The TMC Network seeks to share research, analysis, and ideas on the topic of military culture change. We welcome submissions from all Network members, including emerging scholars and practitioners. We are especially interested in timely interventions into ongoing national and international conversations on military culture change.
Take a look at our blog submission guidelines for information on how you can contribute!
It is important to locate the issue of culture change in the Canadian military alongside these larger societal shifts. In recent years, a series of class action lawsuits, external and internal reviews and reports, and Statistics Canada surveys have documented the systemic and interlocking problems with the Canadian Armed Forces (CAF) culture. Sexual misconduct is widespread, as are discrimination and hostility towards women, 2SLGBTQI+, Indigenous, Black, and people of colour military members. Culture change has been declared a priority of the Department of National Defence (DND) and the CAF.
Numerous change initiatives have been undertaken, but the problem persists, as demonstrated in 2021 when some of the most senior CAF leaders who had previously called for the elimination of sexual misconduct, allegedly perpetrated by others, were themselves accused of sexual misconduct. In September of 2023, court-martial proceedings began against Lt.-Gen. Whelan, who was previously the Chief of Military Personnel and responsible for policy redesign in the wake of the Heyder-Beattie and LGBT Purge class action lawsuits. It is concerning to see the military now dropping its entire case against Lt.-Gen. Whelan. This decision will likely perpetuate the existing chilly climate awaiting those who come forward with reports of sexual misconduct and abuse of power. The handling of this case, and the tone and accusations being made publicly about the complainant and the related emails, demonstrates the limited ways in which the CAF is engaging in culture change and the pushback against it.
DND/CAF have officially recognized culture change as a top priority, promising to go beyond a focus on symptoms and individual behaviour. The Initiating Directive for Professional Conduct and Culture (CPCC) issued by the Chief of the Defence Staff and Deputy Minister states, “we have simply not achieved the cultural change required and we must embark on a fundamentally new approach to address the root causes of systemic misconduct.” However, DND/CAF’s focus has since shifted, recasting change in terms of evolution and growth, sending the message that the core of CAF culture does not need to be challenged, but should be accepted. We at the TMC Network argue for transformative change—what is needed is to question all aspects of CAF culture, consider alternatives, and imagine ways to bring about meaningful change. We therefore ask and are guided in our work by the following questions:
The co-directors of the TMC Network have co-edited a forthcoming special issue of the Canadian Military Journal (CMJ). In this special issue, we provide readers with insights and recommendations for meaningful military culture change. The articles discuss research on root causes, lived experiences of racialized military personnel, contested military identities, familial norms, critical feminist education, and trauma-informed pedagogy as they relate to transforming military cultures. The issue also includes an article about Argentinian public and military gender policies as well as a book review essay on Australian and Canadian military cultures. The issue concludes with perspectives pieces, which respectively focus on military culture change through research, professional, and personal lenses in relation to women’s experiences on deployment, regimental ritual objects, feminist identity in a military context, CPCC, and youth.
As we show with the special issue, military culture change is necessary and possible, with concrete ideas, approaches, and recommendations to move us in the right direction. In particular, we argue for the need to:
In light of how the military justice system has handled the case against Lt.-Gen. Whelan, we would also add: closely consider how the system too often ends up protecting senior leadership at the expense of those who make complaints related to sexual misconduct and abuse of power.
The military can and should play an active role in dismantling enduring systems of power and privilege both within and beyond its institutional boundaries. The stakes are high, especially in view of the military’s central place in the nation. Achieving meaningful culture change in the military will have positive ripple effects across Canada’s social and political landscape and inform broader societal and institutional change initiatives. As the work on culture change progresses, we will continue to ask the question: Are DND/CAF, and the Government of Canada, serious about military culture change or too focused on maintaining the status quo?
*Parts of this blog are adapted from the authors’ co-edited CMJ editorial.
My military experience was a privileged one, and that privilege extended beyond rank. It included all aspects of my identity—an identity which is able-bodied, white, male, and conforms to institutional norms. I recognize my experience does not compare to those that were and are excluded because of their diverse identities and systemic institutional inequities. Alongside military obligations, I met my partner, we had children, and we tried to manage my work, her work, and our family as best we could. From the standpoint of the institution, I was an ideal member because I deployed and left home to train when required without question or complaint. I progressed professionally and advanced academically. From my vantage point, I was able to see myself in my superiors, subordinates, and peers. For much of my career, I thought my experience was the experience, but that is because I joined and served in an institution that was designed for me to the exclusion of others. During my service, the Deschamps Report was released, highlighting longstanding systemic issues related to sexual misconduct, discrimination, and exclusionary practices. This was a moment that caused me to reflect upon my actions and inaction and how both contributed to these systemic issues.
Dorothy Smith (1987) draws upon the geological metaphor “line of fault” to describe a disconnect between dominant ideologies and the everyday worlds of those who are othered. This term speaks to the space between what one experiences and what is professed within dominant ideologies (Norris, 2001). I found Smith’s phrase useful as I attempted to make sense of the disconnect between espoused values and actual experiences. I draw upon this term as conceived in Smith’s (2005) work, Institutional Ethnography: A Sociology for People, to encompass those whose experience exists outside the military hegemony. It is this space, the space between what is espoused and what is experienced, that I hope to explore in my research. It is also within this space that I reflect upon my own military service to understand the ways in which I both contributed to, and operated against, the cultural status quo. It is this disjuncture or perhaps these types of disjuncture that draw on my curiosity while also evoking a sense of shame in the institution. My military experience did not exist within this othered space—it felt familiar. The clothes and equipment issued to me fit because they were designed with me or those like me in mind. Time off and away from work coincided with the holidays I grew up celebrating without the need to justify the extent to which I believed or how they mattered to me. I was ignorant and unaware of this space for much of my career, and I know that my actions likely harmed people, from the language I used to my beliefs about what constituted leadership.
In the context of the Canadian military, this idea of being othered speaks to those who have been systematically excluded, whether they were permitted to serve openly or not. By recognizing the privileged place I once occupied within the military, I must also recognize the ways in which I, alongside my former institution, oppressed others. As a member, I experienced multiple attempts by the military to address individual conduct and unacceptable behaviors through training via check-in-the-box pedagogy. Here, the provision of lists describing acceptable and unacceptable behavior alongside online efforts that valued completion rather than comprehension was deemed sufficient. The military failed to approach these issues as an adult learning problem that requires critical examination of both oneself and the institution and the roles each play in perpetuating an undesirable status quo. It is through institutional ethnography that I hope to understand, make visible, and explicate three inter-related issues: (1) the disconnect between the institution’s values with respect to policy, and the daily experience of military members within the classroom; (2) the ways in which military members witness institutional policies upheld and contradicted within their learning environments; and, (3) the unnecessary or hidden work imposed upon some in order to succeed in training. Institutional ethnography is an appropriate approach for my research as it has a long history of being used in the military context (e.g., abuse against women and children in military families, Harrison, 2006; gender bias in leadership training, Matheson & Lyle, 2017; military partners’ deployment experiences, Norris, 2001; and, dominant narratives of ideal military membership, Taber, 2009).
Issues of heteronormativity, racism, and sexual assault and misconduct exist within members’ communities, their homes, and beyond. While this may seem like a bleak note to end upon, I do have hope. Partly, my hope comes from the actions of an institution trying to change alongside those members in uniform pushing for change, but it also comes from those who continue to critically examine the CAF’s actions and speak up when daily experiences fall short of espoused values. It is my hope that institutional ethnography will make visible the different ways, from the obvious to the more subtle, in which the CAF’s values and ethos fail to manifest within the learning environment of its members.
References
Deschamps, M. (2015). External review into sexual misconduct and sexual harassment in the Canadian Armed Forces [External Review]. External Review Authority. http://www.forces.gc.ca/assets/FORCES_Internet/docs/en/caf-community-support-services-harassment/era-final-report-(april-20-2015)-eng.pdf
Harrison, D. (2006). The role of military culture in military organizations’ responses to woman abuse in military families. The Sociological Review, 54(3), 546-574. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1467-954X.2006.006
Matheson, L. I., & Lyle, E. (2017). Gender bias in Canadian military leadership training. Journal of Ethnographic & Qualitative Research, 12(1).
Norris, D. (2001). Working them out…working them in: Ideology and the everyday lives of female military partners experiencing the cycle of deployment. Atlantis: Critical Studies in Gender, Culture & Social Justice, 26(1), 55-64.
Smith, D. E. (1987). The everyday world as problematic: A feminist sociology. Northeastern University Press.
Smith, D. E. (2005). Institutional ethnography: A sociology for people. Rowman Altamira.
Taber, N. (2009). The profession of arms: Ideological codes and dominant narratives of gender in the Canadian military. Atlantis: Critical Studies in Gender, Culture & Social Justice, 34(1), 27–36.
The Canadian Armed Forces (CAF) consists of a unique culture, with particular regulations, traditions, history, language, and customs permeating all areas of life. Although there has been an increase in research examining the impact of militarized culture on the experiences of serving members, military family members often find themselves omitted from the conversation. For CIMF, the operational tempo of military life impacts virtually every area of their development, including behavioral, social, and psychological traits (Chandra et al., 2010). CIMF experience unique stressors compared to civilian peers, such as frequent relocations, lengthy separations from the serving parent(s), heightened awareness of international conflicts, and participation in longstanding hierarchical traditions. There is an abundance of empirical support demonstrating that CIMF are at increased risk of receiving mental health diagnoses during their adolescent years, particularly in relation to their serving parents’ deployments or deployment related mental health struggles (Cramm et al., 2019; Krešić Ćorić et al., 2016; Lester et al., 2010). Despite the prevalence of existing literature, however, the majority of studies have relied on reports from parents or psychologists rather than engaging with the direct experiences of the child. To understand the role of military culture in the upbringing of CIMF, researchers must seek to integrate the unique and diverse perspectives of these individuals. By integrating these perspectives, my aim is to provide effective support that addresses the unique stressors of military life while also fostering a more positive relationship between the CAF and military families.
I recruited adults who grew up in military families, whose parents deployed on at least one mission with the potential of moral injury, to take part in one-on-one qualitative interviews. Interview questions were developed through a lifespan perspective, allowing participants to reflect on various long-term implications they experienced during their parent’s service in the CAF. Specific questions directed towards the experiences of military culture were included, such as “how did military culture impact your experiences of growing up?” and “are there instances where military culture continues to impact your life?” with responses reflecting a variety of experiences. While some participants reflected on the resiliency factors they developed throughout their childhood, many reflected on moments where “It was sad. It was shitty”. These participants noted that the culture of the military was ever present, and there was a distinct void of support directly available to them. Where supports may have been offered, CIMF were dependent on the at-home parent to access them. This may present CIMF with a dilemma: the militarized culture in which they find themselves discourages seeking support (Peck & Parcell, 2021), and parents may be less likely to make CIMF aware of support options available. However, participants in this study also noted the many positive changes they have seen the institution implement throughout their life. Participants frequently reflected on the benefits of Military Family Resource Centres, additional opportunities to communicate with family members while deployed, and optimism that the CAF is moving in the right directions.
My research has broad implications, for both civilian and military members. My findings support that military culture has long-lasting impacts on CIMF, and demonstrate the need for inclusion of child specific support options to military families. Additionally, academics and researchers can build on my findings to conduct more studies that involve the direct perspectives of CIMF. This will allow us to better understand the nuances of military culture and directions for future military culture change.
References
Segal, M. W. (1986). The military and the family as greedy institutions. Armed Forces & Society, 13(1), 9–38. https://doi.org/10.1177/0095327X8601300101
Chandra, A., Lara-Cinisomo, S., Haycox, L. H., Tanielian, T., Burns, R. M., Ruder, T., Han, B. (2010). Children on the homefront: The experience of children from military families. Pediatrics, 125(1), 16–25. https://doi.org/10.1542/peds.2009-1180
Cramm, H., McColl, M. A., Aiken, A. B., Williams, A. (2019). The mental health of military-connected children: A scoping review. Journal of Child & Family Studies, 28(7), 1725–1735. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10826-019-01402-y
Krešić Ćorić, M., Klarić, M., Petrov, B., Mihić, N. (2016). Psychological and behavioral problems in children of war veterans with Post Traumatic Stress Disorder. The European Journal of Psychiatry, 30(3), 219–230.
Lester, P., Peterson, K., Reeves, J., Knauss, L., Glover, D., Mogil, C., Duan, N., Saltzman, W., Pynoos, R., Wilt, K., & Beardslee, W. (2010). The long war and parental combat deployment: Effects on military children and at-home spouses. Journal of the American Academy of Child & Adolescent Psychiatry, 49(4), 310–320. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jaac.2010.01.003
Peck, B. S., & Parcell, E. S. (2021). Talking about mental health: Dilemmas U.S. military service members and spouses experience post deployment. Journal of Family Communication, 21(2), 90–106. https://doi.org/10.1080/15267431.2021.1887195
Canada’s first NAP, released in 2010, lacked clear targets and budget allocations, did not include civil society input, and appeared to have been developed in an ad hoc manner. The second NAP, released in 2017, addressed many of the criticisms of the first iteration. While the first NAP was focused on the protection of women, the second was more focused on the gendered consequences of conflict through five objectives:
Since the second NAP, Canada has demonstrated a strong commitment to the WPS agenda through many of its actions, including most recently reappointing Jacqueline O’Neill as Ambassador for WPS and continuing to consult civil society for input. The development of CNAP3 is an opportunity for Canada to build on its previous National Action Plans (NAPs) and address recent critiques and recommendations made by civil society.
In mid-2022, the Women, Peace and Security Network-Canada organized a series of activities seeking civil society input on CNAP3 and we should look out for how these recommendations will be included. Drawing on 162 responses, these dialogues resulted in recommendations organized under the following eight themes:
The Research Network on Women, Peace and Security outlined similar themes in their report based on dialogues with civil society, public servants, and scholars about Canada’s NAPs. With regard to DND/CAF, the report notes that organizational culture change is necessary and that the CAF must engage with questions of inclusion and gender, beyond only training a select group of gender advisors. Further, the report highlights inconsistency in how GBA Plus is applied across federal departments and a need to ensure consistent systematization of GBA Plus in all policies and programs. The report states, “GBA+ is often considered as the ‘home game’ and the WPS agenda as the ‘away game’” (Beaulieu, 2022, p. 4). As such, it is necessary for public servants to better understand how GBA Plus and WPS interact and intersect (ibid.).
In relation to the domestic agenda, WPSN-C recommended that the CAF increase women’s representation, implement recommendations from the Minister’s Advisory Panel on Systemic Racism and Discrimination Report and the Arbour Report, and focus on culture change. Numerous other recommendations apply to DND/CAF as well, such as: operationalizing intersectionality; including the voices of diverse women (women with disabilities, Indigenous and racialized women, and gender-diverse people); ensuring timely reporting; increasing commitment to transparency; improving reporting through indicator clarity and tracking; and, consistently engaging with civil society (WPSN-C, 2022).
DND/CAF’s implementation plan of the second NAP focused on governance; training and education; accountability; recruitment and retention; and, integration of women into operations. One of the goals was to increase the representation of women in the CAF by 1% per year to achieve a desired goal of 25% women’s representation by the end of 2026. This goal will not be met as women’s representation has only marginally increased (from 16% in 2019/2020 to 16.3% in 2020/2021).
Arbour (2022) noted that some CAF members are “more at risk of harm, on a day to day basis, from their comrades than from the enemy” (p. 9). Without a culture free from psychological harm, it is irresponsible to continue to call for the increased representation of women and other marginalized groups, including the 2SLGBTQI+ community. To add women (and other diverse groups) and stir will not result in the culture change needed to ensure current CAF members feel safe and that Canadians want to join the CAF in the future. While CAF members can be ordered into harm’s way, they should feel equitably treated by the institution and their colleagues as well as physically and psychologically safe in non-operational settings. Even in operational settings, they should be free from harassment and assault.
Further, while diversity is essential, it should not be a goal that is primarily driven by operational effectiveness. DND/CAF’s 2020-2021 progress report on the implementation of Women, Peace and Security states:
Diverse personnel broaden the range of skills and capacities, improve the delivery of peace and security tasks, enhance situational awareness and early-warning by facilitating outreach to communities, and improve a military force’s accessibility, credibility, and effectiveness in working among local populations (DND, 2021, para. 1).
Relying less on operational effectiveness arguments for diversifying the CAF is essential as many of these instrumentalist and essentialist justifications are not only unwarranted but place a burden on women to fix the very structures in which they are marginalized. DND/CAF should not rely on the logic of operational effectiveness to foster culture change either. While it may be a way to get military buy-in, if operational effectiveness arguments are favoured above principles of gender equality, military culture remains virtually untouched.
For Canada to be a global leader on WPS, it must lead by example. We cannot promote gender equality abroad without ensuring gender equality within Canada as well. For this to happen, a strong domestic agenda is essential, and culture change in the CAF should be central to the DND/CAF CNAP3 implementation plan. With increased attention to culture change, an opportunity is on the horizon for DND/CAF to take on a more transformative approach in their implementation of WPS, which necessitates looking inward and fostering, as well as prioritizing, despite increased global militarization, culture change.
References
Arbour, L. (2022). Report of the independent external comprehensive review of the Department of National Defence and the Canadian Armed Forces. Borden Ladner Gervais. https://www.canada.ca/en/department-national-defence/corporate/reports-publications/report-of-the-independent-external-comprehensive-review.html
Beaulieu, K. (2022). Canada’s National Action Plan on Women, Peace, and Security: What We Heard from our Dialogue with Civil Society, Public Servants, and Scholars. Research Network on Women, Peace and Security.
Department of National Defence. (2021). 2020-2021 Department of National Defence departmental progress report for Canada’s National Action Plan on Women, Peace and Security. https://www.international.gc.ca/transparency-transparence/women-peace-security-femmes-paix-securite/2020-2021-progress-reports-rapports-etapes-dnd.aspx?lang=eng
Global Affairs Canada. (2017). Canada’s Action Plan for the Implementation of United Nations Security Council Resolutions on Women, Peace and Security – 2017-2022. https://www.international.gc.ca/transparency-transparence/women-peace-security-femmes-paix-securite/2017-2022-action-plan.aspx?lang=eng#a3
Women, Peace and Security Network-Canada. (2022). Civil society voices on Canada’s next Women, Peace and Security National Action Plan. https://wpsn-canada.org/consultations/wps-dialogue-fps/
Based on lines shared by participants of TMC Annual Symposium writing workshop
I want to leave behind a story that helps others laugh and gives them the strength and confidence to be imperfect.
I can do hard things!
Willing to take the journey through storm and calm.
I do not know if I can leave behind the anger, abandonment. How others can revel in their liberty, and yet I will try.
Even when I feel frustrated at the speed of progress – I know I’m standing on the shoulders of giants and that I have community – and that gives me strength.
Take the time to pause.
If I knew then, what I know now, then I wouldn’t be who I am today!
Would I be better or would I be worse?
I would not give so much power to acts of resistance to my humanity and dignity.
The only approval I need is my own.
Feeling like an imposter, but it was exciting, captivating, an imposter no more.
I was keeping myself stuck.
I would have given pieces of myself I didn’t know I could give.
Collective identity, party of one.
I would tell her that she would be ok, that she would love and live again, she would be good, do good and feel whole again.
The pressure we all feel to persevere and keep pushing on even if it means we must conceal the fact that we just need time to heal.
Through the years, I have found healing in people and places that did not hurt me.
Don’t rock the boat, until you can.
Je veux laisser derrière les faux-semblants et les prétextes, les enjeux contraignants et l’absence de mouvement pour aller de l’avant avec ceux qui sont trop souvent laisses derrière.
I want to leave behind hope.
For their dark times…it will shine.
Or it would give voice to the ones who feel like they have nothing to say, like it’s not their place to speak, like they have no story to contribute.
The story always belongs to us.
Poem shared by Ash Grover
Poem shared by Nancy Taber
Poem shared by Tammy George
Poem shared by Maya Eichler
Poem shared by Sandra Biskupski-Mujanovic
Poem by Lamare Robinson
CAF don’t cry.
Why?
Don’t cry. Don’t cry. Don’t cry.
Why?
We live in systems we didn’t create,
But we are responsible for them.
What?! That feels like betrayal.
Don’t be silenced.
How?
Listen. Draw. Practise. Pause.
Why?
What can we do,
Tomorrow, six months, a year, two years?
What is the purpose?
What about hope?
I don’t know, but I hope.
Poem by Walter Callaghan
In OUR space, in this time and place
we engage
we share
we cry
we discover
We find meaning and purpose, solace and comfort,
the will and inspiration to fight for change
Can we take that with us
out there
back home
in the face of the abusers
and the willfully blind,
to confront those who decry
“woke” as treason and betrayal
Do we maintain strength and hold true
when we feel …
alone
Hope that memory of this shared time will sustain us.
Challenges:
Best practices:
Challenges:
Best practices:
Challenges:
Best practices:
The discussion that followed the presentations was animated and insightful. Participants explored the ways in which military service, and the notion of a specific ideal of military membership, affects military culture. While there has been some progress in culture change in the Argentinian, Australian, Ghanian, and Canadian militaries, there is also much resistance, particularly from military personnel who embrace a warrior ideal and seek out bastions of maleness and masculinity. With a return to “great power” confrontation in the international context, there has also been a return to traditional military actions and identities, which participants fear may inhibit military culture change. Finally, a gender-neutral approach—often phrased as “a soldier is a soldier is a soldier” in Canada—continues to be premised on a male and masculine norm.
Approaches and resistance to military culture change differ from nation to nation but also demonstrate remarkable commonalities. Policies are insufficient to change practices, traditional values continue to frame military service, and political and military leaders often fail to take responsibility. Despite this, there are dedicated academics, practitioners, and military personnel who have embraced and championed culture change. Their work has the potential to transform military cultures to the benefit of military personnel, military institutions, and society.
Anti-oppression as a concept requires deep consideration of context and an acknowledgement of subjective experience. In other words, anti-oppression work does not generalize regarding human experience and, instead, seeks to subvert systems of thinking that essentialize and stereotype individuals. A true anti-oppression framework honours the experiences of each individual and acknowledges the nuance between different people’s experiences as they are impacted by systems of harm. Throughout my years working in the field of equity, diversity, and inclusion, numerous people have asked, “How can we implement an anti-oppression framework in our organization?” Better questions to begin with might be, “Why are you seeking to be anti-oppressive? Do you care about the wellbeing of everyone within the organization, or are you concerned with the overall effectiveness of the organization itself? How deep into the institutional culture of your organization are you willing to go?” It is critical to recognize that being anti-oppressive is inherently decolonial in that it defies the valuing of productivity, efficiency, and operational effectiveness over everything else. Therefore, the very notion of efficiency and productivity as key priorities is directly challenged by anti-oppression practice. Anti-oppression theory teaches that lasting, meaningful, and informed transformation is not something that will ever come quickly.
The only way to determine if anti-oppression practice is working is to engage in a lengthy process of application and reflection – that is, continuously evolving and restructuring practice according to the feedback received from communities impacted. At some point, this will require an engagement with both the theory on anti-oppression practice, as well as the lived experiences of communities “at the margins” of military contexts. Neither will suffice on its own, and the voices of communities impacted must be amplified and integrated, in order to evolve any framework of anti-oppression.
Dismantling systems of oppression requires an ability to determine what actions will be needed in each unique circumstance. In the context of the CAF, this translates into an awareness of the lived experiences of military members who are affected by such systems, as well as an exploration of the vast and various ways in which they experience those effects. An example of this can be found in Dr. Tammy George’s research exploring the experiences of racialized military members and how these experiences emphasize a culture of white supremacy in military spaces. Therefore, an effective model of anti-oppression needs to be adaptable and developed in collaboration. As many, if not most, of us know: collaboration takes time and is never easy or straightforward.
Our workshop asked: How does culture change require a health and wellness lens and what culture change is needed specific to the CFHS? The military is unique in its dual responsibility for both the profession of arms and the provision of health care. Workshop participants engaged with our two guest speakers, LCol Trisha MacLeod and then Rear-Admiral (now Senator) Rebecca Patterson, as well as academics, military members, military health care professionals, and civilian health care professionals to think through, and reflect on, issues of equity and intersectionality in health care. As part of the TMC Network’s ongoing work on culture change, we recognize that health and wellness are central to service members’ and Veterans’ sense of belonging at various stages along their military trajectory. Our workshop discussion centered around the following four questions:
Fruitful and engaged discussion on a number of themes emerged from the workshop which included but were not limited to:
Furthermore, there was a need to recognize service members’ experiences and trajectories into and out of the CAF. The importance of understanding issues of identity and the barriers to belonging and recognizing military families as mechanisms of support for members’ health and wellness needs were also noted. Finally, engaging with intergenerational trauma and understanding the shift from health care provided in the military and the transition to accessing care as a Veteran in civilian spaces were issues identified as important to include in future discussions on culture change and health.
The following highlights emerged from our workshop discussion and illuminate key considerations to build on moving forward:
There is no doubt that culture change is complex and contested terrain. However, the link between culture change and the health and wellness of service members and veterans is essential to consider for the survival of the CAF. What does it mean to have a healthy culture? How can it be achieved? Given the sexual misconduct crisis and other grievances, what might health care professional need to consider going forward? Engaging with an anti-oppression framework is important because it can assist health care professionals to engage with how power operates in the delivery of health services. Furthermore, this framework assists health care professionals to think through how systems of oppression continue to play out in our assumptions around bodies, health, service delivery, and treatment. To foster these shifts, this workshop emphasized that we must avoid a one-size-fits-all approach, consider the contemporary context in the CAF, and consider in a more nuanced fashion how the health and wellness of service members (and Veterans) is vital to the survival of the CAF.
The report is a radical departure from previous reports in that it names racism and white supremacy as a foundational structure of the CAF and Canadian society. By naming colonialism, racism, patriarchy, heteronormativity, and ableism as the root causes of inequality, the report sets a new tone for discussion of culture change in the CAF. However, while the report names the military as a product of colonialism, it does not name the CAF as an agent of the colonial state. As a result, the report situates the CAF’s failures as unintentional and coincidental in nature. This has implications for how the CAF grapples with accountability. For example, how might the CAF meaningfully engage with truth and reconciliation if it does not recognize its own role in colonialism? If the CAF does see itself as an agent that problematically reproduces the colonial state, how might its responses to racism and discrimination be transformative?
Connected to the point above, naming white supremacy could have led to a more fruitful discussion of power and its operation in the CAF. There needs to be greater emphasis and more education on the difficult and uncomfortable work of acknowledging and dealing with white privilege and white fragility, especially among those who are the gatekeepers and decision makers within Defence. Understanding white supremacy at its core involves tracing and engaging with everyday encounters of racism and discrimination—not focusing only on extremism—and understanding that these occurrences are not exceptional, but rather grounded in larger relations of power. Coming to terms with how the CAF attracts racist behaviours and ideologies through problematic constructs of the ideal soldier, and challenging national myths grounded in racial and colonial constructs, including white saviourism, are necessary steps in transforming the military’s culture.
The report introduces intersectionality as a useful concept to understand racism and discrimination, however, does not apply it throughout the analysis of the report. Participants in our meeting had many recommendations, including that a greater emphasis be put on intersectionality without diluting the focus on racism and continuing to highlight the specific discriminations faced by racialized service members. More research needs to be conducted through an intersectional framework to provide a richer, more nuanced, understanding of military members’ experiences. As well, this report should be read in concert with other reports such as the Deschamps Report and the Arbour Report to work towards holistic, integrated, and intersectionally-informed responses to the problem of bias, discrimination, and abuse.
Another recommendation from TMC Network members was to pay greater attention to emerging local and regional best practices. One way this can be accomplished is by showcasing promising practices and initiatives at the unit or brigade level that have been successful so that military members can have a clear example of the meaningful integration of equity, diversity, and inclusion. Through dialogue, this would also ensure that service members feel like they are in a “listening culture” where their concerns and grievances are heard, which is critical for military members who need accommodations.
While the Minister’s report provides some important and insightful recommendations, these efforts will be difficult to achieve without acknowledging the foundational nature of the problem. Historically, responses to racism and discrimination in the CAF have been superficial and reactionary in nature, for example, focusing on providing courses or modules, with a lack of buy-in and continued internal resistance. There remain concerns among CAF members that addressing equity issues is in tension with operational effectiveness. However, the opposite is likely more true. How do we construct a narrative where the failure to address racism and discrimination are seen as having a negative impact on operational effectiveness?
The Minister’s Report was not the first time that discrimination and racism were brought to the forefront; however, for the first time they were named as foundational to the defence team culture, giving us pause to reflect. In order to avoid that the recommendations become side lined or translated into a check box, a careful multipronged strategy grounded in an intersectional approach must be adopted. Only then can the recommendations be transformed into meaningful, proactive, and integrated culture change. Several prior reports have pointed to the cultural dysfunction that has harmed the CAF’s most vulnerable members. This report is bolder and even welcomingly radical in some instances in its ability to name and locate racism as a historical reality that has had a profound impact on the CAF.
As we continue to build and expand on the ideas of this report, it is time to recognize that racism and discrimination are not only overt acts, but systemic and constitutive of the CAF as an institution and that it is imperative to move beyond superficial responses. It is time to facilitate change at the grassroots level, through restorative engagement, dialogue, storytelling, relationship building, and intersectional feminist experiential learning. Instead of reacting and constantly problem solving, it is time for the CAF to imagine itself anew as an institution that sees reducing the harm its service members experience as a result of racism and discrimination as paramount. Is it perhaps even possible to imagine the CAF as a proactive agent of change beyond the military, an institution that thinks through its broader societal role in anti-racism and truth and reconciliation efforts?
Reference
Department of National Defence. (2022). Minister of National Defence Advisory Panel on Systemic Racism and Discrimination with a focus on Anti-Indigenous and Anti-Black Racism, LGBTQ2+ Prejudice, Gender Bias, and White Supremacy. Available from: https://www.canada.ca/en/department-national-defence/news/2022/04/ministers-advisory-panel-on-systemic-racism-and-discrimination-final-report.html