Banner

Defence and Human Security

Nuclear Disarmament and the 2018 NATO Summit

Posted on: April 21st, 2018 by Ernie Regehr

No single issue has yet emerged as a central focus for the coming NATO Summit. Priorities listed by the NATO Secretary-General, as well as by some member States, include the need to reinforce alliance deterrence and defence (in the face of Russia’s new assertiveness, is how it’s usually framed), burden sharing (code for increased military spending as well as a greater military role for the European Union), reinforcement of transatlantic solidarity (code for trying to manage President Trump), projecting stability (a nod to continuing out-of-area or counter-terrorism operations), and attention to cybersecurity. Disarmament tends not to make such lists, but at least three nuclear issues warrant scrutiny and action by the NATO leaders: ballistic missile defence, the forward-basing of US non-strategic nuclear weapons in Europe, and the ongoing nuclear posture of the alliance. Continue reading at The Simons Foundation.

Cruise Missiles: When defence is not an option

Posted on: March 30th, 2018 by Ernie Regehr

Cruise missiles recently made the front pages when President Vladimir Putin marshaled impressive audiovisuals to hype Russian strides in developing new and sinister military technologies. Cruise missiles were included but concerns regarding them didn’t just arrive with his speech. They have figured prominently, for just one example, in the current Canadian and American intention to replace the Arctic-based North Warning System.1 Cruise missiles pose a two-fold challenge: the unavoidable reality that there is no credible defence against long-range nuclear-armed cruise missiles; and, the related and equally inescapable reality that the only way to manage them in the long term is through internationally negotiated control agreements. The latter challenge is obviously made all the more daunting by a current political climate that is less than conducive to anything quite that rational.

Continue reading at The Simons Foundation.

Peacekeeping and Canada’s interests in Mali

Posted on: March 28th, 2018 by Ernie Regehr

Letter to the Globe and Mail

Published 28 March 2018

I confess to being perplexed by arguments that Canada shouldn’t go to Mali because it’s dangerous, or hopeless, or not in Canada’s interests (Trudeau’s Mali Misadventure – editorial, March 22).

Peace support operations are by definition dangerous, they take place where political accord and governance are severely compromised. That doesn’t mean quagmire, it means it takes a long, long time to transition from armed conflict to political stability and the rule of law. And it is certainly in Canada’s interests to support the international community in its responsibility to support such transitions – for the sake of the people affected, to be sure, but also for the sake of building a more stable international order from which we all benefit.

The Mali case is urgent precisely because it is complex and dangerous. It does have the benefit of a peace accord, and the government needs to tell us a lot more about what it will be doing in support of the non-military elements of the UN mandate in Mali.

That mandate includes helping implement the fragile peace pact, supporting reconciliation, implementing institutional reforms, preparing for elections this year, promoting security-sector reform, and demobilizing and disarming combatants and reintegrating them into society. How much of that will be part of the Canadian mission? Success is not guaranteed – but there’s little doubt where Canadian responsibilities and interests lie.

Ernie Regehr, Waterloo, Ont.

Replacing the North Warning System: Strategic competition or Arctic confidence building?

Posted on: February 28th, 2018 by Ernie Regehr

Canada and the United States have begun planning a replacement for the North Warning System, the network of air defence radars across the top of the continent. Jointly funded and operated through NORAD, though located primarily in Canada, the system’s renewal comes in the context of a persistent Cold War revivalism that presages a preoccupation with national defence and geostrategic competition. But another feature of the current context is broad recognition that the changing physical environment and increasing access to and activity in the Arctic drive a priority need for enhanced domain awareness within the region to support public safety, law enforcement, and sovereignty protection, while also serving national defence and strategic stability. Continue reading at The Simons Foundation.

BMD: Cooperative Protection or Strategic Instability

Posted on: January 20th, 2018 by Ernie Regehr

It’s hard to believe, but less than a decade ago, academics, policy analysts, and even officials were exploring US-NATO-Russia cooperation on ballistic missile defence – begging the question: why is that no longer considered an appropriate subject for polite company? Missile defence cooperation is still happening, of course, but it’s between Russia and China on one side and among the US and its friends and allies on the other. Unless, however, missile defence is pulled back from its current competitive dynamic to one of east-west accommodation and cooperation, nuclear tensions, and arsenals, will only grow. Canada has joined the competitive fray in Europe through NATO, but, to its credit, continues to resist direct involvement in the strategic North American version of ballistic missile defence. 

Continue Reading at The Simons Foundation.

 

Is the government spending enough on re-equipping the military?

Posted on: January 10th, 2018 by Ernie Regehr

David J. Bercuson (author of the “Eye on defence” column in Legion Magazine, director of the Centre for Military and Strategic Studies at the University of Calgary) and Ernie Regehr (Senior Fellow with The Simons Foundation of Vancouver and co-founder of Project Ploughshares) debate the question in the January/February 2018 issue of Legion Magazine.

Can a Fisheries Agreement help Forestall Militarization on the central Arctic Ocean?

Posted on: December 21st, 2017 by Ernie Regehr

If the Cold War is truly back, the news has yet to reach the Arctic. In the high north, putative rivals are having a hard time getting over their habit of cooperating. They’ve been at it again, this time agreeing on a set of measures to prevent over-fishing in the soon to be accessible high seas of the Arctic Ocean. The agreement is rightly lauded as another advance in collective Governance in the Arctic. Furthermore, it bolsters hopes that the logic of cooperation in support of public safety, environmental protection, and responsible resource extraction will increasingly spill over into security cooperation in the global commons of the Arctic high seas. Continue Reading at at The Simons Foundation…

Shielding the Arctic from NATO’s return to Territorial Defence

Posted on: December 12th, 2017 by Ernie Regehr

NATO Defence Ministers have signalled their intention to create a new north Atlantic Command, one with Arctic operations also in mind. Along with current deployments in the Baltic states and Poland, intensified air patrols on its eastern and northern flanks, European ballistic missile defence, and a new logistics command for Europe, this new command reflects NATO’s shift from out-of-area missions and back to the Cold War priority of defending the territories of NATO member states. Whatever that shift means for Eurasian security writ large, alliance-dominated territorial defence preoccupations in the Arctic would bode ill for its evolving cooperative security framework.

Continue reading at The Simons Foundation.

Arctic Coast Guard Forum – Cooperative Security Under Construction

Posted on: November 23rd, 2017 by Ernie Regehr

The first ever “live exercise” involving all eight countries of the Arctic Coast Guard Forum (ACGF) rightly has some observers hailing this new forum’s potential for reinvigorating pan-Arctic security cooperation. Significant challenges remain – not the least being ongoing wariness of Russian military developments and growing Chinese interest in the region, pushing some states towards the more familiar models of military competition – but the region-wide ACGF clearly affirms security cooperation as essential to survival in the Arctic. To the extent that all states of the region “benefit from a rules-based international order that enhances economic well-being, respects human rights and human dignity, and supports mechanisms for the peaceful resolution of disputes while providing for territorial integrity,” the pursuit of more formalized, and thus more sustainable, forms of mutual security promises to remain a feature of Arctic geopolitics. The slow emergence of cooperative pan-Arctic Coast Guard operations in the Arctic is a case in point.

Read further at The Simons Foundation.

Why debate in Canada over military drone use is sorely needed

Posted on: November 1st, 2017 by Ernie Regehr

Earlier this year, Canada’s chief of defence staff assured Canadians that the Armed Forces won’t be using the armed drones they are bent on acquiring on “Hollywood” style assassination missions.

That is certainly good to know, but it will take more than personal pledges to mitigate concerns about the uses and abuses of armed, remotely piloted aerial vehicles.

Continue reading at OpenCanada.ca.