This article is a follow-up of a previous one that I submitted to the Arch in the winter of 2003. The article written two years ago was about my reflections about the fundamental differences between our two military academies.  It was stated that while the onus was on the institution to inculcate the values of leadership in the West Point model, RMC placed the onus on the individual.  As a graduating cadet and a participant of the annual exchange for four years, my stance on this issue has not changed.  However, the focus of this article will not be on the differences between USMA and RMC.  Rather, I will comment on the competition aspect of this arch rivalry between our institutions that happens to be the longest running exchange in North America.

When I fought and defeated my USMA counterpart in February 2002- this was the first time in the 74 years rivalry where Taekwondo was introduced into the competition- my reasons for fighting, then and now, have remained virtually unchanged.  For myself, personally, I view my responsibilities as an athlete to be three-fold.  First, I am representing our college against West Point.  Second, I am representing the Canadian Forces against United States Army.  Lastly, and not least, I am ultimately representing Canada against the United States.  One may look at this view and come to the conclusion that by merely focusing on the competition aspect of the exchange, I am overlooking the original purpose of this historic event; that of exchanging friendship and culture between our two nations. 

In response, I would say that merely focusing on the competition aspect of the exchange does not in any way hinder this ideal.  In fact, I would argue that this view may actually be closer to the founders’ intent than what it has the tendency to be regarded as today.  I make this comment based on several observations as an athlete who has fought on all three of the levels mentioned above.  Whether it has been competing as an RMC fighter in our varsity season, representing the CF Team in world military championships (CISM), or representing the Canadian national team in competitions such as US Open and world university championships (FISU), Canadian athletes, not excluding military, tend to fall into the same trap of compensating their competition potential for the competition ideal.  That is, there seems to be a socio-cultural belief that Canadians are by nature non-competitive people.  To want to win and stand out on top is very un-Canadian. 

Just as an aside, in the military context, this can have severe implications.  Our soldiers tend to be seen as nothing more than peacekeepers.  It is obvious that this short-sightedness can undermine the combat readiness and morale of our troops.  In the sports world, the same kind of effect presents a major challenge to our athletes.  To the uninformed public, Canadians are seen to be gentle people that are not traditionally likened to ego-centric and aggressive behaviours like our American friends for example.  Be it on the battlefield or in the ring, Canadians are stereotyped and are seen to be more amiable than Americans.  While this might be an advantage when going on vacation, as a competitor, this translates to opponents having less fear, respect, and thereby feeling less threatened, by Canadian athletes in competition.  Thus, the psychological intimidation necessary to facilitate victory for elite athletes is stymied by this fallacious way of thinking.

How does all this relate to the RMC-USMA exchange?  Indeed, there exists a need to clearly separate the idea of cultural exchange with the reality of straight competition.  The Olympic motto of “Unification of Man Through Sport” and the CISM motto of “Friendship Through Sport” remain valid insofar that whatever sport is being played is being arbitrated objectively, impartially, consistently, and accurately.  When there is a deviation of one or more of these factors, sportsmanship deteriorates.  Disputes occur between athletes, between athletes and referees/judges, between coaches and arbitration boards, and even between fans.  Hence, strictly from a competitor’s point of view, at the end of the day, the objective of the annual exchange should be, first and foremost, to win.  To expect athletes to perform in their optimal state, athletes must have the freedom to facilitate optimal preparation.  Being told either directly or indirectly that the overriding purpose of the exchange is friendship and sociability, vice competition, can undermine the athlete’s desire to win unconditionally.  To put it simply, there is a disconnect in the athlete’s mind when he desires to see his opponents as merely opponents- a team or a person to be destroyed during competition- but is being pressured to see his opponents as a friend-in-arms or a team mate. 

Surely for most, my stance may be deemed to be very controversial and hostile.  Well, neither war nor combat is peaceful let alone altruistic, but we are military servicemen and consider ourselves to be professionals.  I say the same kind of mentality should remain the case for our athletes.  Realistically, if we desire to beat Army in sports- hockey, fencing, or taekwondo- we must adopt a fighter’s psyche.  When I step in that ring, I do not care who is before me.  Be they friend or foe, I will knock them out with my hook kick.  It is not that I am endorsing violence or utter disrespect, but combat is combat as competition is competition.  As a fighter, this is the only way to ensure that the 3 rounds of 3 minutes are devoted solely to win.  This same spirit can apply on the ice or on the tip of the sabre. 

In closing, by wanting nothing more than to defeat Army in sports during the exchange does not bring discredit to the ideal.  This is being realistic.  When one is on that ice preparing for a face-off, sharpening the sword to slash the opponent, or taping the feet and hands to tear open the opponent’s face, all is fair in war and competition.  You can still do all of these with the utmost respect and professionalism.  Yes, the purpose of the exchange is friendship and sharing of service culture, but competition first.  We can shake hands and have a drink afterwards.  By winning and feeling proud to represent one’s uniform and one’s nation, I believe, was the end state that was desired by the founders of the RMC-USMA exchange.  Let us go back to that winning and competitive spirit so we can be proud to be called a Paladin and always be satisfied with the knowledge that we can beat Army at any game, anytime, anywhere.

The RMC men's basketball team will honour its' four graduating players in a short ceremony preceding their game this Saturday against York University at 8:00pm.

Jonathan Carreiro on court

 OCdts 23242 Steve Scriver, 23131 Jonathan Carreiro and 23104 Grant Anderson will be graduating from RMC after four successful years as members of the basketball team. 22909 Lt. Kevin Dulude, who returned for his fifth year this season, will also be playing his final home game for the Paladins, who were officially eliminated from post-season competition this past weekend.

 Dulude will leave as the most decorated RMC athlete ever.  The four-time OUA All-Star was also named 2003-04 CIS All-Canadian, following his OUA Player of the Year award that same season.  Dulude holds the OUA career marks for scoring and rebounding.  He was also named CF Male Athlete of the Year for 2002, an award he has been in the running for the past three years.

  UP

First Penalties at West Point

 Last week we read about the first West Point penalty.  This time we will go “behind the scenes” and find out how it really happened back 50 years ago.

First RMC Penalties – 1955 By 3918 A.K. Roberts

The noted historian Dr. George Stanley, who would later become the Lieutenant-Governor of New Brunswick, was at that time an avid supporter of the RMC senior hockey team.  In 1954/55 he also taught Canadian History to the entire Second Year class, which contained four of the senior team’s players (3906 Cooke, 3824 Pitura, 3961 McClure and the aforementioned Roberts).  A week or two prior to the 1955 game, Dr. Stanley announced during one of his stimulating lectures to Second Year that . . . click here for more . . .

A Pilot’s Log Book (Part Two)

A Pilots Log Book Part II Continued from last week 

After Winnipeg I took early retirement from the Forces in 1979 in order to continue flying and went to work for an aircraft charter company in Calgary called Business Flights.   It was run by two ex-Air Force generals, Ken Lett and Bob Edwards, both of whom I had known in the Air Force. We flew Lear 35s. . . click here for more . .  .

Career Opportunity
 
Spar Aerospace is looking for a Program Manager to lead project initiatives and maintain relationships with the Department of National Defense.  Based in Edmonton, AB., the successful candidate will be charged with establishing and executing program plans designed to achieve objectives in accordance with DND requirements.  The ideal candidate is a current or ex-military professional of a senior rank who has had at least 10 years experience in the aerospace industry involved in areas of aircraft maintenance, repair and overhaul programs.  Engineering degree or equivalent is required.  For more information, please contact Chantel Maloney of Boyden Global Executive Search at 403-237-6603, email cmaloney@boyden.com.

Other Employment Opportunities and Résumés can be found HERE