Photo: RCMP harassment on Wet’suwet’en territory. Photo by Gidimt’en Checkpoint/Twitter.

In June 2022, CBC reported: “[Wet’suwet’en land defenders Janet Williams, Lawrence Bazil and Molly Wickham/Sleydo’] are suing the RCMP and Coastal GasLink for alleged harassment they claim to have suffered at the hands of police and private security overstepping the boundaries of an injunction guaranteeing the construction of a controversial pipeline.”

The civil claim filed in the British Columbia Supreme Court says they have been subjected to “relentless campaign of harassment and intimidation”.

The lawsuit can be read in full here.

It also says the interlocutory injunction granted by the court in December 2019 protects access to the Morice Forest Service Road, but that it does not allow the RCMP to stop Wet’suwet’en people from “using, occupying and residing on their land.”

And it says that Forsythe Security, owned by Forsythe Investments ULC and hired by Coastal GasLink, routinely shares information, video footage and pictures with the RCMP in a joint effort to target the plaintiffs and visitors to the sites.

The Terrace Standard also notes: “The claim alleges members of the RCMP’s Community-Industry Response Group (C-IRG), a special squad sent regularly to locations where there is conflict over land use, visited the checkpoint and village approximately 269 times between the beginning of March and the end of May.”

The lawsuit specifies: “The true reason for the C-IRG campaign is to force or encourage the Plaintiffs and others to leave the Gidimt’en Checkpoint and Lamprey Village, to abandon their ancestral territory and cultural practices, and to permit CGL to advance the Pipeline Project unencumbered and without oversight or monitoring by the people on whose traditional territory the Pipeline Project is being built.”

Sleydo’ says: “There’s quite a stark contrast from enforcing an injunction and being on the territory for a specific legal reason and engaging in the kinds of behaviour that they have 24 hours a day, seven days a week for the last over three months now. We’re seeking damages from all of these companies for the duress and the psychological harm and the infringement of our right to be on our territory and engage in cultural practices.”

And she has highlighted: “On multiple occasions, I have witnessed the RCMP on the ground take direction from Coastal GasLink workers. Their relationship is so close and intertwined that it’s hard to distinguish roles.”

Now, more than six months after the filing of the lawsuit on June 22, 2022, CBC reports: “The RCMP, Coastal GasLink and Forsythe Security, named as defendants in a lawsuit three Wet’suwet’en members launched last June, all deny the allegations.”

That article adds: “The latest defence filing to the lawsuit comes from B.C.’s public safety minister [Mike Farnworth], the provincial politician in charge of policing, who is being represented by a Justice Canada lawyer because the claim involves the Mounties.”

This most recent news article by CBC reporter Brett Forester can be read at RCMP, Coastal GasLink deny conspiring to intimidate, harass Wet’suwet’en members.

The Yintahaccess.com statement on the civil claim is here.

Beginning in December 2019, the United Nations Committee on the Elimination of Racial Discrimination has repeatedly called on the RCMP and private security to leave Wet’suwet’en territory. Amnesty International has also highlighted this demand.

Photo: The red tail of a B61-12 nuclear bomb is visible inside the bomb bay of the F-35 during a flight test in October 2019.

The United Nations Treaty on the Prohibition of Nuclear Weapons, the first legally binding international agreement to comprehensively prohibit nuclear weapons, entered into force on January 22, 2021.

Canada has not signed the Treaty.

The Canadian Press has reported: “[The Treaty] has no support among the countries that possess nuclear weapons — including the United States and its allies, including Canada. Canada doesn’t have nuclear weapons but its membership in NATO means it adheres to the 29-country military alliance’s nuclear-deterrent policy.”

Two weeks prior to the anniversary of the Treaty, Defence Minister Anita Anand announced that Canada would be purchasing 88 F-35A fighter-bombers.

The F-35 is nuclear capable

The F-35 has tested dropping a B61-12 nuclear free-fall bomb that would have an explosive yield of 50 kilotons (the bomb dropped on Hiroshima had an explosive yield of about 13 kilotons, while the bomb on Nagasaki had a yield of 21 kilotons).

Defense World reports: “The tests, carried out at Edwards Air Force Base in California, [with an inert bomb] were dated back to June 2019.”

CNN has also reported: “A US Air Force F-35 jet conducted a successful test drop of a mock nuclear bomb [in August 2020] while traveling at greater than the speed of sound.”

The Defense World article further highlights: “The test has proven that the nuclear bomb can be carried in the weapons bay of the F-35 thereby giving it the ability to take the bomb to its target undetected – a huge tactical advantage that flies in the face of global nuclear non-proliferation efforts.”

In October 2021, the Air Force Times reported: “America’s most advanced fighter jet is on its way to becoming the newest addition to the nuclear arsenal. The Air Force recently wrapped up the flight testing needed to ensure the B61-12 thermonuclear bomb design is compatible with the F-35A Lightning II, paving the way for the jet to begin carrying nuclear weapons. The airframe must still become certified to conduct nuclear operations as well.”

Canada also invests in the F-35

Beyond paying $19 billion to buy F-35s (with a lifecycle cost of $70 billion or more) Canada has been making payments toward the development of the F-35 since 1997.

By 2020, Canada’s payments totalled US $541.3 million. Previous payments were US $70.1 million per year. The payment in 2021 was slightly higher at US $71.7 million.

With its latest payment of US $99 million in May 2022, that total is now US $712 million (CAD $955.93 million).

If those payments continue in 2023 as expected, another payment of US $71.7 million would take the total to US $783.7 million (CAD $1.05 billion).

F-35s with nuclear hardware in Europe

At this point, there is no suggestion that the Canadian F-35As will carry nuclear weapons (though that could be an issue of concern).

The US Air Force says: “Not all aircraft will become nuclear-capable upon full certification. Only those units with a nuclear mission will be given the hardware and manpower necessary to configure and maintain nuclear-capable F-35s.”

Hans Kristensen, the director of the Nuclear Information Project at the Federation of American Scientists, says that could include RAF Lakenheath, 100 kilometres from London, England, and Aviano Air Base, 90 kilometres north of Venice, Italy.

In response to German government’s decision to buy F-35 fighter-bombers, US ambassador to Germany Amy Gutmann commented that it served to cement Germany’s “continued participation in NATO’s nuclear-sharing mission.”

Greenpeace activists in Germany have warned: “Germany doesn’t have nuclear bombs, but the US has nuclear bombs here.”

We remain deeply concerned that the Canadian government has purchased and invested in F-35s that have the “stealth first-strike capability” to deliver nuclear bombs with destructive yields almost four times that of the bomb dropped on Hiroshima.

Photo by Koozma J. Tarasoff.

Video of Toronto police evicting tent with heavy machinery.

Housing is a human right.

Article 25 of the Universal Declaration of Human Rights recognizes the right to housing as part of the right to an adequate standard of living.

As of November 2022, 9,711 people were considered “actively homeless” in Toronto, up from 9,199 people one year prior.

Leilani Farha, the Ottawa-based former UN Special Rapporteur on the Right to Housing (from 2014 to 2020), shared this video and tweets:

“I repeat, Mayor @JohnTory – forced eviction, bulldozing homes, is a gross violation of the right to housing under int’l law, now recognized in law in Canada. To Min @HonAhmedHussen – surely you can w/hold federal homelessness $ from Toronto until Mayor Tory complies w/ the NHSA.

To Toronto Police Chief @TPSMyronDemkiw – Forcibly evicting homeless ppl violates int’l human rights law, now recognized in law in Canada. Police are bound by human rights law. Perhaps you could raise this w/ the Mayor when he calls on you to evict homeless people to nowhere.

@CaseCE do you really want your construction equipment to be used by the City of Toronto in the commission of human rights violations?”

As noted on the CASE website, “Jerome Increase Case founded the Racine Threshing Machine Works in Racine, Wisconsin, USA [in 1842].”

Their website further states: “At CASE, we do more than build great equipment…our passion also lies in building communities.”

Case Construction Equipment is headquartered in Turin, Italy.

Further reading: Protest rejects police violence and encampment evictions, calls for affordable housing and accessible washrooms (November 23, 2022) and Canadian government provides more than $525 million for housing – warplanes (December 23, 2022).

Photo: An F-35A flies past the CN Tower, September 2021.

On January 9, Defence Minister Anita Anand announced at a virtual media conference that Canada is buying 88 F-35A fighter-bombers.

Global News reports that Jessica Lamirande, a spokesperson for the Department of National Defence, says that an assessment has been conducted on the “environmental impact” of F-35 fighter jets that includes the “planned capture of emissions”.

The article by Montreal-based reporter Gloria Henriquez notes: “The government says they have conducted an assessment of the jets’ environmental impact, concluding that it would be the same as those of the existing CF-18 aircraft.”

It then quotes Lamirande who says: “In fact, they may be lower as a result of reduced use of hazardous materials, and planned capture of emissions. The analysis supports the conclusion that replacing the current fighter fleet with the future fighter fleet will not have an adverse impact on the environment.”

CCPA report

On August 5, 2021, the Canadian Centre for Policy Alternatives released a report titled Leading the way? A critical assessment of the federal Greening Government Strategy.

DND = 59% of federal government emissions

The CCPA report specifies: “The Department of National Defence alone accounted for 59% of federal emissions in 2019–20.”

Fighter jets exempt from 2025 emission reduction plan

The CCPA report highlights: “The most obvious and serious challenge is the outsized contribution of national security operations to federal government emissions. The [Department of National Defence is] exempt from key commitments in the Greening Government Strategy [of reducing emissions by 40% below 2005 levels by 2025]. Specifically, while [DND is] beholden to the 2025 target for facilities and administrative fleets, their operational fleets [i.e., the air force] are only subject to the 2050 target [of net zero emissions].”

DND decarbonization plan due in 2023

The report also notes that the Department of National Defence is required to develop a decarbonization plan by 2023 for its operations.

DND responds to CCPA report

In response to the report, Lamirande told the Ottawa Citizen that National Defence is working on reducing greenhouse gas emissions by 40 per cent from 2005 levels by 2030.

In August 2021, the Ottawa Citizen reported: “She noted that initiatives included transitioning 20 per cent of non-military vehicle fleets to hybrid and electric, the requirement for new construction and major recapitalization projects to meet industry-recognized environmental design standards and installing electric charging stations at new or retrofitted buildings for personnel to use with defence fleets as well as their own vehicles. Another strategy will improve energy efficiency and reduce the environmental impact of defence activities, Lamirande added.”

Lamirande said: “These activities have put us on track to reduce our GHG emissions by 40 per cent by 2025, five years ahead of schedule.”

Energy-efficient, net-zero carbon facilities for the fighter jets

The recent Global News report did also note: “As for the environmental aspect, Lamirande added the department is taking steps to reduce the potential impacts of the project, such as designing their new facilities as energy-efficient and net-zero carbon.”

According to Defence Construction Canada: “The total value of the contract [to build these new facilities] is approximately $525 million—$272 million for a 34,500 square metre facility in Cold Lake and $253 million for a 22,000 square metre facility in Bagotville.”

This would be in addition to the $21.3 million spent on the design of the hangars – $9.2 million for 4 Wing Cold Lake and $12.1 million for 3 Wing Bagotville.

The Canadian government has noted: “These facilities will be designed and constructed to Leadership in Energy and Environmental Design Silver standards and will use energy efficient options wherever possible.”

DND analysis on environmental impact of F-35s

We have contacted the Department of National Defence to ask for this report first mentioned by Lamirande in the January 6, 2023 Global News report. 

Given each F-35 is supposed to have a service lifetime of 8,000 hours and burns 5,600 litres of jet fuel an hour, we look forward to the release of the Department of National Defence environmental impact assessment of the F-35 and an update on its decarbonization plan that is reportedly due this year.

Photo by Koozma J. Tarasoff; January 7, 2023.

The Department of National Defence has now acknowledged that the lifecycle cost of Canada’s new fleet of F-35 fighter-bombers will be about $70 billion over a 30-year period.

The No Fighter Jet coalition has calculated the figure to be $76.8 billion. The Parliamentary Budget Officer will release its figure in the Spring.

If we use DND’s figure of $70 billion over a lifecycle period of 30-years, that about $2.3 billion a year (or $2.8 billion a year over a 25-year period).

Now, Defence Minister Anita Anand tweets: “Investing in new F-35 fighter jets will deliver clear economic benefits for Canadians. As I told @BNNBloomberg, this project has the potential to contribute over $425 million annually to our economy and close to 3,300 jobs annually for Canadian industry over a 25-year period.”

In other words, it could be said that Anand is arguing for a $2.8 billion annual expenditure on warplanes for a $425 million annual benefit.

Video: Anand on BNN.

In the U.S. context, Phyllis Bennis has written: “$1 billion in military spending creates approximately 11,200 jobs — but the same amount of money would create 26,700 jobs if invested in education, about two-and-a-half times as many. Or 16,800 jobs in clean energy, or 17,200 in health care.”

Similarly, research by the Costs of War Project based at Brown University’s Watson Institute for International and Public Affairs found that while $1 million spent on “defence” creates 6.9 direct and indirect jobs, the same amount invested in solar power creates 9.5 jobs, in health care 14.3 jobs, and in elementary and secondary education 19.2 jobs.

We also recall the Alternative Federal Budget 2022 stated: “This AFB cancels the new fighter jet procurement and missile defence purchase, for an estimated saving of $3.1 billion a year for 30 years (in accrual terms). This includes the initial purchase cost, the lifespan costs of the jets, and estimated upkeep of the missile defence system.”

It also noted: “Military savings will be redirected to education, health care, human rights, environmental protection, housing, and future-proofing the Canadian workforce through industrial development strategies and skills development, among other initiatives that promote real human security.”

We continue to follow this situation.

Photo: Liberal MP Karina Gould, the federal Minister of Families, Children and Social Development, challenged on the F-35 deal; January 8, 2023. Photo by Graham Paine/Metroland.

Further reading: How have the Conservatives, NDP and Greens responded to the Liberal decision to spend $70 billion on F-35 fighter-bombers? (January 10, 2023).

Video by Ende Gelände #LütziBleibt.

The Associated Press reports: “Several hundred climate activists tried Tuesday [January 10] to prevent heavy machinery from reaching an abandoned village in Germany that is due to be cleared for the expansion of a coal mine, even as police pushed back protesters and removed road blocks ahead of a possible clearance this week.”

“About 300 people refused to heed the ruling arguing that civil disobedience at the site was justified in the face of the climate crisis.”

The article adds: “Climate campaigners say [the expansion of] the massive open-cast Garzweiler mine goes against Germany’s international commitments to reduce emissions of planet-warming greenhouse gases.”

On January 8, Mining.com had reported that about 1,500 climate activists were in the town that has now been declared an exclusion zone.

The BBC adds: “The land around and under Lützerath is rich in lignite – the dirtiest form of coal. The mine, a bleak and dull brown man-made canyon which stretches over 35 square kilometres, yields 25 million tonnes of the stuff every year.”

And Izquierda Diario MX comments: “With the expansion of the Garzweiler II quarry, where the village is located, 650 million tons of lignite could be extracted, and the impact on climate change would be catastrophic.”

RWE AG is a German transnational energy company headquartered in Essen.

As noted in the Banking on Climate Chaos website, the Canadian bank RBC provided USD 71.42 million to RWE in 2019.

Overall, RBC provided $372 million in financing to coal mining companies and 1.938 billion to coal power companies between 2016 to 2021 (as noted on pages 61-62 of Banking on Climate Chaos: Fossil Fuel Finance Report 2022).

Video by Ende Gelände #LütziBleibt.

Photo: The No Fighter Jets coalition mobilized for a January 6-8 weekend of action that called on Members of Parliament to #DropTheF35Deal.

On January 9, Defence Minister Anita Anand announced that Canada is purchasing 88 F-35 warplanes at a cost of $19 billion.

Video: Defence Minister Anita Anand speaks at the virtual media conference on the F-35 deal.

In a technical briefing before the announcement, Department of Defence officials acknowledged that the lifecycle cost of the jets would be about $70 billion.

The decision by the Liberal government to purchase F-35s stands in contrast to the promise they made during the 2015 federal election not to buy the fighter-bombers.

How have the Opposition parties responded?

Conservative Party of Canada leader Pierre Poilievre tweets: “Justin Trudeau said that buying the F-35s would be a “nightmare” for taxpayers. Now he is buying 88 of them. Phoney. Out of touch. Incompetent.”

And his Defence critic James Bezan tweets: “Trudeau said he would NEVER buy the F-35. Then, he wasted years and taxpayer money on rusted out Australian CF-18s, only to realize the Conservative plan was right all along. The fact is Trudeau has failed to provide our military with the equipment they require now. #cdnpoli #F35.”

Bezan has also commented in the media: “This is a situation where [Trudeau] originally said he would never buy the F-35 and did everything in his power to stop it from actually happening, but at the end of the day, this is the only modern fighter jet that can deliver the capabilities Canada so desperately needs. And so here we are today, where Justin Trudeau has to eat crow and do what’s right for Canada, do what’s right for the Royal Canadian Air Force, and do it right for our NORAD and NATO allies.”

Bob Zimmer, the Conservative Member of Parliament for Prince George-Peace River-Northern Rockies, has also commented: “We’ll be getting the best fighter in the world. It is at a hugely increased price from when we were looking at the F-35 ourselves. So again, pleased with the acquisition, but alarmed by the costs.”

New Democratic Party Defence deputy critic Randall Garrison basically makes the same argument as the Conservatives.

He says: “In 2015, Trudeau said that Canada didn’t need F-35. He promised never to purchase them and promised to purchase one of the many lower priced options to better serve Canada’s defense needs. That statement is in complete contradiction with today’s announcement, and yet again, the price tag announced today is higher than what was announced a few months ago—with no guarantees for Canadian jobs.”

Garrison also notes: “The NDP critic for national defense, Lindsay Mathyssen, has put forward a private member’s bill, Bill C-300 [that can be read in full here], which would protect Canadian jobs for defense contracts.”

This appears consistent with the NDP platform from the 2021 election that states: “In contracting for new military equipment, including ships and fighter jets, New Democrats will ensure maximum industrial benefits and jobs.”

And Green Party leader Elizabeth May says: “Trudeau was elected opposing F-35, saying they didn’t work and weren’t needed. Now, in the midst of accumulating economic, health and housing crises, this is how they decide to spend Canadians’ money? By purchasing planes that don’t work and aren’t needed?”

The other Green MP Mike Morrice adds: “This is a deeply disappointing decision, one that Trudeau himself was opposed to in 2015. We can’t let ourselves become accustomed to broken promises, from the Liberals or any other political party.”

The Bloc Québécois does not appear to have responded to yesterday’s announcement, but on April 1, 2022, following the news that the Liberals had chosen the F-35, BQ Defence critic Christine Normandin stated: “Imagine: the Liberal government cancels the F-35 project in 2015 on the grounds that it is too expensive, then spends hundreds of millions of dollars to buy and upgrade 18 old Australian F-18s, gobbling up huge sums to keep these aging aircraft on the ventilator. After this shameless waste of public funds, he finally announced the purchase of 88 F-35s! You can’t make it up!”

And Bloc Québécois Aerospace critic Simon-Pierre Savard-Tremblay commented: “The choice of the F-35 will not generate additional benefits for Quebec, which represents more than 50% of the Canadian aerospace industry. We have solid expertise, but under pressure from Washington, Ottawa did not want to guarantee any benefits here. Once again, we see that the Liberal government has not been able to demonstrate a strategy to benefit Quebec’s industry and economy.”

(Mario Simard, the BQ MP for Jonquière, while seemingly supportive of the purchase of new warplanes now, says: “70 billion over 30 years, including maintenance costs. I cannot believe that Canada has not ensured that this $70 billion is a firm amount, so that we do not have unpleasant surprises with a final amount of $80 billion or $90 billion.”)

While parliamentary opposition parties are mostly either focusing on Trudeau’s flip-flop or the economic benefits of the weapons industry, but ultimately supporting the purchase, the No Fighter Jets coalition will continue to mobilize against new warplanes.