NORAD renewed indefinitely and to have maritime surveillance

[foerestedwarrior]

Well, there IS only one skill testing question that matters...

What...is the airspeed velocity of an unladen swallow?  (insert best Bridgekeeper's voice here...)

African or european?

 

[Edward Campbell]

This is from this evening’s Globe and Mail:

http://www.theglobeandmail.com/servlet/story/RTGAM.20060508.wnorad0508/BNStory/National/home

Commons backs NORAD pact 257-30

Canadian Press

Ottawa — The House of Commons voted late Monday to renew and expand the NORAD pact, a keystone of Canada's defence for half a century.

Both the Conservative government, which signed the latest renewal agreement, and the Liberals, who oversaw the renewal process, support the deal.

The latest version of the Canada-U.S. treaty, which expands its watch over sea approaches as well as air and space, passed 257-30.

It also makes the deal permanent, eliminating the need for five-year renewals, although both countries retain the right of periodic review and can drop out on a year's notice.

The NDP objects to provisions of the treaty, which they say will compromise Canadian sovereignty and draw Canada into the controversial American missile-defence program.

The government denies that sovereignty will be compromised or that Canada will be bound to missile defence — a program the Liberals refused to join.

NORAD began in 1958, during the Cold War, as a joint effort to defend North America from the threat of attack by Soviet bombers over the North Pole. Then, it was known as the North American Air-Defence Command.

It has been renewed nine times since, expanding its role to watch for missile and space-based dangers. Now, it's the North American Aerospace Defence Command.

Its headquarters in a bomb-proof burrow under a mountain at Colorado Springs, Colo., is run by an American commander, with a Canadian as deputy.

It uses far-flung radars and satellites to monitor the skies and space and now will turn its gaze down to sea level.

 

[17thRecceSgt]

Ok...I have NEVER understood the NDPs "anti-missle" defence posture.  They would rather let them thru?  Lets give the coordinates of their backyards and cottages to the "bad guys" so they know where to send 'em then.


Next question...who are the 30 ding-bats that voted against??  :brickwall:

 

[GAP]

ndp :

 

[17thRecceSgt]

Thank god for "majorities" and CDF (common dog fu.....er...sense)

 

[Gayson]

I'm currently enrolled at RMC through DCS and am working on Defence management.

On our course discussion board we have been discussing the renewal of NORAD.  In my responce to the professors question of wether or not I believe parliament should be involved in the approval process I said yes.

My argument was that I see a possible sovereignty issue by allowing a country to patrol our northern waters when they themselves do not recognize those waters as being "Canadian".

After posting my responce, I thought that this would be an interesting topic of discussion at Army.ca .


What are all of your thoughts on this matter?

[EDIT]  I see there has already been a thread made on the subject.  My apologies.

 

[MarkOttawa]

Speculating about the future from John Ivison of the National Post (one way to deal with any possible maritime patrol aircraft shortfall?):

NORAD could be expanded to land and sea
http://fullcomment.nationalpost.com/2011/02/11/john-ivison-norad-could-be-expanded-to-land-and-sea/

Sources suggest the North American perimeter security talks announced last week will include an intriguing proposal: expanding NORAD to cover land and sea operations. In this scenario, Canadian and U.S. navies and land forces would integrate their command structures, headquarters and operations when it comes to continental security.

George Macdonald, a retired lieutenant-general in the Canadian Forces and a former deputy commander of NORAD, said the structure is in place to expand NORAD’s role beyond the air. “Trusted relationships have been built up over the past 50 years….There is no reason we couldn’t have a maritime NORAD of the North,” he said.

A more comprehensive security arrangement that increased cooperation between the two armed forces was one of the key recommendations of a Canada-U.S. Bi-National Planning Group in 2002. The two governments did extend the aerospace warning regime to include a maritime traffic warning in 2006 but backed away from the more ambitious deal proposed by the planning group.

However, since then melting sea ice at the top of the world has changed perceptions and shifted priorities – not least for the Canadian government, which has made Arctic sovereignty one of its key policy planks.

One defence source said there is a great deal of talk in military circles about how to maintain operations in an era of fiscal austerity. “The chat is all about more role specialization, more pooling and sharing of resources,” he said...

...if the two governments do take the next logical step in bi-national defence, there remains the prospect of American ships and submarines operating in Canadian waters, not to mention the sensitive issue of American troops entering Canadian soil. The fact that U.S., and even Danish, ships take part in interoperability exercises in the Arctic on a regular basis will likely be lost in the heat of the nationalist rhetoric...

More on specialization, pooling from the NATO SecGen:
http://forums.milnet.ca/forums/threads/94602/post-1016681.html#msg1016681

Mark
Ottawa

 

[MarkOttawa]

And LGen (Ret’d) George Macdonald himself at the Canadian Defence and Foreign Affairs Institute's 3Ds Blog: 

Expand NORAD
http://www.cdfai.org/the3dsblog/?p=102

...The NORAD Agreement renewal in 2006 expanded the NORAD mission to include a role in maritime domain awareness, in recognition of the need in our two countries that the more formal sharing of this information was in our mutual security interests.

With global warning and the increasing level of interest and traffic in the North, there exists an opportunity to exploit the close, integrated relationship extant in NORAD to greater use.  Why not consider a ‘NORAD of the maritime North” arrangement whereby we share information and assess movements of interest bilaterally?  This does not mean that the US Navy will have unimpeded access the Northwest Passage, but it could mean that we have an arrangement whereby we deploy the nearest asset to investigate a vessel of interest, provide assistance to a ship in distress, or patrol a specific area.  Protocols to identify ‘unknowns’ or threats to our respective sovereign territory could be developed, much as is done every day in NORAD...

Mark
Ottawa