Canadian Armed Forces under United States Command
| Author | Michael Byers |
| Published date | 01 March 2003 |
| Date | 01 March 2003 |
| DOI | 10.1177/002070200305800105 |
| Subject Matter | Article |
MICHAEL
BYERS
Canadian
armed
forces
under
United
States
command
IN
JANUARY
2002,
IT
BECAME
APPARENT
that
negotiations
were
under
way
to
place
a
substantial
part
of
the
Canadian
armed
forces
-
land
and
sea
forces
as
well
as
air
-
under the
operational
control
of
a
permanent,
integrated
command
structure
under
United
States
leadership.
The
creation
of
a
'Northern Command'
in
April
2002
unified
the
conti-
nental
United
States
into
a
single
military
command
and
provided
a
logical
precursor to
an
expansion
that
would
include
Canada
and
Canadian
forces.'
A
number
of
difficult questions
will have
to
be
answered
before
the Canadian
government could
responsibly
embark
on
closer
military co-operation
of
this
kind.
Associate
Professor,
Duke
University
Law
School.
This
is
a
revised
and
condensed
version
of
a
report
commissioned
by
the
Simons
Centre
for
Peace
&
Disarmament
Studies, University
of
British
Columbia,
and
presented
to
the House
of
Commons
Standing
Committee
on
Foreign
Affairs
&International
Trade,
6May 2002.
lam
gratefulfor
comments
from
Robert Adamson,
LloydAxworthy,
Gerry
Barr,
Douglas Bland,
Bruce
Broomhal4
Jutta
Brunnie, Maurice
Copithorne,
Paul
Evans,
John
Godfrey
David
Haglund,
Brian
Job,
Nicole
La
Violette,
Neil
MacFarlane,
Patricia
Marchack,
Pierre
Martin,
Donald
McRae,
Richard
Price,
Reni
Provost,
Ernie
Regehr,
Marco
Sassoli,
Jennifer
Simons,
Penelope
Simons,
Stephen
Toope,
and
Michael
Wallace.
1
Paul Knox,
'What
does the
Canadian
military
have
to
prove?'
Globe
and
Mail
(Toronto),
9
January
2002,
A9;
Paul
Koring
&
Daniel Leblanc,
'Canada
aims
to
join
"Americas
Command,"'
ibid,
29
January
2002,
Al;
Jeffrey
Simpson,
'What matters
is
defence
integration,
not
the
Eggleton
sideshow,'
ibid,
2
February
2002,
A15.
2
Jeff
Sallot,
'u.s.
plan
raises
questions
for
Canada,'
Globe
and
Mail,
18
April
2002,
A7;
Shawn
McCarthy,
'us
plays
down
Northcom
threat,'
ibid,
19
April
2002,
A14;
Stephen
Handelman,
'Who's in
control?
Canada
will
have
to
come
to grips
-
discrete-
ly
-
with
the
new
u.s.
Northern
Command,'
Time
(Canadian
edition),
29
April
2002,
18.
INTERNATIONAL
JOURNAL
Winter
2002-2003
Michael
Byers
UNITED
NATIONS/NATO/NORAD
OPERATIONS
Canadian
soldiers
have
in
the
past
functioned
under
United
States
command
in
operations
authorized
by
the
United
Nations, the
North
Atlantic
Treaty
Organization
(NATO),
and
in the
North
American
Aerospace
Defence
Command. The
first
operation authorized
by
the
United Nations
Security
Council
was
the
1950
intervention
in
Korea.
Subsequent operations include
the
1991
Gulf
War
and
the
interven-
tion
in
Bosnia-Herzegovina
in 1991-5.
Canada
has
also
placed
its
sol-
diers
under
foreign
command
within
peacekeeping
operations
autho-
rized
by
the
General
Assembly.
Those
operations
are
not
contentious:
the
Council and
the
Assembly
operate
under the
United
Nations
Charter
-
a
multilateral
treaty
ratified
by 190
states.
Although
American
commanders
are
sometimes
in
charge
of
day-to-day opera-
tions, they
have
the
explicit,
delegated
authority
of
the
international
community
behind
them.
And
these
operations
are,
in
any
case,
tem-
porary
in
scope.
As
parties to
the
1949
North
Atlantic
Treaty,
Canada
and
the
United
States
are
obligated
to
assist
any
NATO
member
country
subject
to
an
armed
attack.
This
obligation,
set
out
in
article
5,
has
been
invoked
only
once
-
by
the
United
States
following
the
11
September 2001
attacks
in
New
York
and Washington.
Even
then
NATO
was
not
called
upon
to
engage
in
military
action.
Article
5
operations
would
be
very
different
from
that
which
is
contemplated
today.
NATO
structures
remain
largely
dormant
and
without
authority,
except
in those specif-
ic
instances in
which
the
members
agree
to
activate
them.
Moreover,
NATO,
like
the
United Nations,
is
a
multilateral
organization
-
in
this
case
composed
of
19
states.
When
an American
commander
is
placed
in
charge
of
an
operation,
he
acts
as
a
NATO
commander
within
the
multilateral
structure.
Outside
the context
of
article
5,
NATO
participated
in
operations
authorized
by
the
Security
Council
in
Bosnia-Herzegovina.
And
in
one instance
-
Kosovo
-
NATO
acted
without
explicit
United
Nations
approval.
But
even
then,
the operation
was
that
of
a
multilateral
orga-
nization,
subject
to
its
authorization
and
control.
Every
target
had
to
be
approved
unanimously
by
all
involved
governments.
NORAD
was
designed
to
enable
rapid
responses
to
incursions
into
Canadian
or
United
States
airspace by Soviet
bombers.
Its
integrated
command structure
is
limited
to
one
specific
function
-
air
defence
-
and
involves
a
relatively
small
part
of
the Canadian
forces.
Since
the
90
INTERNATIONAL
JOURNAL
Winter2002-2003
To continue reading
Request your trial