Skip to main content
A scary good deal on trusted journalism
Get full digital access to globeandmail.com
$0.99
per week for 24 weeks SAVE OVER $140
OFFER ENDS OCTOBER 31
A scary good deal on trusted journalism
$0.99
per week
for 24 weeks
SAVE OVER $140
OFFER ENDS OCTOBER 31
// //

Justin Trudeau is remaking Canada's military in a Liberal image. But it remains an unfocused picture. If Canadians think he can bring back the past of Canadian peacekeeping, they have the wrong impression.

On Wednesday, Mr. Trudeau's Liberals will open a debate in Parliament on the revamping of the military mission against Islamic State. And when United Nations Secretary-General Ban Ki-moon visited Ottawa Friday, Mr. Trudeau delivered a reminder that he has promised to revamp the overall mission of the military, and bring the Canadian Forces back to UN peacekeeping.

Together, it presents an image of a military that will be less warrior and more peacekeeper, less bombing and more blue beret.

Story continues below advertisement

But Mr. Trudeau's disjointed reasoning for withdrawing CF-18s from air strikes in Iraq and Syria makes it hard to tell what his view of the military's role really is. And reaching back to the iconic peacekeeping of the past presents an expectation that will clash with reality.

"One of the problems is that peacekeeping is a lot more kinetic or violent than it used to be," said Stephen Saideman, a Carleton University professor and author of Adapting in the Dust: Lessons Learned from Canada's War in Afghanistan. Spoilers who seek to disrupt peacekeepers' missions have learned one way is to shoot at them. There's often not much peace to keep.

Part of Mr. Trudeau's reach for peacekeeping is political myth-making, playing on a popular Liberal legacy in peacekeeping.

His predecessor, Stephen Harper, also tried to alter the image of the military, playing down peacekeeping and stressing combat capabilities. He made a show of refunding the military and declared Canada a stalwart ally ready to fight. The image stuck even after Mr. Harper withdrew troops from Afghanistan and tightened defence budgets.

Whatever the Liberals say now, drawing a contrast with Mr. Harper's image was the reason that Mr. Trudeau, in opposition, opposed sending CF-18s to bomb Islamic State. His other arguments, such as insisting other contributions could be more effective, were accessories to his main message that Mr. Harper was a warmonger, and he was not.

Now he's trying to square that position with governing. He must wrestle myths, too. Mr. Harper was never all-in against Islamic State: the CF-18s were a modest contribution to a low-risk campaign. Still, Mr. Trudeau's attitude to combat needs explaining.

So does his promise to bring Canada back to peacekeeping. That can be a useful contribution to global security – U.S. President Barack Obama asked countries to step up. And it's popular. An Angus Reid Institute survey taken last fall found 74 per cent felt peacekeeping should be the military's priority – just 26 per cent chose preparing for combat.

Story continues below advertisement

But most modern peacekeeping isn't like guarding the line in Cyprus, as Canadians once did. The Liberals complained that Canada is now far down the list of peacekeeper contributors, with just over a hundred deployed. But Canada won't rise high up that list any time soon. Bangladesh tops it now, alongside other developing countries. The UN pays $1,028 (U.S.) a month per soldier – decent revenue to poorer countries with large armies.

UN missions don't need thousands and thousands of Canadians. "What is needed is quality, not quantity," said Walter Dorn, a peacekeeping expert at the Royal Military College.

To their credit, the Liberals have recognized some modern needs. Mr. Trudeau and Mr. Ban discussed the need for female police officers to deal with sexual assault in conflict zones, and more francophone officers. The Liberal platform also promised aircraft engineers and peacekeeping training. That's all on Mr. Dorn's list of what is needed.

But it leaves out the pointier stuff. The Netherlands sent 100 special forces troops to the UN mission in Mali. Mr. Dorn thinks the Canadian Forces could provide crucial intelligence and reconnaissance, notably with reconnaissance-equipped Coyote armoured vehicles. The UN might even seek a highly capable battle group, not unlike those sent to Afghanistan.

That's because peacekeepers now face dangerous spoilers in dangerous environments, like the Central African Republic and Democratic Republic of Congo. Mr. Dorn sees potential for a UN mission in chaotic Libya. To Canadians, that might seem more like Afghanistan than Cyprus. It's still hard to see that reality fitting Mr. Trudeau's image of the military.

Your Globe

Build your personal news feed

  1. Follow topics and authors relevant to your reading interests.
  2. Check your Following feed daily, and never miss an article. Access your Following feed from your account menu at the top right corner of every page.

Follow the author of this article:

View more suggestions in Following Read more about following topics and authors
Report an error Editorial code of conduct
Due to technical reasons, we have temporarily removed commenting from our articles. We hope to have this fixed soon. Thank you for your patience. If you are looking to give feedback on our new site, please send it along to feedback@globeandmail.com. If you want to write a letter to the editor, please forward to letters@globeandmail.com.

Welcome to The Globe and Mail’s comment community. This is a space where subscribers can engage with each other and Globe staff. Non-subscribers can read and sort comments but will not be able to engage with them in any way. Click here to subscribe.

If you would like to write a letter to the editor, please forward it to letters@globeandmail.com. Readers can also interact with The Globe on Facebook and Twitter .

Welcome to The Globe and Mail’s comment community. This is a space where subscribers can engage with each other and Globe staff. Non-subscribers can read and sort comments but will not be able to engage with them in any way. Click here to subscribe.

If you would like to write a letter to the editor, please forward it to letters@globeandmail.com. Readers can also interact with The Globe on Facebook and Twitter .

Welcome to The Globe and Mail’s comment community. This is a space where subscribers can engage with each other and Globe staff.

We aim to create a safe and valuable space for discussion and debate. That means:

  • Treat others as you wish to be treated
  • Criticize ideas, not people
  • Stay on topic
  • Avoid the use of toxic and offensive language
  • Flag bad behaviour

If you do not see your comment posted immediately, it is being reviewed by the moderation team and may appear shortly, generally within an hour.

We aim to have all comments reviewed in a timely manner.

Comments that violate our community guidelines will not be posted.

UPDATED: Read our community guidelines here

Discussion loading ...

To view this site properly, enable cookies in your browser. Read our privacy policy to learn more.
How to enable cookies