Relay-Version: version B 2.10 5/3/83; site utzoo.UUCP
Posting-Version: version B 2.10.1 6/24/83; site ubc-vision.CDN
Path: utzoo!utcsrgv!ubc-vision!woodham
From: woodham@ubc-vision.CDN (Bob Woodham)
Newsgroups: can.politics
Subject: re: Canadian Military
Message-ID: <797@ubc-vision.CDN>
Date: Wed, 16-Jan-85 20:56:25 EST
Article-I.D.: ubc-visi.797
Posted: Wed Jan 16 20:56:25 1985
Date-Received: Wed, 16-Jan-85 23:43:47 EST
Organization: UBC Computational Vision Lab, Vancouver, B.C., Canada
Lines: 35

I am always disturbed by talk of war with winners and losers.  It is
ludicrous to think that a military buildup, conventional or otherwise, could
defend Canadian sovereignty from overt attack.  Parading around with new
weapons may make Canadians feel more secure but surely that is an illusion.
Reality is more subtle.  Sovereignty does demand strength but the nature of
that strength is no longer military.

Some years ago, the US proposed to send oil tankers through the northwest
passage.  Canada was concerned because of the potential damage an oil spill
would cause to the arctic environment.  The official US position was that
the passage was in international waters and Canada had no jurisdiction.  The
official Canadian position was that the passage was inland waters and
Canadian regulations would have to be satisfied.  There was intense
posturing on both sides.  In days gone by, it might even have been something
to go to war over.  In the end, Canada more or less won out and extensive
modifications were made to the tanker ship Manhatten.  In my view, the
reason was simply that Canadian ice-breakers were essential to the project
and the possibility that Canadian ship support would be withdrawn was enough
to sway the outcome.  Canada could assert its sovereignty because it had an
appropriate presence in the region.

Acid rain is a serious long-term threat.  What will be required to assert
Canadian sovereignty over our lakes and vegetation?

Canadians are fortunate to inhabit a large and resource rich chunk of land.
Sovereignty does not follow from divine right supported by military might.
Sovereignty follows from social, economic, technical and cultural strength.
It my view, the best path to security is collectively to perfect the skills
required to be successful in our own environment.  That is the most
effective leverage against the destruction of either ourselves or our
environment.

I would feel more secure if I were sure that militarism could be made
obsolete.  Ghandi and Martin Luther King, Jr. provided hopeful examples.
That is the kind of strength that I look to in this star-wars age.