The Enemy Within

By Michael Nickerson

Paranoia has a bad rep. As the saying goes, “You may be paranoid, but that doesn’t mean they’re not out to get you.” Let’s face it; part and parcel with an effective military is a healthy dose of skepticism and mistrust. It’s the duty of our armed forces to seek out possible threats, anticipate dangers and be aware of who might be foe and not friend. Good intelligence and preparation wins the day, or so the theory goes.

So it was with some relief that I read the recent reporting by David Pugliese in the Ottawa Citizen concerning intelligence gathering and public information planning by the Canadian Armed Forces (CAF). It confirmed for me, as it should for all Canadians of pure hearts and minds, what we all expected: The enemy is closer than we thought. Very close. 

As examples, we now know that there are Yukon residents who are very interested in information on wildfires, and British Columbians showing keen and troubling inquisitiveness in Amazonian forest fires. We also know through deep intelligence gathering, that there are people in Ontario who are dissatisfied with their provincial government’s management of long-term care homes. Needless to say, sedition runs deep and wide in this country. Can provincial coup d’états committed through the combustion of conifers be far off? Think about that for a minute…chilling indeed.

Thankfully the CAF has already prepared for such threats with what it calls Precision Information Teams, or PiTs for short. These are small teams composed of young, motivated members combing social media sites like Twitter, Facebook and Instagram for anything that might catch their eye. 

As the chief of staff for Canadian Joint Operations Command, Rear Adm. Brian Santarpia explained to the Ottawa Citizen, the CAF refrains from hindering PiT members’ enthusiasm in data collection, saying “the young folks who are doing it are going to surprise us every time with something that turns out to be more relevant than any of us thought it would be.” No stone left unturned, no mouse click left unnoticed. I feel safer knowing they know where I’ve surfed, don’t you?

As you can imagine, there are some who aren’t onboard with the new military order of domestic intelligence gathering. But rest assured members of our CAF not only know better than those people, they’re working to help change their minds. 

In order to help deal with what might be considered irrational and detrimental behaviour by the Canadian public during the current pandemic, there are patriots (may they be blessed) who have planned to deter social disobedience and ensure compliance of government edicts. This would not only involve “influence activity” specialists but stratagems from the war in Afghanistan; namely portable radio stations and vehicles broadcasting live information by loudspeaker. It went well there, so I take heart it will work here, and so should you!

But we have a problem, my dear friends. Some see this as an intrusion, perhaps even a violation of public trust. Unfortunately, the domestic data collection effort will now be reviewed, no doubt curtailed, heaven forbid abandoned. And efforts toward shaping the views and minds of the citizens in this country face stiff opposition. When the pandemic plan for what a good patriot would call public clarification and compliance came to the attention of Chief of Defence Staff Jonathan Vance, he shut it down. He’s since announced his retirement. A coincidence? I think not!

I have no doubt that CDS Vance has already researched the temperatures required to ignite at least a half-dozen types of trees in this country. He’s been very busy admitting things that just aren’t helpful for the public good. How dare he be transparent, even in the face of bad press?! He could have stood strong and faced the enemy. But he’s one of them, my fellow patriot. He’s a Canadian!

Take heart that the CAF is still watching, monitoring, and identifying the enemy within. They’ll find them and they’ll let you know what you’re supposed to think about that when they do. Trust the CAF, because they don’t trust you.

The Army of Tomorrow, Today

By Vincent J. Curtis

Yogi Berra once said that predicting the future was hard, especially since it hadn’t happened yet.

Imagine you were a Canadian military planner in 1927. Andy McNaughton orders you to forecast what the army should be like in 1942, a mere fifteen years in the future.

“Simonds,” you cry. “Take a note!”

The Bren gun and the Browning Hi-Power hadn’t been invented. The No. 4 Lee-Enfield rifle hadn’t been developed. The 2” mortar hadn’t been thought of. The armoured doctrine of Plan 1919 was known and the British were experimenting with it, but this was way beyond Canadian industrial capabilities and the funding interests of the government. We were up to date on artillery doctrine even if we lacked the guns. Tanks, trucks and other heavy mechanical gear were primitive and unreliable. The Kellogg-Briand Pact and the Locarno Treaties made war in Europe illegal.

A future strategic environment (FSE) assessment would fail to account for the coming revolutions. The Nazi Party was an obscure, fringe group. Germany itself was crippled by the Versailles Treaty and was convulsing with political unrest. Berlin was dissolute with the frivolities of the late 1920s. The Soviet Union was still consolidating its communist revolution. Lenin was dead, and Trotsky and Stalin were competing for the leadership of the party.
Russia was deeply impoverished and economically confused. Japan had been an ally in the Great War, and hadn’t invaded China. The great depression lay ahead.

It’s now 1942. The Canadian army has three divisions in Britain and would launch an ill-fated raid on Dieppe. The Germans are on the Volga River in Russia and driving on the Caucuses. Brand new Sherman tanks engage with Panzer Mk IVs in the deserts of Egypt and Cyrenaica. The Canadian Force Employment Concept (FEC) is a shambles, the only things that hold from 1927 are artillery doctrine and that peculiar Canadian invention of World War I, the Machine Gun Corps. The machine gun is the self-same Vickers .303 HMG, but mounted on Bren gun carriers instead of armoured cars.

Andy McNaughton orders you to forecast what they army should be like in 1957.

“Kitching” you cry. “Fetch your Underwood!”

The 1942 FSE of 1957 would be blind to revolutionary events. The atomic and then the hydrogen bombs would be invented. Strategic bombers would advance
successively from the new Lancaster, to the B-29, the B-36, the B-47, and the B-52. Germany would be defeated, occupied, and replaced as an enemy by the Soviet Union. NATO would be created. The Korean War would be fought. Sherman tanks would be replaced by Centurions, woolen battle-dress by FSOD, the No.4 by the FNC1, the Bren by the C2, the Sten by the Sterling, the PIAT by the 3.5”, and the Vickers by the Browning. Ballistic missiles would be deployed. But why have an army if the war will be over in thirty minutes?

It’s now 2006. You’re a Major. In Kingston. You’ve been issued a T-shirt, Bermuda shorts, sandals, and a Toshiba 486SX laptop with Office 2000. Andrew Leslie tasks you with coming up with a concept for “The Army of Tomorrow” (AoT for short). This will be the capstone concept for future material acquisitions and doctrinal development through 2021. No pressure. You look up. It’s a blue sky. What do you do?

Here is the Present Security Environment (PSE). Canada, under Prime Minister Paul Martin and MND Bill Graham, just committed Canada to a mission at Kandahar, dramatically expanding our commitment in Afghanistan. No idea how long this will last. The tactical situation around Kandahar is hazardous. General Rick Hillier is the new CDS. The dark decade for the CF is over, as Hillier made it a condition of his appointment that money starts to flow. We have no tactical aviation, no transport helicopters, and the heaviest lift aircraft we have are C-130H Hercules, each with over 30,000 flying hours. We have no modern artillery and no tanks. 

Start typing.

To Be Continued….

PTSD, An Excuse For pedophilia?

By Michael Blais CD

The vulnerability of children is proving to be an integral factor as we delve into the foundations of what defines the moral wounds Canadian veterans have sustained through decades of war, peace and domestic service. Military deployments to areas of the globe that do not share the qualitative standards Canadians cherish in respect to our children often stands in stark contrast to Canada's values. Often, improving the plight of children within the operational sphere reinforces the individual’s moral decision to enlist, to offer great sacrifice in order to make Canada and the world a better place in which to live. Strong bonds are often forged between the deployed troops and the children which they befriend. In one remarkable instance an orphan of the Korean War was seemingly adopted by the Royal Canadian Regiment and repatriated to foster care in London, Ontario. Veterans of United Nations peacekeeping/peacemaking missions in former Yugoslavia, Africa, Haiti, Cyprus and other areas affected by civil war or catastrophic natural events undoubtedly shared these same levels of empathy. More so when bearing witness to children who have been victims of violent genocide, acute poverty or repugnant cultural customs.

Accordingly, recent media disclosures pertaining to the civilian trial in BC of a sea-deployed CWO and his convoluted scheme to drug and sexually exploit his 5 year old child created a tsunami of brutally stark condemnation. Succinctly stated, while operationally deployed aboard a Canadian frigate, the accused CWO conspired electronically with his common law spouse to drug and sexually assault her incapacitated 5-year old son. The context is obscene, were not the communiques intercepted by the child’s biological father via the estranged family’s shared I-Pad, the traumatic consequences would have undoubtedly been far worse. Nearly nine hundred pornographic images of children were discovered on the accused CWO’s laptop, tablet and storage device during the subsequent criminal investigation. 

The CWO ultimately pleaded guilty to possession of 881 pornographic images of children. During his mental assessment, he blamed his abhorrent behavior on acute PTSD. Acute PTSD, perhaps conveniently, which was diagnosed only after he was charged. A forensic psychologist representing the defense claimed his behavior may be linked to this recently diagnosed PTSD. His lawyers cited his austere criminal record, his rank, deployments to Afghanistan, and Bosnia. Leniency was urged by the defence lawyers, because this highly decorated CWO was not responsible for his own monstrous behaviour. No, it was the fault of his PTSD!

During the sentencing, the judge concurred.

“It is a well-known symptom that those who suffer from PTSD often turn to dangerous and risk-seeking behaviours to combat the awful symptoms they suffer from the PTSD. I am satisfied that the accused here was seeking out this risky and deplorable sexualized behaviour to deal with his symptoms.”

The CWO escaped incarceration. Instead, he was sentenced to 18 months house arrest, with his name being added to the province’s sexual predators list for twenty years. 

The question now begs,Is PTSD now an excuse for pedophilia? (Or any other act of criminal behavior, for that matter?)

Walter Callaghan, a veteran and PhD candidate at University of Toronto, questioned the forensic psychologist’s opinion. “While risky behaviour and thrill-seeking can be common in some forms of PTSD, there is no evidence in the peer-reviewed literature of this particular type of vile behaviour being connected to PTSD in this way.”

Doctor Patrick Smith, President and CEO of the Veterans Affairs Canada sponsored, Ottawa based Centre of Excellence on Post-traumatic Stress Disorder, shared our concerns. Motivated by this case, he has taken the lead in collaborating with researchers, clinicians and veterans to provide, as he wrote to me, “an “open letter” that focuses on the evidence of PTSD and the concern we have about how this ruling may inappropriately represent PTSD and further stigmatize those who suffer with it.”

“As President and CEO of Canada's Centre of Excellence on PTSD and Related Mental Health Concerns, it is imperative that we portray PTSD and the experience of Veterans in a way that is accurate and leads to better understanding and awareness. Any portrayal that may cause increased confusion and stigma associated with this serious condition is of grave concern and can contribute to added stress and pressure on those who have proudly served our country.”

Is it okay to not be okay?

By Military Women

Question: Is it okay to not be okay? 

Answer: The short answer is…yes. It is okay to not be okay.

Before March 2020 most of us had never heard of “coronavirus”. We have quickly learned that although everyone is at risk from the virus, the impacts from it can be quite varied.

 Some of us have stood by helplessly as friends and family members have fallen ill, and distancing restrictions have kept us away from a loved one’s bedside or even their funeral.

For others, coronavirus has meant the postponement of needed chemotherapy sessions or long awaited surgeries. For those newly diagnosed as pregnant, the pandemic adds a layer of fear of the unknown on top of what should have been sheer unadulterated joy.

We all empathise with our elderly neighbour’s indignation at their seemingly overnight loss of independence. Elderly parents, no longer able to babysit or visit, can quickly start to suffer from social isolation—too often followed by depression.

Regardless of how the virus is, or is not, impacting you – we can all agree that these are not normal times. Canada has passed the point of no return. There is no going “back to normal”, things are going to be different. Be that good or bad, change and uncertainty are always stressful. It really is okay to say, I’m not okay today.

We know women are experiencing these phenomena differently than men. Women are still disproportionately fulfilling the role of caregiver for others. School closings have meant younger children are now home all day—needing to be fed, entertained and homeschooled.  Many women are either unable to return to paid labour because of their increased parenting and caregiving work at home; or, they are continuing their parenting and caregiving roles at home in addition to their work as “tele-workers”.  Women are also known to be bearing the brunt of the ever-increasing rates of intimate partner violence. 

It’s been a tough few months in other ways as well. Canada’s worst mass murder spree was initiated by intimate partner violence. That horrific event resulting in the first of three rapid sequence workplace deaths of Canadian women in uniform (RCMP and military). We’ve all been further shaken by the shocking deaths of people of colour, women and men, on both sides of the border.

And what about women veterans?  Is it true women veterans are so self-reliant that they find it harder than civilian women to ask for help, especially for themselves? Do some woman veterans still think that “sucking it up” and suffering in silence is a badge of honour? Do some women veterans stay busy, taking care of everyone else, so they don’t have time to self-reflect about their own needs and feelings? It really is okay to say – I’m not okay today. It’s okay to be sad today, or angry. It’s even okay to cry. Acknowledging our own emotions comes from a place of strength, not weakness.

Most of us have been jarred out of our normal daily routines. Why not take this surreal moment in time to just stop. Breathe. Reflect. Reassess. Let’s focus our minds not just on the challenges, but also on the opportunities. Let’s start the lessons learned discussions in our families, communities, cities, provinces, and nation. How can we build back better? How can we ensure tomorrow’s Canada and world are more equitable for all? We really are stronger together.

Let’s also reach out to that friend, neighbour, or battle buddy we haven’t talked to for a while. Let’s start having more authentic and meaningful conversations with the people we interact with. When people ask, let’s tell them how we really feel. On days we are struggling, let’s remember Dr. Bonnie Henry’s healing mantra: “Be calm. Be kind. Be safe.” And on those days when we are not okay, let’s give ourselves permission to say “I’m not okay today”.

All Hands On Deck!

By Michael Nickerson

The line between hope and denial is very thin. Its human nature to hope for a better tomorrow no matter how bad today is. When a loved one is ill, most hope for recovery (if not, find yourself a shrink). Farmers hope for rain, or sun, or whatever weather they need to get through another growing season unscathed. It keeps you going, helps you push through the tough times. It helps people get by when all seems lost.

But that can flip to denial in a big hurry. That lump under my arm can’t be a tumor; must have just pulled something. What drinking problem? I’m just a really social guy. Do I smell smoke? You’re dreaming, go back to bed.

It is not a stretch to say that many Canadians (and much of the world, really) have been in a state of denial about Covid-19. It’s overblown; just a bad case of the flu. We’ll be fine by Christmas. Let’s get back to some NHL hockey and have a good ol’ fashioned summer BBQ party!

Now those who have either been ill, lost someone, or been on the front lines treating the infection and its many repercussions don’t need a wake-up call. It’s all too real for them. But those thinking the world was going to get back to normal by fall should have had the stupidity thoroughly smacked out of them when Finance Minister Bill Morneau recently provided a “fiscal snapshot” on the state of Canada’s federal finances. In short, the federal deficit for this fiscal year is estimated to be $343 billion. There’s nothing like a good gut punch to start your summer vacation.

To put this in perspective, that’s tenfold what the deficit was originally projected to be in a time when the Liberal government was already under fire for spending their way down a deep dark hole of national debt. It amounts to, in one year, some 70% of the total military budget the government pledged to spend over the next twenty years. We’re talking numbers and job losses as bad as or worse than the Great Depression, back when there was no such thing as universal healthcare or the substantial social safety net we enjoy today. From a military perspective, fighter planes didn’t cost over $100 million each, nor did maintaining a modest underfunded military cost more than $25 billion annually (defence spending in 1933 amounted to some $13 million, about $250 million in today’s dollars, and less than three percent of the total budget instead of eight percent today).

So what’s this all mean? It means all hands on deck. To get through this we’re going to need everyone pulling their weight, making sacrifices and hard choices. And we’re going to need everyone to park their ideological hobby horses and work together. A case in point: Morneau had barely sat down after his update when the usual Conservative response was parroted from across the aisle. Where’s the plan for recovery?! We need to decrease spending, engage in austerity and balance the books! It’s like telling a man drowning in a hurricane to work on his breast-stoke. The old rhetoric is not going to cut it anymore.

And the military needs to make not just hard choices, but existential ones. No more infighting between departments, no more pumping up budget requests and looking for the most expensive kit there is instead of the most practical available. Cut extraneous expenses and operationally needless expenses (submarines and the Snowbirds anyone?). There will be limited budgets in the coming years. Suck it up and get used to it.

But how limited those budgets will be ultimately lies with the Canadian public. Will we come together in common cause like in past world wars and prioritize what matters, shelve the partisan squabbling, make even the most basic of personal sacrifices (that’s right, wear the damn mask already!)? Because if you’re still in denial, it’s that serious folks. And we’re going to need all hands on deck for some time to come if we have any hope of getting through it.

Naval Gazing

By Vincent J. Curtis

Why does Canada even have a navy? We’re going to spend $62 billion (allegedly) to replace the one we have, so before we break the bank, let’s understand why. When the RCN lost its replenishment vessels, it was downgraded to an “offshore regional coastal defense force” from a “multiregional power projection force,” so we mustn’t forget replenishment in the strategic picture.

The RCN came into its own during the Secord World War. By 1945, Canada boasted the fifth largest navy in the world, floating over 1,100 boats. Canada possessed two aircraft carriers and two light cruisers. The most famous craft were the Tribal class destroyers and the corvettes. The RCN was designed for convoy escort, of which anti-submarine warfare is the central component. The Tribals proved useful also in the English Channel against German E-boat raiders.

The RCN was put back into water after the heating up of the Cold War and the outbreak of the Korean War.  Canada acquired the HMCS Bonaventure, a light aircraft carrier, and equipped her with McDonnell F2H Banshee jet fighters and Grumman Tracker ASW aircraft. The navy also recommissioned WWII vessels. The Bonaventure was scrapped in 1970, and Canada acquired four Iroquois class ASW destroyers (since retired) and the Halifax class patrol frigates, which were useful in ASW and anti-piracy patrols. These are coming to the end of their useful lives and are scheduled to be replaced with fifteen Type 26 frigate, at a cost of $4 billion each.

The choice of fifteen of the same type indicates a lack of imagination and a lack of vision. Navy brass doesn’t seem to have a particular purpose in mind for a fleet of slow frigates. The Type 26 was designed as an ASW escort vessel for the new Queen Elizabeth class aircraft carriers of the Royal Navy. These fleet carriers are conventionally powered and hence seem intended for operations in the North Atlantic. The Type 26 will be equipped for the ASW role and can provide close-in air defence for the carriers.

But why the Type 26 for Canada? The Type 26 is slow and expensive. Why spend $4 billion on a 7,000 ton frigate when for only $2 billion (U.S.) you can have a 10,000 ton Arleigh Burke class missile destroyer? The top speed of the Type 26 is 26 knots, while that of an Arleigh Burke is 35 knots. An Aleigh Burke is configurable for ASW as well as long range strike, as the Type 26 will be. Bigger, faster, cheaper.

Strategic realities are that the naval service is the only one Canada has that can deliver a strategic strike anywhere in the world independent of any other power.

Former CDS General Rick Hillier said that Canada needed a “big honkin’ ship.”  So, why not build ten of the Type 26, and invest five frigates worth of cash into a big honkin’ ship? A 15,000 ton displacement heavy cruiser would have all the deck space needed to deliver a multiplicity of heavy blows, and would form the core of an honest-to-god Canadian naval task force.

Modern naval warfare is designed around missile technology. A modern naval battle would take place with opposing ships out of sight of each other, with helicopters and radars providing target acquisition. Missiles would be used to attack opposing ships and defend against incoming missiles. But there is a gap in naval capability that used to be filled by the battleship, now derided as obsolete.

Battleships captivated the imagination because of the majestic power they obviously disposed in their massive guns. Diplomacy in peacetime occurred when battleships sailed. Allied battleships in WWII used their heavy guns primarily to support landing operations. Long barrelled, heavy guns are still intimidating and, with modern artillery guidance technology, still capable, and would be a versatile weapons system on a ship big enough to carry them.

A hybrid of heavy cruiser and missile cruiser could form the core of a uniquely Canadian naval task force.

Veterans Disability Backlog: Delay, deny, hope that you die?

By Michael Blais

Sadly, I have heard this catch phrase far too often during a decade of veterans advocacy. Particularly in respect to the prolonged waiting times the troops have been historically confronted with when seeking assistance to cope with various levels of mental and/or physical trauma directly attributable to their service in war and peace. Whether it be for basic acknowledgement of national sacrifice or for seeking approvals for entitled treatment procedures, hearing aids, medical cannabis and medications as the situation dictates, problems with delays persist. 

By the left… Slow… March! 

We know through recent media reports approximately 50,000 disability applications remain in transition as of the end of March 2020. These claims are unattended, collecting dust and awaiting due process as pledged by the Liberal government 5 years ago in respect to a pledged 16 week period wherein veterans’ applications for benefits would be formally processed. 

Veterans Affairs Canada has deemed 21,000 of these claims as ‘acklogged’, a quaint term to define their collective failure to accommodate the increasing numbers of veterans seeking recognition in the aftermath of the Afghanistan War. Innovative ideas floated by the department may have proved marginally effective but have yet to significantly impact the
steadily rising number of applicants awaiting the due processing of their claims. Strikingly, there are 10K files more in the cue now than there was at the time of reporting last year. The much maligned backlog is increasing, despite the hiring of 150 staff last year to facilitate intake issues.

The last integral number is the most important, as it is indicative of where the standard truly lies in respect to processing veterans’ claims within a 16 week period: A mere 37%.

Hardly encouraging. 

There is good news, however. The government is dedicating $192 million over the course of the next two years to address the perpetual delays. Staffing levels assigned to intake services will increase by 300 temporary positions and these workers will “drill down” on deficiencies in disability adjudication, case management, and salvos of incoming applications. They will encompass comprehensive team efforts and innovation designed to streamline the adjudication process. 

The pandemic has had a decidedly adverse impact on many veterans. Many physical therapies have been cancelled or greatly mitigated, while those confronting mental trauma have often been isolated, left alone and without the assistance required. 

Here is where veterans can help veterans: Do a buddy check. 

Were we all to do our part, we could very well save lives by the time this pandemic is finally over. You need to know what VAC is doing as there are resources available and should the situation dictate, emergency financial support is possible through the Veterans’ Emergency Fund. Should one of your buddy checks require mental health support, urge them to call 1-800 268-7708. Psychological assistance and counselling by mental health professionals are available. Veterans concerned about their benefits should be aware almost 3000 VAC employees are still performing their duties albeit ‘virtually’ these days.,

Provisions have been attained wherein VAC will cover the costs for Personal Protective Equipment (PPE) aka the masks and gloves which disabled veterans will require to safely continue their treatment programs. Veterans can use their VAC card at their pharmacy, and the expense is automatically approved. Certain prescription requirements have been temporarily waived and the department is extending coverage for telehealth or virtual health services. 

Veterans access to medical cannabis has not been ‘impacted’ by the crisis. 

Many veterans enrolled in vocational services are very concerned about their status and more importantly, how it affects their Education and Training Benefit. VAC has staff on hand to review your education plan.

More information can be found by calling 1-800-866-522-2122, through your My VAC Account. 

Extremism in the Canadian Forces? DND has launched a new initiative, inclusive of defining what exactly constitutes hateful conduct. 

To wit:”[any] act or conduct, including the display or communication of words, symbols or images, by a CAF member, that they knew or ought reasonably to have known would constitute, encourage, justify or promote violence or hatred against a person or persons of an identifiable group, based on their national or ethnic origin, race, colour, religion, age, sex, sexual orientation, gender identity or expression, marital status, family status, genetic characteristics or disability.”

Stay strong, stay safe, remember always that we are a very unique brother/sisterhood and the challenges many within our family are confronting during the pandemic are far greater than our own. 

Do a buddy check, be aware, if you think things are going sideways, step up, be the one that makes a difference through kindness and compassion.

Bedpans, Sponge Baths and Band-Aids

By Michael Nickerson

So you want to join the military. Fantastic! Welcome aboard. We certainly have some spaces just waiting to be filled. A few questions first, if you don’t mind: How are you with bedpans? Ever changed an adult diaper? Certainly you have experience giving your grandparents sponge baths. Necessary skills for the modern soldier, I’m afraid. What did you think you were signing up for?

I’m going to stick my neck out here and suggest that when the Canadian Armed Forces dared recruits to be “extraordinary” they weren’t referring to excellence in social work, palliative care, or the nitty gritty of personal support work for seniors and the disabled. I suspect those recruits weren’t prepared to watch our most vulnerable die badly and not be able to do anything about it. That’s rather anathema to military culture and training in general no?

In theory it’s also anathema to Canadian culture and values, but the coronavirus pandemic is laying bare some truths about us all. Stress will do that. Apply a bit of it and you’ll see the soft spots. Apply lots of it and you’ll see just where the seams start to burst, and where things simply explode.

As of this writing, there were some 5500 deaths officially recorded in Canada (from a population of 38 million) as being the result of Covid-19. While many argue the number is actually higher, relative to the United States (89,000 and growing amongst a population of some 330 million) and the United Kingdom (34,000 deaths amongst a population of 67 million), that’s a rousing success. Relative to countries like South Korea (262 deaths amongst a population of 51 million) or New Zealand (21 deaths amongst a population of 4.8 million), that is a dismal failure.

But what seems merely dismal becomes downright criminal when you consider that over 80 percent of those Canadian deaths occurred amongst the residents of long-term care facilities…our seniors, our disabled; our most vulnerable. They’re dying before their time and in the most horrible ways (respiratory failure, suffocation…think a drawn-out state of drowning and you’ll start to get the idea), alone, separated from loved ones due to quarantine rules.

Why? Lack of preparation, lack of money, and a lack of care on the part of all Canadians. We are a society that shuffles off those most difficult to deal with to the sidelines, but then forgets about them when it comes to funding and support. Underpaid care workers working multiple jobs at minimum wage transferring the virus from one residence to the other; a dearth of personal protection equipment (PPE); poor to no oversight or foresight, standards or accountability. In short, it’s a case of no money, no care, and just hope things don’t get so bad we have to pay attention.

Enter those soldiers who never dreamed they’d be up front and personal with the sort of problems we all as a society try to ignore. Be it issues of climate change, pandemics, or the simple fact we’ve ignored our most vulnerable for decades, we continue to call on our military as just another Band-Aid to solve the latest problem. That’s right soldier, you’re not here to defend Canadians from others, your here to defend Canadians from themselves.

In a recent interview with the CBC, Finance Minister Bill Morneau said the government is “not thinking about raising taxes” despite all the stimulus spending they’re doing and the historic deficits they’re about to rack up. He’s printing money by the billion to keep the economy going, so no need. But that won’t go on forever, and it begs the question: will Canadians ultimately accept higher taxes to properly face the challenges that become more obvious by the day?

The current pandemic has lain bare the realities that our healthcare system is underfunded, our long-term care system is underfunded, and given the threats facing us domestically and globally given climate change, our military and its veterans are underfunded. Will Canadians give up some disposable income to fund these broader institutions? I fear we haven’t been hit hard enough yet to care.

Let’s Play Conspiracy!

By Michael Nickerson

I’m starting to go nuts. Seriously, I kid you not. While many have theorized about this throughout my life, I’m willing to admit there might be some truth to it right now. I can’t go out; not to the pub, not to the park, not for a nice greasy breakfast at the diner around the corner. All work has been cancelled; social gatherings verboten; saying hi to dogs in the park not just off limits, but likely to illicit blasts of bear spray from their masked owners. It’s like a school snow day from hell. You can’t even play outside.

So how does one pass the time? Well, I thought of turning Monopoly™ into a drinking game, taking shots whenever you land on an opponent’s property, cheap vermouth for St Charles Place on up to 18 year-old Glenlivet for Park Avenue. Alas, the only people in my home to play with are my wife and three cats, and none of them drink. They also think I’ve been acting more weird than usual and have been keeping their distance. Well beyond two metres I might add, which is a bit hurtful.

So there I was about to concoct a scotch martini with three olives when I was saved by François-Philippe Champagne, our intrepid foreign affairs minister. No, he did not come to my home and give me a slap for crimes committed against mixology; he gave me a very good idea, a new game to play; drinks optional.
The moment of epiphany came while he announced the revised arms deal with Saudi Arabia, involving both the contentious sale of LAVs to the rather human rights challenged kingdom and further sales of arms to come, punctuating a saga that has been going on for years. Not unexpected, given how the Liberals have been foot-dragging on the whole thing hoping everyone would just forget about it, but still lamentable for those who thought Canada stood more on principle than dollars.

But the metaphorical light went on when the good minister made clear that the timing of the announcement had nothing to do with the current coronavirus crisis, but was merely a byproduct of when the agreement was signed on March 31st. Really?

Any good conspiracy theory starts with a denial, and so my game of Conspiracy!™ was born. Keep in mind, this game can work for any denial. Covid-19 was not created in a lab…aha! Conspiracy! The Chinese say they have not concealed any information about the virus outbreak…Conspiracy! Donald Trump denies everything…well you get the idea.

Right then, so here’s how you play: Start with a denial. In my case, I ran with the whole Saudi agreement thing. What are they trying to cover up? I asked myself. A renegotiation of a multibillion dollar agreement that we’ve never been given the details about, announced amid the din of virus news coverage. Sounds fishy, no?
Next, I got boxes of coloured push pins, balls of yarn and some 4’ by 8’ cork sheets (think big here people, we’re going to be locked up for some time) and started connecting the dots, just like they do on those crime shows. In my case, I went the extra mile and got images of everyone involved, from Stephen Harper and John Baird to Justin Trudeau and Chrystia Freeland, members of the House of Saud, their deputies, assistants, gardeners and interior decorators.

I pinned up questions, like why any government would sign a contract where the penalty for even divulging the contents of the agreement is paying out the total worth of the contract. Is that remotely legal? Who stands to benefit? Who is pressuring who? Did someone forget to weed the garden last year, and if so who? My lord! If you really get creative you can have yourself tangled in yarn in no time. My cats are still trying to untangle me.

And let’s be honest, that’s a lot more fun than admitting the truth: that we traded morality for money long ago, and this pandemic is only going to make it that much worse.
Stay safe.

Approaching Victory 1945

By Vincent J. Curtis

April 1945, in the words of one regimental war diary, “which commenced with our push northward from our concentration area at the Rhine, was undoubtedly the most turbulent and widely travelled month the battalion had spent since leaving England.” 

After the closure of the Falaise Gap on 21 Aug, 1944, the 2nd Canadian Corps advanced to the River Seine and crossed it at Elbeuf and Rouen. September saw the liberation of Dieppe, the investment of Dunkirk, and the liberation of Belgium’s Ostend and Bruges.

Stiffening German resistance required the 2nd Canadian Corps to mount formal operations: Wellhit to capture Boulogne and Undergo to capture Calais and Cap Gris Nez.

October, 1944, saw the mounting of Operation Switchback to clear Belgium north of the Albert Canal and Operations Vitality and Infatuate to clear the South Beveland peninsula and Walcheren Island.

A phase of static operations commenced in November and compassed the period of the German counterattack known as the Battle of the Bulge.

The advance resumed in February, 1945, with Operation Veritable, the attack on the Reichwald Forest, and then Blockbuster, which comprehended the battle of the Hochwald Gap and the capture of Xanthan on the Rhine River, the traditional western border of Germany.

The 2nd Canadian Corps pushed eastward into Germany near the border with the Netherlands, in the area known as Lower Saxony. With the coming of April, the end of the war was in sight. The Soviets were pushing westward from the Vistula River in Poland into pre-1939 German territory. The Americans, spearheaded by General George Patton’s Third Army, was knifing eastward through the belly of the beast towards Prague, Czechoslovakia.

German resistance became sporadic: dangerous, unpredictable, and frustrating. Some infantry units were experiencing four or five KIA/DW’s every day, along with half a dozen to a dozen wounded. Most of these casualties were caused by sniper fire, artillery and mortars, and rockets known a “Moanin’ Minies”. The occasional machine gun caught the unwary out in the open. Although these daily losses seem small, after ten days to two weeks they add up. A fully manned infantry battalion mustered only five hundred in those days, and infantry companies often fielded only fifty men.

Men began experiencing the “getting short” syndrome, first acknowledged in the Vietnam War. (As a tour was coming to an end, men got very cautious and took no risks hoping not to get killed just before they came home.) Patience with German resistance was wearing thin. The war was clearly lost, PW’s were coming in every day, yet pockets of needlessly fierce resistance were encountered.

At Friesoythe, this impatience exploded. The 4th Canadian Armored Division, under the command Maj-Gen Chris Vokes, had to take this German town which was believed defended by about 200 paratroops. The civilians had evacuated. The Lake Superior Regiment assaulted the town on 13 April and were repulsed with two dead and nineteen wounded. Next up were the Argyll & Sutherland Highlanders, under the command of Lt-Col Fred Wigle. Since the LSRs had attacked from the west, Wigle decided to march at night around the town and attack at dawn from the east.

The plan worked beautifully, except that advancing companies missed a group of about fifty paratroops. These Germans attacked the battalion tactical HQ, which was behind the advancing companies. Wigle was killed, shot in the back by a sniper. Lt Alan Earp (later OC, CD and HCol) was shot through the head, but survived. The town was secured by mid-morning, but when the troops heard of the death of their CO, all hell broke loose. An enraged Vokes, who commanded 1st Div at Ortona against the German 1st Parachute Division, ordered Friesoythe razed in reprisal of Wigel’s death. The Argylls needed no encouragement. Crocodiles (flame-throwing tanks) were brought in and burned down the town, the stone buildings were demolished, and the rubble used to rebuild roads that had been heavily cratered.

The end of April still didn’t herald the end of resistance.

ACVA 101

By Military Woman

Question: The Parliamentary Veterans Affairs Committee – what’s new for women veterans? 

Answer: The 43rd Parliament of Canada’s all-party Standing Committee on Veterans Affairs (ACVA) held its inaugural meeting February 18, 2020. The first order of business was to elect Members of Parliament (MPs) Bryan May, Phil Coleman and Luc Desilets as chair and vice-chairs respectively. Notices of motions were then given for six topics for the committee to potentially study – Commemoration, Caregivers, “Minority” Veterans, Education Training Benefit, veteran benefit application backlogs and service dogs. You can review (by audio or transcript) this, and all subsequent, ACVA meetings at http://ourcommons.ca/committees.

What’s of interest from this first ACVA meeting from a military woman’s perspective? First, let’s look at the committee itself – 3/12 or 25% committee members are women and they represent three different parties – Conservative (Cathay Wagantall), Liberal (Marie-France Lalonde), and NDP (Rachel Blaney). Some will think that this is a fair representation level, others will not, but we can all agree that it fell short of seeing any women elected into one of the three committee chair positions. 

Second, let’s look at the proposed topics for study. Darrell Samson, Parliamentary Secretary for the Minister of Veterans Affairs, started the priority list off with “Commemoration”. Always an important veteran topic, making it a “safe” minority government priority to lead with. One hopes, government will include the experience and voice of women veterans within all future veteran commemoration programming
and external communication strategies. 

The Parliamentary Secretary then asked for a review of the services and supports for injured veterans and their caregivers. For many, this is the most important of the veteran study topic areas. Caregivers, both formal paid and informal unpaid, are still largely assumed to be women, not men.
One hopes, the study will include both identifying the needs unique to caregiving civilian male spouses, and to injured and ill veterans without spousal caregiving support.

Andy Fillmore MP proposed the third motion, a study on “Women, LGBTQ2+ and Racialized” or “minority” veterans. Although there are clearly unmet needs worthy of more study for all these groups individually and collectively, perhaps it’s time for a new approach. Perhaps these unmet needs would be better served by a study on how to best ensure equitable care, benefits and end wellbeing outcomes for all veterans. Doubling down on sex and gender-based analysis throughout Veteran Affairs Canada (VAC) being one obvious answer.

MP Lalonde requested a study on the Education Training Benefit. A benefit more single parents would be able to use if it came with subsidization for children’s daycare costs. 

MP Alex Ruff, a highly decorated veteran, proposed a review into the backlog of VAC benefits application. The Veterans Ombudsman has already confirmed that women wait longer for VAC claim decisions than men do. One hopes, that any study on this topic will include the obvious fastest and smartest way to alleviate the backlogs over the long term, which is to put more efforts into prevention. The capture and analysis of VAC claim trends, fed back to CAF as lessons learned, can and would assist in the prevention of unnecessary injuries and illnesses altogether. 

MP Dane Lloyd, an army reservist, rounded up the motions requesting a long overdue and needed service dog efficacy and standards study. 

Interestingly, despite specific mention in the Speech from the Throne, there is no mention today about veteran homelessness, male or female. 

Regardless of which study topics end up being selected (check out the 25 Feb 2020 ACVA meeting for that answer), hopefully all ACVA committee members have completed their GBA+ training and will “lead by example” to ensure that the needs of all veterans will be forefront in their deliberations. When applied properly sex and gender-based analysis should result in all veterans feeling valued, respected and fairly treated.

Stalking

By Military Woman

Question: I have heard a lot about “sexual misconduct” in the military but not very much about stalking. Is stalking a problem for military women? 

Answer.  First, let’s agree on what stalking is. Stalking is when a person, who has no legal reason to, continues to contact, follow, talk to, or send things to you, or people closely connected to you, despite repeated requests for them to stop.  

Stalking is categorized as a type of “criminal harassment” in the Criminal Code of Canada. Stalking can be linked with other crimes, such as sexual assault, indecent exposure, threats, voyeurism, the sharing of private images without consent and trespassing.

Who stalks? Stalkers can be total strangers or casual acquaintances, but are most likely current or past intimate partners.  Women are the stalkers in about 20% of cases, but rarely do these cases end in intimate partner violence (IPV) against men. Unfortunately, the reverse does not hold true. One woman is murdered every six days in Canada by a present or past male partner. Margaret Atwood once observed, “Men are afraid that women will laugh at them. Women are afraid that men will kill them.” Stalking is a very gendered experience and is therefore considered to be a type of gender-based violence (GBV).

How common is stalking? In North America, between 8 and 19% of civilian women and 2 to 6% of civilian men are estimated to be victims of stalking. These rates in the US veteran population are thought to be doubled, or around 35% for women and 15% for men. The Journal of Interpersonal Violence recently reported even higher stalking rates for current US active duty populations, up to 60% for women and 35% for men. 

In the absence of available statistics on Canadian military and veterans, we don’t know if Canadian rates are higher, lower or the same as US rates. We do know that Canadian military women are more likely to have a past or current intimate partner relationship with another military member than a civilian woman would.  We do know that having a common military workplace may make it easier for would-be stalkers to access personal information about their current and past military intimate partners. Access to information such as a person’s place of work, home address, schedule and work/social contacts helps stalkers to stalk. We also know that military women have higher separation and divorce rates than civilian women or military men. This is of particular concern when you consider that data from the Canadian general population that suggests a woman in Canada has six times the risk of being killed by a past intimate partner than a present partner.

Reporting stalking is also complicated, especially in a military context where the victim may still fear negative consequences to their own career and/or their previous partner’s career. It’s further complicated if there are any ongoing financial reliances relating to child custody or spousal support payments.

How can you help someone who thinks they may be getting stalked? Believe them. Listen non-judgmentally. Encourage all evidence to be saved and documented (a stalking log is available at www.ncvc.org/src). Ask if they know (or suspect) who their stalker is. Review their perceived risk or threat level and brainstorm how to minimize it. Think about ways to block any ongoing access by the stalker to knowledge about the victim and their family and/or schedules.  Develop a safety plan on how to avoid the stalker and how to deal with any unexpected encounters. Research workplace rights and supports including the police, a lawyer, the Sexual Misconduct Response Centre (SMRC), and websites such as YellowManteau.com. Decide when and how to report to authorities.

What to do if you are being stalked now? Step one is to acknowledge the problem. Family, society and even military workplaces can deny, minimize, normalize and/or perpetuate inappropriate relational stalking behaviours. Research your options. Ask for help, third party interventions are often required. 

Knowledge and policy gap. Canadian military (and RCMP) women statistics for stalking remains largely unchartered territory. It’s a gap that we look forward to being addressed in this government’s “National Gender Based Violence Plan.”

The Making of a General: Guy Granville Simonds

By Vincent J. Curtis

Rather than be sent home from Italy humiliated, Simonds instead went to England in January, 1944, as GOC 2nd Canadian Corps. At 41, he was the youngest Corps commander in British Commonwealth forces. Simonds immediately got rid of F.F. Worthington, the father of the Canadian Armoured Corps as GOC 4th Armoured Division, replacing him with George Kitching. He also replaced other McNaughton holdovers.

McNaughton left the Canadian army in Britain poorly trained. Above the company level training was bad, and all-arms combat went unpracticed. Simonds had a lot of preparing to do and little time to do it in. Making matters worse, Crerar was appointed GOC 1st Canadian Army, Simonds’ titular boss, though Montgomery was GOC 21st Army Group, Crerar’s boss.

Simonds began by writing down his battle outlook for his staff, division, and brigade commanders. He described the German method of defense, and held that the key to defeating it lay in repelling its counterattacks while maintaining sufficient reserves that forward movement could be resumed. Any plan had to include forward movement of artillery support. Stylistically, this was refighting the Battle of Hill 70 – bite and hold – with an exploitation phase added. Since divisional artillery could only support one brigade, attacks would be along narrow frontages. That was the standard battle formula.

The 2nd Canadian Corps was activated in France in July, 1944, and Simonds led the Corps through Operations Atlantic, Spring, Totalize, and Tractable before Monty let Crerar on the scene with the activation of the 1st Canadian Army. Atlantic saw the Canadians cross the Orne river, seize the southern half of Caen, and advance towards Verrières Ridge. Spring was the disastrous attempt to seize the ridge, and saw the destruction of the Black Watch and the breaking of the South Saskatchewan Regiment, who were left unsupported on an exposed forward slope of a hill overlooked by German mortars and artillery.

After Spring, Simonds wanted Charles Foulkes, GOC 2nd Div, who was responsible for the debacles (and, coincidentally, an old and future rival), fired. Crerar prevented it, and eventually Foulkes was appointed Simonds’ equal as GOC 1st Canadian Corps, and later CGS after the war ahead of Simonds. Rod Keller was, however, let go as GOC 3rd Div after Totalize, and Simonds fired George Kitching as GOC 4th Div immediately after Tractable. Today, Simonds would be accused of micro-managing his division commanders.

Coming from a military family and spending his entire life in the Regular army, Simonds had probably never been treated with kindness in his life. He seems never to have learned the value of treating subordinates with kindness occasionally. By his own admission, the tightly-wound Simonds was bad tempered, headstrong, and unable to tolerate fools. He maintained a cold, glacial appearance, and he commanded rather than led. He was innovative, hard-driving, and driven himself, as well as ambitious, ruthless, highly self-confident, and
arrogant. 

Simonds had poisonous personal relations with Crerar, and could not trust him. His Brigade and Divisional commanders simply weren’t as competent as they should have been. The cold, brainy Simonds was probably too impersonal towards his subordinates, commanding where he should have coached or encouraged. When a boss thinks he is surrounded by idiots, the subordinates tend to act accordingly. But after Verrières Ridge, the destruction of Worthington Force, and with Crerar looking to shaft him, it takes a mature man to maintain composure.

As a gunner through and through, Simonds cherished the belief that “artillery conquers, infantry occupies.” Advancing the guns cost him time in his operations – time the Germans used to regroup. He attacked along narrow fronts without thinking that a secondary attack would stretch the German defenses and might create opportunities of its own.

Confining himself to Corps HQ, the formulaic Simonds lacked the battlefield “touch” that Currie demonstrated at 2nd Ypres, and Simonds’ chief antagonist in Normandy, Kurt Meyer, had. His personality, gunner prejudices, and his poorly prepared instrument impaired his operations in Normandy. Still, the technically proficient Simonds was a giant among Canadian generals in World War II.

Let's Be Honest

By Michael Nickerson

Fun fact: women don’t want to kill innocent people. Who knew? It was a complete surprise to me. I’ve always been under the assumption that my wife, mother and friends of the female persuasion were merely one step away from sticking a steak knife into any child silly enough to cross their path after a long day at the salon. But thanks to the mandarins at National Defence, we now know better. 

But gosh darn, the insight and wisdom doesn’t stop there, no sir. Thanks to David Pugliese and his reporting in the Ottawa Citizen, we now have a window into our military’s take on the wants and needs of those who constitute (at last count) fifty percent of the country’s population. Now we know how they think, what they expect in life, and ultimately what is keeping them from ‘daring to be extraordinary’ as the advertising goes. 

Well let me tell you, as a privileged white male it’s been a real eye-opener. For instance, women don’t like being away from their families and friends for long periods of time. Morning pushups are a real turnoff. Being sexually harassed is not a plus. Suffering from PTSD is a definite downer, and the whole combat/killing thing just does not sit well when it comes to recruiting women to be involved in that combat/killing thing. Who knew?

What’s implicit to some degree in this is the idea that men live for pushups and grueling runs, are quite happy to kill people, innocent or not, don’t mind a little PTSD or living rough on the street, and are content to be separated from their families for as long as possible. It’s a guy thing apparently. 

So given all this eye-popping market research, what do you think is the solution to attracting more women to join the military? Marshmallow roasts! Shorter skirts! Male chaperons! Telling women that camouflage is stylish, face paint is just a sexier form of makeup, medals are like earrings, and combat boots are the latest thing on the Paris fashion runways. Sign up, ladies, and we’ll have you on the cover of Vogue in no time!

Now you’re probably guessing who came up with these suggestions. Some might assume it was a cadre of sexist old men wondering what the wee little fillies might want to make them more comfortable in uniform. But no, it goes to the “Tiger Team” for these suggestions, a group consisting of mostly women (90%) enlisted from all branches of the military to brainstorm on how to meet Chief of Defence Staff Jonathan Vance’s goal of having twenty-five percent of the Canadian military be staffed by women come 2026. Sadly, they chose lies over honesty. Marshmallow roasts?!

It’s in the great tradition of advertising: push the positive and minimize (or simply do not mention) the bad. This is all well and good when selling such things abrasive toilet paper or the career opportunities available at the local call centre; you can always walk away from both. It’s quite another when you’re trying to recruit people, male or female, into the military.

To put it mildly, the job requires commitment, sacrifice, hardship, and the potential for long-term disability without recourse to union protection. There continues to be issues of sexual harassment, and veterans have rightfully called for recognition and support.

Yet it is also a noble profession, a much needed profession in our country, and one that offers much in terms of experience and training that truly lasts a lifetime. But it speaks volumes for the insecurity and failings of military leadership when more time is spent trying to trick people into the job than in being upfront and treating people as the adults they must be to ultimately handle the job. 

It’s a seriously tough gig. Not many people can handle it. So be honest about that and leave the marshmallow roasts for someone else. You’re not training people for firefights around the campfire after all.

Trifecta

By Michael Blais

Veterans are not alone in having good reason to be dismayed with respect to Veterans Affairs Canada’s performance when one considers the trifecta of adverse headlines which this department has garnered over the past month. Hopefully, Prime Minister Trudeau will share our concerns as it was promises he made to veterans in exchange for their votes during the past two election’s which have been broken and/or marginalized.

Serving members, veterans and their families will recall an infamous exchange between an ex soldier and Trudeau during a town hall meeting in Edmonton, February, 2018. Afghanistan War veteran Brock Blaszczyk had issued a challenge to Mr. Trudeau regarding the Liberals much heralded Pension for Life and the Equitas lawsuit.

“I was prepared to be killed in action. What I wasn’t prepared for, Mr. Prime Minister, is Canada turning its back on me” Said Blaszczyk. Trudeau replied “Certain groups are asking for more than we can afford, right now.” 

Afford? Veterans Affairs Canada, under a Liberal mandate, has to date returned hundreds of millions of parliamentary approved dollars unspent, sending close to 350 million dollars back to treasury. This practice is ongoing with the latest report citing 105 million returned by VAC the very same year in which Trudeau claimed veterans “were asking for more.” Despite unanimous support for a parliamentary vote in 2019 to ensure budgeted funds delegated to veterans care which remain unspent at the end of the fiscal year would be carried forward until services have been restored.

Could this money not have fulfilled Trudeau’s promise to acknowledge Blaszczyk’s national sacrifice by re-establishing the Sacred Obligation pension as the Prime Minister promised?

Trudeau’s promise on backlogs have been abrogated by the reality of recent media headlines.

“Backlog of applications for veteran’s benefits grows by the thousands,” proclaimed The Canadian Press.

Delays in adjudication and services persist unabated. Despite the Liberals infusion of over 5 billion dollars, the rehiring of hundreds of front line positions which had been deemed redundant by the conservatives, the backlog status has somehow grown worse? Pas possible!

Forty-four thousand applications are currently in motion, while approximately twenty-three thousand have been processed yet are stagnant, waiting for adjudication. Most of these claims are combat arms related, which is important in the sense of debunking the long standing Liberal promise to expedite combat arms decisions on claims relating to hearing impairment, tinnitus, traumatized feet, ankles, knees, backs, necks and shoulders, maladies which are all too common to the life of former infantrymen, tankers, sappers and gunners.

Damaging headline number three for VAC would be in Nova Scotia’s ongoing provincial inquiry into the horrific deaths of Cpl Lionel Desmond and his family. This coroners inquiry has raised critical questions which strike to the very heart of VAC’s credibility with respect to the department’s ability to effectively provide expedient mental health services to veterans in the wake of the Afghanistan War. 

Justice Warren Zimmer’s extraordinary decision on the 11th day of the proceedings, to read Cpl Desmond’s military medical files into the court record when confirmed that VAC did not share this vital information when they contracted Catherine Chambers the community based psychologist to treat Cpl Desmond after a four mouth absence of care. The Zimmer felt it important to detail the degree of negligence demonstrated by VAC when they failed to share Cpl Desmond’s medical records with Chambers.

She testified she was unaware hospital doctors recommended on-going therapy, inclusive of brain scans, neuro-cognitive testing and potential monitoring for Post-Concussion Syndrome. She was unaware Cpl Desmond suffered from PTSD, major depression and anxiety, poor cognitive abilities and paranoia concerning the motives of health care professionals. Dr. Chambers wept as she informed the judge that knowing now what VAC had failed to disclose to her that December, she did not believe Cpl Desmond would have been a candidate for “community based psychotherapy but would have required further inpatient care.”

Veterans are not falling through the cracks. Veterans are being abandoned and in respect to Cpl Desmond and his family, abandoned into a catastrophic dimension.

Will Trudeau hold anyone at VAC to account? I doubt it.

Manic Monday. Wacky Wednesday. Freaky Friday

By Mike Blais

Soldiers in-theatre often have unique, shall we say descriptive terms to blunt the adversarial impact of any given situation through humour rather than alarm. Not surprisingly, Mefloquine’s nickname’s are related to the day of the week wherein soldiers were ordered to take this drug in order to stave off the never ending scourge of malaria. Manic.

Wacky. Freaky.

Objectively, the drug has proven to be an effective anti-malarial deterrence.

Malaria is a virulent disease. Strategically, it is necessary to effectively inoculate soldiers prior to deployment to malaria plagued operational theatres as a vital component to mission success. The Americans would not have been successful against the Japanese during the Pacific campaign of WW2 without strictly regimented use of powerful quinines due to the profoundly mission-adverse impact which rampant malaria would have inflicted upon their combat forces ability to function, let alone fight.

Mefloquine’s discovery was consequential to American engagement in another theatre of war, this time in South-East Asia wherein malaria posed a clear and present danger to American troops. In fact during the Vietnam War, Americans sustained 24,000 cases of malaria. Noteworthy?

The term Post Traumatic Stress Disorder was coined during this era and this term have now been applied as the catch all for veterans suffering from mental trauma symptoms inherent to military service in both war and peace.

Most of these symptoms are also currently identified by Health Canada, with respect to the Mefloquine generation of quinines, as serious “side effects” by Health Canada.

Coincidence?

DND embraced Mefloquine after choosing valiant paratroopers of the

Canadian Airborne Regiment as involuntary “guinea pigs” for the anti-malarial drug’s “clinical” trials during the infamous deployment to Somalia (92-93). Subsequent to those “successful” trials, Mefloquine was provided as DND’s primary anti-malarial deterrence up until 2017 wherein it was withdrawn from general use and provided only when medical contradictions negate use by other medications.

Health Canada responded to widening concerns from Canadians about the seriously adverse effects of Mefloquine in 2016. The population was cautioned about anxiety, depression, paranoia, hallucinations, psychotic behaviour and suicide ideation for years after exposure

The Canadian military also conducted a Mefloquine review, while contrarily assuring affected veterans, the troops and the nation that Mefloquine posed no long-term adverse effects?

How can two assessments be so diametrically opposed? 

Was there a cover up, as so many veterans believe?

What were the consequences to those adversely affected by mefloquine toxicity, particularly veterans of Canadian Airborne Regiment in respect to the “clinical” trial during their Somalia deployment?

Are there veterans of Somalia and other Mefloquine deployments who have been potentially misdiagnosed by DND doctors as suffering from PTSD. Consequently were they then subject to treatment plans and anti-psychotic medications that were not effective because Veterans Affairs Canada refuses to acknowledge Mefloquine may be ultimately responsible as the persistent, long term source of their mental trauma?

Indeed, did the Canadian government of the day willfully forfeit their Duty of Care responsibilities to the men of the Airborne

Regiment of Canada, subjecting the valiant to clinical trials bereft of individual consent or appropriate oversight

Could it be that this insidious drug was the underlying, malignant curse that corrupted the very essence of the Somalia mission?

Could Mefloquine be the common denominator to the inexplicable behaviour affecting the CAR’s deployment?

Could Mefloquine be the dominant factor in the brutal murder of Shidane Arone (the Somali team brutally beaten to death in captivity by the paratroopers)?

Could this “psychotic” incident have been prevented were the “rules” of clinal trials which are accorded to the civilian population, been applied to the military?

Veterans have resorted to the courts for answers to these questions and many more.

The legal firm of Howie, Sacks and Henry LLP has agreed to represent veterans in a class action lawsuit. Should you feel that you have been affected by Mefloquine during your service, contact them on line or at 1 877 771 7006. Tell them you are a veteran, you were prescribed Mefloquine and you wish to speak to Paul Miller.

Broken Cups and Cold Tea

By Michael Nickerson

The 70th anniversary of NATO was to be a celebration. A fine and noble postwar organization reveling in the stability and success it had brought the world. Pour the champagne! Let us salute this fine institution, maintaining peace in our time.

The problem is that NATO resembles not so much a strong and noble alliance as a marriage on the brink of destruction desperately trying to put on a good smile for the guests and failing miserably. All’s good here, nothing to worry about…what do you mean, brain dead? Maybe you should check your brain first before talking! I’m nasty? Let’s get serious and stop blaming the other guy. Disruptive, am I? Did you just call me two-faced? Well so is your mamma!

It was a wonder there wasn’t a food fight given the petulant behavior during the summit, though one could be excused for throwing some mashed potatoes across the room when your dinner guest is Donald Trump; that or making fun of him at a royal reception within earshot of a CBC microphone. That two-faced Trudeau, what a card!

But while Trudeau got the headlines, German Chancellor Angela Merkel got the best line. Calling out French President Emmanuel Macron for suggesting NATO was effectively brain dead, the alliance’s den mother opined thus: “I understand your desire for disruptive politics, but I’m tired of picking up the pieces. Over and over, I have to glue together the cups you have broken so that we can then sit down and have a cup of tea together.” Bravo Chancellor! 

Of course this would be all so very hilarious if it were a sitcom and not an organization of 29 countries spending over a trillion dollars on defence and vainly hoping they’ll find some reason to use all that expensive kit. Formed with a purpose after the Second World War, the organization has been in an existential tailspin since the fall of the Soviet Union. And it’s been a midlife crisis full of pain, tears, and an awful lot of blood.

NATO’s overreach and martial enthusiasm following the breakup of Yugoslavia in the ‘90s has been well documented. NATO’s role in Afghanistan following the sole invoking by the United States of Article 5 (the “my war is your war” clause) has led to 18 years of pointless death and destruction in the region, outlined in great detail most recently in The Afghanistan Papers by The Washington Post. This is to say nothing of NATO’s bombing campaign in Libya that effectively resulted in a flood of weapons and further destabilization of much of northern and western Africa.

So instead of a calm, considered rethink of the purpose of NATO and the responsibility of its members the great debate in NATO is not what should it be doing, but how can it spend more money on lethality while not knowing what to do with it. Brilliant!

Yes, I refer to the two percent rule, that arbitrary and nonsensical spending requirement all NATO members agreed to follow, pointless as it may be. Initiated at the insistence of the United States in 2006 and codified in 2014 the mandate is very simple: we, the United States spend astronomical amounts of money on military spending, more than the world combined, almost four percent of our gross domestic product; and you dear NATO members don’t, so pony up at least two percent or you’re on your own. It’s a bit like a crack addict getting angry that no one is smoking as much as he is, now get puffin’ or get your ass out of the crack den. The difference of course is we’re not talking about crack. I guarantee you crack does less harm.

So what does drinking tea have to do with all this? Think of it as a metaphor for sanity, sober second thought, the antithesis of a crazed cocaine addiction. NATO needs to mend its cups, sit calmly down and pour some tea before it all goes cold.

Why Was Currie a Better General Than Simonds? - Part 2

By Vincent J. Curtis

At Vimy, Currie’s lessons were first applied, much to the surprise of the Germans. As a result of the new technology of sound-ranging and with the aid of aerial photography, the Canadian Corps located the main positions of the German artillery.  When the assault went in, Canadian artillery suppressed, when it didn’t destroy, German defensive fires.  Canadian troops had been training for months, practicing the assault behind the lines. Every man knew the job of every other man. The task-organized platoons were winning in detail against the usual German defensive measures. The 1st Canadian Division, commanded by Currie and which had the farthest to go, reached its final objective noon the next day. The 4th Division conquered “The Pimple” on April 12th, closing the battle for Vimy Ridge and providing the only flash of light for the Allies in the spring of 1917. The Canadian amateurs out-did the German, British and French regulars.

Byng was promoted to command the 3rd British Army, and Currie was promoted to Lieutenant General and commander of the Canadian Corps. Now we see on a larger stage the tactical eye that Currie had developed.

Currie was ordered to take the town of Lens by assault.  Currie proposed he attack a hill to the north of the town instead; it was less well defended and possession of the hill would make the German possession of the town untenable.  Thus the battle of Hill 70 was fought.  Having taken the hill, Currie placed artillery and heavy machine guns on it in a manner that interdicted the routes of German counterattacks.  Running the kill zone cost the Germans heavily; Currie was left in possession of Hill 70, and then of the town of Lens.  The battle cost the Germans 20,000 casualties and the Canadians 9,000.

In preparation for his attack on Passchendaele, Currie ordered the construction of roads as well as a massing of artillery and heavy machine guns. In his mind’s eye he could see the battle unfold.   Currie objected to Passchendaele, saying it would cost him 16,000 casualties, and in the end it cost 15,500!

Currie demonstrated superior talent throughout the Hundred Day campaign. At Amiens, after making a head-fake north, the Corps moved rapidly south, detrained, and quickly attacked without artillery preparation.  The result was the “black day for the German Army.” In September, 1918, the Corps tore a 7,000 yard-wide hole in the German line at Drocourt-Quéant, said to be the “greatest single achievement by the British Expeditionary Force in the whole war.” Currie then squeezed the Corps through a 2,700 yard hole at Canal du Nord to break the Hindenburg Line, confusing the Germans with a sequence of zig-zag attacks reminiscent of manoeuvre warfare tactics.

After Valenciennes, pursuing to Mons, Currie employed an embryonic form of blitzkrieg, mixing infantry and tanks assaulting on the ground, supported by artillery and tactical air power.  The capture of Mons culminated the campaign on the day of the Armistice.

In early 1919, Currie was promoted to General and appointed Inspector General of the Armed Forces. Deep cutbacks in military spending and the bureaucratic deep state in the Ottawa establishment thwarted Currie’s plans to reform the military, and he retired from the army in 1920 at the age of 44 with 23 years’ service.

Currie was not a man of military science. He took his courses and was an enthusiastic student. No doubt he liked the subject matter. He had a mind’s eye for tactics, and the coolness and courage to be able to use it.  He had time and opportunities to develop his war knowledge through experience – in this war on this front. Being only a high school graduate did not hinder him, given his talent and the opportunity to gain experience.  Though not personally inspiring and cool towards his troops, he worked amiably and participatively with subordinates who had themselves proven their worth.

Because Currie had time to gain experience, he was able to develop his talent.

Veterans - Choosing Forward?

By Michael Blais CD

I spoke briefly with Prime Minister Trudeau after the national Remembrance Day service. I am disabled. Over the years, I have often sat beside the same valiant WWII veteran in the reception line. Now, neither of us is able to stand through the entire service.

“Will we be choosing forward for veterans?” I asked while briefly shaking his the Prime Minister’s hand. “Or will we be forgotten?”

Veterans were acknowledged during the Throne Speech, a vague reference to the billions of dollars the Liberals have committed since 2015 and a promise of continued attention on mental health. Of note, Veterans Affairs Canada (VAC) sought an additional $857.6 million in supplementary funds from the treasury this year, spending a total of $5.3 billion on veterans during 2019-20.

How can it be, after committing $5.3 billion this fiscal year, that so many veterans remain disenfranchised?

Because there is no equality in recognition of their national sacrifice? 

Because they are subject to divergent levels of respect?

Prime Minister Trudeau promised a Liberal government would re-establish a pension for life (PFL) in exchange for veterans’ votes in 2015, yet the Liberals’ PFL, in respect to national sacrifice provided, abysmally fails to meet the threshold
established with the Pension Act. Consequently, we have Afghanistan War veterans’ sacrifice acknowledged by two disparate pension standards with the Liberals’ much heralded pension for life obscenely bereft at a meagre 30 cents on the dollar.

One war, one standard?

The Liberals’ 2015 pledge to increase TPI (Totally and Permanently Impaired) veterans’ income loss replacement to the 90% threshold is likewise deficient when program equality standards are applied. Restrictions limiting the 90% threshold to ONLY those supported through VAC’s Earnings Loss Replacement Program. Afghanistan War veterans who have sustained the severest degree of mental and/or physical trauma and deemed Totally and Permanently Impaired on release or within Manulife’s two-year assessment period have been excluded and receive only 75% of their military wages through the SISIP Financial program.

There is no equality in recognition of their national sacrifice and, despite the severity of the wounds incurred in war, thousands of veterans have been denied, no, willfully excluded from the promised 15% increase.

One war, one standard?

Other programs are equally delinquent.

The disparity between eligibility standards in respect to the Pension Act’s Exceptional Incapacitation Award and the Permanent Injury Award / Career Impact Allowance are obscene. The New Veterans Charter (NVC) criteria provides far easier access, provides three levels of acknowledgement in respect to their trauma. Afghan War veterans supported by the Pension Act have one and due to stringent criteria designed to exclude, more often than not result in denial.

One war, one standard?

What about the much heralded Combat Injury Award? $75,000 for Afghan War veterans covered under the NVC but not critically injured Afghan War veterans who would certainly qualify had they not been injured/wounded prior to 2006?

One war, one standard?

Caregivers Relief Benefit versus Attendance Allowance? Once again, eligibility criteria disparities abound. There is no singular standard and when inequitable criteria requisites of each program are assessed, many Pension Act recipients are again confronted with exclusion or denial.

The harshest example of inequity is defined on how Canada’s Memorial Cross widows are being treated and the profound consequences therein. I suspect Canadians would be appalled to note that there are some Memorial Cross widows who are living well below the VAC-defined poverty threshold standards.

The New Veterans Charter acknowledged the fault and resolved widows’ despair through income loss replacement provisions and vocational resources … but only to widows whose loved one perished after 2006.

Choose forward?

I would suggest, before we choose forward, we start caring for all veterans equally without discrimination or reservation due to disparate programs. Veterans are not falling through the cracks. They are willfully, through corrupt, inequitable policies, being denied and excluded, forced into a life of poverty and despair. Before we can further advance, we must consolidate and fight for a comprehensive approach that accords equality in recognition of national sacrifice that leaves no veterans behind.

One veteran, one standard?

One war, one standard?

We can do better.

Why was Currie a better General than Simonds?

By Vincent J. Curtis

The question I hope to answer over the next several columns is why Arthur Currie was a better general than Guy Simonds. From his experience in the Boer War, Sam Hughes believed that the Canadian amateur was a better soldier in fighting war than the British professional. Hughes’ evidence was the manifest success of the Boer commandos in holding off the British for so long and worsting them in many encounters. Is the superiority of Currie over Simonds an example of the superiority in war of the amateur over the British trained professional, or, in the Canadian context, of the militia officer over the Regular, as Hughes believed?

The explanation of why Currie was superior can be found under the headings of training, experience, talent, personality, and instrument. By instrument I mean that the Canadian Corps of 1917-18 was a superior fighting instrument to the 2nd Canadian Corps of June – August 1944. As will be shown later, this too has to do with experience.

The philosopher Aristotle said that science was knowledge of the general, while experience was knowledge of the particular. Hence, it was possible for the man of pure experience to hit upon the correct solution to a problem faster than the man of pure science because the man of experience may have seen a similar problem solved before. With this stipulated, let us now examine the knowledge and experience of Arthur Currie

Currie was born in 1875, and received a high school education. He found employment as a teacher in Victoria, B.C., later he became an insurance salesman and then a land speculator. At the age of 21, he joined the 5th (B.C.) Field Artillery Regiment in 1897 as a gunner. He was commissioned in 1900 and progressed rapidly through the ranks. He came to command his regiment in 1909. Currie was an enthusiastic student, said to take every course available. Being artillery, the tactical courses would have been about the brigade and divisional battles and the artillery fire planning for each.

A friend and subordinate of Currie’s was Garnet Hughes, son of Victoria M.P. Sam Hughes, who was Minister of Militia and Defense from 1911 to 1916. When war broke out in August, 1914, Hughes appointed Currie GOC 2nd Brigade, 1st Canadian Division in September, 1914. In October, from Valcartier, Currie took his Brigade to Britain.

The 1st Canadian Division was in the line in April, 1915, at Ypres, when the Germans launched their very first gas attack. Poisonous chlorine caused the French colonial troops to break for the rear, leaving the flank of the Canadian position hanging. Currie demonstrated coolness, bravery, and a real tactical instinct when he led his brigade to counterattack into the flank of the advancing Germans. He persuaded a couple of British brigades to help out and together the German breakthrough was stanched. As a result of his actions, Currie was promoted to Major General and the command of 1st Canadian Division.

Between April 1915 and April 1917, the Currie method of meticulous preparation and artillery support was demonstrated at Mont Sorrel in June, 1916. The Corps only participated in the Battle of the Somme near the end. By 1917, the Canadian Corps was commanded by Julian Byng, who tasked Currie with studying the battles of the Somme and Verdun and to make recommendations. Currie questioned both senior and junior French officers and compared the impressions of the senior officers with the experiences of the junior.

Currie found that French success resulted from careful staff work, thorough artillery preparation and support, surprise, and a high state of training among the assault troops. The Canadian platoon was reorganized into task groupings to better deal with common tactical problems: the machine gun nest, clearing a section of trench, and beating off German counterattacks. Over the course of two years, Currie came to master the set-piece battle and accepted the strategy of bite and hold.

At Vimy, the fruits of the study became manifest.