Topic
Love The Tyee? We need your support. Become a Tyee Builder for as little as $5/month.
Inside the push to militarize our collective memory, and what it costs us.
As Canada establishes new military 'hubs' around the world, conservative historians proselytize a national story steeped in war fighting.
New factors mean cost may skyrocket. Is this even the right plane for the job?
We're signing on to a major shift, without much debate.
A close read reveals shrewd propaganda designed to expand Harper's immigrant base. There's a lot of war and no medicare.
Find more politics reporting on The Tyee.
[Editor's note: This is excerpted with permission from Warrior Nation: Rebranding Canada in an Age of Anxiety by Ian McKay and Jamie Swift, published by Between the Lines.]
In 2007 J.L. Granatstein, the doyen of the new warrior historians, brought out a new book, Whose War Is It? How Canada Can Survive in the Post 9/11 World. Another title for the book might be Warrior Nation for Dummies. The retired academic had become so popular with dial-a-quote journalists that the CBC's Peter Mansbridge even called him "Canada's national historian."
For Granatstein, to be a Canadian is to understand that the Canadian past was basically about war. The present? The country confronts grave, even existential, threats. Granatstein does not present these ideas as being open to debate. They are absolute certainties. "The simple fact is...." And the simple fact is, in the Warrior Nation, that only fools, knaves and romantics can miss the dire necessity of massive military investment in a looming war for Western civilization. To think otherwise is to confess to ignorance and to countenance error. To argue with this thinking is to indulge in public mischief. Even people whom one might have thought to be conversant with foreign and defence policy, Liberals such as former cabinet ministers Lloyd Axworthy or Bill Graham (the latter being as much as anyone responsible for Canada's blunder into Kandahar) are ignorant. They are self-deluded proponents of a false view of history, propounders of "moralizing" views that are just "naive foolishness" and "nonsense," often anti-American purveyors of "a poison afflicting the Canadian body politic." One can but imagine new warrior reactions to Linda McQuaig's analysis of Canada's aggressive military posturing. In her book published around the same time that Granatstein came out with Whose War Is It?, the radical journalist offered a suggestive title -- Holding the Bully's Coat: Canada and the U.S. Empire.
For Granatstein, perhaps the poison-purveyors' most odious nest can be found in "deeply pacifist and anti-military Quebec." For him, in 2003, the province played a damaging role in preventing Canada from invading Iraq beside its U.S.-led allies. Here was an abdication of our true national interests, first and foremost among which is the maintenance of good relations with the United States. Perhaps a future prime minister -- or even the one elected while Granatstein was writing his book -- would finally level with the child-like Canadians who cling to romantic dreams of a peaceful world. The author of hand-wringing books about the sad demise of old-fashioned history and a stalwart military imagines what such a valiant leader might tell Canadians: "Canada has a dominant cultural pattern comprising Judeo-Christian ethics, the progressive spirit of the Enlightenment, and the institutions and values of British political culture." Such a valiant Caesar would realize that "He is in a war for the soul and survival" of the country, against all who oppose these ideals.
Granatstein and others have since the 1990s been attempting, recently with Ottawa's active assistance, to right what they consider to be grievous wrongs. This essentially revanchist struggle pits itself against ideological foes in a fight for the Canadian imagination. A revanchist is someone who wants to reverse war-induced losses, often through further warfare; and revanchism in this case applies to the militarist historians who are attacking not just their professional rivals but those forces that they think their rivals represent -- naive and romantic tendencies excessively wedded to the ideals of peacekeeping. What truly distinguishes this right-wing current from any we have seen since the Great War of 1914–18 is the extent to which the new warrior campaign is working in tandem with the state's propaganda apparatus to institute a new regime of truth.
Military spending beyond Cold War level
Even as Canada awaited the final bill for Afghanistan, the Harper regime announced a further bold new projection of Canadian power on the world stage: the creation of new military fixtures overseas, to defend the "national interest." As of June 2011, the Canadian military was engaged in talks "to establish a permanent presence in up to seven foreign countries ... marking the first time since the end of the Cold War that Canada has aimed to expand its military reach around the globe." Under the "Operational Support Hubs Network" concept, Canadian facilities may be established in Senegal, South Korea, Kenya, Singapore, Jamaica, Germany and Kuwait. In the view of David Bercuson, in his capacity as the "senior research fellow" of the Canadian Defence and Foreign Affairs Institute, the aim is to establish "forward supply depots" near "parts of the world where Canadian Forces may be deployed in future." (Senegal should prove handy for Canadians fighting for multinational claims to Africa's oil.) Undeterred by the mixed record of a similar venture in the Middle East, surreptitiously conceived, expensively maintained and now embarrassingly concluded, the government was, then, contemplating the establishment of Canadian operations in many of the world's hot spots. Perhaps, in homage to both William Stairs and George Orwell, one of these bases could be named "Fort Peace." Although doing its bit at "force projection," Canada will never approach what Andrew Bacevich describes as an "empire of bases." The U.S. government maintains some 300,000 troops at 761 "sites" in at least 40 foreign lands.
Establishing foreign toeholds is just part of a colossal buildup of Canadian defence spending, which began under the Liberal administration of Paul Martin. Harper not only agreed to fulfil the outgoing government's promise to increase defence spending by over $12.8 billion over five years, but committed an additional $5.3 billion to an unprecedented increase in the military budget. Under Harper, Canadian military spending attained its highest level since 1945, exceeding even the levels attained in the Cold War. The $492-billion Canada First Defence Strategy: A Modern Military for the Twenty-First Century (CFDS), first introduced in 2008, linked vastly enhanced military spending to an increasingly abstract notion of "Canadian values."
In all of this Canada is simply taking advantage of a continental arms bonanza after decades of modestly diverging from that stream. By 2009 the U.S. military budget was seven times as high as that of its nearest competitor, China; its military spending was roughly equal to that of the entire rest of the world combined. It has long been the world's biggest arms dealer. But the Canadian war machine itself is not inconsiderable. Although in both the United States and Canada it is difficult to obtain an exact account of military expenditures, one estimate pegged Canadian military spending at just over $21 billion in 2009. In that year Canada ranked thirteenth in the world for its military spending -- the sixth highest in NATO.
As Zefra so excitedly suggested, the new world of permanent war entails elaborate and wonderfully expensive networks, an entire hidden economy flourishing largely outside the purview of the public. The new-style wars are neither declared nor officially terminated. The battlefields are often no longer even identifiable places. In the new forms of "Network-Centric Warfare," in the words of U.S. Vice Admiral Arthur Cebrowski, victory will go to the side with the best "total information awareness." The wars following this new model will unfold within a world "in which communication systems, modes of production and transportation systems function as vectors redirecting war from the battlefield to the scientific and the military economy." Fighting the new wars will be a job for civilians, perhaps as much as, or even more than, it is a job for professional service men and women. WikiLeaks disclosures revealed that about 600 "civilian" organizations in the United States have joined in the planning and execution of war.
Warrior Nation by Ian McKay and Jamie Swift, published in spring of this year.
Iraq and now Afghanistan have introduced the world to a form of war not generally seen for two centuries: the mercenaries' war, fought by subcontractors and retailers pursuing profit wherever they can find it. Henceforth, the Anglosphere's exploits will be necessarily accompanied by such emblems of Western superiority as Tim Hortons, Pizza Pizza and Subway, in addition to a host of more militarized firms such as Blackwater, since rebranded "Academi." The for-profit War on Terror, Naomi Klein points out, signals the arrival of a new "disaster capitalism complex," one with more far-reaching tentacles than the military-industrial complex denounced by Eisenhower: "This is global war fought on every level by private companies whose involvement is paid for with public money, with the unending mandate of protecting the United States homeland in perpetuity while eliminating all 'evil' abroad."
This perpetual war economy, already extraordinarily expensive, will become more and more burdensome. "Redistributive militarism" entails increases in war spending along with tax cuts for the wealthy. Peace activist Matthew Behrens notes: "Slightly more than $63 million a day is spent on Canada's war machine. That's the daily equivalent of 420 affordable housing units or 3,000 four-year full-tuition grants for university students. Over the course of a month, that's 13,000 affordable housing units and 90,000 students going to university without massive debt load." The welfare state is starved so that the warfare state might thrive. Canada as Warrior Nation means a stance of permanent aggression. It also signifies a hard, competitive society in which the weak go to the wall. We all become warriors -- in a permanent struggle against each other. ![[Tyee]](http://thetyee.cachefly.net/ui/img/ico_fishie.png){kind=small}
19
Login or register to post comments
Kreditanstalt
44 weeks ago
More than just spending and overseas bases...
It goes further.
The military is becoming an entrenched social program in itself. Whole communities, especially but not solely in the Maritimes, are now economically dependent on military spending. Add to that subsidized or free health care, education costs, housing, language training, insurance, pensions...
What about the glorification of miltary "service"? See the army-style U.S. Olympic uniforms? BERETS? Why special veterans' license plates? Why discounts on transport and at stores for them? Our language is now full of talk of Canada's "mission" in this or that country...
Perhaps this is all part of the government's modern-day crusade against foreigners, "muslim fundamentalists" and any non-born-again "Christians", too.
And this all goes hand-in-glove with the growing surveillance state, with biometric ID, with passports becoming ID documents, with computerization of tax information and with FinTrac snooping into everyone's private finances. And they continue to hire more and more cops, arming them with ever-more lethal paramilitary-style equipment.
And to think: the governments' "terrorist threat" doesn't even EXIST!
mcwar52
44 weeks ago
Granatstein's Flawed Analysis
Dr Granatstein has made his reputation by arguing that, based on Canada's impressive military contribution to the two world wars, (for some reason, the Boer War gets short shrift from him) we are clearly imbued as a people with the right, gung-ho "military spirit" and the traditions to go with them. Unfortunately, we are prevented from expressing our spirit, and thus carrying our proper weight in the world's (for which read U.S. and NATO) counsels, because of a superabundance at the political level of pusillanimous Liberals and communist-leaning socialists.
To make such claims is to completely misunderstand the Canadian people's response (and even that of the people of U.K. and U.S.) to both wars.
Especially at the start, Canadian troops (like the British and the Americans) were civilians who had volunteered to go to war, civilians who had decided to become temporary soldiers in order to defend their country, not to aggrandise it. Unlike the Germans and French, there was no contingent whatsoever of trained conscripts who had previously completed mandatory military service. Furthermore, the wars did not create any interest among Canadian troops in prolonging their military service, viz. the demobbing mutinies at Kimmel Park in 1919.
In short, Canadians demonstrated that they were willing to fight, and fight well, if they believed the cause worthwhile. But pace Dr Granatstein, they never had the slightest interest in the trappings of military power, in establishing even a watered-down version of the German General Staff, with its political influence and insidious militarisation of civilian life. Canadians simply wanted to get the fighting over with and get back to "civvy street". What they had seen of professional armed forces left them with a profound dislike and mistrust of them.
A cure for Dr Granatstein's fantasies would be to introduce, for the first time in peace time, universal conscription. He would soon learn that most Canadians may be sympathetic to bromides about "supporting the troops", but they have absolutely no interest in supporting the troops live and in person. And so far as the historical record tells us, that is not a very good foundation for building a militaristic nation.
The French and the Germans may once have pursued "la Gloire", but they now know all too well that "the paths of glory lead but to the grave." It's a truth most Canadians, Granatstein excluded, recognise instinctively.
RickW
44 weeks ago
mcwar52
As does the Mackenzie–Papineau Battalion in the Spanish Civil War:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mackenzie%E2%80%93Papineau_Battalion
where it is noted:
Except for France, no other country gave a greater proportion of its population as volunteers in Spain than Canada.
But Granatstein is an idiot. For instance, he opined the Avro project was overrated when just about every other judgement on the cancellation by the Diefenbaker government called it the death knell of technological innovation in Canada.
miguel
44 weeks ago
Western civilization?
Can someone reassure me that we are civilized?
wvdk
44 weeks ago
good points
Good points Kreditinstalt and mcwar52.
I'm wondering if we're ever going to see any more footage of that large, staged but non-public, military celebration following our 'victorious' action in Libya. I doubt there'll be a similar event when we follow a long line of greater powers and finally slink out of the graveyard of empires.
Hakuin
44 weeks ago
How many times
Did this Granastein buffoon actually get shot while collecting an army paycheck?
Hakuin
44 weeks ago
made in 1930
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rSPj_G2yVz4
RickW
44 weeks ago
Hakuin - a little more recent
http://rickmercer.com/Rick-s-Rant/Blog/January-2010/Politicians-Are-Not-the-Kind-of-Tools-Our-Soldiers.aspx
Hakuin
44 weeks ago
a twerp like Granularstein
tries to grab dignitas through the paunch of time. No better way to show what a fool he is by examples older than his childish fantasies.
His appropriation of "warrior" is particularly offensive. He hasn't the remotest idea.
Labowe
44 weeks ago
War of 1812
Has anyone else wondered why and how much we are spending on commemoration of The War of 1812? While watching the Olympics it seems the Govt new website was constantly promoted. Is this part of the trend?
Okanagan Orchardist
44 weeks ago
A quote from Chief of Defence Staff
General Walt Nahynezyk:
"The world is turbulent right now and the fact is our allies want more of Canada, more of the men and women who wear Canadian uniforms."
It is hard to believe that our Canadian armed forces personnel have been so hypnotized, so mentally traumatized, so irrational, so oblivious as to how they are being used, that they would willingly put their lives on the line, in other countries, to protect American corporate interests.
If our "allies" are quite willing to sacrifice Canadian men and women for the benefit of their own greedy corporations, I would ask: "With friends like these, who needs enemies?"
We should let our "war machine" in Ottawa know that our tax dollars can be put to better use by developing a paramilitary army within Canada to help people who are being forced out of their homes by forest fires or floods.
The purpose of Canada's military should be to "protect" Canada and Canadians, not "attack" as they have done in the Middle East.
We are not a "warrior" nation!
RickW
44 weeks ago
Obect All You Want - But Don't Touch The Money!
http://www.cpti.ws/resources/global.html
Imagine that! No connection between collections and expenditures. If that is the case, just why ARE we paying taxea??
retsof
44 weeks ago
In my humble opinion the guy
In my humble opinion the guy is an idiot. If you go looking for war you will find it. Just dont' go looking for it. It kills people & costs a lot of money.
Governments like to talk about war & past wars, etc. when they do not want the public to look at the real issues in the country.
Canada went into Iraq & Afghanistan because the Americans did. Lets not follow them. Their country is in grave trouble. Lets not follow them.
It is fine for the author to speak about war, etc. but when was the last time he picked up a rifle & did his 6 month tour in the desert. Ya I thought so. He & his type don't do the work. They leave that to others. The soliders who do go to war for this country come back to illness, little support, & no job. This country has enough problems supporting the current veterans lets not make more veterans.
Western civilization is not going to fall to its knees unless big corporations take us there. They are the winners. The corporations which build the armaments, tanks, jets, subs, uniforms, provide the food, etc. It is all a waste of money. Given much of the wars the Americans go into are fought by "contractors" who make billions who can say if countries are going to war for a principal or some connected military corporation wants to increase their profits.
We really need to get back to minding our own business & taking care of Canadian citizens. "nation building" in Iraq & Afghanistan is all well & good but we have a lot of First Nations communities which need "building". They don't have adequate housing, education, health care, water. The living conditions are very third world.
It is one thing to be part of a peace keeping mission or to try & prevent genocide but this going into other countries because the U.S.A. wants a war, not so much. Harper & Peter MacKay need to focus on Canada & forget about their pretend tough guy act. Neither one of them has the guts to go & actually fight in a war. They'd spoil themselves first.
All war does is kill people & make money for the elite, who don't send their kids to war. I for one do not buy into this "war" routine along with all those ads regarding the war of 1812. So what does Harper want us to do, go pick another war with the U.S.A. or just get us in the mood for a war anywhere.
anne cameron
44 weeks ago
civilian
civilian Steve and Potato Pete would like us all to imitate those in the Excited States who really believe "my country right or wrong". If enough of us start marching to the beat of their drummer, they can spend more on war toys which are obsolete before we even overbid on them.
Re-read "The Rise and Fall of the Third Reich"... and prepare yourself for the rise of the fourth.
While waving the flag and spending big money on pee-poor TV commercials the government of this nation continues to treat wounded and disabled veterans shabbily. They had to fight all the way to the Supreme Court in order to get back pension benefits those patriotic twits had clawed back from them.
Now the government is dickering about how far back they have to go in the repayment... buncha sleazy tightwads.
DonValley
44 weeks ago
Labowe
The War of 1812 - PMO edition:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?&v=w2AfQ5pa59A
RickW
44 weeks ago
Canada's Submarine Sham (Scam?)
http://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/nova-scotia/story/2012/03/15/ns-british-mp-questions-sub-deal.html
Then there is this:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gotland_class_submarine
So - if Sweden, with a populaton slightly more than 1/4 of Canada's, with an area only 5% of Canada's, with a GDP only 29% of Canada's, can build submarines, why are we not doing the same?
OwlRol
44 weeks ago
Revisionism to fit dangerous ideology
That Harper government War of 1812 ad is revisionist history at its worst. There really were no winners, only a lot of losers. If the Americans had competent leaders and a professional army, we would now be American. "We" didn't exist as a nation then, only a British colony. The real heroes were les Canadiens and First Nations (along with some British soldiers), because their land, language and culture (non English-Protestant) were seriously threatened by the Yanks. Upper Canada settlers would likely have gone over if it weren't for the brutal practices of the invaders. Consider how many of these wanted a republic only 25 years later. This govt. ad is an unbeleivable piece of propaganda.
How about an ad about the early 50s' Korean police action (never declared a war) in which Canadian troops fought and died against N. Koreans, backed by huge numbers of Chinese troops, or should we ignore that in fear of offense to that nations economic interests.
Most of the world is coming together in peace, despite some radical groups. Often they act this way for the same reasons as the northern participants in the War of 1812, to try and preserve their lands, culture and belief systems, not usually out of greed or blind faith.
Corporate "Manifest Destiny" is now the global enemy, be it US based banks and arms manufacturers, Canadian international mining companies or Chinese state oil outfits et al.
Yes, we need a well managed CSIS type of agency, including a proper watchdog, but military bases around the world can only make us appear the imperialists and drain our nation's financial resources needed for much more important tasks and priorities. A good portion of the US debt is due to this similar course of action. And it also does not include possible blowback.
Canada had spent very little on its military prior to the two world wars, yet ramped up and performed very well when needed. Cyber warfare requires funding, but not expensive and mostly unwanted military bases oversees.
Neo-imperial, cold war mentality drives this dangerous agenda, and to convince Canadians otherwise is no more than Harper government propaganda.
OwlRol
44 weeks ago
Granatstein approach is too militaristic
Funny thing, even before Harper's rise, here in BC.
That blinded conservative historian, J.L. Granatstein, pointed out that Canadian school kids never learned of Canadian military accomplishments in the two World Wars. He is surely mistaken and surely deserves little higher status than some of his less militaristic colleagues.
Yeah, Hollywood has pumped out their stories that our kids watch. Can't really compete there.
Can't speak for other provinces, but BC socials/history curriculum includes WWI Arthur Currie, Ypres, Vimy Ridge, etc. and WWII King, CD Howe, Japanese internment, battle of the Atlantic, Ortona, Juno Beach, plus much more.
But the causes of World War One were ommitted from the BC curriculum, only to be tested after August 1, 1914. Now, according to this revision, Canadians were simply sent to assist the British white hats against the evil, black spiked German hats. No reasons given, sort of like the privates who went into battle without knowing who they were fighting or why.
Truly sad sack historical understanding, but still not as bad as the recent Texas textbook revisionism to be published for most of that nation.
Accurate history, in all its facets, is seriously needed to develop a critical and competent citizenship, all the rest is propaganda.
But then, just maybe that's not what our political and economic leaders want, rather ignorant, misinformed consumers.
anne cameron
44 weeks ago
Could it be
that the USA told Civilian Steve what to do and how to do it? Could it be the great war bird has so many "boots on the ground" in so many places that it can't continue to pour munny into empire expansion? Even if they bring back the draft can they find the shekels needed when they're also grappling with some serious economic problems at home? Maybe the country with the biggest military club told its' lap dog to learn how to curl back its' lips and imitate a fierce snarl...jeebus but it's a scary thought, Steve on steroids..."history" is always told and written by the winners, it's always propaganda...it's always bullshit...it's lies and more lies...