Over the past 18 months, the primary focus of the Canadian Army commander has been the mission in Latvia: The transition from an enhanced Forward Presence Battle Group to a Multinational Brigade and all the resource challenges that created, from generating personnel to identifying urgently required equipment (UORs) and other capabilities, and even transforming a significant portion of collective training and validation.
The Army footprint is now more than 1,500 soldiers, and will expand during key NATO exercises each year, such as Resolute Warrior in November, as troops and equipment transit to Eastern Europe for explicit training purposes.
Latvia remains a critical point of focus for Lieutenant-General Michael Wright, who assumed command of the Army in July. The brigade headquarters was stood up in July, and the first iteration of validation exercises for both the Canadian-led battle group and Canadian-led multinational brigade were completed in September, demonstrating their ability to exercise command and control, and to fully integrate into the NATO command-and-control structure.
But the mission in Latvia is now part of a larger modernization agenda that is driving his thinking.
For the past three years, Wright was the commander of Canadian Forces Intelligence Command (CFINTCOM) and Chief of Defence intelligence, and last served in the Army as commander of 2 Canadian Mechanized Brigade Group six years ago. His time in CFINTCOM has afforded him a unique understanding of the global threat picture, from the strength of peer adversaries and rogue actors to disinformation campaigns and climate change.
Since July, though, he and the Army Sergeant Major, Chief Warrant Officer Christopher Robin, have visited all five divisions and the doctrine and training centre, to get reacquainted with the Army, “confirm some assumptions, change some assumptions,” before he issues Commander’s direction and guidance.
“What I need to do is to be able to establish a Canadian Army that’s capable of providing options to any mission that the Government of Canada gives to us,” he explained in a recent interview.
That includes defence of Canada, notably in the Arctic, domestic assistance operations in support of provincial governments, or missions in priority theatres such as the Euro-Atlantic and Indo- Pacific. (Canada recently placed members of the 3rd Regiment, Princess Patricia’s Canadian Light Infantry, the current rotation for the Global Response Task Force, on standby in the Mediterranean to support a non-combatant evacuation from Lebanon or elsewhere in the region should the need arise.)
What I’m focused on is the overall modernization of the Canadian Army. [Latvia] is currently our largest mission, and I think it will continue to be our largest mission. The Brigade in Latvia will allow us to experiment with new tactics, techniques, and procedures in the presence of industry experts and allied forces in a multinational setting. It’s going to serve as a validation, not only of the skill of our soldiers and our command and control, but also as a validation of the equipment that went through that UOR process such as air defence, counter-UAS, and anti-armor weapons. Did we get the right equipment? Are we able to integrate it? But what I need to ensure is that I’m working on modernizing the entire Canadian Army.
We have 49 major capital projects, a number of which are connected to some of those UORs. I can’t go around Ottawa and say, here are my priorities, one through 49. What I’ve done, initially, is say, here are the four priorities that I have: Something we’ve never had, something we need to modernize, a capability we need to reinvigorate, and then a capability we need to ensure that we have to exercise sovereignty in the Arctic.
The something we’ve never had is long range precision strike, [and] we need to modernize our indirect fires – anything from our mortars up to our M777s – and those are very much connected to Latvia. The capability we need to reinvigorate is ground-based air defence. Through a UOR, we are getting an [interim] capability into Latvia, but we’re still working the longer-term project. The importance of both ground-based air defence and long-range precision strike is that, yes, they will be great for Latvia, but they also provide options for the Canadian Army to present to the leadership and the government for a continental defence role. And then the ability to be mobile and survive in the Arctic is coming up with a replacement for our Bv 206 (tracked vehicle).
Then, I always stress that there’s a backbone of integrated command and control that needs to be in place, and we are working very hard to modernize and ensure that our command-and-control systems are integrated so that, as we bring all this new equipment in, we’re able to integrate it, not only within the Army, but also have that interoperability and interchangeability with our allies.
Those 49 major capital projects represent the largest modernization project for the Canadian Army in at least 25 years. When we talk about the Army of Tomorrow, in terms of its capabilities and equipment, it will be based on what we’re bringing in over the course of the next few years.
CAF infanteers spot potential enemy movement in a wooded area north-east of Kilingi-Nomme, Estonia, as part of Ex Spring Storm in May 2024. Photo: Lt Jennifer Kusche
STRUCTURE REVIEW
I should note, though, that the Army of Tomorrow structure may not look like the structure we have within the Army today. Way too early to get into details, but I’ve spent a considerable amount of time with the Chief of Staff, Army Strategy, on this. Brigadier-General Stéphane Masson and his team are the ones I’m giving the greatest amount of tasks to, because the future Army and modernization are so important. We’re looking at what does the future structure of the Army need to look like? When I say, Canadian Army, it’s that One Army team of Regular Force, Reserve Force, Canadian Rangers, and defence team civilians. We’re not looking at this as four different elements. What’s the optimal structure? Some of that is able to dovetail nicely into initiatives that we already have ongoing, like the Canadian Ranger Enhancement.
We are looking at not only the current battle and what the Army of Tomorrow needs to be ready for, but then what the Army of the future needs to be prepared for: What are the capabilities and the doctrine that we need to put in place? I’m asking the Canadian Army Land Warfare Centre to look beyond that Army of Tomorrow and to work with colleagues across the Canadian Armed Forces to figure out the Army of the future as part of the Canadian Armed Forces of the future. What are the threats? How do we make sure that we’re able to remain relevant?
We are in the process of revising Advancing with Purpose: The Canadian Army Modernization Strategy. That document was for 2025, which is months away. We’re taking the great work that was done in that modernization strategy and determining what we need to continue, what we need to change in terms of scope or scale. We need to make sure that the direction that we’re giving for the Army of Tomorrow and the Army of the future is clear.
It’s still too early to get into details, but I’ll use the example of bringing in long-range precision strike. That’s a capability we’ve never had, so we need to figure out where that capability is best suited. Another example is our Global Response Task Force (GRTF). Over almost the past decade, we’ve had the Light Forces Working Group, which has resulted in the GRTF, where our light battalions provide high readiness forces to Canadian Joint Operations Command for [such things as] non-combatant evacuation operations or disaster assistance relief. They also provide a capability in terms of agility and scalability that the Army hasn’t necessarily had previously. So, we need to look at what’s going to be coming in, and determine the best way to exercise command and control of that.
It’s important that we are not only interoperable, but that we’re digitally transformed. When I came in this summer and received the brief from the Directorate of Digital and Army Combat Systems Integration (DDACSI), it was great to see that the Army is ahead of where I thought it was. It’s great to see the work that DDACSI is doing, what they’re doing to encourage a spirit of innovation across the Army.
Members of 39 Canadian Brigade Group during urban ops training. Photo: Pte Brandon Lin
RECONSTITUTION
Two other priorities of modernization that I’ve laid out for the Army are reconstitution and readiness. Modernization is important, because the Army that we have now is not the Army that we need for the future. Reconstitution has three elements to it. There’s the ongoing evolution of our culture. We need to ensure that the Army is an institution that Canadians can see themselves serving in, can see themselves coming in as individuals, but then forming part of that One Army team. Being an organization that has adapted, it is going to open us to more Canadians being willing to join, and that will strengthen our overall team and lead to greater operational effectiveness.
The other two parts of reconstitution are recruiting and retention. We still have a shortfall of about 7,000 – 3,000 in the Regular Forace and 4,000 in the Reserve Force. The number one priority of the Chief of the Defence Staff is recruiting. There are changes being put in motion, everything from our Canadian Forces Recruiting Centres to the Canadian Forces Leadership Recruit School, that will eventually put soldiers into the units. We’re in a situation where we cannot just continue to do things the way we’ve done things before. The CDS has been very clear in her expectations as to what we need to do to get those numbers back up to where they need to be, in a timeline that does not extend into the 2030s. Modernization of our recruiting system is important so that we can have better data to provide us the analysis to determine how are things going, like for certain stress trades.
It’s one thing to get people through the door, through that training system. It’s another thing to make sure we’re keeping them. Hopefully, as we send soldiers to what is a pretty amazing mission in Latvia, they’re going to say, that was a great experience. But we also need to work closely with Chief Military Personnel to look at what are measures that can be put in place for retention of the forces we need? When we look at our middle level, in particular, whether it be captains and majors on the officer side, or sergeants and warrant officers on the non-commissioned members side, it’s going to take a while for that bubble to get through the training system, so we need to put the measures in place to retain the talent that we have.
We’re also creating more opportunities for the Reserves. We’re looking for 20 percent of our rotations to Latvia to be filled by reservists. In terms of other current force employment for reservists, we have our Arctic response company groups, which is incredibly important. We also have the territorial battalion groups and the ability to respond as part of any call outs that we have for domestic operations. There are also discussions happening about mobilization. What would mobilization look like? And the Reserves provide that basis for mobilization.
The third priority is readiness. This is where we need to modernize and reconstitute in order to augment our readiness. As we bring in new capabilities, it’ll be important for us to determine the best way to exercise those capabilities. We’ve mentioned the validation training that we used to do in Canada, that we’re now doing in Latvia because that’s where we have the people and the equipment. But as we rebuild, reconstitute and modernize, we will be able to get back to a level of readiness, not only for Latvia, but for any operation the government could assign to us.