General Rick Hillier was a remarkable chief of the defence staff. During his tenure from January 2005 to June 2008, Hillier wielded an unusual degree of influence for Canada's highest ranking general, and he sought to use this influence to rebuild and reshape the Canadian forces. As part of this effort, he assumed a prominent role in the formulation of Canadian defence policy. Hillier was also a widely recognized public figure, achieving near-celebrity status in a country that is usually uninterested in defence and military matters. For Canadians accustomed to silent soldiers and sailors, Hillier's three years as chief were, if nothing else, notable for the degree of attention garnered by the Canadian military's top officer.Hillier's time as chief of the defence staff was equally noteworthy for the adulation he received from the defence community, media outlets, and several pundits.' Though a few commentators expressed misgivings about his worldview and frank language, critical assessments of Hillier were in the minority.2 There was an especially strong consensus on Hillier's impact on the forces and Canadian defence capabilities. Hillier was widely praised for rehabilitating the military and honing Canada's defence posture. Under his direction, it is commonly held, both the forces and Canadian defence issues began an overdue ascent from neglect to respect. According to this prevailing account, Hillier's presence at the head of the Canadian military represented a high point for the forces and for Canadian defence policy and politics. Indeed, when contemplating his inevitable departure as chief, Janice Gross Stein and Eugene Lang lamented that there were too few Hilliers to fill the void he would leave.3This decidedly positive interpretation of Hillier's legacy merits a reexamination. While there is little doubt that Hillier was instrumental in securing much -needed funds for the defence department and increasing the public esteem of the Canadian forces, the outcome of his program innovations were more ambiguous. Of note, Hillier's efforts to transform the forces' command and force structure produced questionable results. Hillier's term as chief, moreover, was marred by a significant failure. When he was given an opportunity to improve the military's position in Canada's traditionally imbalanced civil -military relationship, Hillier repeatedly overstepped his bounds, compelling the civilian authorities eventually to reduce the military's input into defence policy. While identifying Hillier's failure and ambiguous achievements does not detract from his accomplishments, it suggests, at the very least, that his legacy is mixed.The aim of this article is to reassess Hillier's legacy as Canada's chief of the defence staff. In so doing, the article seeks to spark a wider academic debate about the impact of this noteworthy military leader on Canada's defence policy and politics. We begin with an analysis of Hillier's successes. The article then discusses the former chiefs ambiguous policy achievements and, last, examines Hillier's failure in the realm of civil-military relations.SUCCESSES: POLITICAL EFFECTIVENESS AND PUBLIC SUPPORT When evaluating Hillier's legacy, two successes stand out. First, he played an important role in securing multiyear budget increases for the Department of National Defence (DND) and the Canadian forces. From the perspective of the military as a bureaucratic organization, an ability to protect existing budgets and secure budget increases is the mark of a strong, politically effective leader. By this measure, Hillier's political effectiveness counts as one of his successes. Second, Hillier enhanced the public's support, trust, and admiration of the military. Taking the military's point of view, this boost in public esteem is the sign of a successful leader. By raising Canadians' esteem of the military, moreover, Hillier lifted the forces' morale, bringing it out of the difficult years that military personnel had endured since the end of the Cold War. …