Sunk costs: How Canada lags behind on submarines
Sweden's example shows we could have done better, writes Robert Smol.
Recently, the Canadian government tried to put a positive spin on the relaunching of the submarine HMCS Corner Brook after almost 10 years out of service and under repair. But seriously, is this really a symbol of Canadian defence resolve, or is it a desperate public-affairs shot at redemption in the ongoing national embarrassment that is Canada's Victoria class submarines?
These fragile, cast-off former British subs, acquired by the Liberal government in the late 1990s, have continually been in need of costly repair, but nonetheless are expected to remain serviceable into the mid2030s.
Could Canada have done better when these four mothballed subs were leased from the United Kingdom in the 1990s and later purchased? Not likely, considering the severity, even by Canadian standards, of the Chretien Liberals' defence cuts during the 1990s. Back then, much as with today's governments, defending Canada and its coasts could be summed up as just enough to maintain our national dignity as a quasi-colonial auxiliary to the United States.
Should we care to look, several examples stand out of smaller NATO countries or other allies, such as Denmark, the Netherlands and Australia, that continue to trounce Canada in the acquisition of both newer navy surface ships and submarines.
And when it comes to smaller allies succeeding in the design, development and deployment of affordable, combat-capable submarines, there is much that Canada can learn from the Swedes.
This long-standing champion of social democratic policies was, like Canada, faced with the need to replace its outdated submarine fleet in the 1990s when the world was in recession and the former Soviet Union was not seen as a threat. Canada, however, took the cheap, short-term fix on the submarine challenge while Sweden invested in itself and its own defence.
In almost half the time it took Canada to merely repair HMCS Corner Brook, Sweden contracted, designed, built and commissioned three of its own A-19 Gotland-class Diesel Electric submarines between 1990 and 1996. This defence project was initiated by Sweden's Social Democratic Party under thenprime minister Ingvar Carlsson, who returned to power by the time the project was completed.
Canada's used submarines, meanwhile, dawdled in and out of maintenance. In 2020, it was reported that not a single one of Canada's subs was able to spend a day at sea during the previous year.
Meanwhile, in Sweden, hightech, homebuilt submarines garnered the respect of the defence community not so much for what they do, but for what they do not do — that is, make noise and surface.
In the world of submarine warfare, silence and ability to stay underwater and undetected for extended periods of time are preciously sought-after advantages. The Gotland Sub's Stirling Engines were, 30 years ago, designed to be undetectably quiet and vibration-free. Its AIP (Air Independent Propulsion) provides electric power to the submarines, allowing them to preserve battery power while submerged. The sub's structure is designed to minimize sonar and radar detection. When engaging a target, the Swedish sub is equipped with an advanced fire-control system that allows its crew to control multiple torpedoes in the water simultaneously.
The combined impact of the Gotland-class sub's high-tech structure and weaponry was proven in 2005 when, during war games with a U.S carrier task force, a Swedish Gotland submarine managed to (virtually) score several hits on the aircraft carrier USS Ronald Reagan, evading the phalanx of warships defending the carrier. The U.S. Navy could not detect the Swedes coming, nor could it catch them leaving.
(Those of us old enough to remember the right-wing, non-social-democratic policies championed by Reagan in the 1980s can certainly see the irony in his military namesake being “sunk” by a Swedish-designed, -built, and -crewed submarine.)
Today, as Canada tries to keep its submarines, now probably older than most of its crews, in operation for at least another 15 years, Sweden already has underway an even newer, more advanced generation of submarines, the A-26 Blekinge Class, which will soon give the Swedes a two-generation technological advantage over Canada.
Meanwhile, Canada's submarines, for now and however long they may be able to sail, can remain secure under the protection of the U.S Navy, the same navy that failed to catch the Swedes.