Posted on 02/23/2008 9:18:08 AM PST by BGHater
Canada and the U.S. have signed an agreement that paves the way for the militaries from either nation to send troops across each other's borders during an emergency, but some are questioning why the Harper government has kept silent on the deal.
Neither the Canadian government nor the Canadian Forces announced the new agreement, which was signed Feb. 14 in Texas.
The U.S. military's Northern Command, however, publicized the agreement with a statement outlining how its top officer, Gen. Gene Renuart, and Canadian Lt.-Gen. Marc Dumais, head of Canada Command, signed the plan, which allows the military from one nation to support the armed forces of the other nation during a civil emergency.
The new agreement has been greeted with suspicion by the left wing in Canada and the right wing in the U.S.
The left-leaning Council of Canadians, which is campaigning against what it calls the increasing integration of the U.S. and Canadian militaries, is raising concerns about the deal.
"It's kind of a trend when it comes to issues of Canada-U.S. relations and contentious issues like military integration. We see that this government is reluctant to disclose information to Canadians that is readily available on American and Mexican websites," said Stuart Trew, a researcher with the Council of Canadians.
Trew said there is potential for the agreement to militarize civilian responses to emergency incidents. He noted that work is also underway for the two nations to put in place a joint plan to protect common infrastructure such as roadways and oil pipelines.
"Are we going to see (U.S.) troops on our soil for minor potential threats to a pipeline or a road?" he asked.
Trew also noted the U.S. military does not allow its soldiers to operate under foreign command so there are questions about who controls American forces if they are requested for service in Canada. "We don't know the answers because the government doesn't want to even announce the plan," he said.
But Canada Command spokesman Commander David Scanlon said it will be up to civilian authorities in both countries on whether military assistance is requested or even used.
He said the agreement is "benign" and simply sets the stage for military-to-military co-operation if the governments approve.
"But there's no agreement to allow troops to come in," he said. "It facilitates planning and co-ordination between the two militaries. The 'allow' piece is entirely up to the two governments."
If U.S. forces were to come into Canada they would be under tactical control of the Canadian Forces but still under the command of the U.S. military, Scanlon added.
News of the deal, and the allegation it was kept secret in Canada, is already making the rounds on left-wing blogs and Internet sites as an example of the dangers of the growing integration between the two militaries.
On right-wing blogs in the U.S. it is being used as evidence of a plan for a "North American union" where foreign troops, not bound by U.S. laws, could be used by the American federal government to override local authorities.
"Co-operative militaries on Home Soil!" notes one website. "The next time your town has a 'national emergency,' don't be surprised if Canadian soldiers respond. And remember - Canadian military aren't bound by posse comitatus."
Posse comitatus is a U.S. law that prohibits the use of federal troops from conducting law enforcement duties on domestic soil unless approved by Congress.
Scanlon said there was no intent to keep the agreement secret on the Canadian side of the border. He noted it will be reported on in the Canadian Forces newspaper next week and that publication will be put on the Internet.
Scanlon said the actual agreement hasn't been released to the public as that requires approval from both nations. That decision has not yet been taken, he added.
I must admit ... IF this were an agreement to coordinate and interoperate with Mexican troops, I would NOT be in favor of it. There would be no reasonable US interest served in such a cooperation.
Let me ask you this. Do you think 2,000 armed troops going door to door in our cities would be a problem?
Let’s look at it another way. If Canadian troops are approved to come over our border, why not Mexican troops? Why not U.N. troops?
I look at this in terms of incrementalism.
Do I care if we help out Canada? No I don’t. I also don’t see why this had to be a reciprocal agreement if that’s all we wanted to accomplish.
Canada should have said, “You know, we’d love to have your help if something catastrophic were to happen.” We would have said, “You know we’ll always have your back.” That could have been the end of it.
Instead we have an agreement for each nation’s troops to enter the other nation. I don’t like it one bit.
It could serve as an end run around posse comitatus (sp?).
What are you talking about? When did Mexico confiscate guns? What they did to control guns was end manufacturing of all but military weapons, control imports and stop producing ammo for non-military weapons. But sending army troops from one part of the country to another to confiscate guns? Never happened.
Besides, while there are more poor southerners serving in the military than rich northerners (same as the U.S. Army for many years), military units are not regionally based.
Where did you get your information?
I love our Canadian neighbors and their soldiers but no thanks.
Didn't Posse Comitatus bite the bullet last year under he guise of a military appropriations bill?
Yep, and it's called the "Amero!"
Uh-oh. Have they provided a definition of “civil emergencies?”
Unfortunately, that was also my very first thought. After the actual gun confiscation in New Orleans, a repetition of a similar scenario can no longer be automatically discounted --- and foreign troops from a country which has no Second Amendment make this a whole different kettle of fish, and a far more dangerous one, in my opinion.
What does all of this have to do with a rap musical group? 8~)
That was New Zealand getting rid of its fighter force, FRiend.
If it makes you feel any better, the Republic is about to come to a screaming halt, not a long slow death.
This is the last election. All of the candidates are ringers for the CFR.
The Community will be in place by 2010.
UN troops, courtesy of China.
It may have, but I wasn’t aware of it. Perhaps someone else will chime in on that point.
Greg, those troops would process one city at at time. And if five of those groups came into the nation at our government’s request, it wouldn’t be pretty. Splitting them up into 500 men squads, they could do 20 cities at a time, going sector by sector through them.
Would that happen? I doubt it. I still think it’s a crazy idea to entertain a situation that could even remotely turn into something like this.
I don’t like the idea of Quebec going that route either. And that’s one of the major problems I have with a bi-lingual policy in the U.S. It’s separatist in nature. It certainly isn’t unifying.
U.S. Northern Command, Canada Command establish new bilateral Civil Assistance Plan
|
U.S. Air Force Gen. Gene Renuart, left, commander of North American Aerospace Defense Command and U.S. Northern Command, and Canadian Air Force Lt.-Gen. Marc Dumais, commander of Canada Command, signed a Civil Assistance Plan that allows the military from one nation to support the armed forces of the other nation during a civil emergency. The signing took place at U.S. Army North headquarters, Fort Sam Houston, Texas, Feb. 14, 2008. |
February 14, 2008
SAN ANTONIO, Texas — U.S. Air Force Gen. Gene Renuart, commander of North American Aerospace Defense Command and U.S. Northern Command, and Canadian Air Force Lt.-Gen. Marc Dumais, commander of Canada Command, have signed a Civil Assistance Plan that allows the military from one nation to support the armed forces of the other nation during a civil emergency.
“This document is a unique, bilateral military plan to align our respective national military plans to respond quickly to the other nation's requests for military support of civil authorities,” Renuart said. “Unity of effort during bilateral support for civil support operations such as floods, forest fires, hurricanes, earthquakes and effects of a terrorist attack, in order to save lives, prevent human suffering and mitigate damage to property, is of the highest importance, and we need to be able to have forces that are flexible and adaptive to support rapid decision-making in a collaborative environment.”
“The signing of this plan is an important symbol of the already strong working relationship between Canada Command and U.S. Northern Command,” Dumais said. “Our commands were created by our respective governments to respond to the defense and security challenges of the twenty-first century, and we both realize that these and other challenges are best met through cooperation between friends.”
The plan recognizes the role of each nation's lead federal agency for emergency preparedness, which in the United States is the Department of Homeland Security and in Canada is Public Safety Canada. The plan facilitates the military-to-military support of civil authorities once government authorities have agreed on an appropriate response.
U.S. Northern Command was established on Oct. 1, 2002, to anticipate and conduct homeland defense and civil support operations within the assigned area of responsibility to defend, protect, and secure the United States and its interests.
Similarly, Canada Command was established on Feb. 1, 2006, to focus on domestic operations and to offer a single point of contact for all domestic and continental defense and security partners.
The two domestic commands established strong bilateral ties well before the signing of the Civil Assistance Plan. The two commanders and their staffs meet regularly, collaborate on contingency planning and participate in related annual exercises. http://www.northcom.mil/News/2008/021408.html
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.
