Alberta has five refineries: Strathcona (Imperial Oil), Edmonton (Suncor), and Scotford (Shell) in the Edmonton area; Sturgeon (NWR) in Redwater; and Lloydminster (Cenovus.)Together they account for 28.5 percent of Canada’s total refining capacity (at 542.4 Mb/d), and 13.7 percent of Canada’s total GDP. The U.S. also obtains 52 percent of its petroleum imports from Canada, which includes O&G infrastructure in British Columbia and Saskatchewan. As important as these facilities are to our economy, and our nation, they are also highly vulnerable.In a war over Taiwan — something China has vowed to do by 2027 — it is almost certain that the U.S. will conduct stand-off missile attacks on missile bases and port infrastructure targets along the Chinese coast. America's Navy, Marines, Army and Air Force, are tightening their grip on China, as we speak. This is not a videogame, my friends, the US is arming itself in the Indo-Pacific.Beijing is therefore likely to reciprocate with missile strikes against targets in the continental U.S., and because of Canada’s geographic proximity and economic integration with the U.S., we too, have it coming. According to an analysis in RealClearDefense, Beijing would most likely fire an 8,000 km range, conventionally armed 600kg high explosive payloaded Dong Feng 27 ballistic missile, which once it becomes exo-atmospheric, would deploy its direction-changing Hypersonic Glide Vehicle (HGV.) The Pentagon has already assessed that “there is a high probability” that the Chinese DF-27 hypersonic missile can penetrate the missile defence base at Fort Greely, Alaska (equipped with 44 Ground Based Interceptors (GBI.)The latter are primarily designed to intercept missiles following ballistic trajectories, such as ICBMs (Intercontinental Ballistic Missiles,) not cruise missiles on non-parabolic paths, the report said.While it is impossible to determine whether any specific Chinese missile is carrying a thermonuclear warhead, even after the warheads are released for re-entry exo-atmospherically (in space), Beijing is unlikely to escalate so provocatively.Were this to occur, Washington is almost certain to respond with a prompt and retaliatory nuclear attack, inflicting damage far greater than the expected political payoff of conquering Taiwan, the report said.The chip factories in Taiwan would be useless to China when its major cities were smouldering ruins.One of the most lucrative Canadian targets for a Chinese strike would be the oil sands refineries and natural gas infrastructure.An equally vulnerable energy infrastructure is the facilities of Quebec’s energy provider, Hydro-Quebec. They are slated to provide 1.25 gigawatts of electrical power to New York State alone.Because the China’s DF-27 can circumnavigate the globe, it will have time to alter its trajectory and approach Canada from any direction..Regardless of whether Ottawa is as determined as the Pentagon that war with China is a possibility, not preparing for a reality where Canada is susceptible to billions of taxpayers’ dollars in damages from bombardment, poses a grave risk.While Canada has already committed to upgrading its Northern Warning Systems of sensors and NORAD infrastructure, it's unclear when it will be capable of tracking hyper-velocity vehicles, given the tendency of how plasma reflects radar signals. The US, meanwhile, is toying with the idea of breaking out of its post-Cold War posture and move to a full war-fighting stance with forward deployed theatre level or tactical nuclear weapons on warships.Yes folks, it has reached that point. Nukes on the water.The George H.W. Bush administration withdrew theatre-level nuclear land-attack cruise missile and weapons from U.S. warships in the aftermath of the Cold War in 1991 and it was a reasonable move for the time.That was then, of course. Imagine the concern and uncertainty involved for Chinese war planners today if U.S. warships were now carrying nuclear-tipped cruise missiles.The approach would also get the attention of other rogue states such as Russia, North Korea and Iran.Forward deploying theatre level nuclear weapons to the region on U.S. warships would counter-China’s missile force threat and threaten its homeland without the full weight of U.S. strategic nuclear power.Would a Trump administration have the guts to do that? We shall see, as it appears he could be back in the White House in November.Nevertheless, it does show how seriously the Pentagon is taking the growing Chinese threat. Particularly their dual-capable cruise, ballistic and hypersonic missile forces, and Beijing’s more self-interested and aggressive intentions.According to the RealClearDefense analysis, Canada must show the resolve to fight alongside Pacific allies and not peel out of the coalition as it did from Afghanistan in 2014.Washington also needs to remind Canada that Ottawa cannot expect unconditional protection from its allies, if it is unwilling to reciprocate.China will certainly not be dissuaded from striking Canada if Ottawa declares neutrality, nor should the U.S. feel the political compulsion to expend scarce missile defence resources in defending an ally that has committed itself to a strategic free-ride.Keep in mind, other U.S. allies, including Australia, Japan, and South Korea, all host ground-based Ballistic Missile Defense systems and associated U.S. military bases. China is a strategic rival and a threat unparalleled by any power the U.S. has faced to date and a seeming willingness to bully and subjugate U.S. allies, push the U.S. out of Asia, and the Western Pacific. Let's face it, Beijing’s ‘no first use’ pledge is not worth the paper it is written on. That's because of China’s limited missile early warning and tracking capability that forces them to use nuclear weapons first in a crisis or face losing them in a first strike scenario. As for the nuclear arms race, and arms control, the race is already underway, and the Chinese are building-up their nuclear forces at a rapid rate with plans for near parity with the U.S. and Russia by 2030 with 1,000 warheads. While Canada is making steps in the right direction — jointly investing in NORAD, shopping for new submarines, the F-35 and P-8A Poseidon purchases and the Liberal promise of $8 billion in spending over five years — it must do more.The free ride is over, folks. It's time Canada wakes up to the reality of the serious challenges we and our allies face in the Indo-Pacific.Our very lives and those of future generations, depend on it.— with files from RealClearDefense
Alberta has five refineries: Strathcona (Imperial Oil), Edmonton (Suncor), and Scotford (Shell) in the Edmonton area; Sturgeon (NWR) in Redwater; and Lloydminster (Cenovus.)Together they account for 28.5 percent of Canada’s total refining capacity (at 542.4 Mb/d), and 13.7 percent of Canada’s total GDP. The U.S. also obtains 52 percent of its petroleum imports from Canada, which includes O&G infrastructure in British Columbia and Saskatchewan. As important as these facilities are to our economy, and our nation, they are also highly vulnerable.In a war over Taiwan — something China has vowed to do by 2027 — it is almost certain that the U.S. will conduct stand-off missile attacks on missile bases and port infrastructure targets along the Chinese coast. America's Navy, Marines, Army and Air Force, are tightening their grip on China, as we speak. This is not a videogame, my friends, the US is arming itself in the Indo-Pacific.Beijing is therefore likely to reciprocate with missile strikes against targets in the continental U.S., and because of Canada’s geographic proximity and economic integration with the U.S., we too, have it coming. According to an analysis in RealClearDefense, Beijing would most likely fire an 8,000 km range, conventionally armed 600kg high explosive payloaded Dong Feng 27 ballistic missile, which once it becomes exo-atmospheric, would deploy its direction-changing Hypersonic Glide Vehicle (HGV.) The Pentagon has already assessed that “there is a high probability” that the Chinese DF-27 hypersonic missile can penetrate the missile defence base at Fort Greely, Alaska (equipped with 44 Ground Based Interceptors (GBI.)The latter are primarily designed to intercept missiles following ballistic trajectories, such as ICBMs (Intercontinental Ballistic Missiles,) not cruise missiles on non-parabolic paths, the report said.While it is impossible to determine whether any specific Chinese missile is carrying a thermonuclear warhead, even after the warheads are released for re-entry exo-atmospherically (in space), Beijing is unlikely to escalate so provocatively.Were this to occur, Washington is almost certain to respond with a prompt and retaliatory nuclear attack, inflicting damage far greater than the expected political payoff of conquering Taiwan, the report said.The chip factories in Taiwan would be useless to China when its major cities were smouldering ruins.One of the most lucrative Canadian targets for a Chinese strike would be the oil sands refineries and natural gas infrastructure.An equally vulnerable energy infrastructure is the facilities of Quebec’s energy provider, Hydro-Quebec. They are slated to provide 1.25 gigawatts of electrical power to New York State alone.Because the China’s DF-27 can circumnavigate the globe, it will have time to alter its trajectory and approach Canada from any direction..Regardless of whether Ottawa is as determined as the Pentagon that war with China is a possibility, not preparing for a reality where Canada is susceptible to billions of taxpayers’ dollars in damages from bombardment, poses a grave risk.While Canada has already committed to upgrading its Northern Warning Systems of sensors and NORAD infrastructure, it's unclear when it will be capable of tracking hyper-velocity vehicles, given the tendency of how plasma reflects radar signals. The US, meanwhile, is toying with the idea of breaking out of its post-Cold War posture and move to a full war-fighting stance with forward deployed theatre level or tactical nuclear weapons on warships.Yes folks, it has reached that point. Nukes on the water.The George H.W. Bush administration withdrew theatre-level nuclear land-attack cruise missile and weapons from U.S. warships in the aftermath of the Cold War in 1991 and it was a reasonable move for the time.That was then, of course. Imagine the concern and uncertainty involved for Chinese war planners today if U.S. warships were now carrying nuclear-tipped cruise missiles.The approach would also get the attention of other rogue states such as Russia, North Korea and Iran.Forward deploying theatre level nuclear weapons to the region on U.S. warships would counter-China’s missile force threat and threaten its homeland without the full weight of U.S. strategic nuclear power.Would a Trump administration have the guts to do that? We shall see, as it appears he could be back in the White House in November.Nevertheless, it does show how seriously the Pentagon is taking the growing Chinese threat. Particularly their dual-capable cruise, ballistic and hypersonic missile forces, and Beijing’s more self-interested and aggressive intentions.According to the RealClearDefense analysis, Canada must show the resolve to fight alongside Pacific allies and not peel out of the coalition as it did from Afghanistan in 2014.Washington also needs to remind Canada that Ottawa cannot expect unconditional protection from its allies, if it is unwilling to reciprocate.China will certainly not be dissuaded from striking Canada if Ottawa declares neutrality, nor should the U.S. feel the political compulsion to expend scarce missile defence resources in defending an ally that has committed itself to a strategic free-ride.Keep in mind, other U.S. allies, including Australia, Japan, and South Korea, all host ground-based Ballistic Missile Defense systems and associated U.S. military bases. China is a strategic rival and a threat unparalleled by any power the U.S. has faced to date and a seeming willingness to bully and subjugate U.S. allies, push the U.S. out of Asia, and the Western Pacific. Let's face it, Beijing’s ‘no first use’ pledge is not worth the paper it is written on. That's because of China’s limited missile early warning and tracking capability that forces them to use nuclear weapons first in a crisis or face losing them in a first strike scenario. As for the nuclear arms race, and arms control, the race is already underway, and the Chinese are building-up their nuclear forces at a rapid rate with plans for near parity with the U.S. and Russia by 2030 with 1,000 warheads. While Canada is making steps in the right direction — jointly investing in NORAD, shopping for new submarines, the F-35 and P-8A Poseidon purchases and the Liberal promise of $8 billion in spending over five years — it must do more.The free ride is over, folks. It's time Canada wakes up to the reality of the serious challenges we and our allies face in the Indo-Pacific.Our very lives and those of future generations, depend on it.— with files from RealClearDefense
