Don't mess with Newfoundlanders named 'Rick'

Obviously Hillier isn't the only Rick from The Rock you need to worry about: sit down with a bowl of popcorn and watch Mercer deliver a well-deserved written flaying in the St. John's Independent (ht:Fred).

Poor Noreen Golfman. She wrote in her Jan. 12 column (Blowing in the Wind � ) that her holidays were ruined by what she felt were incessant reports about Canadian men and women serving in Afghanistan. So upset was Noreen that, armed with her legendary pen, sharpened from years in the trenches at Memorial University's women's studies department, she went on the attack. I know I should just ignore the good professor and write her off as another bitter baby boom academic pining for what she fondly calls "the protest songs of yesteryear," but I can't help myself. A response is exactly what she wants; and so I include it here. After all, Newfoundlanders have seen this before: Noreen Golfman, sadly, is Margaret Wente without the wit.

Dear Noreen,

I am so sorry to hear about the interruption to your holiday cheer. You say in your column that it all started when the CBC ran a story on some "poor sod" who got his legs blown off in Afghanistan...

Paul Franklin doesn't need any defending from anyone, but boy-oh-boy, is it ever nice to see someone with the public clout of Mercer watching his - and the entire Canadian Forces' - six.

Go read the whole darned thing.

NATO failing in Afstan/Whose Spring offensive?

Maj.-Gen. (ret'd) Lewis Mackenzie takes our allies to task.

For the past month, the news media have been replete with forecasts of a looming spring offensive by the Taliban in Afghanistan. Open sources have guesstimated that as many as 15,000 of them are mobilizing just over the Pakistani border. Many are "tier one" (really dedicated in the jihad against the rest of us) and the remainder "tier two" (in it for the money). NATO is deemed to be "preparing" for this offensive and continues to call for a modest injection of additional troops to deal with the increased threat.

There was rejoicing on the weekend over the news that a 3,500-strong brigade of the U.S. 10th Mountain Division (headquartered just across the St. Lawrence from Kingston) will stay in Afghanistan for an additional four months. One of the brigade's combat battalions of 650 soldiers is to be relocated to Kandahar airfield as a rapid-reaction force. The other two can also be deployed to the south if necessary. There was also talk of the North Atlantic Treaty Organization providing a mixed international brigade of as many as 3,500 troops to help out in the south, but no countries have yet stepped forward to volunteer their soldiers

So, we have 650 additional troops from the 10th Mountain Division. We have about 2,500 additional Mountain Division troops standing by in other parts of Afghanistan who, in the event of a Taliban offensive, will find themselves unable to redeploy to the south as a result of modest Taliban diversionary attacks aimed at freezing U.S. soldiers in place. And we have a phantom NATO brigade of 3,500 troops from various countries yet to be identified, who have not trained together and presumably employ different tactics (assuming that some ex-Soviet satellite countries and recent NATO members would be involved). Conclusion? NATO has found 650 extra soldiers to help thwart the Taliban's spring "offensive."

As an armchair general nearly 10 time zones away from Kandahar and with no inside access to military intelligence, I find the response from NATO's political headquarters to the so-called Taliban spring offensive deplorable and a threat to NATO's very survival as the world's leading military alliance. No military commander sits around and waits for the enemy to take the offensive. When you are invited to a knife fight, you show up at the back door with a gun...

There are about 800,000 troops available within the expanded NATO membership. About 4 per cent of them are in Afghanistan, and the alliance is "concerned" and "preparing" for a Taliban spring offensive! Will someone please give me a break -- if anyone is going on the offensive, it should be NATO, and it shouldn't be waiting for spring.

Unfortunately, thanks to a lot of talk and empty promises by most NATO members at the political level, the military commanders on the ground in Afghanistan have little choice. The time for diplomatic niceties is long past. If we are serious about rebuilding Afghanistan, we have to eliminate the security threat that stands in the way of that undertaking. That won't be achieved with 650 additional troops and handing the initiative to the enemy.

But a NATO spokesman says it will be ISAF launching a spring offensive, not the Taliban. Hmmm.

What the CF may have to give up

Major cuts in order to have money for all the new equipments, if the plans are approved. Hits for all three services, as might be expected (I wonder which aggrieved service member leaked the document).

The Canadian Forces is [sic] recommending getting rid of ships, surveillance aircraft and up to 25 per cent of its Griffon helicopter fleet to help pay for new equipment in the future, according to the Conservative government's defence strategy obtained by the Citizen.

The cuts would include six Aurora maritime patrol aircraft, one destroyer and the navy's two aging refuelling and resupply ships. The elimination of the resupply vessels will mean the navy is going to face at least a two-year period in which it will not have its own means to refuel vessels at sea.

The government's "Canada First" defence strategy also highlights the previously announced plans to buy medium-lift helicopters, tactical and strategic airlift planes, aerial drones, search and rescue and northern utility aircraft.

The military will also look at the replacement of the CF-18 fighter, according to the strategy, which is not yet public.

But those new purchases come at a cost.

"To make these much needed investments possible, the Canadian Forces will reduce a number of platforms, including Aurora surveillance aircraft and Griffon utility aircraft," according to the strategy.

In the document, Defence Minister Gordon O'Connor says the erosion of military capabilities is "far worse" than originally anticipated.

"Reversing this decline will take time and involve a number of difficult decisions," writes Mr. O'Connor. "Moreover, we must consider the pressing needs of the military against other government priorities."..

As it gets rid of the Auroras, the air force will purchase approximately 12 aerial drones to be located at Canadian Forces Base Comox in British Columbia and CFB Greenwood in Nova Scotia for domestic surveillance and overseas operations. The first of those will be in operation starting in 2008. The purchase of longer-range drones would be considered in the future.

Work will be stopped on the ongoing $900-million modernization program for the Aurora.

Another air force plan to spend hundreds of millions of dollars more on a structural life extension for the aging Auroras will also be cancelled. The remaining Auroras will be re-assigned to Arctic sovereignty patrols.

Over the next three to four years, the military will also get rid of one Iroquois-class destroyer and its two Protecteur-class refuelling and supply ships.

The defence strategy acknowledges that the replacement for the existing refuelling vessels, the Joint Support Ship, will not be in the water until at least 2012. The navy will have to somehow "manage the risk" of operating without refuelling and supply ships for a two-year period, according to the strategy paper.

According to the Canada First report, the navy will also begin work on the acquisition of the future surface combatant fleet, a new type of vessel that will come into service in 2018. Those 14 ships would replace the service's existing frigates and Iroquois-class destroyers...

In the meantime, the Halifax-class frigates will be modernized and command and control equipment now on the Iroquois-class destroyers will be transferred to the frigates.

The air force will get rid of CF-18 fighter aircraft that have not been modernized.

The army will get rid of most of its Air Defence Anti-tank Systems, a ground-based air defence missile system. A small number of the systems will be kept around long enough to provide protection for the Winter Olympics in B.C...

The Conservative strategy also gives the army approval to cancel the planned $750-million purchase of the Mobile Gun System, a wheeled armoured vehicle that was to be built by General Dynamics in London, Ont. Army commanders did not see the mobile gun as providing enough protection and firepower for troops.

The army will also be allowed to cancel the Multi-Mission Effects Vehicle, an upgrade program for the Air Defence Anti-tank Systems that was to be handled by Oerlikon Aerospace in Saint-Jean-sur-Richelieu, Que.

A minimum number of Leopard tanks will be kept for training and operations, according to the strategy paper. But a replacement for a direct-fire capability won't be introduced until 2015 at the earliest.

The strategy also calls for the purchase of more M777 howitzers, the same type of gun now in use by Canadian soldiers in Afghanistan. It also outlines the previously announced purchase of new trucks for the army...

No Auroras for Afstan I would guess. With the reduction in their numbers I would say the case is even stronger for more civilian maritime surveillance planes.

It's not just what you say, it's how you say it

The Government of Canada has put together a website that details the 'whole of government' approach our country is employing in our relationship with Afghanistan. It is full to the brim of good information.

I'm particularly glad someone on the public payroll has decided to publicize the Afghanistan Compact. This document, finalized a year ago tomorrow and drawing from the collective participation of a list of nations longer than your arm, has been described as a Marshall Plan for Afghanistan (Stephane Dion, call your speechwriters). Canadians helped the Afghans draft the plan brought to that conference, we helped the Afghans ensure the plan was endorsed and adopted by the international community through the auspices of the United Nations, and in partnership with the nations of the world - including thirty-six others with troops on the ground - we're continuing to help the Afghans implement that plan. Anyone interested in the fate of Afghanistan would be well-advised to review this blueprint before deciding whether the Canadian mission is an appropriate one, which is why I'm pleased that the government is finally telling Canadians about it in a more prominent way.

Within the federal government's overall web-presence on Afghanistan, the CF has put together a site devoted to the Kandahar Provincial Reconstruction Team. It is also overflowing with little-known information.

Especially useful is this page that breaks down some of the specific activities undertaken by the KPRT, although I have to wonder why the first subheading on the list is for Security, and you have to scroll all the way down past the Civilian Police, Military Police, and Quick Reaction Force sections before you get to the DFAIT diplomacy paragraph and then the CIDA development points. If this site is supposed to educate the public on reconstruction efforts, why is the big-money and big-project development story buried at the bottom of the page?

I know it's tilting at windmills, but one of these days I'd like to see the government allow its people to tell a story instead of spouting facts and figures. To pull one example out of the pile: statistics on the number of micro-loans that went to Afghan women are needed, no doubt, but I want to hear about a couple of those women's stories. I work in sales and service, and I was taught early on in my career that customers don't care what you know until they know that you care. In other words, discounting the importance of creating an emotional connection is counterproductive if you're looking to convince anyone of anything. Real people will consistently relate to the plight of other real people, and while bullet points detailing GDP growth per capita can support that effort, bullet points alone cannot accomplish it.

The one area of the site that creates a personal connection effortlessly is the photos page created by Combat Camera. How can pictures like this one of an Afghan woman thanking a Canadian medic at a Village Medical Outreach not touch Canadian hearts? And why aren't there more of them on each page alongside the cold, hard facts?



While mulling this over, I was visited by the Good Idea Fairy: I want you to tell me in e-mail or comments what information you'd like to see on these Canada-Afghanistan websites. Tell me how the government can make the presentation of that information more attractive and user-friendly. And in a few days, I'll e-mail the results of this little survey to a couple of people I know at DND and elsewhere in government who might be in a position to refine the message. Maybe we can throw a stone into the pond and be rewarded with a ripple or two for our efforts.

Because, quite frankly, the nation's effort in Southwest Asia is too important to leave informing Canadians about it to people whose fundamental purpose is to sell more pieces of newsprint or bombard you with more radio or television ads. The truth about the Canadian mission cannot be seen dimly through a media straw.

Of course, if you like an uninterrupted news diet of ramp ceremonies served with a side order of governmental Public Relations boilerplate, then this little project isn't for you. For the rest of you, my e-mail goes out on Friday of this week.

"Squishy" Canadians

Or, the dream world most of us prefer to inhabit.

This is first of four articles by Mr Granatstein:

What are Canada's national interests? Are we able to defend them? How can we protect ourselves from terrorism and natural disasters? These are the questions that historian J.L. Granatstein answers in his new book Whose War Is It? In the excerpt that follows, the first of four presented this week by the Post, Prof. Granatstein outlines the sort of catastrophes Canada could face in this dangerous new age.

And commentary:

A just-published book on the Canadian military hits the reader like a cold shower, a slice of reality pie and a good kick in the arse.

Historian and author Jack Granatstein offers his take on where the public is, versus where it needs to be, with respect to Canada's long-neglected defence force that, in 2007, simply isn't up to the urgent array of tasks potentially confronting it.

There's too much naive idealism around, asserts the York University professor emeritus in Whose War Is It? How Canada Can Survive in the post-9/11 World.

As a country, we have national interests, he writes. "The denigration of national interests . . . is almost wholly wrong, naive and ultimately misguided.

"Nations do not exist in a fairy-tale world where good always triumphs, where the cowboys in white hats inevitably beat up the bad guys in black hats. . . . It's not a benevolent world out there, and the cold-blooded or rational calculations of realpolitik are sometimes precisely what is needed."

Canadians spend $343 per capita on defence, compared to $903 spent by Brits and $648 by Australians.

The author advances the view that Canada's largely pacifist foreign policy results in part from the large role non militaristic Quebec plays in setting the foreign policy agenda. Canadians have a blue-beret image of themselves as peacekeepers which may be comforting and pragmatically inexpensive but is totally impractical.

Granatstein notes, even in the face of our do-gooder intentions, we're tightwads when it comes to foreign aid (.27 of 1 per cent of GDP compared to a global target of .7).

He calls the Canadian preoccupation with promoting values abroad -- stuff like good governance, human rights, diversity, gender equality -- "preachy squishiness" and asserts it has little to do with safeguarding our national interests.

Liberal politicians such as Lloyd Axworthy and Bill Graham, and former UN Ambassador Paul Heinbecker [emphasis added] come under attack for promoting naive and moralistic mythologies about Canada's role in the world.

Scoffs Granatstein: "Canadians are the world's good guys, the nation that always does the right thing and is not afraid to tell the rest of the world, especially the United States, just what the right thing happens to be . . . Naturally enough, such a nation can have no enemies."

The fundamental point he drives home is that it's not in our domestic interest to be mere missionaries spreading a values-based gospel. When the rubber hits the road, Canada, quite simply, is unprepared to protect itself...

The book here.

Update: Second piece here, via Spotlight on Military News and International Affairs:

The peacekeeping myth: 'Canadians keep the peace; Americans fight wars,' goes the cliche. In Afghanistan, the Balkans and beyond, the reality has been very different

No headlines yet

From Bruce Rolston at Flit:

Canadian Afghanistan update you didn't read

In the "News you didn't read in your weekend papers" column, it has been over two months since the last Canadian fatality in Afghanistan.

No, it's not going to last forever. Let's hope it lasts as long as possible, though.

Campaign promises and JTF 2

It looks like JTF 2's main base will move to CFB Trenton, and that a marine unit will be established at CFB Comox. During the last election campaign the Conservatives promised to base regular Army "rapid reaction" battalions at Trenton (a reborn "Airborne" battalion), Comox, Bagotville and Goose Bay. The JTF 2 moves will presumably be presented as keeping the promises for the first two places--what about the latter two?

The military will move its Ottawa-based Joint Task Force 2 counter-terrorism unit to Trenton, Ont., as it prepares to launch a further expansion of the country's special forces.

Besides moving the 600-member unit from its current location in Dwyer Hill, near Richmond, the military will position special forces equipment at sites around the country to allow for a quicker response to a terror attack.

It will also further expand the recently formed special forces regiment based at CFB Petawawa, as well as create a new Marine Commando Regiment to be based at Comox, B.C.

The plans will be announced when the Harper government releases its long-awaited "Canada First" defence strategy. No date has been set for its release.

JTF2 will complete the move to its new home at CFB Trenton by 2010. Until then, it will continue using its 80-hectare Dwyer Hill installation.

Positioning JTF2 at one of the country's main airbases allows it immediate access to aircraft for domestic and overseas missions, military officers say.

As previously reported in the Citizen, the government wants to change the name of JTF2 to the 1st Battalion, Special Service Regiment. The Canadian Special Operations Regiment, now based at CFB Petawawa, would be renamed the 2nd Battalion, Special Service Regiment. Both units will include a parachute capability, according to officers.

The Marine Commando Regiment will concentrate entirely on maritime operations.

The unit will initially consist of about 250 personnel, but that will be expanded over the years. The regiment will be able to react to seaborne terrorist incidents, at home and internationally. It will also be given the job of rescuing Canadians trapped in war-torn nations that are accessible by sea.

The government wants the country's special forces units to be able to work more closely with similar units in the United States when reacting to incidents that potentially threaten North America. Canada's special forces will also play more of a role in training foreign militaries...

Some questions:

1) Is there enough space at Trenton to house the troops and their equipment, and for training?

2) How will a unit based at Comox be able to respond rapidly to the most likely marine terrorist targets in B.C., the Port of Vancouver and ferries from the lower mainland and Washington state to Vancouver Island (and maybe Esquimault a target too)?

3) Will part of JTF 2 be kept near Ottawa to deal with a hostage incident--the reason the RCMP's Special Emergency Response Team, and then its replacement, JTF 2, were stationed at Dwyer Hill in the first place? Or is it now good enough to have members roughly half-way between the capital and Toronto (smile)?

Comment thread at Army.ca.

C-130J for fixed-wing SAR?

David Pugliese of the Ottawa Citizen raises what I think is a fanciful proposition, but does at least discuss the capabilities of aircraft.

Much more here at Army.ca.

Afstan in US press/CF plan

A major story in the LA Times:

In the wind-scoured high desert that was once the heartland of the Taliban movement, the will and determination of a little-heralded American ally have been undergoing a harsh test.

For the last six months, the task of confronting insurgents in volatile Kandahar province in southern Afghanistan has largely fallen to Canada, whose troops have participated in myriad peacekeeping missions in recent years but had not seen high-intensity combat since the Korean War.

Although its nearly 3,000 troops account for less than 10% of the allied forces in Afghanistan, Canada absorbed nearly 20% of the coalition's combat deaths last year, losing 36 soldiers.

A Canadian diplomat also was killed, by a suicide bomber.

The disproportionate casualty count in a region that Taliban commanders have pledged to seize this spring has triggered debate at home about whether Canada is finding itself in a quagmire of American making.

The deployment is a strain for military families. Moreover, the Canadian mission points up the stresses and strains caused by unequal burden-sharing within the North Atlantic Treaty Organization.

Already, alliance unity has been frayed by what commanders describe as an insufficient overall troop commitment and rules that sharply limit the combat capabilities of some participants.

"Would I be happy if there were more nations in the south? Yes," said Lt. Gen. Michel Gauthier, commander of Canada's expeditionary forces, who toured Canadian outposts in Afghanistan in mid-January.

"Would I be happy if there were fewer caveats?" he added, referring to rules that limited the combat missions of many NATO troops to emergency sorties to aid other alliance forces. "Yes."

A NATO meeting in Brussels on Friday brought a pledge from the U.S. for more troops and an additional $10 billion over two years, but only vague promises from other alliance members.

Canadian military officers in Afghanistan sidestep questions about the safer tasks given to French troops in the capital, Kabul, or to the German deployment in the relatively calm north.

They point instead to others in the line of fire: American troops' front-line engagement with insurgents in the east, the battles that British forces have waged to the west in Helmand province, or other contingents serving alongside Canadians in Kandahar, including Dutch troops.

Even so, Canadian forces who arrived in August were stunned by their initial encounter, a full-blown battle with thousands of insurgents.

Canadian troops took the lead in NATO's Operation Medusa, a September confrontation with Taliban fighters who had entrenched themselves in and around the Panjwayi district, southwest of the city of Kandahar.

"Everyone here has seen someone die," said Cpl. Luke Winnicki, a 26-year-old combat engineer in the Royal Canadian Regiment, gesturing toward dozens of troops in a drafty tent at Masumghar, a hillside outpost about 15 miles southwest of Kandahar...

But the Conservative government is not, as the article later says, a "coalition".

Meanwhile, the CBC uncovers the Canadian Forces' very reasonable plan for Afstan--a document dated, I think, May 2006 from what I saw in the television story but the date is not mentioned in the online version.

The document — authored by Gen. Rick Hillier and obtained recently by CBC News —stated that the military's job in Afghanistan is considered successful and completed:

* when new Afghan security forces "are established" and "fully controlled" by the Afghan government.
* when those forces are trained and can conduct their own "counter-insurgency operations."
* when the forces can defend against foreign fighters and "effectively control borders."
* and when "terrorist groups are denied sanctuary within Afghanistan."

Looking forward

The Integrated Tactical Effects Experiment (ITEE), taking place on the eastern seaboard from 2-20 November, 2006 is a significant exercise within the Standing Contingency Force (SCF) concept of operation. The aim of the exercise is to evaluate and define the feasibility of the deployment and maintenance of a high readiness sea based and seaborne joint expeditionary task force for Canada. Participating in the ITEE are Canadian soldiers, sailors and airmen and women, along with ships from the Naval Task Group, G-Wagons, Light Armoured Vehicles (LAV) III and Sea King helicopters modified for troop transport. Key to the experiment is the expertise of the U.S. Navy combined with the U.S. Marine Corps mentorship and the lending of USS Gunston Hall, an amphibious assault ship embarking CF Staff and troops required to test the SCF concept.

Eternal Flame for Petawawa

A soldier's wife has taken the initiative.

"Keep the home fires burning

While your hearts are yearning

Though our lads are far away

They dream of home ..."

---

Not happy with fruitcake? Get what you really wanted

Although written by Ivor Novello and Lena Ford in 1914, with Canada suffering casualties and injuries in Afghanistan, the words above continue to ring true, says military wife Dianne Collier.

The words inspired the creation of an 11-member committee headed by Collier which is trying to raise $20,000 to erect a Parliament Hill-style eternal flame monument at Canadian Forces Base Petawawa recognizing the ongoing role of military spouses and mothers.

Backed by base command and to be located at an existing park overlooking the Ottawa River, the flame would symbolize the fact wives and mothers have kept the home fires burning when their loved ones are away on the front.

TRANQUIL SITE

"The flame is an obvious choice to acknowledge their role in this very challenging lifestyle," said author and columnist Collier, who is heading the campaign along with the woman who proposed the project, Linda Mohns.

The committee, which includes active and retired military members and spouses, local businesspeople and representatives of the Royal Canadian Legion and Korean Veterans Association, has been meeting for several weeks to plan the monument and fundraising activities, Collier said.

When completed, she said, the eternal flame site will offer a tranquil place to pause and reflect. Featuring benches, a walkway and flowering dogwood bushes -- which turn a symbolic red in the winter -- the 8-ft. grey granite monument and surrounding Home Fires Park will create "an atmosphere of love and support," organizers say.

Mounted on the monument will be a 4-ft.-long bronze rose topped by a bowl containing the eternal "flame of hope."

The fundraising effort includes sales of eternal flame brooches for $5 and yellow ribbon "Support our Troops" magnets for $4. Details are available at www.renc.igs.net/~tcollier.

The committee's goal is to complete the monument and light the flame in June. With the current Afghanistan deployment involving 1,600 CFB Petawawa-based troops under way, there's perhaps never been a better time to create something uplifting in the community, Collier said.

Permanent symbol

"Many people have told me they feel somewhat helpless in light of the challenges our military members and families are facing today," said Collier.

"They want to help but don't know how. Well, here's a way to create something permanent which will mean a lot to people."

One of the corporations Collier is negotiating with for support is Enbridge, which she hopes will provide technical expertise as well as a deal on a perpetual supply of natural gas.

A founding member of CFB Petawawa's Military Family Resource Centre, Collier produced the first newsletter linking similar centres in Canada and Europe.

Her contributions have earned her the Queen's Golden Jubilee Medal, the Canada 125 Medal, the Base Commander Commendation and the first Humanitarian Award from 1st Battalion Royal Canadian Regiment, which is leading the battle group in Afghanistan.

In 2006, Collier was named Town of Petawawa Senior of the Year.

While the eternal flame will be located at Petawawa, Collier said it will recognize all Canadian families who support those who serve.

"Let those who've paid the ultimate sacrifice rest in peace knowing that each one of them and the families they've left behind will never be forgotten," she said.

And more troops from Petawawa for Afstan

More from the Ottawa Valley, besides those from CFB Gagetown, N.B.:

About 500 Canadian soldiers from Ontario -- most from Petawawa -- are travelling to Afghanistan over the next two months...

Plus more from the PPCLI, Edmonton [last para at link].

And there are Van Doos there now, with many more to follow at the end of the summer.

A fairly national effort.

Afstan: More troops from the usual contributors

There are several stories on this; I've picked bits from them to try and give an overall picture; it would seem that in reality only the US, UK and Poland really are doing much more. It also looks as if the US hopes only to extend the tour of the 10th Mountain soldiers as a temporary measure and not actually increase its continuing troop strength (Iraq?)--but Canadians will be getting some help for a while at Kandahar. And caveats by ISAF members on troop use remain a serious problem.

1) "More US troops for Afghanistan"

The 3,500-strong 10th Mountain Division, currently deployed along the eastern border with Pakistan, is to have its tour of duty extended by four months.

The unit, on its third tour of the country since 2001, was due to have been replaced next month by men from the 82nd Airborne division, who will still be deployed...

2) "NATO Allies Wary of Sending More Troops to Afghanistan"

America’s European allies on Friday remained noncommittal about sending additional troops to Afghanistan, even as the Bush administration sought to inject new energy into the NATO mission against the Taliban by offering more American soldiers and money...

...the realities that have troubled the NATO mission in Afghanistan since the 26-member trans-Atlantic alliance took command last year remained on display. France and Germany continued to limit their combat role; both countries have refused to deploy troops in the south of the country, where Taliban forces are strongest. Germany’s Parliament has yet to approve a proposal to send six Tornado reconnaissance jets to the south...

...While Mr. Prodi’s government passed a measure on Friday to renew financing for Italy’s troops in Afghanistan, it did so without the support of all of Mr. Prodi’s coalition partners, and Italian officials said it was unlikely that Mr. Prodi could rally support for any increase in troops...

3) "Nato falls in behind US to step up aid to Afghanistan"

Jaap de Hoop Scheffer, Nato Secretary-General, said that the issue of extra troops was likely to be discussed at a meeting of defence ministers in Seville, Spain on February 8. "The message has been clear that the international community intends to keep up the initiative in Afghanistan..."

4) "NATO to send in more troops to Afghanistan"

The surge in allied troops follows a recent warning from U.S. generals that Taliban militants are poised to unleash a bloody spring offensive across the southern half of Afghanistan.

British Gen. David Richards downplayed the gloomy assessment..

"We’ve now got a stabilized (situation)," said Richards, who steps down as commander of the NATO force in Afghanistan on Feb. 4. "I’m not saying we’ve won. We have a stabilized security situation across the south and in the east. We have a lot more to do but we’ve set the conditions for that."

On Thursday, the United States extended by four months the combat tour of 3,200 soldiers from the 3rd Brigade of the New York-based 10th Mountain Division ["...only been pledged for the short term, however."]. At least one battalion, roughly 650 troops, of that group will form a so-called theatre reserve, said Richards. He said he envies the flexibility such a formation will give his successor, an American general.

Based in Kandahar [emphasis added], the tough alpine-trained soldiers will be called upon to respond to emergencies throughout the volatile region. In theory, this should allow Canadians to concentrate on security and reconstruction.

Richards was eager to trumpet as "fantastic news" NATO plans to deploy a mixed brigade of combat troops — as many as 3,500 — in addition to the bolstered U.S. commitment. But even after a meeting of NATO foreign ministers in Brussels on Friday, it remained unclear which countries planned to contribute new troops to the multinational combat group.

Poland, which had committed 900 soldiers last fall, has boosted its contingent to 1,200. There were reports this week that Britain was considering putting 600 more troops on the ground in addition to the 5,200 already deployed...

5) "US Says Troop Coordination Critical to NATO, Afghanistan Mission"

A top US State Department official warned Friday that NATO's future may hinge on alliance members dropping conditions they have placed on their troops' service in Afghanistan. Undersecretary of State for Political Affairs Nicholas Burns says the so-called "caveats" on what various contingents may do in that country are an "existential" issue for NATO...

[US Defense Secretary]Gates said if things go as anticipated, it will not be necessary to further extend [emphasis added] the tours of U.S. troops.

He has said in recent days that he would be receptive to increasing the overall U.S. troop presence in Afghanistan if that is the recommendation of field commanders.

And then there's this, "NATO slow to respond on Afghan force level":

...[Secretary of State] Rice added that in addition to extending the tours, Defense Secretary Robert Gates would expand the number of U.S. troops, "partly through extra forces [emphasis added]."..

Hmm. Things not quite clear.

Gen. Hillier: Two years as CDS

A major CanWest article assessing the General. Seems fairly reasonable to me.

West Coast Navy still sailing

Taking part in exercise with USN--I wonder why they don't seem to have the same money problems as their East Coast counterparts. And I wonder if our national media will report this exercise.

Canadian warships will practice hunting and evading submarines in a training exercise off the Hawaiian coast from January 29 to February 16, 2007. The three-week exercise, designed to train prospective U.S. submarine Commanding and Executive Officers, provides the Canadian Navy with a dynamic and challenging opportunity to further develop its capabilities, with an emphasis on anti-submarine warfare (ASW).

With more than 40 countries operating submarines worldwide, the Commander of the Canadian Pacific Fleet, Commodore Bruce Donaldson, says participating in the exercise will benefit both Canada and our allies alike. “Training in anti-submarine warfare is essential if we are to retain the ability to control our own waters and to operate elsewhere in the world safely and effectively in support of Canadian Forces operations and objectives,” he said. “Our participation in this exercise will provide us with a high level of training at the unit and command team level which is extremely valuable in the development and refinement of Canadian procedures and tactics.”..

HMC Ships Algonquin and Vancouver [see IROQUOIS and HALIFAX classes] will participate in the exercise, each equipped with a CH-124 Sea King helicopter from 443 Maritime Helicopter Squadron at Patricia Bay. Also, a CP-140 Aurora long range Maritime Patrol Aircraft from 407 Maritime Patrol Squadron at CFB Comox will complete the Canadian Task Group. United States Navy participants will include three U.S. fast-attack submarines as well as U.S. Ships Chafee and Reuben James.

Bravo Zulu

Well done Stephen! You don't get much clearer than this.

Whether it was Ministerial jockeying, regional lobbying or simply rumour and innuendo as described by Tom Brodbeck yesterday, in the "where's there's smoke, there's probably fire" category, this situation was threatening to become a Towering Inferno.

Market forces will determine distribution of Boeing benefits, PM says

"This government and our ministers have no intention of interfering in the regional distribution of the contracts," Prime Minister Stephen Harper told reporters yesterday afternoon.

Laying down the law, Mr. Harper said it is up to market forces to determine which companies would receive benefits flowing from the government's purchase of C-17 cargo aircraft from Boeing Co.

"It depends on the company that has the contract and its relations with other industry players," Mr. Harper said.

One down and many to go. The key now is to remain vigilant on the numerous other military contracts over the coming years. For far too long in Canada the military and it's budget have been used as a regional development or job creation program, usually to the overall detriment of the military (Those damn Iltis keep springing to mind for some reason).

A Mother's Love and Support

A blog I found in my travels around the net:

Military Parent

A mother of a son who is currently serving in Afghanistan - standing proudly behind him. Awaiting his safe return. That's me - "Military Mom"- at home.

Best wishes to Military Mom and son Matt. Our prayers for a safe return for all.

H/T to McKinnon Transport in my old hometown of Guelph - lot's of RED.

On Reservists and Insurance

(Cross-posted from The Phantom Observer.)

At first glance, this Globe and Mail story would seem to be an example of how hard-luck Canadian Forces reservists are. Dr. Andrew Kirkpatrick, a reservist thinking about taking a tour in Afghanistan, was applying for life insurance from Sun Life.

Instead, he was incensed when a letter came this month from insurance company Sun Life Financial.

“We have been advised that your plans for the near future include travelling to Afghanistan. We have therefore declined your application for life coverage,” the underwriter wrote.

“I know the military has problems recruiting surgeons,” Dr. Kirkpatrick said. “It’s just one more roadblock to our troops getting proper care.”

Actually, life insurance is in fact available for class-A and -B reservists, though SISIP Financial Services. This agency serves Canadian Forces members exclusively, and offers a term insurance plan for reservists.

The main problem with SISIP, however, is that they don’t advertise their services very well to reservists. So it’s entirely possible that Dr. Kirkpatrick may not have known about them. He also may have wanted to compare premium rates from other companies.

I have to wonder, though: is having a dedicated agency for reservists, which offers specially-targeted insurance, the most effective way of delivering this service? Or should private insurance companies try to create new policies for this population, to foster the notion of a competitive market? What do you think?

What We’re Doing in Afghanistan : Health Care for the Locals

(Cross-posted from The Phantom Observer.)

There’s another positive story about the Canadian military in Afghanistan that really needs to see more play out there. (The story is published in today’s Windsor Star, but it’s behind a subscriber firewall at their website for some reason. However, Doug Schmidt’s blog offers a more detailed version.)

What the VanDoos are doing, as part of a Provincial Reconstruction Team, is help set up and protect a medical clinic in the village of Zangabad. Let me quote from the story as taken from the DND clippings site:

To ensure no Taliban surprises, members of the “Van Doos,” 1st Battalion Quebec’s Royal 22nd Regiment, set up a razor-wire perimeter and posted sentries around the temporary clinic in a rented compound that came complete with protesting roosters. Bolstering their ranks were British commandos and Afghan National Army regulars.

One woman in a burka said she and her children deserved the same medical attention afforded by those with transportation and the necessary funds to see private doctors in the city.

“We are a very poor people and not given anything — no one sees us,” she said, adding of the foreign soldiers: “If they support the people, that is good.”

Better still, have a look at Schmidt’s blog. He’s got some additional human interest details as well as photos of the locals. Nothing humanizes a story quite like a photo.

"No Money" Navy

This sort of thing being reported is unlikely to win the Navy friends in high places:

The East Coast navy’s $25-million shortfall has scrapped exercises planned for next week with the NATO squadron now in Halifax.

Three Halifax-based warships, including a tanker, a destroyer and a frigate, had been scheduled to sail with American and German ships now docked in Halifax.

"We had planned to be there as a squadron working with the Canadians," said Cmdr. Chris Dickinson [clearly not a Canadian officer - MC], a spokesman for the Standing NATO Response Force Maritime Group 1.

"They have, as you’ve already been reporting, basically said, ‘Gee whiz, we’re not sailing because we’ve got no money.’ "

Maritime Forces Atlantic made a splash earlier this month when it postponed fisheries patrols out of Halifax until the end of March. The patrols resumed after Defence Minister Gordon O’Connor diverted $5 million from the military’s budget...

The USS Mahan arrived in Halifax on Monday. The destroyer is in Halifax for a change-of-command ceremony slated for Friday. Commodore Denis Rouleau will hand control of the NATO squadron, now under Canadian command, to his American successor, Rear Admiral Michael Mahon.

Starting Monday, the Mahan and the Federal German Ship Sachsen, a stealthy-looking modern vessel that arrived in Halifax on Thursday, will conduct exercises between here and Boston.

They will be accompanied by Sea King helicopters from 12 Wing Shearwater.

"That may sound like something small, but actually the force right now, those two ships, have no helicopters," Cmdr. Dickinson said.

The Sea Kings will practise landings on the two ships and other manoeuvres.

"So we still get something from the Canadians," Cmdr. Dickinson said. "It’s just going to be from the other side of the harbour."..

I wonder to what extent such a funding shortfall is an occasional but normal end of fiscal year occurrence.

Aussie, Aussie, Aussie - Oi, Oi, Oi!

While our focus at The Torch is the Canadian Forces, sometimes it's instructive to take a peek at how our friends are running their militaries. None of us has a monopoly on good ideas, after all.

Since today's Australia Day, I thought I'd highlight some of the Reserve force similarities and differences between the good folks Down Under and our own militia. I must offer thanks to correspondent FM from upside-down-land, who quite helpfully did most of the legwork here.

While some reporters will bite at any bait any the anti-war types dangle in front of them, the truth is that a CF reservist must volunteer for overseas service under current policy. The Australian military follows a similar path, due in part to the public backlash over the use of militia in WWI (they're serious about that too: incredibly, the defence of New Guinea by Aussie reservists in WWII was only possible because it was an Australian territory at the time).

But while Canadian reservists deploying abroad get slotted into Regular Force units, ADF reservists volunteering to serve outside the country have recently begun experiments deploying in a different way: in reserve units formed specifically for a particular tasking:

More than 40 reservists deployed to the Solomon Islands on October 30 as part of 9RQR’s largest collective operation in the 60 years since World War II.

...

CO 9RQR Lt-Col Chris Austin said it was an historic occasion for the battalion and spoke volumes of the professionalism and capability of the modern reserve infantry in South Queensland.

“While reserve soldiers have served on operations in East Timor, Aceh and Iraq as well as other non-operational deployments overseas, it is the first time 9RQR has deployed a contingent of this size in 60 years,” Lt-Col Austin said.

According to FM, these "formed units" have been used not only in the Solomons, but also in East Timor (as a rifle company in a Regular battalion), in Malaysia, and for security at the recent Commonwealth Games as well. The personnel making up these units would generally come from the same brigade, which usually means that everyone is from the same geographical area, normally the same state.

Civilian employment conflicts with Canadian reservists have recently been in the news. Both legislation and CF policy leaves each individual reservist responsible for getting their employer onside for any time off. Oh, there was a provision made in 2004 (Bill C-7) to protect the jobs of reservists called to duty in an "emergency," as defined by the Act ("an insurrection, riot, invasion, armed conflict or war, real or apprehended"). But beyond that, our government's solution to such issues has been the Canadian Forces Liason Council, who voluntarily try to persuade employers to do right by reservists. Moves in Saskatchewan and New Brunswick to revise the employment law are most welcome, since they would put some teeth behind that persuasive effort.

Australia goes even further. I'll quote FM here:

Since 2001 however, legislation has been introduced that protects (for the length of certain operations) the jobs of reservists who volunteer for active duty. To sweeten the deal, funds have also been made available to compensate employers who lose employees to active service, to the tune of up to $1000 per week (the AUS/CDN dollar exchange rate is near parity -- 0.97 cents to the dollar).

In fact, the $1,035.90(AUS) per week employer compensation can actually top out at $5,600(AUS) per week for healthcare professionals called to service (Word document), voluntarily or not. Here in Canada, we can't even seem to track down proper life insurance for a deploying MD (which I'm going to address in a another post).

Job protection and some compensation to employers inconvenienced by the absence of their reservist employee? While I'm sure there are pitfalls - expense being the first and foremost - this sounds like an excellent idea to me.

This is in line with the overall profile of our respective armed forces: Australia spends more to maintain a smaller force than Canada:

Australian Defence Expenditures
A$23.1 billion
1.9% of GDP
51,000 full-time service members and 19,000 reservists

Canadian Defence Expenditures
C$15 billion
1.1% of GDP
64,000 full-time service members and 27,000 reservists

The Canadian soldier, sailor, and airman has always prided himself (and in more recent decades, herself) on matching up favourably against any other nation's counterpart in the world. But I must admit that even if the Canadian government were to see fit to bump our Defence budget to 1.9% of GDP ($25.9 billion, now where have I seen a figure like that before?) like Australia has, we'd still fall short of the ADF in one respect.

I love the Maple Leaf, but it's not much use in a fight. A boomerang, on the other hand...

The politics of procurement---and of requirements?

Michael Fortier, Minister of Public Works and Government Services, puts it plainly in a letter to the Ottawa Sun today:

There has been recent media speculation regarding the outcome of negotiations taking place between the Government of Canada and Boeing for the procurement of strategic airlift.

No contract has been signed, which explains why no announcement has been made.

Some media have gone as far as to say that I had declared that I would not sign a contract to buy four Boeing C-17 cargo aircraft unless Quebec receives a greater share of the contract's proposed regional benefits.

I never made such a statement.

Buying military equipment -- such as ships, airplanes, or trucks -- is not as simple as walking into a dealership and buying a new car.

Billions of taxpayer dollars are at stake.

There are economic consequences to each purchase. And there are urgent needs in the field, where our troops risk their lives every day.

When billions of taxpayer dollars are given out to suppliers, it is the government's job to see that economic benefits are returned to Canadians and the Canadian aerospace and defence industry [emphasis added].

Our government is committed to address the military's need for new equipment, something that was neglected for 13 long years by the previous Liberal government. But no deal is concluded until it is signed -- that is, until the government is satisfied that the purchase was done properly, that Canadians are getting the right benefits and that the purchase will serve the interests of the country.

While back at requirements for the strategic lifter:

Just weeks before the Conservative government announced its controversial plan to buy $3.4 billion worth of Boeing long-range military transports without a competitive bidding process, the military changed a key requirement that eliminated the only competitor - the Airbus Military consortium.

Documents obtained by the Ottawa Citizen show on June 13, 2006, Defence Department planners were under the impression two planes could satisfy its requirements for long-range airlift: the Boeing C-17 and the Airbus A400.

But planners changed a key specification: they doubled the payload requirement of their desired fleet, deciding each of their new planes now needed to carry 39 metric tonnes of cargo instead of the original specification of 19.5 tonnes.

"It's amazing. You call that a fix," said Liberal defence critic Denis Coderre, when told Thursday about the contents of the documents, that were recently released under Access to Information...

In a backgrounder issued on June 29, 2006, touting the new Conservative government's "Canada First" defence strategy, one of the key requirements that justified purchasing the C-17 plane was that it needed a payload capacity of 39,000 kilograms.

In the months leading up to that announcements, the military documents show the military appeared content to make due with a smaller plane with a maximum payload capacity of 19,500 kilograms.

Military planners understood if they upped the payload requirement, they would eliminate all competition...

...the military wanted a plane that could move the LAV III armoured vehicle, which weighs 18 tonnes...

I wonder why the reporter, Mike Blanchfield of the Ottawa Citizen, did not ask someone if the greater weight requirement might be needed to carry our Leopard tanks [see pix of them and USAF C-17s], which by the end of June, 2006, it was pretty likely the army would be keeping.

A400M update [text subscriber only]:

Final assembly of the A400M was scheduled to start in March in Seville, Spain, in preparation for a first flight in January 2008. But final assembly now may be pushed back until June, placing intense pressure on program officials to maintain the first flight date that, so far, the international consortium building the airplane has not backed away from...

A400M customers, some of whom--due to the aging of their current fleets--are clearly nervous about the delivery date being pushed back [emphasis added], have been briefed on the possible assembly delay, which Airbus says will not exceed three months. However, Williams says the Airbus Military team has devised a plan to do parallel test work this year to ensure that their first-flight target is met.

Although the group would have only six months to wind up all the preparatory work before first flight, Williams says that this "doesn't look entirely impossible."

The first A400M delivery should take place in late 2009...

Upperdate: A much fuller article in Le Devoir makes it clear that this was about strategic, not tactical, lift--but also ignores the Leopard matter.

Leave the politics at the office

Winnipeg Sun Columnist Tom Brodbeck with a different perspective on the C-17 contract "distribution of economic benefits" story. As far as he's concerned, the whole thing is phony, based on nothing more than rumour and innuendo. I hope he's right. Unfortunately, call me a cynic, but I'm not convinced. Even Brodbeck himself qualifies things a little at the end of his story.

"I don't doubt for a moment that Ottawa wants to spread out the economic benefits from the $17 billion to all regions of the country. I'd prefer the contracts go to the best bidder at the best price regardless of region. But that's politics."

Brodbeck's "but that's politics" line is the point that many are trying to make. Stop making it politics.

A simple statement from the Government that they are signing the contract without any pre-conditions regarding regional distribution of contracts would go a long way to relieving my cynicism.

H/T Jack's Newswatch

Just another member of Canada's Armed Forces...

and a terrific one at that.

After winning the Canadian 24hr Running Championship in Ottawa, Sgt McLean had this to say:

"If you think what I did was tough, try visiting the cancer ward at a children's hospital and see what those kids are going through, or what our soldiers are going through overseas," says Sgt McLean. "It's really easy to run 24 hours when you know there are people out there (in Afghanistan) providing you with the freedom and the opportunity to do it. I have legs, I have my health, so why not put it to good use. It sounds kind of corny but I really believe it."

Sgt McLean is a Search and Rescue Technician (SAR Tech) with 435 Squadron. He is now preparing for a 460 mile race in support of the Canadian Paralympic Committee's new Soldier On campaign. My hat's off to the Sergeant.

Soldier and Canadian Ultrarunner goes the distance to raise awareness for new program

Air Force / Force Aérienne - January 25, 2007

17 WING WINNIPEG – Canadian Forces member and Canada’s male Ultrarunner of the year, Sergeant Andrew McLean, departs for a challenging international, 740-kilometer race to raise awareness for the Canadian Paralympic Committee’s (CPC) Soldier On program.

CPC is working closely with the CF to have the Soldier On program help to rehabilitate injured soldiers through sports. Sgt McLean learned about the program while searching for a cause to dedicate his Yukon Artic Ultra to.

“I would like to do my part to help injured soldiers get back in the game – running, biking, skiing, whatever it is they want to do,” says Sgt Andrew McLean. “These soldiers are young and have full lives ahead.”

“The primary area of interest is to help injured Canadians, and injured soldiers, become involved in sport, as a proven way of rehabilitation,” says CPC president Carla Qualtrough. “We see it as an ideal way of promoting Paralympic Sport in Canada. Our aim is to develop a sport system for people with disabilities, including soldiers, that encourages participation at all levels, from recreational to high performance.”

Since Sgt McLean has become involved in Soldier On, others across the CF have offered their support by organizing fundraising initiatives, such as a rock concert, a dinner, and a dive-a-thon.

Sgt Andrew McLean is one of two Canadians to enter the Yukon Arctic Ultra’s 460-mile event. With only 13 days to complete the trek through the Arctic, that is nearly 18 full marathons. As the current Canadian male ultrarunner of the year, and Canada’s fastest 100-mile marathon runner in 2005, training has become a lifestyle for the world-class athlete.

McLean will benefit from the broad range of Arctic skills and experience that he has honed as a Search and Rescue Technician in the Canadian Forces. Serving at 17 Wing Winnipeg, his Squadron’s area of responsibility for search and rescue includes much of Canada’s artic.

Media wishing to interview Sgt. McLean are asked to contact 2nd Lieutenant Angela Court at (204) 227-3439, or arrive at 17 Wing Winnipeg’s Whytewold gate between 8 a.m. and 2 p.m. Friday, 27 January, 2007.

-30-

For more info contact 2nd Lieutenant Angela Court during working hours at 204-833-2500 extension 6499, or after hours at court.ar@forces.gc.ca or 204-227-3439.

Related : 17 Wing Winnipeg Photo Gallery

Afstan and Canadian politics: BQ beats NDP; Liberal is?

Just imagine how the NDP would howl if senior Canadian Forces officers at Kandahar actually were engaging in direct "diplomatic" talks with the Government of Pakistan.

New Democrat defence critic Dawn Black says Canada's role in the war-torn country is supposed to be what's called a three-D approach - defence, development and diplomacy. She says they haven't heard anything about diplomacy in their visit to Kandahar, particularly when it comes to dealing with Pakistan, which provides safe haven to Taliban militants....

What does Ms Black think our embassies in Kabul and Islamabad are for? I'm all for giving the CF the tools to do the job; but somehow I doubt the NDP, in its orangest of hearts, wants a Canadian MacArthur.

As for the BQ (and a I saw M. Duceppe live on TV) his critique is really more one of process and attitude than substance. As to substantive criticism of the mission itself, there really is no "there" there. Intelligently hedging his bets.

The newly-minted Liberal Foreign Affairs (thank goodness ex-National Defence) critic, the egregious Ujjal Dosanjh, has for his part a view of Canada's international influence that is naive or disingenous or mendacious. Pick one. Or more.

Liberal Ujjal Dossanjh...says the Conservatives need to be tougher with the alliance so they "cough up more resources, particularly more troops."

Dossanjh says Prime Minister Stephen Harper should have done that before Parliament voted to extend the mission by two years.

Sorry for the political aspect of the post--but one has with equal opportunity been bashing MND O'Connor.

If you throw them hard enough...

Darts and laurels on the SCOND brouhaha:

• Dart: Gordon O'Connor for screwing up what should have been a fairly straightforward visit by one of two parliamentary committees whose mandates intersect with his own. He and his office created a conflict out of thin air, and have now been forced into an ignominious reversal of position.
  
  

  "The minister is supportive of every effort to maximize opportunities for members of Parliament to garner a better understanding of what Canadian soldiers, development workers, police representatives, and diplomats are doing for Canada in Afghanistan," spokeswoman Isabelle Bouchard said in an e-mail.
  
  "Therefore, the minister has asked military authorities to see whether the Canadian Forces can safely support MP requests to see CF operations outside of Kandahar Airfield."

  
  
  What a pointless way to lose face.


• Laurel: BGen Grant for making it crystal clear to the media that this charlie foxtrot didn't come from the CF, it came from the Minister's office. As the top Canadian soldier in Southwest Asia right now, he'll take his fair share of lumps from the press for screw-ups over which he has some control; he shouldn't have to take them for decisions made above his pay grade.


• Dart: Ujjal Dosanjh for continuing to inflict his ignorance on the general public with statements like this: "I thought that was the kind of decision that one makes on an operational basis. The general makes that decision. What does the minister know about safety, sitting in Ottawa?" Quite frankly, Ujjal, the Minister has forgotten more about the military's ability to ensure VIP security than you're likely to ever know. Shut the hell up.


• Dart: Speaking of shutting the hell up, Colin Kenny needs to button his yap. This is pure garbage, and he knows it: "We came to the conclusion that we didn't get out because there was no development to see...Clearly somebody either (Gen. Rick) Hillier's office or in O'Connor's had decided there was nothing they wanted us to see outside the wire." Horse patties. Observing that his committee was given the run-around by the Minister's office on a previous trip, Kenny decided to use a cattle-prod on O'Connor in public by spouting off to the media. The problem is that he damned well knows there's development going on. I don't normally expect selfish petulance from Kenny, but that's all this is: a bruised ego lashing out and not caring if the CF takes a PR hit in the process. Boooooo, Senator. Boo, hiss.


• Dart: Dawn Black's common sense seems to have abandoned her on this trip.
  
  

  New Democrat defence critic Dawn Black says Canada's role in the war-torn country is supposed to be what's called a three-D approach - defence, development and diplomacy.
  
  She says they haven't heard anything about diplomacy in their visit to Kandahar, particularly when it comes to dealing with Pakistan, which provides safe haven to Taliban militants.

  
  
  You want to talk diplomacy, Ms. Black? Try sitting down with a CIMIC team leader. In fact, try having a chat with anyone from the KPRT. Even better, get yourself up to Kabul, and talk to the folks toiling away in relative obscurity in SAT-A, who work with the Afghan government every single day. While you're up there, buttonhole our DFAIT staff and find out what they're up to. But reel your expectations in: you're visiting a military base in a war zone. Would you visit Fort Pearson on Sussex and complain that you didn't hear a thing about defence? There's been quite enough childish posturing around this trip without you adding to it, thank you very much.


• Laurel: The Canadian press corps for resisting the urge to splatter some of the excrement that hit the proverbial fan on to the Canadian Forces. The soldiers do what they're told. If they tell you they can't get helicopters, they're telling you the truth (anyone for a CH-47 procurement now?). That this story has rightly focused on the political manoeuvring that is at its core is proof that our journalists can report stuff straight when they want to.

Alan, meet Aaron. Sorry about your credibility.

It's about time someone spanked former DND bureaucrat and current book-shilling talking head Alan Williams in public. So my thanks go to Aaron Plamondon for this piece of work:

Healthy and extensive competition is fine when there is no real rush for the product. This is not the case regarding military equipment in Canada. Most often, the products under consideration were needed years ago. The Canadian Forces cannot afford any more procurement debacles or delays.

Clearly, the military should not be able to purchase whatever they want. But they are the experts on what is needed on the battlefield. If our top soldier says there are no acceptable alternatives, as in the case of the Chinook helicopters, he may well be right.

In all of the above cases, his civilian counterparts have agreed. The federal cabinet, Treasury Board and the Privy Council Office have approved the funds and Public Works and Government Services Canada has confirmed the validity of the purchases.

For the first time in recent memory, the Canadian government is setting out to buy and deliver necessary equipment in an efficient manner for our Forces in their current deployment -- not what they may need in 20 years.

Will this cost more than if we opened a five-year competition so all aircraft companies could build a prototype and then submit a possible bid? It may. It may also mean that our soldiers finally have what they need to undertake their missions.

I couldn't have said it better myself. I'm not just saying that, either: I actually tried, and it wasn't nearly this pretty a result. One of these days, I'm going to learn how to write. In the meantime, I'm just glad that Mr. Plamondon can.

No, thank you...

"For many of my 34 years, it felt as though we in the military were serving in relative obscurity..."

What? Politicians cooperating?

What's next? Cats and dogs living together? The Clippers winning an NBA title? My barren scalp sprouting a thick mop of hair after all these years? I feel the breath of the four horsemen on the back of my neck, folks.

Why? Because the Government of Saskatchewan has embraced a good idea put forth by their most dangerous political foe:

The Saskatchewan government announced Wednesday it will work with the Opposition to develop legislation to ensure job security for reservists who volunteer for duty or training, protection which is not currently offered in any province except Nova Scotia.

Brad Wall, the leader of the Opposition Saskatchewan Party, announced last week he would introduce private member's legislation concerning the issue, and now the government is officially getting behind the idea.

"We really support this issue. We think it's an important job that's done in our society and we're committed to ensuring that Canadian Forces reservists in Saskatchewan are afforded job security," Labour Minister David Forbes said Wednesday on the phone from a meeting of federal, provincial and territorial labour ministers in Fredericton, N.B.

Not only has this provincial government stepped up to the plate, they're encouraging other provinces to do the same:

Forbes said it may be possible for something to be done at a national level, so he plans to raise the issue at the labour ministers' meeting. Wall said he encouraged Forbes to do so, noting a newspaper in New Brunswick recently featured the story of a reservist who had lost his job with a Crown corporation in that province because he volunteered for duty.

"If it gets national attention and other provinces look at this as well ... that's very positive," Wall said.

Sometimes when you do the right thing, it doesn't end up mattering much who put the idea forward first.

In response to a suggestion that the Opposition "got the jump on" the government, Forbes conceded that would be a fair assumption. However, he said his party is not embarrassed by having not raised the issue first.

"This is the role of the Opposition -- to bring forward ideas," Forbes said. "I think the key thing is, if we focus on what's best for the reservists and job security, that's No. 1."

A pat on the back and a hearty 'well done' to both Brad Wall and David Forbes. It seems not every politician in this country has forgotten the underlying purpose of the system after all: to do right by their constituents.

Now, all we have to do is wait for the signatures to dry on the legislation, right? Right?...

Afstan: US keeping troops, planning to up aid, asking NATO for more

1) "Pentagon says 3,200 soldiers face extended tour in Afghanistan"

2) "U.S. preparing new offensive in Afghanistan"

After the bloodiest year in Afghanistan since the U.S. invasion, the Bush administration is preparing a series of new military, economic and political initiatives aimed partly at pre-empting an expected offensive this spring by Taliban insurgents, according to senior U.S. officials.

Even as it trumpeted a change of course in Iraq this month, the White House has also completed a review of U.S. policy in Afghanistan. It will ask Congress for $7 billion to $8 billion in new funds for security, reconstruction and other projects in Afghanistan as part of the upcoming budget package, officials said...

3) "U.S. to urge allies to boost Afghan support"

The United States will urge European allies to match it in injecting more development funds into Afghanistan at high-level talks set for Friday [at NATO, Brussels], a senior U.S. official said...

A Different Kind of Colonel

Smart move on behalf of 423 Squadron. Rick Mercer has been a very vocal supporter of the military over the years.

That's Col. Rick to you: Mercer gets a military gig

In a post sometimes reserved for business executives or minor royalty, Rick Mercer may be the first professional comedian to serve as honorary colonel of a Canadian air force unit.

Rick Mercer has been named honorary colonel of 423 Maritime Helicopter Squadron in Nova Scotia.

Mercer, who is younger than some of the aircraft in 423 Maritime Helicopter Squadron, says he is "probably an unconventional choice" for the unpaid ceremonial gig.

"But I'm happy that it's the guys with the Sea Kings because I always root for the underdog," he told CBC News Online on Wednesday as word of his appointment spread. "And I've always felt perfectly safe riding in Sea Kings."

A sad but true fact in the linked report:

The helicopters, older than most of their crew members and famously inclined to break down in recent years, were delivered between 1963 and 1969, the year Mercer was born.

Good press release on the Air Force site, complete with several links of Mercer's efforts on behalf of the military in the past.

Rick Mercer named Sea King squadron Honorary Colonel

The Heat is On

Time to keep it up.

Doer urges Harper to be fair over contracts

Updated Wed. Jan. 24 2007 5:35 PM ET

Canadian Press

WINNIPEG -- Manitoba Premier Gary Doer is urging Prime Minister Stephen Harper not to let "pork-barrel politics'' hijack a contract to build new military cargo planes.

Doer said Wednesday he's surprised and frustrated by a report published this week that says federal Public Works Minister Michel Fortier won't sign the contracts unless Quebec gets most of the benefits.

Doer has the right idea:

Doer says Manitoba and Quebec companies should be able to fairly compete with each other.

"We're not afraid of competition, why is Quebec?''

This deal would normally be subject to the Agreement on Internal Trade, signed by the Federal Government and all the Provinces but the Government invoked a national security clause in order to circumvent the agreement. There may be valid reasons for this, but they should not be in order to "deliver" jobs for a specific region.

Chapter Five — Procurement

Purpose

To ensure equal access to government procurement for all Canadian suppliers — in a transparent and efficient manner — in order to reduce purchasing costs and to contribute to the development of a strong economy.

Obligations

Governments are not permitted to discriminate against suppliers of another province or territory. This includes means such as local price preferences, biased technical specifications, unfair registration requirements or unreasonable time constraints.

Governments must make opportunities known to suppliers through the use of an electronic tendering system, advertising in daily newspapers or the use of source lists. These must be accessible to all Canadian suppliers.

Equal access — in a transparent and efficient manner. Simple, straightforward and necessary. Make it happen.

Cross posted to Blue Blogging Soapbox

The Liberals and the C-130J

Flippity floppity (just like Mr O'Connor when National Defence critic and then MND):

When the House of Commons convenes in January, the standing committee on national defence will begin detailed hearings on defence-procurement policies. The hearings will provide the Liberal party an opportunity to implement its pre-election promise to help rebuild the Canadian Forces, reform the defence-procurement process and expedite long-delayed major equipment contracts.

But now that the Liberals are sitting in opposition, that promise appears to have been an exercise in optics rather than policy.

Take the case of the new medium-lift planes our Armed Forces need to replace the 32 aging Hercules that make up the present fleet. On Nov. 22, 2005, then Liberal defence minister Bill Graham and Scott Brison, then minister for public works and government services Canada, the contracting agent for defence procurement, announced their intention to acquire 16 medium-lift aircraft to replace the Hercules fleet as the first step in a wholesale rebuilding of air-force transportation capabilities. The purchase, Mr. Graham announced, was central to the government's defence policy and "absolutely essential to the mission" of the Canadian Forces. The Herc replacement plan, moreover, would be "based upon a very small number of minimum performance requirements established by our military operational experts."

The ministers denied that these requirements worked in favour of the new Lockheed Martin Hercules C130J. Mr. Graham, however, emphasized that an operationally certified aircraft must be delivered within "36 months from when we sign the contract and we are going to work trying to get an aircraft earlier than the 36 month [deadline]." These criteria effectively blocked a bid from the only other competitor on the horizon, the Airbus A400M, which at best would not be deliverable before 2010 and more likely not before 2012.

Be that as it may, the urgency of the situation demanded, said Mr. Graham and Mr. Brison, "a streamlined procurement process."..

Yet the urgency that inspired Mr. Graham and Mr. Brison to act decisively a year ago is now a distant memory. The Liberals have mounted a concerted attack on the new Hercules C130J. In 2005, Messrs. Graham and Brison pegged the total cost of the aircraft and it supporting package at "around $4- to $5-billion." But they seem to have forgotten all about that: In Question Period on Dec. 12, the Liberals professed to be scandalized because the Conservative estimate for essentially the same aircraft package is $4.9-billion.

Denis Coderre, the newly appointed Liberal defence critic [not much hope here--Babbling's expectations look spot on], has decried the C130J as an "expensive flying lemon," yet he said nothing of the kind when Mr. Graham promoted the same aircraft as defence minister...

I suppose the A400M could be described as an expensive non-flying fruit that may well turn sour.

As for Mr O'Connor in December, 2005 (even big on regional benefits):

DEFENCE POLICY: CONSERVATIVES THE NEW LIBERALS

Our politicians: plus c'est la meme chose.

Give them as much rope as they want

What's the point of having a Standing Committee on National Defence if they're not allowed to poke around where they see fit?

Yesterday, eight MPs from the Commons defence committee, all sporting helmets and flak jackets, stepped off a Hercules transport aircraft at Kandahar airfield, the main hub for Canada's 2,500 troops.

The trip, which has been in the works within the military bureaucracy for months, is budgeted to cost $156,000, according to one estimate.

But while extensive briefings have been planned for the MPs, they've been warned by senior commanders that it's not likely they'll see much of Afghanistan "outside the wire" – even though their visit comes during a period of relative calm.

Look, I can see a number of possible reasons for Gordon O'Connor's office to keep such an intensely political group confined to Kandahar Air Field while they're in Afghanistan. Politicians get in the way of operators, and tend not to listen too well when they're told what to do - even in a dangerous situation. Having a parliamentarian killed or gravely injured by an IED in Kandahar City or on the backroads of Panjwaii would impact severely on support for the mission among ordinary Canadians back home. Heck, from a purely partisan standpoint, having unserious opposition MP's sniffing around for stuff to criticize is unhelpful in a whole spectrum of ways.

But none of these reasons should be enough to keep them on base if they want to get out into the field with the troops.

The idea that personal safety concerns are driving this directive from the MND's office is pure bunk. Russ Hiebert puckered up for a photo-op at a Kandahar hospital earlier this month. Rick Mercer poured gravy over trays of steaming...'army food' is the polite term, I guess...at Christmas. Conservative MP's Lawrie Hawn, John Baird, and Jay Hill all made it outside the wire in the past couple of months - and Strong Point West is hardly an insignificant jaunt from the KAF front gates.

If the Minister wants to defang the committee, it would be far better to allow them to investigate whatever they wish and expend their energy discovering for themselves that Canada is making progress in the south of Afghanistan. If that's not the case, if we're just spinning our wheels with ineffective make-work projects or just sitting around doing nothing at the KPRT, then we'll all know it soon enough anyhow, media proclivities towards bad news being what they are. But by keeping the MP's bottled up at KAF, all the Minister is doing is giving his opponents ammunition to use against him in the forum of public opinion.

You'd think a Minister of the Crown would understand the need for parliamentary oversight in Canadian democracy a little better than this. Or, failing that, that a former general would at least have a rudimentary grip on tactics to outmanoeuvre his opponents. Unfortunately, it seems Mr. O'Connor is out of his depth in both areas on this issue.

Yes and no

The editorialists at the Globe and Mail are trying: trying to scold the government to quit playing regional pork politics with the Globemaster contract, and trying my patience with their ill-informed position on the rest of the recent aircraft acquisition projects.

First, the good:

Under the proposed $3.4-billion cargo plane contract, Boeing had pledged to buy supplies and services of equal value in Canada. Roughly 30 per cent of that spending was earmarked for Quebec. Mr. Fortier has reportedly insisted that Quebec's share of Boeing's spending should come closer to its share of the nation's aerospace industry -- 55 per cent. Foreign Minister Peter MacKay is now arguing that Boeing should provide more benefits for Atlantic Canada. Boeing, in turn, has responded that it can guarantee its price only until the end of this month. The first plane was to arrive in June. This is more like a game show than a hugely important undertaking to equip our ill-equipped military. [Babbler's bold]

The Conservative party, and especially Mr. Fortier, Mr. O'Connor, and Mr. Harper will be shown to be hypocrites of the first order if they allow this procurement to come off the rails due to petty regional politics. Don't pretend to be a friend to the Canadian soldier when it's convenient and scores you political points in the polls, and then abandon that same soldier when the time comes to eke out the next couple of points in those same polls with some good old-fashioned vote-buying. The Canadian Forces should be something more than a public relations prop to those politicians making the decisions. Good for the folks at the Globe and Mail for saying this to their audience.

Unfortunately, they miss the mark with the rest of their critique:

Equipment specifications have been so narrowly drafted that only one supplier could truly meet the needs. Ottawa is effectively sole-sourcing its purchases of helicopters, tactical aircraft, cargo planes and fixed-wing search-and-rescue aircraft. In each case, the military argued that it required equipment with a proven record. Defence officials also reasoned that they needed the equipment relatively soon to replace aging aircraft or to upgrade capabilities -- and in each case only one supplier could fill their needs.

The Globe and Mail does its readers a disservice by implying that the equipment specifications have been unfairly skewed. The reality is that the CF has hobbled along with gun-tape and pocketknife solutions for decades now. When finally given the chance to obtain what they truly need to perform the tasks we set them, they took it. Hence the Chinooks, which have no peer in the rotary-wing world. Hence the Globemasters, which also have no equal among strategic airlifters. Hence the Hercules J-models, which are clearly the best choice among a limited field of options.

If the critics have realistic alternatives to these choices, it's long past time they put them forward. But we shouldn't allow these critics to pretend that the CF had a long list of viable options, and nefariously or incompetently chose to artificially narrow them. Put up or shut up, folks.

I suspect they don't because they can't. In fact, I suspect most have embraced a "sole-sourcing is bad" general construct, and haven't dug into the details of each specific project deeply enough to determine that each is actually quite justified. That the G&M has included the FWSAR project in their list of questionable de facto sole-sourced contracts, is evidence of this intellectual laziness. DND and PWGSC haven't even decided upon performance requirements, let alone the shape of the procurement format at this point. To lump this acquisition in with the others is nothing more willful ignorance. To publish this ignorance as fact is plainly irresponsible.

When it comes to Canadian mainstream media reporting on military issues, it seems the best we can hope for is a sprinkling of good with an unhealthy dose of bad.