Next February, a year before Canada's combat mission in Afghanistan is to end, Canada's top general, Rick Hillier, is scheduled to retire. Normally, Canada's Chiefs of Defence Staff serve for three years and then that's it.
But L. Ian Macdonald, a former speechwriter for Brian Mulroney who now edits Policy Options and does some commentary work for CTV and others, wonders if Hillier's tenure will be extended.
Writing in The Gazette Friday, MacDonald says:
So there are two questions, of equal importance, around this. On the one hand, is Hillier essential to the mission? On the other, if he is extended for another year, would that be an admission he is indispensable? One man bigger than the mission? That's not a good story line . . . So Harper is on the verge of two important decisions: What to do about Afghanistan after February 2009, and whether Hillier is the man to lead the Canadian Forces until then.
Macdonald also points to two heir apparents, Hillier's good friend and vice-chief Lt.-Gen. Walter Natynczyk and the youngish-looking 50-year-old up-and-comer Lt. Gen Andrew Leslie. Like Hillier, Natynczyk and Leslie are 'tankers', if I understand the term correctly, (and please be gentle in your corrections if I've messed this up) meaning that they are of that special Army breed that thinks a tank or other armoured vehicle is a highly useful, perhaps, the most useful, device a commander could have.
And, helpfully, a reader has sent me a note to clarify this issue of who’s a tanker and who isn’t. I am grateful for the corrective:
Gen. Hillier and LtGen. Natynczyk are armour officers, They both have commanded the Royal Canadian Dragoons in the past. LtGen. Leslie is an artillery officer. That being said, you do not get to command LFWA [Land Force Western Area] and then become Chief of the Land Staff without an appreciation and understanding of the capabilities and uses of tanks on the battlefield.
Macdonald notes Natynczyk's service in Bosnia and Kosovo but doesn't note that Natynczyk also served with U.S. forces in Iraq, an experience which might be a bit of a help in Afghanistan.
The gossip in Ottawa — outside National Defence Headquarters, anyhow — is that Leslie is the most likely among the top generals, Hillier included, to go a long way in politics, if he so desires. But Leslie will likely want to make CDS before he jumps into a political career.
Now traditionally, the chances of either man succeeding Hillier should be discounted. That's because the top job in our combined forces normally rotates through the three services — Army, Air Force, Navy. Hillier, an Army man, succeeded Gen. Ray Henault, an Air Force man. But get this: Henault succeeded Gen. Maurice Baril, also an Army man. So the Navy guys could rightly be thinking that they got passed over once when Hillier was appointed and they might be thinking they are overdue for a turn at the top. (I've met the top Air Force general, Lt. Gen Angus Watt, just once and though he seems like a smart guy, he just started that job last month. He just might be on track, though, in terms of timing to succeed the guy — and it will be a guy, not a gal — who succeeds Hillier) The top navy guy in the forces is Vice-Admiral Drew Robertson. Can't say Robertson has a big profile on “The Hill” (or, just as plausibly, I'm not hanging out in the right committee rooms.) and I've never met him. So if I was a betting man, and if Hillier was to retire on schedule in February, I'd say an Army general stands to be elevated, tradition be damned.