Articles are subscription-only/paywalled. Here's a condensed version:
The Canadian Army is undergoing its most extensive reorganization in more than 30 years, shifting from four geographically based divisions to a structure designed around the realities of the “future battlefield.”
For the first time since the Cold War, the Army is organizing itself to fight as a division.
The 3rd Canadian Division becomes the 1st Canadian Division (Manoeuvre Division), Canada’s primary combat formation. The 2nd Canadian Division becomes the Defence of Canada Division, responsible for domestic response, territorial defence and mobilization, including the Reserve brigades and Canadian Rangers. A new Canadian Army Support Division will handle administrative support, while the Doctrine and Training Centre remains responsible for training and professional military education.
The redesign reflects growing concern over great-power competition, climate instability, rapidly advancing technology and lessons from the war in Ukraine. Army war games identified continuing gaps in air defence, long-range fires, and command and control.
The Army initially considered a dedicated Protection Brigade, including ground-based air defence, but war-gaming led planners to abandon the concept in favour of capabilities that can be integrated where needed.
This is more than a reshuffling of headquarters. It represents a fundamental attempt to rebuild the Canadian Army around large-scale combat, domestic defence and mobilization, while Canada faces pressure to expand its military and reduce reliance on the United States.
The Army says the reorganization is not the end state. It will continue to war-game, assess and adjust the structure as required.
For the Canadian Army, the message is clear: the post-Cold War model is being replaced by one designed for a far more dangerous strategic environment.
@garymasonglobe I would much rather have had him out there on Team Canada than Danielle Smith, that's for sure. She has her own agenda and it is not Canada's. Poilievre should not have left the field.
@PH_OSINT@SenateNews Also, when Canada was at war and the US was standing by, they were still tariffing the heck out of our goods because of course they would.
@jengerson Good point about the learned helplessness of the 80%.
I think we are returning to our traditional balancing act between superpowers. We are actually good at this historically and I feel that Old Canada confidence is returning.
Jean Chrétien is, like many other without noticing it, making my case for being patient. In negotiations with intransigent parties, the strategically superior (and dominant) strategy is to signal to the other that you can wait it out. Everything that the Trump administration is doing is signaling that it cannot wait. If Canadian governments at all levels adopt measures that mitigate the immediate damages and push up productivity growth, then the signal is that Canadian governments can wait longer. Much longer.
Remember that here we are losing sight of what I am trying to dub the Margaret-Thatcher-Sun-Tzu strategy. Thatcher said: I am extraordinaly patient provided I get what I want in the end. Sun Tzu, for his part, said: He will win who knows when to fight and when not to fight.
Patience is a weapon. Refusing to wield it is refusing the most powerful strategy.
Before Trump's trade war, Canada's effective tariff (on a trade-weighted basis) on U.S.-origin goods was well under 1%. Trump can't even come up with a consistent rationale for his Canada trade war (remember when it was about Fentanyl?). You don't have to carry his water here.
Instead of his rehearsed, scripted video he should recall Parliament and answer live questions. Oh, I forgot. He’s too busy planning for his trip to Europe.
Influencers brought a certain number of people into the fold of the CPC, largely engaging a previously unengaged voter cohort. That’s all true.
The main problem is that even in attracting this new group, the net effect of their (very) online activism has been detrimental to broader electability.
They also have a perverse financial incentive to grievance farm from the side of the opposition. Why else would they still be rambling on about covid and pushing separatism in a conservative province? Their thirst for clicks is insatiable by anything a CPC government could possibly implement.
A vanishingly small group of “content creators” cannot hold hostage the party claiming the lineage of MacDonald, Diefenbaker, Mulroney, and Harper. The MAGA apologists cannot be considered Conservatives and ought to be regarded as politically vagrant fifth columnists.
Influencers brought a certain number of people into the fold of the CPC, largely engaging a previously unengaged voter cohort. That’s all true.
The main problem is that even in attracting this new group, the net effect of their (very) online activism has been detrimental to broader electability.
They also have a perverse financial incentive to grievance farm from the side of the opposition. Why else would they still be rambling on about covid and pushing separatism in a conservative province? Their thirst for clicks is insatiable by anything a CPC government could possibly implement.
A vanishingly small group of “content creators” cannot hold hostage the party claiming the lineage of MacDonald, Diefenbaker, Mulroney, and Harper. The MAGA apologists cannot be considered Conservatives and ought to be regarded as politically vagrant fifth columnists.
@MrStache9 You are half way there but just can't crest the hill. I think a lot of conservatives are lost right now, strangely off-side and irrelevant in this pivotal time for Canada.
.@MarkJCarney urges Canadians to join in “sending a message” on the trade war by traveling at home.
Prime Minister made no mention of his own summer vacation in Tuscany.
https://t.co/9avAQ02tBU
#cdnpoli