Canadian Govt. Seen Probing Public Interest in Joining U.S. Missile Shield

Global Security Newswire Staff
Add to Briefcase
Global Security Newswire Staff
May 13, 2014, 6:45 a.m.

Canada’s Con­ser­vat­ive Party-led gov­ern­ment seems to be prob­ing the pub­lic in­terest in join­ing a U.S. an­ti­mis­sile ini­ti­at­ive, the Globe and Mail re­ports.

Con­ser­vat­ive-con­trolled pan­els in the Ca­na­dian Sen­ate and House of Com­mons are in­ter­view­ing ex­perts about the costs and be­ne­fits of col­lab­or­at­ing with the United States on a mis­sile de­fense frame­work to pro­tect North Amer­ica, ac­cord­ing to the Tues­day art­icle. In 2005, then-Ca­na­dian Prime Min­is­ter Paul Mar­tin of the Lib­er­al Party op­ted to turn down a U.S. re­quest to par­ti­cip­ate in re­gion­al mis­sile de­fense.

A change in polit­ic­al lead­er­ship as well as per­cep­tions of a grow­ing threat posed by North Korea’s long-range mis­sile de­vel­op­ment have promp­ted Ot­t­awa to re­as­sess its stance on the is­sue, ac­cord­ing to Colin Robertson, vice-pres­id­ent of the Ca­na­dian De­fense and For­eign Af­fairs In­sti­tute.

“I think the gov­ern­ment is test­ing the wa­ters to see wheth­er the con­di­tions are right,” said Robertson, who fa­vors join­ing the U.S. mis­sile shield.

Philip Coyle, a one­time head of the Pentagon’s weapons test­ing and eval­u­ation of­fice, in Monday testi­mony to the Sen­ate cri­ti­cized U.S. mis­sile de­fense ef­forts as in­ef­fect­ive. “The hard­ware be­ing de­ployed in Alaska and Cali­for­nia has no demon­strated cap­ab­il­ity to de­fend the United States, let alone Canada, against en­emy mis­sile at­tack un­der real­ist­ic op­er­a­tion­al con­di­tions,” Coyle said.

He was re­fer­ring to the 30 in­ter­cept­ors cur­rently fielded on the West Coast as part of the Ground-based Mid­course De­fense sys­tem — the coun­try’s prin­cip­al de­fense against a lim­ited stra­tegic bal­list­ic mis­sile strike.

Con­fer­ence of De­fense As­so­ci­ations In­sti­tute ana­lyst Dav­id Perry said he be­lieves the Ca­na­dian gov­ern­ment is “float­ing a tri­al bal­loon” with the par­lia­ment hear­ings.

De­fense Min­is­ter Rob Nich­olson’s of­fice would not an­swer a ques­tion on wheth­er the gov­ern­ment is con­sid­er­ing chan­ging its mind about mis­sile de­fense co­oper­a­tion with Wash­ing­ton.

“No de­cision has been made to change this policy,” said his spokes­wo­man, Jo­hanna Quin­ney. “We will con­tin­ue to mon­it­or in­ter­na­tion­al de­vel­op­ments.”

What We're Following See More »
Trump Deposition Video Is Online
18 hours ago

The video of Donald Trump's deposition in his case against restaurateur Jeffrey Zakarian is now live. Slate's Jim Newell and Josh Voorhees are live-blogging it while they watch.

Debate Commission Admits Issues with Trump’s Mic
19 hours ago

The Commission on Presidential Debates put out a statement today that gives credence to Donald Trump's claims that he had a bad microphone on Monday night. "Regarding the first debate, there were issues regarding Donald Trump's audio that affected the sound level in the debate hall," read the statement in its entirety.

Trump Deposition Video to Be Released
19 hours ago

"A video of Donald Trump testifying under oath about his provocative rhetoric about Mexicans and other Latinos is set to go public" as soon as today. "Trump gave the testimony in June at a law office in Washington in connection with one of two lawsuits he filed last year after prominent chefs reacted to the controversy over his remarks by pulling out of plans to open restaurants at his new D.C. hotel. D.C. Superior Court Judge Brian Holeman said in an order issued Thursday evening that fears the testimony might show up in campaign commercials were no basis to keep the public from seeing the video."

Chicago Tribune Endorses Gary Johnson
23 hours ago

No matter that his recall of foreign leaders leaves something to be desired, Gary Johnson is the choice of the Chicago Tribune's editorial board. The editors argue that Donald Trump couldn't do the job of president, while hitting Hillary Clinton for "her intent to greatly increase federal spending and taxation, and serious questions about honesty and trust." Which leaves them with Johnson. "Every American who casts a vote for him is standing for principles," they write, "and can be proud of that vote. Yes, proud of a candidate in 2016."

USA Today Weighs in on Presidential Race for First Time Ever
1 days ago

"By all means vote, just not for Donald Trump." That's the message from USA Today editors, who are making the first recommendation on a presidential race in the paper's 34-year history. It's not exactly an endorsement; they make clear that the editorial board "does not have a consensus for a Clinton endorsement." But they state flatly that Donald Trump is, by "unanimous consensus of the editorial board, unfit for the presidency."