Arctic: Give the Canadian Coast Guard the icebreakers

It would be silly for the Conservative government to keep their campaign promise to acquire armed Navy icebreakers (full text not online) when the CCG should be doing the Arctic job--and it also needs new vessels for all the other missions its icebreakers perform. Satellites for the Canadian Space Agency would be useful too.

Canada claims to be a northern nation, but its attention is clearly on the south. That means northern issues -- protecting our sovereignty there is only one of many -- get pushed to the back. And the price tag for the resources to protect our sovereignty is often too great for one department or agency to handle: A single icebreaker, depending on size, equipment and capabilities, can easily range from $300-million to $700-million. That means many key departments, although they support protecting Arctic sovereignty, cannot afford the capital-intensive program it will take...

The problem with waiting for the challenges to Arctic sovereignty to become clear and immediate is that the equipment needed to defend Canadian sovereignty cannot be acquired quickly. Given the Canadian track record, it will take 10 to 20 years to get many of the tools -- such as new icebreakers, more satellites -- that we will need...

Neglect of the North by successive administrations means the cupboard is bare. The assets Canada does have are few and old. Further complicating the task is that the government bodies that should be playing a critical role -- the Canadian Coast Guard and Space Agency -- tend to be smaller and without the clout of their larger brethren.

The Coast Guard has expertise in manning and operating icebreakers, which have proved to be the best presence in the North. The Space Agency designs and operates the satellites that provide the best surveillance of the North. Both agencies seldom receive the funding they need. The Coast Guard will soon need to replace its icebreaking fleet: Canada's most powerful icebreaker was built in 1969, and its three medium icebreakers were built between 1978 and 1982.

The Canadian Space Agency has plans to deploy a number of satellites to improve northern surveillance. Ideally, it needs five satellites, but only has funding for three.

Complicating the picture is the government's decision to make National Defence the main department to develop the capital program necessary to protect Arctic sovereignty. It is the DND that is to build three new icebreakers. While its operation of the HMCS Labrador in the mid-1950s showed it can do this, the navy is reluctant to embrace this proposed new task. It knows that by acquiring this new capability, it must surrender some other existing one. It also knows it will need to spend considerable resources to train its personal in skills the Coast Guard already has.

While the Coast Guard will keep its aging fleet operational, and the Space Agency will make do with three new satellites rather than five, and the DND will operate the icebreakers if ordered, the reality is that if the government is serious about protecting Arctic sovereignty, it must rethink how it develops its capital program for the North. It is obvious the old patchwork style of doing business will hinder rather than help northern sovereignty...

Rob Huebert is associate director of the Centre for Military and Strategic Studies at the University of Calgary.

Update: Letter of mine in the Toronto Star, August 22:

Give icebreakers to Coast Guard

Arctic defence

Aug. 19.

Much is made in Graham Fraser's article of Canada's need for Arctic-capable icebreakers. There may well be such a need, but there is no reason for such vessels to be armed and operated by the Navy as the Conservatives said in an election campaign pledge. The Canadian Navy has not operated an icebreaker since the 1950s. Since then the Canadian Coast Guard has had Canada's icebreaking fleet. Current icebreakers are getting very long in the tooth and will need replacement soon.

The sensible thing to do would be to acquire truly Arctic-capable vessels for the Coast Guard. The Coast Guard, even though not armed, would be perfectly adequate by its presence to assert Canadian legal claims in Arctic waters.

Moreover, assigning the icebreakers to the Coast Guard would avoid the inevitable delays, complications and extra costs involved in the Navy's re-learning very specialized operational skills.

Besides which the Coast Guard can use such vessels for the varied other missions its icebreakers already perform. If Arctic-capable icebreakers are not also used for the full spectrum of Canadian icebreaking operations, then the ships would be severely underutilized and a great deal of money wasted.