Trade, Tariffs, and Trump

[apophenia]

Going back a bit, I've deleted the KAI T-50 image in Reply #15 (just to save on bandwidth).

Here, as an alternative, I attach the Kawasaki CT-244 Goshawk ... named for the Northern Goshawk (Accipiter gentilis atricapillus), a species of diurnal raptor found throughout Canada south of the treeline. [1]

If anyone has knowledge of major ITAR-controlled US components in the Kawasaki T-4, I like to hear about them.

_________________________________________________

[1] In the past, I have whiffed Kawasaki Kestrel for alliteration. Unfortunately, the bird found in subarctic Canada is the American Kestrel (Falco sparverius) so that name was a hard 'no'.

[upnorth]

Have you put any thought into army vehicles?

Canada currently had Leopard MBTs, so that's not a problem.

However, the lighter armour stuff all has strong American connections.

The Bison, Coyote, and LAV 6.0 all come from General Dynamics Land Systems.

The TAPV comes from Textron.

[apophenia]

So rename it "Canadian Kestrel". I mean, if one can rename a gulf...

True. Pas de problème renaming the bird as the Canadian Kestrel renaming ... ICZN binomial nomenclature may be fixed but common names can be anything that locals use, want, or prefer. And the genus/species name F. sparverius presents no difficulties.

Likewise, the Trumpeters are free to be hissed at by the America Goose ... but they'll still be Branta canadensis 

[apophenia]

Have you put any thought into army vehicles? ...

I do have one or two mild opinions on CA vehicles 

The Canadian Army has never given priority to maintaining its Leopard 2 fleet. Nor do we have any convenient way to transport them to Europe. So, unless we're planning to fight the US Army close to Wainwright (before Danielle Smith officially changes sides, I mean), the tanks are of little use on this side of the Atlantic. So keep the Leos currently at Camp Ādaži in Latvia and ship the rest to Sweden for training and active storage. Any unserviceable units should be upgraded to a common strv 123A standard.

AFAIK, all Bison and Coyotes not destined for gate-guardian or scrap have already been delivered (or promised) to Ukraine. Right now would be the perfect time to announce that all TAPVs (and spares) are also being re-directed to Kyiv (and pointedly without asking US permission). I know that TAPV is a roll-over prone Textron turd but I'm sure that the ZSU could find some use for them until the parts run out. As for TAPV replacement, for an 'out there' option, see attached.

BTW, another obvious Kyiv donation would be the new GM Defense Light Tactical Vehicles. The ZSU has found clever uses for a range of smaller, ad hoc dune-buggies. I'm sure that they could find some run-about use for the LTVs as well.

And then there is GDLS-C's ACSV programme. I see all LAV 6.0-based vehicles as enormous, ill-protected targets. Put a 'national security' stop-work order on GDLS-C and, if they don't go away mad, nationalise their London facility. In the short-term, a UOR should be issued to get sufficient loaned strf 9040Cs to equip the MNB-LVA. Then license the CV90 MkIV and build them at the 'new' London Arsenal. Strategic sealift could be done through the Port of Hamilton when icefree and Port Saint John in the Winter. [1]

____________________________________________

[1] To facilitate this, I would cancel the planned (AOR 521) HMCS Preserver - why give more CAD to Dennis Washington to pass on to Trump? The saved JSS funds I would give to Chantier Davie to create a freighter conversion to RO/RO vehicle carrier akin to a scaled-down USN T-AKR type - ie: cranes and a stern ramp for vehicle loading.

[upnorth]

French submarines for the Canadian navy, perhaps:
https://youtu.be/lKSKWI40fI0?si=XEUHgqkjXlSHKt4u

[apophenia]

French submarines for the Canadian navy, perhaps:
https://youtu.be/lKSKWI40fI0?si=XEUHgqkjXlSHKt4u

Sure, in whif-world, we could see potential French AIP boats in RCN service. And there is a host of other plausible options for the Directorate of Naval Requirements to ponder. Let's go through those:

- ES = S-80 Plus: AIP adaptation; but Navantia has experienced weight-control issues.

- FR = Shortfin Barracuda - the AIP variant of France's Suffren class nuke boat.

- JP = 29SS Taigei class: Included for completeness (Japan has already declined submission).

- NO/DE = Typ 212CD: Pitched to Canada by Boris Pistorius (but he is now yesterday's man).

- ROK = KSS-III: With potential overseas build (unlikely under NSS but easy access to CFB Esquimalt).

- SE = A26 Blekinge class: A reminder the RCN needs to update its probable deployments file.

How to rank those? I'll go in order of increasing likelihood of acceptance:

6 - 29SS Taigei class: Not actually an AIP type (unlike its []iSoryu[/i] class predecessor).

5 - S-80 Plus: AIP adaptation; but Navantia has experienced weight-control issues.

4 - A26 Blekinge class: NDHQ has ego issues buying anything from smaller countries.
-- Note: Other than Ops & Ex with the USN; Canada's only current deployment is the Baltic.

3 - KSS-III: Totally unfamiliar supplier (whose greatest advantage is rapid production time).
-- Note: Seaspan has ROK yard connections but cannot even meet its existing schedules.

2 - Typ 212CD: Promising but Canada probably missed the boat for NO/DE cooperation.

1 - Shortfin Barracuda: Canada has an option of coat-tailling on Dutch Orka order.

Buying Orka-type boats would connect DND/PSPC with Damen with whom they have established relationships. Still, the irony is that Canada would be buying AIP submarines from a country which does not even recognise our claims to the NWP. (And I'd put money on it having been an interloping French boat whose conning tower got a .303-inch sized dent in its conning tower courtesy of the Canadian Rangers!)

The Dreaded Real World

On the RW side, two key questions emerge on the Canadian Patrol Submarine Project. The first is: How serious is the GoC about fulfilling this CPSP 'requirement'? The second is: How does a CAD 100 Billion SSK purchase fit into current Canadian fiscal realities? [1]

On Question 1, note that the RCN has been actively lobbying for Victoria class replacements since at least April 2023. But it took until mid-Sept 2024 for the GoC to issue an RFI (mistakenly called an RfP on the GoC website). That RFI called for "heavy weight torpedoes, anti-ship missiles[,] and long-range precision land attack missiles". And, of course, all of the preferred weapons on that list have since been torpedoed by Trump (sorry, couldn't resist). [2]

-- https://canadabuys.canada.ca/en/tender-opportunities/tender-notice/ws4772162365-doc4779172331

On Question 2, even prior to Trump's tariff offensive, Canada had a USD 0.70 dollar (it is now USD 0.69). Obviously the full economic effects of those tariffs have yet to be felt. Indeed, a better comparison might the CAD-EUR exchange rates - the CAD was worth €0.6695 on 31 Dec but only €0.6386 on 14 March 2025.

Carney's placeholder government is being referring to as a 'wartime Cabinet'. That pretty much sums up the current mood of most of the Canadian population. However, no amount of bellicose 'elbows up' attitude is going to reinflate that sagging economy. So, that means that we need to focus on military procurement priorities which genuinely bolster Canadian foreign policy goals (including increased trade with European partners). Personally, I fail to see how any of the RCN's current procurement priorities - including SSKs - serve any but US foreign policy goals. However, that said, I am more than prepared to entertain opposing viewpoints.

____________________________________________

[1] Even in April 2023, RCN lobbyist acknowledged that their implausibly-low CAD 60 Billion estimates would likely end up being CAD 100 Billion.

[2] On a rather OT rant, I'd say that the name Canadian Patrol Submarine Project reveals the lack of gravitas within Canadian military procurement. In current practice, we progress from 'Project' - which involves anything from a random whim expressed within the Puzzle Palace all the way through to orders issued. Then it becomes a 'Program' which, in turn, extends from its Definition phase all the way through to final disposal. A bureaucracy incapable of ordering its terminology more clearly is unlikely to excel at its labours 

[Litvyak]

Personally, I fail to see how any of the RCN's current procurement priorities - including SSKs - serve any but US foreign policy goals. However, that said, I am more than prepared to entertain opposing viewpoints.

SSK with air-independent propulsion would allow us to patrol our Arctic waters properly. Since the US insists those are international waters, how does giving us that patrol ability serve US FP goals? Just delete the land-attack capability and Stan's the Man.

[apophenia]

SSK with air-independent propulsion would allow us to patrol our Arctic waters properly. Since the US insists those are international waters, how does giving us that patrol ability serve US FP goals? Just delete the land-attack capability and Stan's the Man.

You are right. An AIP SSK would allow Canada to patrol our Arctic waters. But so too would a larger fleet (ie: more than 12 x CPSP) of XLUUVs - a technology area that Canada already has design and development experience with.

However, to assert those sovereignty claims, we need to be willing to thwart foreign incursions. Out of convenience, we tend to focus on US civilian or Coast Guard incursions through the NWP. And that helps further the US civilian FON narrative. In reality,  the unapproved foreign presence in Canadian Arctic waters has mainly comprised of US Navy submarines on FONOPs.

Even if our traditional alliances are at an end, to effectively challenge the relevant US FP goal, Ottawa needs to be willing to loose SSKs on trespassers. Obviously, no CPSP captain will ever get a go-ahead for torpedoing a transgressing Virginia class in Parry Channel. (A glance at AOPS armament reveals how loath Ottawa has been to appear assertive - let alone aggressive - in Canadian Arctic waters.)

Will this now change? We may hope so ...
____________________________________

BTW, I will be coming back around to naval planning and construction soon but, next, I will be returning to more immediate policy options and opportunities.

[Litvyak]

Well, I think within the bounds of the relations that have hitherto existed between the US and Canada, a reluctance to be assertive is understandable. Now though, not so much. Let's hope those in charge feel the same way, and start becoming assertive.

Just had a thought on this, too: how plausible would it be to deploy anchored sonobuoys at the entrances to the passage?

(Though if it were up to me - so probably a good thing it isn't! - I'd just mine the entrances and state that publicly that they're mined, do not attempt to trespass in our territorial waters...)

[apophenia]

Well, I think within the bounds of the relations that have hitherto existed between the US and Canada, a reluctance to be assertive is understandable. Now though, not so much. Let's hope those in charge feel the same way, and start becoming assertive...

Agreed. Comparing personal anecdoteage with political actions is dodgy but my experience is that big, dumb bullies are usually best countered with subtle resistance. Usually that just flummoxes them and they forget what they were het up about. (The danger, of course, is that they become confused ... always perilous with frustration anger following.)

(Though if it were up to me - so probably a good thing it isn't! - I'd just mine the entrances and state that publicly that they're mined, do not attempt to trespass in our territorial waters...)

Probably a good thing for me, too! But having resisted my initial temptation to just mine NWP entrances, I'd announced that a DND de-mining exercise in the NWP had gone horribly awry.  The GoC is doing everything it can to rectify the situation but first we must put a new, ice-resistant mine-countermeasures ship design through the NSS process (stayed tuned, work should be complete in 30 years or less!).

... Just had a thought on this, too: how plausible would it be to deploy anchored sonobuoys at the entrances to the passage?

Totally plausible - its been done! Indeed, a low-cost underwater acoustic array was the main driver behind DRDC's Northern Watch project.
-- https://cradpdf.drdc-rddc.gc.ca/PDFS/unc383/p814252_A1b.pdf

Also, here is a link to HI Sutton's article on the Solus-XR, a Canadian-designed/built XLUUV intended for Arctic use.
-- http://www.hisutton.com/Canada-Cellula-Solus-XR-News.html

[GTX_Admin]

Go the XLUUV option!!!

[GTX_Admin]

new RCAF trainers and fighters get quite tricky ... especially fighters (since DND has previously rejected Gripens and Typhoons.

Though with new geopolitical situation and new threats a re-evaluation might be warranted.  A Typhoon would be a great addition.

[apophenia]

Go the XLUUV option!!!

Yeah, along with those Northern Watch acoustic arrays, a few dozen XLUUVs at either end of the NWP should do the trick 

The beauty of building Canadian XLUUVs is that Cellula has done most of the work already and production would be so much faster. Not all of the work would stay in Burnaby, of course. I would imaging the GoC buying build rights from Cellula and spreading XLUUV production to the Great Lakes and East Coast as well.

Crewing might get tricky, though. If only we had a surplus of young people who like to play video games in their parents' basements ... 

[apophenia]

Though with new geopolitical situation and new threats a re-evaluation might be warranted.  A Typhoon would be a great addition.

I'm developing a really 'out there' scenario for future fighters (but it will also involve Europe so I'll probably keep that thread separate from this storyline).

That new geopolitical situation and its threats dictate a major policy rethink. Our domestic emphasis has been minimal satisfaction of our US masters in NORAD. Which leads us to questions ...

- Q1: Will NORAD even exist in the near future?

To avoid that query turning into a paralysing policy 'doom loop', I'll just answer with a probable 'No'. So no further need to play the dancing dog to placate 'the cousins'.

- Q2: What then will be the aerial threat to Canada in the High Arctic?

NORAD's raison d'être was to intercept Soviet bombers attacking the US across the North Pole. But if Trump and Vlad are now besties (or, at least, The Donald thinks that they are), hasn't that Russkie threat now disappeared?

- Q3: If NORAD does wink out of existence, does Canada still need northern interceptors?

If our relationship with the US evaporates entirely (as seems to be happening quicker than could have previously been imagined), a few generations of cross-Polar threat suddenly turns into an intra-Arctic threat. Canada will be at risk (at least of incursions) from JB Elmendorf-Richardson and Eielson AFB in Alaska and/or Thule/Pituffik on Greenland. That would suggest that, if we want to be in the interceptor business, we need patrol aircraft based at soon-to-be CFB Iqaluit and at CFB Yellowknife.

As is probably obvious, the above follows typical DND procurement patterns = always replace what you have with a direct analogue which, paradoxically, must also be bigger, better, and preferably 'gold-plated'. In recent decades, the complaint has been an unwillingness to spend enough. But that will now abruptly change into an inability to even fund much of what we need.

Here, I'll insert some RW by quoting Gustavo Indar: "Nearly 80% of Canada's exports go to the US, but those make up just 13% of total American imports. Meanwhile, more than 60% of Canada’s imports come from the US, yet they account for only 17% of American exports."

IOW, the degree of trade imbalance means that we cannot duke this out or wait for things to get better. Instead, will we invent a totally new economy for ourselves, citizens need to accept an immediate reduction of the overall Canadian economy. And that will mean cuts that hurt. Perhaps, more importantly, it means cuts that still protect that which makes our society unlike that of America's. So, realistically, we are probably looking at CF-18s until they fall out of the sky to ensure that the social programmes which distinguish us from Americans can continue.

[apophenia]

Next installment ...

________________________________________

Arms Production - Bellicosity Balanced by Self-Sabotage

Just prior to the election of US President Donald Trump, there was a ribbon-cutting ceremony at the new IMT Precision Production Facility in Ingersoll, ON. Designed to produce 15,000 155 mm shell bodies per month, the plant was officially opened on 02 Oct 2024. IMT Group CEO, Cheryl Hacking, reminded those present that IMT facilities dated back to the 'bomb girls' of WW1. Also in attendance was MGen. J.T. Reim - US Army XO for Armaments and Ammunition - who quoted Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelenskyy by way of "a reminder that what we do matters not just for one nation, but for millions across the globe".

But such bonhomie did not long survive the inauguration of POTUS 47. The new president made clear that he would follow through on his electioneering threats to force Ukraine into 'peace' negotiations. Then Trump and his VP ambushed Volodymyr Zelenskyy in the oval office before cut off military aid to Ukraine. In the meantime, tariffs had been announced on Canadian aluminum and steel products. If IMT's Cheryl Hacking suffered a few sleepless nights, that would be completely understandable.

Nevertheless, a contract had been signed between the US Army and the GoC's contracting agency - the Canadian Commercial Corporation. So, while all the politicking was going on, in Ingersoll, they got on with the job at hand of producing 15,000 M795 HE shell casings per month. Plans were for the M795s to be joined by the US Army's go-to M1128 base-burn shells by the Summer of 2025. Meanwhile, Québec-based GD-OTS Canada had been contracted to produce the 'energetics' with which to fill these shell casings.

The Canadian Commercial Corporation contract stood but the CCC had been under the distinct impression that such artillery shell production was linked to supplying Ukrainian needs - initially through 'backfilling' for the US Army albeit but, eventually, through direct supply to the ZSU. Obviously, that could no longer be relied upon. It seemed that the author of Trump: The Art of the Deal had no respect for deals which didn't directly bolster his own ego or whims. Any lingering doubts about that vanished when Donald Trump tore up his own 2018 USMCA free trade treaty and applied 25% tariffs to Canadian steel imports.

"Opportunities multiply as they are seized." — Sun Tzu

The 'war-time footing' of newly-installed Prime Minister Mark Carney's Cabinet had a lot on its collective plate. However, all of those tariffed steel products coming out of Ingersoll proven too tempting to resist. An Order in Council by the King's Privy Council for Canada was made in the name of the Governor General. This OIC prohibited the export of any strategically-important steel products to which unfair tariffs had been applied. As Minister of International Trade as well as President of the King's Privy Council for Canada, Dominic LeBlanc was in a position to both issue and approve an Order in Council made in the name of the Governor General. Once this OIC was signed by GG Mary Simon on behalf of King Charles III, it became illegal for IMT Precision to export its tariffed steel shell casings to the United States. And, as artillery shell components were controlled items under Canadian law, their legal ownership was transferred to the GoC.

Another GoC target was Algoma Steel of Sault Ste Marie, ON, which had produced shells during WW2. After layoffs were announced, Algoma's American CEO - Michael D. Garcia (a graduate of West Point) - he made the mistake of declaring his optimism about getting "government support" while predicting that the "steel trade would return to normal". Even if the first was not an unwelcome corporate handout beg, Garcia's second statement revealed an executive completely out of touch with his industry's current predicament.

The GoC offered the Algoma Steel board of directors funding to set up a new shell production line at Sault Ste Marie. But that offer came with a condition - the current CEO was to be replaced by a Canadian. As an interim, former CEO and current Director, Michael McQuade, would resume his leadership role. Both the Algoma board and Industry Canada planners were fully aware that the Sault Ste Marie facility remained in financial peril but a contract for 155 mm shell casings could not but help make up for some lost revenues.

Insensitive but not Insensate - Finding Hole Fillers

While IMT Precision was creating 155 mm shell bodies in Ontario, General Dynamics Ordnance and Tactical Systems - Canada was producing the explosive fillings for those shells in Québec. That Repentigny-based firm wasn't the problem. Rather, at issue, was GD-OTS Canada being wholly-owned by US conglomorate General Dynamics Corporation. And GD were not interested in any negotiations with the GoC which might endanger their supplier relationship with the US Army. So, GD-OTS Canada's answer to Ottawa's request for shell 'energetics' was a hard 'No'.

This reaction by GD-OTS had been anticipated. Moves were begun to nationalise all GD-OTS facilities in Québec, but that would take time. The interim plan was to export empty shell cases for filling in Europe. Discussions with Ukrainian authorities revealed that there was no spare capacity in that war-ravaged country. Bulgaria was identified as the NATO ally with the most underused capacity. And yet talks with Bulgarian government-owned ammunition producers proved fruitless. With politics obviously playing a part in those failed Bulgarian negotiations, Canada turned to the Polish firm of Jakusz Sp. z.o.o. of Koscierzyna.

With an agreement in place, empty shell casings were sent from Ingersoll by rail to sea ports - with an 85 km CP Rail trip to the port of Hamilton between April and November or a full 1,550 km to Saint John, NB when Hamilton was frozen-in between December and March. The shell casings were then offloaded at the port of Gdynia in Poland for a 60 km trip to the Jakusz facility where these casings were filled.

In a relatively short time, lack of Canadian orders or export possibilities forced General Dynamics to close down their GD-OTS subsidiary. The invariable law suits followed but the Supreme Court of Canada found against the plaintiffs (saying that, in refusing work offered by the GoC, GD had become a victim of its own actions). In the aftermath, all GD-OTS facilities in Québec came under the control of the GoC - most importantly, the energetic materials plant at Salaberry-de-Valleyfield. The latter was quickly reorganised as DIL-Valleyfield - being a component of the newly revived Crown Corporation, Defence Industries Limited.

___________________________________________________________

[Litvyak]

Canada will be at risk (at least of incursions) from JB Elmendorf-Richardson and Eielson AFB in Alaska and/or Thule/Pituffik on Greenland. That would suggest that, if we want to be in the interceptor business, we need patrol aircraft based at soon-to-be CFB Iqaluit and at CFB Yellowknife.

You know, it's "funny", when I wrote about the Panhandle tensions with incursions back and forth over Juneau and Dease Lake, that led up to and ended in the very short "Accidental War", that I was maybe being a bit far-fetched... and now here we are looking at it as a plausible scenario.

IOW, the degree of trade imbalance means that we cannot duke this out or wait for things to get better. Instead, will we invent a totally new economy for ourselves, citizens need to accept an immediate reduction of the overall Canadian economy. And that will mean cuts that hurt. Perhaps, more importantly, it means cuts that still protect that which makes our society unlike that of America's. So, realistically, we are probably looking at CF-18s until they fall out of the sky to ensure that the social programmes which distinguish us from Americans can continue.

Conversely, couldn't we just go back to doing things how we used to before the 1970s, and just spend the money into existence like they did for the St Lawrence Seaway? Under the current (post 1974) model of government borrowing money at interest from private banks, the Seaway would be an impossible project, yet we did it back then with little to no impact on the (small and stable!) national debt. We could do it. TD, BMO, RBC et al might not be best pleased about it, but since they've been allowed to create money on their own (which nominally only the BoC is allowed to do, ergo they've been breaking the law), they can quickly learn to live with it. Of course this can only work with domestic projects, but there's still plenty we can do on our own, and there's a lot of infrustructure we need to build or improve...

[Old Wombat]

Just a bit of RW fun;

Australia's 'biggest defence export' was meant to go to the US first, but Canada snuck past Donald Trump

https://www.abc.net.au/news/2025-03-19/canada-snuck-past-trump-buy-jorn-defence-radar/105069292

 

[Litvyak]

Next installment ...

I do like where this is going. :) Although I'm sure that by now you're well aware that I'm fully in favour of at least some degree of state control/ownership of strategically vital industries...

[apophenia]

Just a bit of RW fun;

Australia's 'biggest defence export' was meant to go to the US first, but Canada snuck past Donald Trump

https://www.abc.net.au/news/2025-03-19/canada-snuck-past-trump-buy-jorn-defence-radar/105069292

Great stuff, Guy! This OHR deal is all over the news here ... but no-one has yet picked up that DOGE-stuffed-it-up angle. Love it! 

[apophenia]

Xen: If you haven't already, have a glance at the 2024 voting patterns around Juneau versus, say, Fairbanks and environs. Suddenly our shared BC panhandle irredentism doesn't look so improbable 

Big Banks: Yup, Canada has been in the thrall of Bay Street for far too long. Ironically, it may take a PM with serious banking experience to get TD, BMO, and, especially RBC back into line. (Talking to an RBC investment advisor, we were reliably informed to not worry - she assured us that the country would fail before RBC did. Hubris and a bit of humour in there ... but rather chilling, nonetheless.)

Anyway, endlessly pondering on whether we can 'afford' infrastructure mtx is what got us where we are. At present, Carney's emphasis seems to be on breaking down barriers between provinces. If he can swing (most of?) the Premiers around to that, it is probably the quickest reducer of needless waste (of time and money). If such barriers can be eliminated, I'm confident that the money will be found.

In the meantime, as I said, Canadians have to brace ourselves for a smaller and much more challenging economy. Many will hate that the easy days are over. Personally, I am looking forward to the prevailing me-first attitude being eclipsed by a more nationalist approach. We're already seeing it emerge which is thrilling to say the least!

I do like where this is going. :) Although I'm sure that by now you're well aware that I'm fully in favour of at least some degree of state control/ownership of strategically vital industries...

Absolutely. Let's call the efficiency-through-privatisation-of-arsenals approach an utterly failed experiment - like most of its contemporaries (eg: synth-pop; the K-Car; reality TV programmes; Maggie's excessive hair-spray technique, ... etc.)

[Litvyak]

Xen: If you haven't already, have a glance at the 2024 voting patterns around Juneau versus, say, Fairbanks and environs. Suddenly our shared BC panhandle irredentism doesn't look so improbable 

Big Banks: Yup, Canada has been in the thrall of Bay Street for far too long. Ironically, it may take a PM with serious banking experience to get TD, BMO, and, especially RBC back into line. (Talking to an RBC investment advisor, we were reliably informed to not worry - she assured us that the country would fail before RBC did. Hubris and a bit of humour in there ... but rather chilling, nonetheless.)

Anyway, endlessly pondering on whether we can 'afford' infrastructure mtx is what got us where we are. At present, Carney's emphasis seems to be on breaking down barriers between provinces. If he can swing (most of?) the Premiers around to that, it is probably the quickest reducer of needless waste (of time and money). If such barriers can be eliminated, I'm confident that the money will be found.

In the meantime, as I said, Canadians have to brace ourselves for a smaller and much more challenging economy. Many will hate that the easy days are over. Personally, I am looking forward to the prevailing me-first attitude being eclipsed by a more nationalist approach. We're already seeing it emerge which is thrilling to say the least!

I do like where this is going. :) Although I'm sure that by now you're well aware that I'm fully in favour of at least some degree of state control/ownership of strategically vital industries...

Absolutely. Let's call the efficiency-through-privatisation-of-arsenals approach an utterly failed experiment - like most of its contemporaries (eg: synth-pop; the K-Car; reality TV programmes; Maggie's excessive hair-spray technique, ... etc.)

I'm almost in complete agreement with you - except that I do love synthpop!

[Sport25ing]

Well, one of the consequences is that Portugal cancelled their future order of F-35 (and possibly might also cancell an possible request for M2 Bradley) - so, I might imagine he might due something like the Canadians and buy Grippens, and possibly CV90's.