Royal Canadian Air Force headed to mission in Africa ‘very soon’: top general

[Kirkhill]

I sure hope you're not a Navigator;  if the RCN is patrolling CAR or Mali, something has gone horribly wrong.  ;D

RCN's new patrol ship. 

 

[Eaglelord17]

Don't forget VdQ and Montreal, if there's to be a maritime element added at some point. Are there RCAF French units?

HMCS Montreal is not a French ship. VDQ is the only one.

 

[Colin Parkinson]

RCN's new patrol ship.

Sand Frigate (dust, tent and fleas)

 

[dapaterson]

HMCS Montreal is not a French ship. VDQ is the only one.

MONTREAL is a bilingual ship.

 

[Lumber]

MONTREAL is a bilingual ship.

MONTRÉAL (you forgot the accent) is not a bilingual ship either, unless that was officially changed in the year I've been gone.. X-Ship and all...

 

[dapaterson]

Not using a bilingual keyboard here

According to the CFOO with a DTG of 011200Z MAR 16,

LINGUISTIC DESIGNATION
10. HMCS MONTREAL IS DESIGNATED A BILINGUAL UNIT

See: http://vcds.mil.ca/dgsp/pubs/tools/cfoo/frame.asp?cfooId=1677-01MAR16.txt (DWAN only)

 

[Oldgateboatdriver]

Could they have made a mistake and meant HMCS DONACONNA, in Montréal, the Naval Reserve Unit, which has always been the only RCN unit designated as bilingual before?

Of course, the military machine is always behind the times: When I was X.O., we covered 17 different languages at the Unit.

 

[Lumber]

Not using a bilingual keyboard here

Alt+Num 0201. You don't need a French keyboard and frankly they are the worst thing since allowing communities to set their own speed limits!

Could they have made a mistake and meant HMCS DONACONNA, in Montréal, the Naval Reserve Unit, which has always been the only RCN unit designated as bilingual before?

Of course, the military machine is always behind the times: When I was X.O., we covered 17 different languages at the Unit.

Nope... that's her UIC...

 

[Oldgateboatdriver]

Then, on behalf of DON, welcome to the club MON.

Now begins your fun of drafting all your routine orders, COTM, XOTM, any one's TM and all other internal communications in both languages, all the time. Enjoy!

 

[Lumber]

Then, on behalf of DON, welcome to the club MON.

Now begins your fun of drafting all your routine orders, COTM, XOTM, any one's TM and all other internal communications in both languages, all the time. Enjoy!

This might be the first time that I don't miss her... ;D

 

[daftandbarmy]

Africa: Neither hopeful nor rising

https://www.files.ethz.ch/isn/177211/gf_international_1401.pdf

 

[McG]

Matthew Fisher indicates his read of political messaging as indicating that Canada will deploy specifically into French West Africa.  He also indicates that "Ottawa has been keen to begin that mission with French-speaking troops" but I don't know where this idea comes from, except maybe rumour mill.

As noted in the article, a deployment from 5 brigade would deprive those units of their rest cycle in managed readiness, and it would waste economies of using the units already in high readiness from 1 brigade.  There would still be plenty of Francophone soldiers deployed as, at least outside of manoeuvre arms, there are Francophone soldiers throughout the brigade units.  And our government has expended significant funds investing in French language skills for English soldiers, so we may as well seek some operational return from that investment.

Despite the potential complications, all signs point to Canada sending troops to Africa
Matthew Fisher
National Post
30 Aug 2016

Colombia and South Sudan are the long-shot options for Canada’s first major UN military operation since Jean Chrétien sent troops to East Timor 16 years ago.

A reasonable case can be made for Colombia, where the government and rebels have just signed a peace accord that may end a war that has gone on for years. But Foreign Affairs Minister Stéphane Dion and Defence Minister Harjit Singh Sajjan have made it clear the government has its heart set on a mission in French West Africa to further Prime Minister Justin Trudeau’s ambition to gain a seat on the UN Security Council.

Only time will tell whether it was worthwhile in Canadian blood and treasure to deploy on an open-ended mission to Mali, the Central African Republic, the Democratic Republic of Congo or other options equally fraught with danger, such as Niger or Burundi. Factored into the equation when that reckoning comes will be the true value to Canada of the UN appointment when, like the other 10 non-permanent members, it would only be admitted to the inner sanctum for two years and would be powerless to do anything there in the face of the veto powers of the five permanent members.

As it is almost certain Canada will become involved in French West Africa, Ottawa has been keen to begin that mission with French-speaking troops. This makes sense, but could seriously complicate the training and readiness regimes of the country’s three combat brigades.

Since early August, the Canadian army’s high-readiness brigade has been built around the Edmonton-based Princess Patricia’s Canadian Light Infantry. But the first force to be deployed to Africa may have to be drawn from the Quebec-based Royal 22nd Regiment, the Vandoos, some of whom returned only weeks ago from a deployment to eastern Europe.

Not much has been heard from Gen. Jonathan Vance, chief of the defence staff of the Canadian Armed Forces, about the potential perils of a mission in a region where Canadian deployments to Rwanda and Somalia have had difficulties and where the UN’s current peacemaking operations have been so rife with allegations of grave sexual misconduct, incompetence and cowardice, they can only be described as a total disaster.

Once the Canadians’ destination is revealed in September, Vance, who is a famously straight shooter, is likely to begin making it clear to the troops and the public what lies ahead.

Among the unspoken military concerns is that this is an open-ended mission and little or no help can be expected from the Americans. That may sound great to some Canadians. But if things go south, as they might, nobody except perhaps the French, who are already badly stretched by combat operations in Africa and the Middle East and in dealing with the terrorist threat at home, may have our backs.

One of the reasons Canadian forces would prefer to go to Mali may be because that is where the French have the most troops and the most robust military capability. It is also where the German and Dutch have quietly sent about 1,000 troops over the past year although those countries do not see their contributions as part of a bid for a Security Council seat.

Like the French, the Canadian military needs to be careful about becoming overstretched. As African operations involving about 600 ramp up, it must also sustain about 800 troops in Kuwait and the Kurdish part of Iraq. It will soon send about 450 combat troops on a new NATO mission to Latvia to to try to contain Russia’s irredentist impulses on its western borders.

With only five C-17 heavy-lift aircraft and oceans between these disparate missions and Canada, getting the logistics right will be job No. 1.  Much of the planning will fall to Maj.-Gen. Chuck Lamarre.

The logistician responsible for the massive undertaking of bringing all Canada’s equipment back from Kandahar, he is now Vance’s director of staff and his  right arm on operations.

Given that the Trudeau government intends to keep Canadian Forces in Africa for many years and that those troops will require scores of heavy armoured personnel carriers, weapons, a field hospital and helicopters, something to look for soon may be an announcement Canada intends to establish a regional logistics hub, most likely in the Senegalese port of Dakar. It would be something akin to the ones that already exist in Kuwait and Cologne.

Identifying personnel and assembling the tens of thousands of nuts and bolts required to deploy to a part of the world where infrastructure is almost totally lacking will take time and patience. That will give Canadians the opportunity to ponder whether the African mission is an altruistic endeavour to do good in a deeply troubled part of the world or a grand bid to enhance Canada’s chances of winning the Security Council seat.

http://news.nationalpost.com/news/canada/matthew-fisher-despite-the-potentical-complications-all-signs-point-to-canada-sending-troops-to-africa

 

[Journeyman]

As noted in the article, a deployment from 5 brigade would deprive those units of their rest cycle in managed readiness, and it would waste economies of using the units already in high readiness from 1 brigade.  There would still be plenty of Francophone soldiers deployed as, at least outside of manoeuvre arms, there are Francophone soldiers throughout the brigade units.  And our government has expended significant funds investing in French language skills for English soldiers, so we may as well seek some operational return from that investment.

Again, common sense.  But the reality is, no government (Lib or CPC) knows or cares about our managed readiness cycle;  notwithstanding any assumed CDS advice it's nothing more than a photo op,  a poker chip for a UN bid, and a "Canada's Back" election slogan.

 

[blacktriangle]

I love how the emphasis placed on the importance of winning the security council seat instead of bringing stability and peace to the region.

I really don't see what we are going to accomplish in Africa. However, I could get behind it if we were actually going after the bad guys and stabilizing the region. I don't see us actually doing anything of that nature.

As leaders, how do you all rationalize the potential casualties you will suffer in a mission like this? Is it even possible to confidently lead your people when you have no confidence in your assigned mission itself? Or those that assigned you the mission?

 

[Old Sweat]

Thinking out loud, 600 is not a very large number of troops to be able to do anything very military that might actually involve confronting bad guys. There has been lots of talk/speculation about nation building and civil involvement and humanitarian work, but that may just be wishful thinking about the "good old days" of peacekeeping. Surely somebody hasn't hauled out the concept of three block war that was all in the vogue circa 2005.

What have I missed?

 

[Lumber]

Thinking out loud, 600 is not a very large number of troops to be able to do anything very military that might actually involve confronting bad guys. There has been lots of talk/speculation about nation building and civil involvement and humanitarian work, but that may just be wishful thinking about the "good old days" of peacekeeping. Surely somebody hasn't hauled out the concept of three block war that was all in the vogue circa 2005.

What have I missed?

Those of you with far more deployment and army experience than I:

With 600 troops, how many of those would be available to go out on patrol and conduct combat operations, after factoring all the support trades that are likely to go with?

 

[Journeyman]

Maybe our focus will be on introducing gender-neutral washrooms and convincing them not to wear offensive Chicago Blackhawk jerseys.    :dunno:

 

[Lumber]

Maybe our focus will be on introducing gender-neutral washrooms and convincing them not to wear offensive Chicago Blackhawk jerseys.    :dunno:

I love it when two threads come together.

 

[McG]

With 600 troops, how many of those would be available to go out on patrol and conduct combat operations, after factoring all the support trades that are likely to go with? 

I have heard speculation (ie. one step lower than even rumour) that our contribution to peace support might be "force support" (the logistics, medical, engineering and training support to third world UN troops) and C2.  If there is any substance to this speculation, there will not be substantial Canadian numbers to conduct combat operations  ... but we will still have to be Canadian infantry and armour for Canadian force protection.

Maybe our focus will be on introducing gender-neutral washrooms and convincing them not to wear offensive Chicago Blackhawk jerseys.    :dunno: 

http://www.swc-cfc.gc.ca/gba-acs/course-cours-en.html

 

[Lumber]

http://www.swc-cfc.gc.ca/gba-acs/course-cours-en.html

Woohoo! PER points in PD!