John Robson’s Plan to Revitalize Canada’s Declining Military

Commentary

Decades ago, British Prime Minister John Major announced a revolutionary approach to budgeting. Unfortunately, he did not implement it and became a mere footnote in history. The idea, though sound in principle, was to start fresh with budgeting by determining needs and affordability before diving into the details. This concept can be applied to Canadian defense.

The current state of Canadian defense is widely recognized as a disastrous mess. We lack the resources to defend against potential threats and struggle with procurement, recruitment, and overall management. Our defense capabilities seem outdated and ineffective.

To address these issues, it is essential to follow a strategic approach. Starting with a blank sheet of paper, we should list the necessary elements for a self-reliant military that can contribute significantly to Western alliances. This list should prioritize funds, personnel, and equipment.

For instance, aiming for 120,000 soldiers in the regular forces and 40,000 reservists is crucial. Current numbers fall short of these goals, hindering our ability to deploy forces for combat or show strength overseas.

Another critical aspect is increasing the defense budget significantly. Despite the challenges of finding additional funds, it is imperative to invest more in defense to meet the required standards.

Regarding equipment, a focus on rifles, pistols, ammunition, submarines, fighter aircraft, drones, missiles, and other necessary resources is essential. The goal is to have a robust arsenal that can sustain combat operations effectively.

While the task ahead may seem daunting, it is crucial to acknowledge the gaps in our defense capabilities and work towards filling them. Without a clear plan and determination to enhance our military, we risk being left vulnerable in the face of threats. It is time to take action and prioritize national defense for a secure future.

Views expressed in this article are opinions of the author and do not necessarily reflect the views of The Epoch Times.