army Divisions would have an Arctic Response Battalion consisting of 4 x Arctic Response Companies (i.e. 4 x STAR-assigned Reserve Infantry "Regiments").
  • These 12 x Arctic Response Companies would each be responsible for force generating and deploying a single Infantry Section each summer (60 day Class C deployment for July and August annually) to an Arctic community in order to work with the local Ranger Patrol Groups, conduct sovereignty patrols and provide a general Government of Canada presence in the area.
  • There are also 24 x Naval Reserve Divisions in Canada. Between these units they could also provide annual manning for 12 x multi-role rescue boats (the same Rough Water 8.5's used on the AOPS for standardization of equipment and training) for these same communities. These boats could be used for transport of the Reserve Infantry during their patrols, the Rangers, SAR, transport of other government agency personnel, etc.
  • Lastly I'd propose an expansion of 440 Squadron with the purchase of additional CC-138 Twin Otters to provide air transport for the deployed units as well during the deployment window.

I'd see this system roll out in stages starting with just three communities seeing these summer deployments. I'd suggest that good possible candidates for these first three communities would be:
  • Nanisivik, NU (and the surrounding communities of Arctic Bay and Pond Inlet). This makes sense as the site of the RCNs new facility to support AOPS operations in the Arctic and its location at the Eastern end of the NWP
  • Tuktoyuktuk, NWT due to it's location near the Western end of the NWP and the presence of the only road link on the Arctic coast to the rest of Canada.
  • Cambridge Bay, NU which is roughly at the mid-point of the NWP and according to Wikipedia "is the largest stop for passenger and research vessels traversing the Arctic Ocean's Northwest Passage".
I would propose that each of these communities have constructed a joint facility large enough to support the planned annual deployment with the capability to provide surge accommodation for an entire Company if required. A boat launch facility would be included as well as garage facilities for at least 4 x BV206 (or their replacements). All three of these locations have existing airports to support the Twin Otters. Logistical and maintenance support could be contracted out to the local communities and northern companies in order to provide employment opportunities and economic development. Ideally also deep water port facilities would eventually be build at Tuk and Cam Bay in addition to Nanisivik (such a facility has already been proposed for Tuk).

The goal would be to eventually provide training (in the South during the winter months?) to members of the Canadian Rangers so that they could eventually provide manning of the facilities during the remainder of the year with the Southern Reserve units simply providing surge manning during the busier summer months. This would include Ranger Small Boat units manning the RHIBs and Ranger Air Transport units manning Twin Otters.

These facilities and their troops would also provide support for other Government agencies including CBSA oversight of foreign and cruise vessels transiting the NWP, DFO monitoring of commercial fishing activities, Environment Canada monitoring and research, Natural Resources Canada surveying, RCMP, etc. All of these activities would strongly support Canadian sovereignty in the Arctic and create stronger links between Arctic communities and the rest of Canada.

A phased roll-out of this system starting with just three key communities would mean that each Reserve Arctic Response Company would only have to provide an Infantry Section once every four years to start. This would give plenty of time for the units to be properly trained, equipped and organized for their roles. Once the facilities become ready at other communities the deployments could be expanded. With six communities engaged each Company would deploy a Section every other summer and eventually we'd reach twelve communities with each Company doing a deployment annually.

Personally I think this type of approach would provide greater support for Canadian sovereignty in the Arctic and greater economic development for Arctic communities than 47 x Infantry Platoon deployments to remote radar sites which face little to no ground-based military threat.
 

MarkOttawa

Army.ca Fixture
Reaction score
73
Points
560
I made this somewhat tongue in cheek comment in the Force 2025 thread in response to Kirkhill's suggestion for 47 x Reserve Infantry Platoons tasked to defend 47 x North Warning Sites in the Arctic. While I don't think that particular idea is particularly practical or necessary, I do believe that there are important roles that the Reserves (including Reserve Infantry) can play in defending Canada's Arctic sovereignty.

However, rather than using the Army to provide point defence of specific military facilities, I'd instead use it as a core around which to provide an all of Government presence in the Arctic using an "ink spot" strategy similar to what is used in counter-insurgency operations. I'm envisioning something like this:

  • Each of the three current Army Divisions would have an Arctic Response Battalion consisting of 4 x Arctic Response Companies (i.e. 4 x STAR-assigned Reserve Infantry "Regiments").
  • These 12 x Arctic Response Companies would each be responsible for force generating and deploying a single Infantry Section each summer (60 day Class C deployment for July and August annually) to an Arctic community in order to work with the local Ranger Patrol Groups, conduct sovereignty patrols and provide a general Government of Canada presence in the area.
  • There are also 24 x Naval Reserve Divisions in Canada. Between these units they could also provide annual manning for 12 x multi-role rescue boats (the same Rough Water 8.5's used on the AOPS for standardization of equipment and training) for these same communities. These boats could be used for transport of the Reserve Infantry during their patrols, the Rangers, SAR, transport of other government agency personnel, etc.
  • Lastly I'd propose an expansion of 440 Squadron with the purchase of additional CC-138 Twin Otters to provide air transport for the deployed units as well during the deployment window.

I'd see this system roll out in stages starting with just three communities seeing these summer deployments. I'd suggest that good possible candidates for these first three communities would be:
  • Nanisivik, NU (and the surrounding communities of Arctic Bay and Pond Inlet). This makes sense as the site of the RCNs new facility to support AOPS operations in the Arctic and its location at the Eastern end of the NWP
  • Tuktoyuktuk, NWT due to it's location near the Western end of the NWP and the presence of the only road link on the Arctic coast to the rest of Canada.
  • Cambridge Bay, NU which is roughly at the mid-point of the NWP and according to Wikipedia "is the largest stop for passenger and research vessels traversing the Arctic Ocean's Northwest Passage".
I would propose that each of these communities have constructed a joint facility large enough to support the planned annual deployment with the capability to provide surge accommodation for an entire Company if required. A boat launch facility would be included as well as garage facilities for at least 4 x BV206 (or their replacements). All three of these locations have existing airports to support the Twin Otters. Logistical and maintenance support could be contracted out to the local communities and northern companies in order to provide employment opportunities and economic development. Ideally also deep water port facilities would eventually be build at Tuk and Cam Bay in addition to Nanisivik (such a facility has already been proposed for Tuk).

The goal would be to eventually provide training (in the South during the winter months?) to members of the Canadian Rangers so that they could eventually provide manning of the facilities during the remainder of the year with the Southern Reserve units simply providing surge manning during the busier summer months. This would include Ranger Small Boat units manning the RHIBs and Ranger Air Transport units manning Twin Otters.

These facilities and their troops would also provide support for other Government agencies including CBSA oversight of foreign and cruise vessels transiting the NWP, DFO monitoring of commercial fishing activities, Environment Canada monitoring and research, Natural Resources Canada surveying, RCMP, etc. All of these activities would strongly support Canadian sovereignty in the Arctic and create stronger links between Arctic communities and the rest of Canada.

A phased roll-out of this system starting with just three key communities would mean that each Reserve Arctic Response Company would only have to provide an Infantry Section once every four years to start. This would give plenty of time for the units to be properly trained, equipped and organized for their roles. Once the facilities become ready at other communities the deployments could be expanded. With six communities engaged each Company would deploy a Section every other summer and eventually we'd reach twelve communities with each Company doing a deployment annually.

Personally I think this type of approach would provide greater support for Canadian sovereignty in the Arctic and greater economic development for Arctic communities than 47 x Infantry Platoon deployments to remote radar sites which face little to no ground-based military threat.
"I think this type of approach would provide greater support for Canadian sovereignty in the Arctic"--no country , Denmark and Hans Island, has ever made any claim to Canadian land territory in the Arctic. That sovereignty is unchallenged, undisputed. Just like US sovereignty for mostly empty Alaska. Or Canada's over mostly empty Labrador--a post from 2013:

"Arctic Sovereignty Hoo Hah Letter to Editor Printed!"

Mark
Ottawa
 

GR66

Army.ca Veteran
Reaction score
334
Points
1,010
"I think this type of approach would provide greater support for Canadian sovereignty in the Arctic"--no country , Denmark and Hans Island, has ever made any claim to Canadian land territory in the Arctic. That sovereignty is unchallenged, undisputed. Just like US sovereignty for mostly empty Alaska. Or Canada's over mostly empty Labrador--a post from 2013:

"Arctic Sovereignty Hoo Hah Letter to Editor Printed!"

Mark
Ottawa
That is the case now. But can we assume that there will never be questions? Quebec narrowly avoided a separation crisis by 1 percentage point and there is growing discontent with Confederation in the West.

If either one of these regions left confederation and we begin to see greater foreign investment in development of the Arctic then how strong will the ties to the Canadian south remain?

The Arctic is treated as an afterthought by the rest of Canada. The more they are left to feel that being part of Canada really is of no great advantage to them then might they consider following their own path? How would that affect the strategic situation between the US and Russia/China? Or between the US and Canada for that matter?

My fear isn't some other country seizing the Arctic territories away from Canada, it's the Arctic deciding that Canada is just another foreign power to them and deciding they might have other options for their future. That's why I think the role of the CF in the Arctic is to be part of a larger tying together of the Arctic communities to the rest of Canada. And that means infrastructure, institutions and economic development.
 

YZT580

Army.ca Veteran
Reaction score
198
Points
630
That is the case now. But can we assume that there will never be questions? Quebec narrowly avoided a separation crisis by 1 percentage point and there is growing discontent with Confederation in the West.

If either one of these regions left confederation and we begin to see greater foreign investment in development of the Arctic then how strong will the ties to the Canadian south remain?

The Arctic is treated as an afterthought by the rest of Canada. The more they are left to feel that being part of Canada really is of no great advantage to them then might they consider following their own path? How would that affect the strategic situation between the US and Russia/China? Or between the US and Canada for that matter?

My fear isn't some other country seizing the Arctic territories away from Canada, it's the Arctic deciding that Canada is just another foreign power to them and deciding they might have other options for their future. That's why I think the role of the CF in the Arctic is to be part of a larger tying together of the Arctic communities to the rest of Canada. And that means infrastructure, institutions and economic development.
not with a bang but a whimper
 

Kirkhill

Army.ca Legend
Subscriber
Donor
Reaction score
703
Points
1,060
I made this somewhat tongue in cheek comment in the Force 2025 thread in response to Kirkhill's suggestion for 47 x Reserve Infantry Platoons tasked to defend 47 x North Warning Sites in the Arctic. While I don't think that particular idea is particularly practical or necessary, I do believe that there are important roles that the Reserves (including Reserve Infantry) can play in defending Canada's Arctic sovereignty.

However, rather than using the Army to provide point defence of specific military facilities, I'd instead use it as a core around which to provide an all of Government presence in the Arctic using an "ink spot" strategy similar to what is used in counter-insurgency operations. I'm envisioning something like this:

  • Each of the three current Army Divisions would have an Arctic Response Battalion consisting of 4 x Arctic Response Companies (i.e. 4 x STAR-assigned Reserve Infantry "Regiments").
  • These 12 x Arctic Response Companies would each be responsible for force generating and deploying a single Infantry Section each summer (60 day Class C deployment for July and August annually) to an Arctic community in order to work with the local Ranger Patrol Groups, conduct sovereignty patrols and provide a general Government of Canada presence in the area.
  • There are also 24 x Naval Reserve Divisions in Canada. Between these units they could also provide annual manning for 12 x multi-role rescue boats (the same Rough Water 8.5's used on the AOPS for standardization of equipment and training) for these same communities. These boats could be used for transport of the Reserve Infantry during their patrols, the Rangers, SAR, transport of other government agency personnel, etc.
  • Lastly I'd propose an expansion of 440 Squadron with the purchase of additional CC-138 Twin Otters to provide air transport for the deployed units as well during the deployment window.

I'd see this system roll out in stages starting with just three communities seeing these summer deployments. I'd suggest that good possible candidates for these first three communities would be:
  • Nanisivik, NU (and the surrounding communities of Arctic Bay and Pond Inlet). This makes sense as the site of the RCNs new facility to support AOPS operations in the Arctic and its location at the Eastern end of the NWP
  • Tuktoyuktuk, NWT due to it's location near the Western end of the NWP and the presence of the only road link on the Arctic coast to the rest of Canada.
  • Cambridge Bay, NU which is roughly at the mid-point of the NWP and according to Wikipedia "is the largest stop for passenger and research vessels traversing the Arctic Ocean's Northwest Passage".
I would propose that each of these communities have constructed a joint facility large enough to support the planned annual deployment with the capability to provide surge accommodation for an entire Company if required. A boat launch facility would be included as well as garage facilities for at least 4 x BV206 (or their replacements). All three of these locations have existing airports to support the Twin Otters. Logistical and maintenance support could be contracted out to the local communities and northern companies in order to provide employment opportunities and economic development. Ideally also deep water port facilities would eventually be build at Tuk and Cam Bay in addition to Nanisivik (such a facility has already been proposed for Tuk).

The goal would be to eventually provide training (in the South during the winter months?) to members of the Canadian Rangers so that they could eventually provide manning of the facilities during the remainder of the year with the Southern Reserve units simply providing surge manning during the busier summer months. This would include Ranger Small Boat units manning the RHIBs and Ranger Air Transport units manning Twin Otters.

These facilities and their troops would also provide support for other Government agencies including CBSA oversight of foreign and cruise vessels transiting the NWP, DFO monitoring of commercial fishing activities, Environment Canada monitoring and research, Natural Resources Canada surveying, RCMP, etc. All of these activities would strongly support Canadian sovereignty in the Arctic and create stronger links between Arctic communities and the rest of Canada.

A phased roll-out of this system starting with just three key communities would mean that each Reserve Arctic Response Company would only have to provide an Infantry Section once every four years to start. This would give plenty of time for the units to be properly trained, equipped and organized for their roles. Once the facilities become ready at other communities the deployments could be expanded. With six communities engaged each Company would deploy a Section every other summer and eventually we'd reach twelve communities with each Company doing a deployment annually.

Personally I think this type of approach would provide greater support for Canadian sovereignty in the Arctic and greater economic development for Arctic communities than 47 x Infantry Platoon deployments to remote radar sites which face little to no ground-based military threat.

I very much like the proposal. To Nanisivik, Tuk and Cambridge Bay I would add the RCAF's Forward Operating Locations of Inuvik, Rankin Inlet, Kuujjuaq and Iqaluit. And my perennial favourite of Churchill.

I would still like to keep the NWS element in the training and operational development. Precisely because they are remote and isolated.

I would also like to continue promoting the USMC's larger squad for its applicability to Adaptive, Dispersed Operations and independent small group Expeditionary Advanced Base Operations.

The USMC wants to use those bases to host radars and launch missiles. I would see the CAF using those bases to host FARPs and launch helicopters. - both in peace and war.
 

Kirkhill

Army.ca Legend
Subscriber
Donor
Reaction score
703
Points
1,060
First things first - sites to defend in the north include EW and Met sites, NWS sites, Trg sites, RCAF FOL sites, Yellowknife, 200 to 250 communities, a few mines and harbours. Airfields.

The risk has always been, since the days of the 1946 Mobile Strike Force small scale lodgements, sabotage and civil disenchantment.

In 1987 Perrin Beatty proposed bumping the Reserve/Millitia up to a level of 90,000 all ranks.

What happens if we treat 90,000 as the total strength of the Militia to include unpaid volunteers, rangers and reservists?

We end up with the table below.



90,000​
Beatty Volunteers
19,000​
A, B and C Class Army Reservists
5​
Volunteers / Reservist
86​
Cities
185​
Units
1047​
Volunteers / City
221​
Reservists / City
2​
Units / City
486​
Volunteers / Unit
103​
Reservists / Unit
5000​
Rangers
190​
Patrols
26​
Rangers / Patrol
1​
Patrol / Unit


90,000 unpaid volunteers on the rolls. One in five of them volunteering for paid service at high readiness levels. That gives us our existing 19,000 reservists.

There are apparently 185 units in 86 cities. That suggests and average of 1000 volunteers per city on average with each city hosting 2 units.

That results in each unit having on strength 500 volunteers with 400 of them being available as sedentary volunteers, as the Danes describe them, for local emergencies and 100 of them being active volunteers (A, B and C class reservists). The 400 would be monitored the same way as the Supp List. The minimum training requirement would be the 5 week BMQ required of the Bold Eagle participants to get on to the unit's sedentary rolls. Active volunteers would make themselves available for additional training and service. So a sedentary battalion of 500 would supply and active company of 100 for general disposition. Some would be for local administration. Some would be attached to regular force HQs. Some would make themselves available for reaction units.

Continuing GR66's thought on alliances

185 Reserve Units
190 Ranger Patrols

Each Reserve Unit (400 Sedentary, 100 Active) allies with 1 Ranger Patrol (25). North-South exchanges occur. Ideally the two entities meld into a single mutually supporting entity.

The Sedentary Members provide a civic base for the unit as well as a reinforcement in particular circumstances. An exploitable pool of willing volunteers with useful skill sets.


* Bold Eagle
Once you are accepted into the Bold Eagle program, your training will take place in Wainwright, Alberta at the 3rd Canadian Division Training Centre from early July to late August of that year.

The program is made up of two parts.

The first week involves the Culture Camp, where you will learn traditional Indigenous values and teachings as demonstrated by Indigenous Elders or teachers. The Culture Camp helps candidates understand the need for self-discipline and teamwork and instills pride and the sense of continuing the Indigenous tradition of military service.

At the end of the first week, you will continue your military training with CAF military instructors. The course itself is the standard five-week Army Reserve Basic Military Qualification (BMQ). During the BMQ course, you will learn a number of skills, including weapons handling, navigation with a map and compass, first aid, drill, outdoor field craft and survival skills.

If you live near a Primary Reserve unit, you can, upon graduation, transfer to that unit to continue to serve in the Canadian Armed Forces (CAF) when you return to your community. You can also transfer into the Regular Force or into a Canadian Ranger Patrol Group. Serving full-time or part-time are excellent career options and a chance to further your service in the CAF, should you choose this route.

 
Top