Canada is moving towards direct war with Russia. And the escalation to the NATO proxy war is happening with barely any pushback.
Recently Kremlin spokesperson Maria Zakharova threatened Ottawa over a Department of National Defence facilitated venture between Canadian and Ukrainian drone makers. Under the joint venture drones from Hamilton will be sent directly to Ukraine’s military.
Zakharova accused Canada of being “a warmonger, seeking by any means necessary to further fuel this bloody conflict.” She added, “we reserve the right to provide an appropriate response.”
The drone agreement is but one of many ways Canada has been arming Ukraine. In what would represent a major escalation of Canada’s contribution to the war, Ottawa may buy Swedish Gripen fighter jets as part of a plan the European Union has to offer Ukraine warplanes. The agreement to buy fighter jets from Saab would include Gripens built in Ontario for both the Canadian and Ukrainian air forces.
In four years, Canada has given Ukraine $9 billion in arms. At $25 billion total, Canadian spending on the proxy war is more than Ottawa spent on its 13-year occupation of Afghanistan.
Canada is flirting with direct war through its large military presence on Russia’s border in Latvia. In recent weeks the Russians have claimed that drone attacks on its territory are being coordinated from Latvia and its drones have reportedly entered that country’s airspace. A week ago, the head of the Latvian military bombastically declared that a war was likely to break out by 2028 due to Russia’s purported drone advantage. General Kaspars Pudāns told the Financial TimesMoscow may exploit a “window of opportunity” by the end of 2028 to invade the Baltic states.
“Canadian troops are steeling to fight Russia. Will Ottawa back them?”, read a recent National Post article. More than 2,000 Canadian troops are stationed in Latvia and the Canadian-led NATO brigade keeps growing and bolstering its position near the Russian border. According to Defense News, “The Canada-led NATO brigade in Latvia has moved beyond its original ‘tripwire’ deterrence posture and is now focused on mounting a credible defense of the Baltic country bordering Russia, according to its commander, Col. Kris Reeves. Reeves said the shift towards what he described as ‘tactical credibility’ has meant establishing forward locations and stationing troops near Latvia’s eastern border, in the terrain where they would actually fight in the event of a conflict.”
Ottawa keeps pouring money into NATO infrastructure in Latvia. Three weeks ago, Canada broke ground on a $70 million upgrade to its base in the country and through Operation REASSURANCE Canada has invested more than $315 million in military infrastructure in Latvia since sending troops there in 2017. Canada has committed to maintaining troops in the Baltic state until at least 2029.
These measures have come without any real political discussion. There is near unanimity in the House of Commons and dominant media about Canada’s contribution to the NATO proxy war.
During the NDP leadership race Avi Lewis declared that “Ukraine should not have to give up an inch of its territory, and Canada should continue providing the defence assistance that Ukraine needs to protect its sovereignty.” He subsequently reappointed the hawkish Heather McPherson, who is on the NATO Parliamentary Association, as NDP foreign affairs critic. Since before Russia’s illegal 2022 invasion McPherson has been pushing the Liberals to be more aggressive towards that country. Over the past few months she’s released multiple aggressive statements, including a recent declaration that “Canada must stand up for democracy and against Putin’s barbarous assaults. We must do everything possible to support Ukraine’s defence and democracy.”
Canada has fueled the NATO proxy war. It’s also inching ever more closely to direct conflict with Russia. Do Canadians believe this is a good thing? Shouldn’t we at least have a discussion about the implications? Is it really a good idea to simply keep repeating “Ukraine good, Russia bad” which seems to be the extent of the ‘debate’ in Parliament?
Support Yves’ work. Donate Now.
You must be logged in to post a comment.