Would you like a spare with that used Leopard?

Updated below.

The purchase of used Leopard 2 main battle tanks from the Netherlands and the 20 loaners from Germany just took on the look of the Upholder/Victoria class submarines. From the Vancouver Sun:

Just months after the Defence Department claimed it had enough spare parts for its Leopard tanks, military officials are buying surplus armored vehicles to strip down for components so Canadian tanks can keep operating in Afghanistan.

This is worth a look back. In April 2007, when this was suddenly sprung on the Canadian public, the total cost of purchase and refurbishment, including 20 operational loaners from the German Bundeswehr was announced as $650 million.

The total project cost of the loaned tanks, the acquisition of 100 surplus tanks from the Netherlands, the requisite upgrades and enhancements to this new Leopard 2 fleet, and an initial acquisition of spare parts is $650 million, which will be funded from existing departmental allocations.

Then in May things took something of a leap.

Canada's purchase and long-term support of 100 slightly used Leopard 2A6 battle tanks will be $1.3 billion — roughly double the Conservative government's initial public estimate last month.

As he detailed a laundry list of military hardware the Conservative government plans to buy over the next few years, Defence Minister Gordon O'Connor surprised the Commons by announcing there will be a 20-year, $650-million service contract attached to the tank deal.

“The capital acquisition is $650 million and the support for 20 years is about $650 million; about the same range,” he said in reply to an opposition question during debate over Defence Department estimates.

And now, we're buying 15 more surplus Leopard 2 MBTs to cannibalize for spare parts.

In regards to the new purchase of 15 surplus tanks for spare parts, MacKay's office issued an e-mail which reiterated that the Leopard 2s are an invaluable asset to Canadian commanders.

"The procurement of surplus German vehicles will provide the Canadian Forces with valuable platforms for training, testing and, where applicable, spare parts," the e-mail stated. "This acquisition fills the short-term needs of the military and demonstrates the judicious use of public resources by this government."

Privately, military officials said the 15 tanks won't be used for training or testing and that they are all destined to be stripped down for parts.

So, let's see now, former Defence Minister Gordon O'Connor started off by telling us the cost was $650 million, quietly tried to sneak the fact by everyone that the cost was actually double that amount and now, we have 15 more surplus tracks being delivered which were unannounced and nobody seems to be talking about cost. Current Defence Minister Peter MacKay hasn't been heard from on this.

Germany waived the lease fees on the 20 loaned tanks so the capital acquisition originally announced was worth about $6.5 million per tank for the Dutch tanks. The 15 surplus tanks appear to be coming from Germany. Even at 1/2 the price, that means an additional cost of $48 to $50 million has just been tacked on to the original purchase.

Then there is this promise which was intended to soften the blow:

This acquisition represents a significant opportunity for Canadian industry. Once negotiations are complete, the Dutch Leopard 2 tanks will be transported to Canada where they will receive the necessary upgrades to final Canadian Forces standards.

Apparently, that too has changed.

But some Canadian industry officials worry the project has now gone off the rails.

They say work to refurbish the used tanks, that was supposed to be awarded to Canadian firms, is now going to European companies and there are questions whether domestic industry will reap that many benefits from this major purchase.

That may be due to the logistics involved and the cost of moving them. To deliver the Dutch tanks to Canada for refurbish and upgrade and then transport some of them back to Afghanistan (if they are completed in time for use in that theatre) would be hugely expensive.

While we're on this subject, this statement needs a look.

The tanks being loaned from Germany are fully operational, and will be deployed to Afghanistan in conjunction with the next rotation of personnel this summer.

These tanks are able to operate in intense heat as their electric turret systems and more powerful engines generate significantly less heat when operating than the hydraulic systems of Canada’s 30-year-old Leopard 1 fleet. They will also be fitted with climate control systems once in theatre.

Anybody could be excused for believing that the loaned German tanks were going to be fitted with air-conditioning to make them more habitable for the crews in the intense heat of the summer. That, however, did not happen. Because the German tanks are on loan there were limits put on modifications. The fully electric turret is cooler than the older Leopards since it no longer needs a hot hydraulic pump to operate but "climate control" is not a good description of what is actually in place. Crews wear a cooling vest.

All in all, this has been a full court press of Conservative dishonesty and obfuscation.

Something has been bugging me about this: It strikes me that the "fee-free" German loan of 20 operational main battle tanks is more than a little generous. In fact it seems to be more than one could expect without some sort of deal having been stuck. What possible arrangement was made with the German government to get 20 combat-ready up-to-mod tanks?

1) We'll lend you 20 good tracks if you purchase 15 more of our surplus rigs;

2) We'll lend you what you need in theatre if we get the contract to refurbish the Dutch tanks you're buying;

3) Here's 20 tanks. We don't want to hear one word from you about moving German troops into southern Afghanistan;

4) Something else.

I know it's pure speculation so if anyone has anything which might make more sense or actually has anything concrete drop it into comments.

Costs soaring on new tanks and Afghanistan

That didn't take long. Last month, Minister of National Defence, Gordon O'Connor, when he wasn't making up detainee transfer stories, announced the acquisition of slightly used Leopard 2 main battle tanks: 20 on loan from the Germans and 100 to be purchased from The Netherlands. The total cost of the deal was announced to be $650 million, including spare parts and modification to Canadian standards.

Canada is negotiating government-to-government agreements for both borrowing and acquiring the Leopard 2 tanks. The total project cost of the loaned tanks, the acquisition of 100 surplus tanks from the Netherlands, the requisite upgrades and enhancements to this new Leopard 2 fleet, and an initial acquisition of spare parts is $650 million, which will be funded from existing departmental allocations.

No other expenditure was announced and no further estimate of funds was discussed. As it is, taking $650 million from "existing allocations" means shifting money from other essential operations and maintenance.

Today, however, the real cost of buying main battle tanks was disclosed.

Canada's purchase and long-term support of 100 slightly used Leopard 2A6 battle tanks will be $1.3 billion — roughly double the Conservative government's initial public estimate last month.

As he detailed a laundry list of military hardware the Conservative government plans to buy over the next few years, Defence Minister Gordon O'Connor surprised the Commons by announcing there will be a 20-year, $650-million service contract attached to the tank deal.

“The capital acquisition is $650 million and the support for 20 years is about $650 million; about the same range,” he said in reply to an opposition question during debate over Defence Department estimates.

Once this little disclosure was made DND officials starting bobbing and weaving, sucking and blowing and generally answering questions by speaking into their lapels.

The official did not explain why the Conservative government broke with its long-standing practice of rolling both the purchase price and long-term support costs into one package.

When other big-ticket equipment purchases were made, such as the $4.7 billion acquisition of 16 heavy-lift Chinook helicopters, the entire program cost was announced at the same time.

It's really not all that confusing, and Dawn Black nailed it.

New Democrat defence critic Dawn Black accused the Conservatives of deliberately trying to hide the true of cost the tanks.

“They know that Canadians are becoming more and more concerned about the mission in Afghanistan and they're low-balling” the cost pricetag, she said.

“Canadians are concerned about all of the costs of the mission.”

Yes. It's a lack of transparency, a lack of accountability and, well, dishonest. And if you think that's all there is, you'd be wrong.

Also on Thursday night, Mr. O'Connor released a revised estimate on the cost of Canada's current mission to Kandahar. From February 2006 to February 2009, when the mission is slated to end, it is estimated that $4.3 billion will have been spent by the Defence Department — an increase of $400 million since the last forecast in November.

The increase is attributed to the additional cost of reinforcements, including tanks, which were dispatched to Kandahar last September by the Conservatives.

“We've added a few hundred more soldiers; they cost money,” Mr. O'Connor said. “There's more machines in there.”

The latest estimate does not include the price tag of all of the new equipment the Defence Department has purchased over the last few months specifically for the mission.

So, in truth, the cost of the Afghanistan mission is even higher than the revised and increased estimate provided by O'Connor today. Why didn't he provide the true figure?

Easy.

He's deliberately burying the true figure. Even though new equipment has been purchased he will defend the cost by stating that new artillery, new ammunition, new vehicles, etc. are all now a part of army's permanent equipment inventory and the fact that it's all been purchased for the Afghanistan mission is irrelevant. Count on it.

Again, all of that money comes from the fixed Defence budget which means operations and maintenance in other areas of the Canadian Forces is succumbing to funding shortfalls. If the money isn't coming from the Defence budget then it's being taken from other departments and that is illegal. Parliament is required to be consulted on estimates and amending budget items is a decision of the House of Commons.

Worst. Defence. Minister. Ever.

So much excitement. So little toilet paper.

It seems some of the more virulent blogistan war-bangers are getting all short of breath over this article, with at least one of the Blogging Tories claiming that it's "nice to see Canada doing some of the heavy lifting for a change."

Jesusfuckingchrist!!! It's all heavy lifting. It's always been heavy lifting! What the hell was putting a battalion group on the front line during Operation Mountain Thrust? An infantry association cookout? But it's not heavy lifting until there are main battle tanks in the picture? Is that it? There has to be big things that make a big bang?

Canuck tanks roll
Leopards playing key role in Operation Achilles

That's the headline and, if that's all you read, well...

I don't see how this produces evidence that Canadian Forces in Afghanistan weren't doing the "heavy lifting" prior to the execution of Operation Achilles. During Operation Mountain Thrust, Canada employed a significantly larger force and the tactical commander of the entire operation, was a Canadian brigadier general.

There is also the fact that Canada has incurred a disproportionately high number of combat casualties when compared to other allies. If that's not an indication of "heavy lifting", what is? Is the casualty count not high enough?

Further down the Edmonton Sun article, however, there is information which seems to have been ignored. (Emphasis mine)

A force of more than 200 soldiers from the Royal Canadian Regiment battle group is supporting the offensive by setting up a blocking position in the Maywand district just inside the northwestern border of Kandahar province.

The key words are "blocking position". And then there's this:

The Gagetown, N.B.-based soldiers are tasked with preventing Taliban militants from retreating through the region, said Brig.-Gen. Tim Grant, the senior Canadian commander.

They are also to disrupt bands of local insurgents, including drug lords who control the opium trade.

Grant said he doesn't expect the same type of bloody pitched battles between Canadians and Taliban fighters that occurred last year in the Panjwaii and Zhari districts west of Kandahar city.

"I don't expect to see and I hope not to see any fighting by Canadians in the Maywand district," said Grant, who noted the battle group includes a force of 46-tonne Leopard 2 tanks.

"If things go well then we won't have to fire a shot in anger. If the Taliban choose to stand and take us on, then they will learn how robust the Canadian force is."

Right. Because what Grant is describing is what is known as a mobile defence, something which is usually carried off by the tactical reserve on the battlefield. He describes it in a little more detail here:

"We will provide a very robust force that will essentially sit on top of the Taliban lines of communication, in an area of western Kandahar province that has traditionally been a thoroughfare for the Taliban," Brig.-Gen. Grant said. "They have moved their troops and their casualties and their logistics supplies through this area, sometimes at will. So we are going in there to disrupt them, which will allow the other coalition forces in Helmand province to prosecute their operation more freely."

Again, it is a description of a tactical reserve and a mobile defence. I would have expected the war-bloggers to have known that. It's very curious.

I don't want to minimize the danger, because it doesn't matter where a force appears in the battle-space, it is always dangerous. And even a mobile defence can get ugly if the opposition correctly predicts the ambush points, but the insinuation that the presence of Canadian tanks is an elevation of force committed to the front of the operation is completely erroneous.

The Leopards are a force multiplier for the Canadian unit which is operating in reserve. They are not being committed with other NATO forward units.

It's a team effort. Everyone is doing the heavy lifting.