And while there are much-delayed plans for replacements coming in the next few years, our navy will, for the foreseeable future, have to try and fulfill its obligations with a much reduced fleet and corresponding capability.

But is this really a budgetary problem, the classic either/or debate of defence versus social programs, or is it more a failure of our collective national will? A failure that we may think we can afford to live with in the naïve assumption that the U.S. military will always be there to protect our coastlines at no apparent political cost to us?

Or would it be possible for a country to have a modern well-equipped military and still be able to provide the social programs at an equal or (if I may dare to dream for a moment) a greater level than today? Does it have to be the old “bullets versus butter” argument, or can we actually fire and feast on both?

At least one perspective on this answer can be found in the defence and procurement decisions made by the one Scandinavian country with which Canada shares a somewhat disputed boundary in the Arctic.

Denmark is a much smaller country than Canada and its citizens enjoy generous social welfare policies; it has also managed to modernize its military (including its navy) to an extent that we Canadians can only dream of today. We may impulsively assume that on all fronts the Royal Canadian Navy, even in its struggling state, can outdo the naval capability of this small social democratic country, which provides five weeks of paid vacation, generous maternity leave, as well as tuition-free post-secondary education to its citizens. Think again folks!

Yes, Canada’s fleet has more ships and sailors. But consider the areas of new technology, arms, equipment, logistical, and special operational support, and a different perspective emerges.

As Canada scrapped all but one of its 44-year-old air defence destroyers and dallied and defaulted on its plans for an eventual replacement, Denmark constructed three air defence frigates, the last of which became operational in 2012. Today, these three Iver Huitfeldt-class frigates serve as the country’s main warships. Praised by the U.S. Navy for its low cost and flexibility, the Iver Huitfeldt’s impressive armament consists of six vertical launching systems (VLS) containing up to 32 SM-2 111A surface-to-air missiles and up to 24 RIM-162 Raytheon Evolved Sea Sparrow Missiles. It also operates 8 to 16 Harpoon Block II ship-to-ship missiles and 2 dual MU90 Impact anti-submarine warfare (ASW) torpedoes. In addition, its close-in weapon system (CIWS) consists of an Oerlikon Millennium 35mm gun. Finally, the ship has two OTO Melara 76mm guns.

Where Denmark literally shuts the Royal Canadian Navy out is in the area of support ships. Today, the Royal Danish Navy has two armed Absalon-class multi-role support ships that became operational in 2005. The vessels carry the same basic configuration as the Iver Huitfeldt-class air defence frigates and can serve as a command platform for land, air and naval forces with additional employability as a transport, hospital ship or minelayer. The Absalon’s impressive armament includes a 5-inch 54-caliber Mark 45 Mod 4 naval main gun, as well as two Rheinmetall Millennium 35mm CIWS with an additional six 12.7mm machine guns. Its missile arsenal consists of 16 RGM-84 Harpoon Block II anti-ship missiles, 36 RIM-162 surface-to-air missiles and two FIM-92A Stinger Missiles and MK32 Mod 14 launchers.