Star Wars/Earth Wars

Then-Prime Minister Jean Chretien, studying the popular polls, stated in 2005 that Canada would not participate in the United States' ballistic missile defence program. This was a hugely popular decision on the part of the government, reflecting the majority opinion of Canadians who shrank at the very notion of 'weaponizing space'. The United States was puzzled by the decision, but then they were accustomed to Canada riding the free ferry.

Strangely enough up until that final decision Canada had indicated its interest in taking part and was in fact participating through agreeing that warning information collected through the North American Aerospace Defense Command (NORAD), be utilized in Ballistic Missile Defence. So Canada was the spoiler, the outlier, the sardonic onlooker agreeing in the potential of BMD but strategically and ethically it just wasn't on the Canadian playbill.

2013 Aegis photo / US Navy

Scooting forward a decade, and viewing the volatile insanity of the world gone berserk from North Africa to Asia, the Middle East to Eastern Europe, suddenly BMD as a defensive measure looks fairly appropriate. Even if the much-vaunted potential hasn't lived up to the initial public relations enthusiasm. Intervention success rate was nothing to write home about. But it was, assuredly, better than nothing at all.

It is a system intended to offer protection against a limited ballistic missile attack by a state like North Korea, or like Iran, partners in both nuclear architecture and ballistics delivery. It's hard to say which of the two regimes is more threatening; the delusional lunacy of North Korea, or the cold calculation of the Islamic Republic of Iran. As far apart as they appear rooted in their ideology, they do have a common goal and they share their technical research expertise.

The program doesn't militarize space. It barely manages to fend off experimental attacks, but the intention is there to perfect the system, and should Canada decide, after all, to throw in its lot, there is a good possibility that advanced Canadian technical expertise could lead to improvement in the success rate of stopping missiles as they enter our airspace.

First SM3 Launch  US Navy

The Standing Senate Committee on National Security and Defence feels the time has arrived for the reassessment of Canada's BMD policy. Time to set aside Chretien's cynical manipulation of the electorate for a realistic look at Canada's self-protection needs. Sanctimony aside, there's national pride in acknowledging that the free ride incumbent on sharing a continent with the United States has its perquisites, but also its responsibilities.

NATO has fully embraced BMD within its New Strategic Concept. Australia, South Korea and Japan have agreed to participate in the eventual global network of regional BMD systems. Should Canada continue its rejectionist stance, it would be embracing self-delusion bordering on a penchant for masochism. The contradiction of Canada's explicit support for NATO allies protected by BMD but not Canada is rather absurd.

Hearing from The Deputy Commander of NORAD, Lieutenant General Alain Parent, the committee learned that Canada should not assume its territory will be under default protection within the existing American BMD system for it is optimized to protect American territory and the U.S. military command that operates it.

USNORTHCOM is legally contracted to respect this prioritization. With Canada not a full BMD participant, when critical decision-making takes place on how to handle an incoming missile NORAD's binational command hands the decision making over to USNORTHCOM, co-located with NORAD, commanded by the very same general officer who when the decision must be made favours the signatory U.S.