Thoughts are still gathering but I am ready to start engaging.
Three preliminary thoughts:
1. We live in MacKinder's world - Eurasian Heartland vs the Islands
2. We live in the Islands and face the Heartland across the Arctic Ocean
3. The Islands are dominated by the United States.
....
I am lazy. I want to know how much can be done without leaving my couch.
....
1. MacKinder's World of the Sino-Russian Eurasian Heartland as Pivot and the Islands of Oceania.
MacKinder's Map focused on the British Empire, centered on India and stretching from the UK to Australia. The Americas were a peripheral consideration and Canada was divided as two separate countries, an Atlantic country and a Pacific Country.
Fast forward a few decades and a couple of wars and the focus switches from London and the British Empire to Washington and the American Empire. The American map now looks like this:
A subtle shift to the right but still an Atlantean map. Now the center has switched from New Delhi to London. The Americas are now considered as lands unto themselves and not just as a barrier between the Atlantic and the Pacific. The US Navy's Fleet structure reflects the Pentagon's Command structure.
7th Fleet supports the Indo-Pacific Command
6th Fleet supports both Europe and Africa Commands
5th Fleet supports Central Command
4th Fleet supports Southern Command
Northern Command, responsible for the defence of the Homeland, which Canada shares, is supported by two fleets:
3rd Fleet on the Pacific coast
2nd Fleet on the Atlantic coast.
Now one of the problems with these maps is that the are based on Mercator's projections and they give short shrift to the Poles, Antarctica and the Arctic Ocean. Some of the problems that creates are associated with time and space. This projection is the projection that people have been building over the age of exploration. People are accustomed to thinking of movement over long distances at nautical speeds and tend to envisage journeys of weeks, if not months, to get from point to point. Even the USN's fleets take weeks to get into position, which explains why they tend to be forward based, stay in position and cycle replacements through those positions.
The other thing that gets lost is the sense of how short distances are at the Poles and how close the contact is between the nations.
I am using Valkyrie XQ-58 as a measuring stick. It has a one-way range of 5800 km and a speed of about 1000 km//h so it takes about 6 hours to fly from Canada's most northern post at Alert to the limits of its range. A one way trip could take it to Florida, or California. It could take it to Japan or Gibraltar. It could take it to the Caucasus or the Himalayas.
Did I mention I am lazy?
It may be low and slow but it can be launched from my couch, or Colorado Springs, or North Bay and do stuff. It is also, as these things go, cheap. It is in roughly the same price range as a Tomahawk, or a Harpoon, or an NSM or any other cruise missiles but it has 5 to 10 times their range. And it can carry submunitions like decoys and anti-radiation missiles and small cruise missiles and glide bombs of its own.... as well as top quality sensors and radio relay links.
But back to the measuring stick.
The Valkyrie can be sent on one way missions, and because it is cheap and uncrewed, that presents and array of interesting possibilities. But it doesn't have to be sent on one way missions. It can return to base for reuse. That gives a range of 2800 km with a flight time to bingo of about 3 hours. 3 hours out and 3 hours back. At that range Alert can reach out and touch, with precision and with an observer in the loop, anything in the area of the Arctic Ocean.
With that type of reach the Arctic Ocean becomes more like a lake.
Now I am talking about Valkyrie based at Alert under Canadian authority. It could equally be based at Thule on Greenland under Danish authority, or in Alaska under American authority, or Spitzbergen or Svalbard. Or it could be any of a number of Russian, Chinese or Iranian craft.
My preference would be that that lake be a friendly lake.
....
How important is that?
If I go back to the US fleet distribution map what I see is that the seam between Northern Command's 3rd Fleet on the Pacific and 2nd Fleet in the Atlantic is somewhere north of Canada. In the Arctic Ocean. The fleets are separated, or joined, by the Northwest Passage that passes through the archipelago that we claim. The archipelago that also borders that ocean/lake that is used by the Russians as a base for their missile boats to threaten the same territory that a Valkyrie at Alert could threaten. With similar times of flight for cruise missiles. But only minutes for ballistic missiles.
Control of the Arctic Ocean seems like a big thing to me.
....
Valkyrie can also carry Air to Air missiles. Ballistic missiles at launch are vulnerable. They are building speed and they are low in the atmosphere. They are accessible to Air to Air missiles. How many patrolling aircraft with AAMs would it take to counter SLBMs and keep their heads down? Whatever that number is it would be cheaper with UAVs, allowing more of them, and would not require exposing aircrew to a very risky mission.
Again, I use Valkyrie as a measuring stick. Not just in geographic terms but in terms of state of the art capabilities. What is possible currently or in the very near future.
...
So what is Canada's responsibility? We have staked a claim to this land, its waters and all its resources. Our neighbours and allies accept those claims, if we are not overly selfish. If we share our resources, by selling them at a reasonable price, if we allow reasonable access, if we look after their people in our area of responsibility then we get no grief if we exploit our land to provide ourselves with a comfortable life. They let us join all sorts of clubs, so long as we co-operate fairly and pay our fair share.
This is the Area of Responsibility that Canada is given to exploit and serve.
This is what we are expected to service even as we claim its benefits.
The first thing I note about it is how big the area is given how few Canadians we have.
The second thing is that that area is entirely a subset of the USA's Northern Command.
The third thing is that we are a wedge between the USN's 3rd Fleet on the West and 2nd Fleet on the East.
The fourth thing is that the Arctic Ocean flanks both the Atlantic and Pacific Oceans.
Control of the Arctic Ocean secures the northern flanks of both the Atlantic and the Pacific.
If we don't control the Arctic on our terms then some one else with control it for us. Russian, Chinese, Scandinavians, AUKUS or the USA on it own.
The Arctic matters. And we have it within our power to control our patch on our terms - and many people are begging us to do exactly that.
One last map before closing this chapter (I told you that you would be sorry).
The Red Line represents the line between Us and Them.
On our side of the line are the US in Alaska, the Danes on Greenland and the whole of NATO, to include Scandinavia and the Baltic in their entirety. Also on our side of the line is Ukraine, currently leaving a very weak and exposed flank.
What Canada does inside those Yellow Borders matters. People want that ground secured. They want us to do it. But if we won't do it then somebody will do it for us.
.....
More to follow - What happens when Plan A fails.