I humbly think that the discussion about Canadian naval defense priorities so far is completely wrong. You are talking about different ships and their capacities and not the real challenges to Canadian sovereignty as the Canadian’s currently think of their territorial borders and securing their integrity in to the future.
First to the Pacific Ocean, nobody is going to realistically screw with Canada and its lines of communication at this point because it is not even practical for some outside foreign power to do so, without at the same time equally screwing with the USA ’S lines of communication (think of the Lusitania). That kind of action would have consequences that could easily rise far above any possible advantage that some foreign power might think they would gain from those actions.
On the Atlantic side they are a little bit more exposed but Canada ’s many trading partners would certainly come to its aid if it were to be threatened on that side of the continent. This is not to say, that Canada dose not need a real military presence on its West and East coasts to remain a creatable free independent nation state in the eyes of both itself and the world. It is to say that they are not Canada’s main concern.
The real security challenge for Canada lies to its North and it comes in many forms. I hate to go all Geopolitical on you guys but the most important security problem Canada might have in its future comes from the Artic. In 1925, based upon the Sector Principle, Canada became the first country to extend its boundaries all the way northward to the North Pole, even to unexplored islands not connected to its land mass. The sector principle is not, I repeat for clarity is not, a universally recognized method of claming lands that it has not in fact discovered, occupied, mapped, effectively and continually policed, or dose it have effective continuous control. The fact that nobody else has done so in this area has no bearing on the issue whatsoever. These are facts that no reasonable person can dispute. No matter how often Canada has tried to affirm that claim in the past. Canada as it is currently constituted is the second largest country on earth with a fairly small population for its great size. Most of that territory is not effectively occupied at the present time.
Up until now this has not lead to direct confrontations with any significant power simply because of the harsh, almost unlivable conditions found in this part of the world, coupled with the lack of suitable technology and or will to overcome those harsh conditions. This is now changing. I do not know if the environment in that part of the world is significantly changing for the better or not. But many people seem to believe that it is. Sometimes perceptions become facts when enough people believe in them. Regardless, the technology is how becoming available to live and more importantly exploit the possible rich resources within this vast area. A truly vast area where few people live.
A Little history lesson, Canada only succeeded in reaching the Pacific Ocean with its small population and claming the right to hold on to all the territory from that ocean is because it even before settlers arrived upon the seen, the government secured the land militarily and far more importantly, civilly. They brought law and order, secured lines of communication, and generally kept the peace, (at first just between the native tribes). They did this when nobody else cared enough to bother. In so doing it demonstrated through acts of responsibility, their legitimate right to govern those lands. The sine posts of effective governmental control are many and most of them are not military. Thank you RCM.
Now I am an American, not a Canadian so feel free to think I am biased but we on this side of the border like the idea of having a neighbor where we have no danger of going to war with. And with the, The north American Free Trade Agreement there is no reason for us to dispute Candia’s current claim as long as, the resources up there in the far north, whatever they may be, are exploited when and where the weather and or technology make them cost effectively to be recoverable. As long as we have fair access to them through the mechanism of the open and fair market we are satisfied. Most of the world will feel the same but not necessarily all.
Besides the pushy Russians we all know about, don’t discount the possibility of the Chinese discovering in some forgotten lost archive that a Chinese Junk sailed up that way in the 14th century and surprise, discovered they were the first one’s to see it. Thus they have first clam. That is exactly the same reasoning they are making for the Spratly Islands. Remember in the world of the future many things are uncertain, their will be new players and they may be hungry. Could you correctly predict the current geopolitical situation forty years ago?
If the resources in the Artic are conceived by many to be vital to the prosperity of the many various populations of the world, sometime in the next hundred years or so and if Canada is, correctly or not, seen as not making those resources available to those populations that deem they need them, the theory of the (Sector Principle) may quickly fall out of favor on the world stage. Many of Canada ’s allies may be less inclined to support its interests under these perceptions.
The best course of action for Candia is its historical one. First bring Law and Order to the area before it is really required. Establish secure lines of communication, navigation, and safety before they really needed or even before their costs can even be justified. Maybe even using that current bugaboo; of preserving the fragile environment and its innocent living creatures, if that is what it takes to get the job done. Personally I think that is a bag of crap but we are talking politics here not a use of the power of reason.
As to establishing recognized national authority, what are the naval implications? First the Artic sea’s is primary a theater of military operation of the submarine, submarines of both kinds depending on how much land support Canada is willing to provide up north to support Subs. Subs are the best platform suited to operate in these waters regardless if the expected weather change come as predicted or not. Second, because of the distances involved over this vast territory, air power will be of the most important aspect of exerting national control in times of military conflict. But the best possible use of military power is when the obvious presents of credible assets create a sufficient deterrents and sense of recognized occupation that it is never has to be uses at all. Both submarines and aircraft with all their destructive power are poor political tools in demonstrating national authority and occupation in this region of the world. Otherwise you are not living there, your are just visiting.
What the Canadian Navy needs beside seven to eight submarines and sufficient air power of all types to reach, all of their vast domain, is four to five especially designed and built armed Icebreakers. If these ships are put under the flag of the coastguard or not it makes no difference politically in their effect. The ideal ship design with have the same weapons load out as the Norway’s Fridtjof Nansen class frigate butt would be 50% larger. It would have space for four helicopters and an enclosed moon pool. The helicopters would normally be one large cargo hauler and 2 search and rescue types but in time of war they would be replaced with two ant-submarine and two land attack gunship military models. Under normal conditions the towed sonar of the Fridtjof Nansen class would be replaces with a similar compatible civilian model designed for sea floor mapping and other artic research (talk to the fish) but could be easily be swapped out for the active/passive military model. Hull mounted sonar and icebreakers do not mix. The moon pool would normally be used to employ remote under water research vehicles that could also be used for salvage and recovery as well as for exploration but ant-submarine/minesweeping models are in the works and will soon become availed and they too could be swapped out in times of possible threat. You can also fire torpedoes (the larger wire-guided kinds used in submarines from a single fixed tube in cooperation with UWRV or smaller self homing kinds usually found on surface ships) from the moon pool even in ice bound conditions.
Enough top side space would need to be designated and left preserved for a rack of Harpoon missiles or something similar and for decoys (shaft and flare launchers), freeing up the small VLS cells for more missiles than it would normally need to carry as a coastguard vessel, saving a lot of money but again the added weapons would only be installed unless their was a perceived threat. Though the capacity to quickly and easily upgrade the armament of this ship would be plainly visible to all and a good selling point, it is in itself a non-threatening act. What could be better that, a credible weapons platform that has many peacetime functions at far less expense, but can quickly be upgraded if it is really needed? This platform would have a thirty year working life and is a good all around investment.
Even though the combat power of this proposed design is only slightly above that of a modern corvette, its primary functions of icebreaking, navigation, search and rescue, scientific research, mapping, and maritime patrol fulfill all of the political, civil, and military needs that the sovereign nation of Canada require for maintaining it territorial integrity in this region. Of course Canada will still need a few patrol and ASW frigates as well as necessary supporting axillaries but if the navy has enough assets to cover its Artic, the rest of its cost lines are well taken care of.
Two more things, first the US coastguard needs three of these same type icebreakers (we would change the gun to the new coastguard standard but it has similar foot print) and we need it for many of the same reasons the Canadian’s do. The icebreakers we now have are getting very old. Maybe we could do a deal.
And number two, in the Artic Ocean , bottom dwelling magnetic mines planted in the shallow water, narrow channel, ice restricted passages of the far North, will be the terror weapon or choice and if you do not have effective anti-mine clearing capacity that reliably works under the Artic environmental conditions you are totally screwed no matter what else you do.
.
