Conference of Defence Associations meeting, Feb. 21-22

Here's the agenda--CPAC video of the whole meeting is here and here, first and second days respectively. Following are some highlights from my notes (any errors of fact or interpretation are completely my responsibility; I'm not covering everything to keep length within reason):

Panel I – Afghanistan: the Whole of Government Approach

Moderator: Mr. Mel Cappe, President, Institute for Research on Public Policy
Panelists:

1) Mr. David Mulroney, Deputy Minister, Afghanistan Task Force [PCO now]
2) Lieutenant-General Michel Gauthier, Commander, CEFCOM
3) Mr. Stephen Wallace, Vice President CIDA, Afghanistan Task Force

Mr Mulroney: The key problem is coordinating security and development. The are problems multilaterally, within our partner's efforts, and between Canadian organizations. The Whole of Government approach is coordinated much more effectively from the Privy Council Office than Foreign Affairs.

The Afghans do want a more direct Canadian aid impact at Kandahar, especially for immediate and short-term needs. There are now 29 Canadian government civilians at Kandahar. We are looking to establish a few key metrics/targets.

Lt.-Gen. Gauthier: When the CF arrived at Kandahar in February 2006 there was only one Operation Enduring Freedom battalion [American] in the whole of Regional Command South (Day Kundi, Helmand, Kandahar, Nimroz, Uruzgan and Zabul provinces). In August that year the Taliban took on ISAF in conventional operations [and were soundly defeated - MC]. They are less and less willing to take on the CF--or the Afghan National Army (ANA) head-on. Our greatest progress has been in building and working with the ANA who are now holding terrain.

Over time the Strategic Advisory Team in Kabul should transition from military to civilian leadership, with majority civilian composition.

Our Afghan intervention is very different from previous overseas missions; we are there to win, to achieve a particular outcome. The CF are constantly seized with learning, training, and developing and altering doctrine. Civilian departments are quite different in this respect. Civilian agencies tend to recruit previously trained personnel and find it hard to carry out on-going training. They are especially weak in conducting field operations as these departments are traditionally bureaucratic. Civilians might be able to take advantage of coursed offered at the Canadian Forces College, Toronto; perhaps the faculty there might be broadened.

Mr. Stephen Wallace: There are now 50 Canadian government civilians in Kandahar and Kabul. The challenge now is to institute "quick impact" projects to have a direct, beneficial effect on the populace. Our PRT now numbers more than 300: CF, Foreign Affairs, CIDA, RCMP, CSC. The PRT has so far helped train over 600 Afghan police.

The aid program for Afghanistan is our largest ever; we are the third or fourth largest donor overall. But there is inherently tension between quick impact projects and long-term development programmes. John Hopkins University says the Kandahar hospital ranks 3rd out of 30 in Afghanistan.

Three steps in particular should be taken:

1) Pre-position emergency supplies, equipment, e.g. at Kandahar
2) Decentralize decision-making from Ottawa to Kandahar
3) Coordinate better the Whole of Government elements on the ground.

Our civilian departments need a force generation capacity, an ability to see ahead for the longer term and better training. One cannot simply rely on regular postings as in the past. Lots of good people are applying to serve in Afghanistan. More exchange of personnel is needed between civilian organizations themselves and with the CF.

Keynote Address – The Right Honourable Stephen Harper

I'll just say it was mostly the usual warm and fuzzy, UN-centric stuff with almost no mention of national interest or terrorism (the speech is here). Very conciliatory and non-partisan. It was very sober and pitched to the Canadian Weltanschauung and our prejudices. He did say:

...
And we are demonstrating to our enemies and our allies that Canada is a reliable and resolute partner in the quest for global security and the fight against terrorism...

The successful pursuit of all of Canada’s interests around the world – trade, investment, diplomatic and humanitarian – ultimately depends on security, on the willingness of some of our fellow citizens to put their own lives on the line...

You understand that countries that cannot or will not make real contributions to global security are not regarded as serious players.

They may be liked by everybody; they may be pleasantly acknowledged by everybody...

Day II

Introductory Address: The Honourable Peter MacKay, Minister of National Defence (video presentation)

Boilerplate.

Mr. Laurie Hawn, Parliamentary Secretary to the Minister of National Defence

Mr Hawn's speech is not at his website. In my view the straightest presentation of the three politicians, but that's probably just my prejudices showing. He gave three main reasons to be in Afghanistan:

1) Defending our national interest (fighting terrorism, even economic--remember the immediate fall-out from 9/11).

2) Upholding our values.

3) Keeping trust with the Afghans (and how we do that will affect the attitude of others in the future)--"The Taliban bring a new level of evil..."

Mr Hawn highlighted the UN Secretary General's recent strong defence of international actions in Afghanistan. When asked when the "Canada First Defence Strategy" would be released, he replied "soon".

Special Address: General Rick Hillier, Chief of the Defence Staff (his speech also not online; most recent one by a CDS is Nov. 30, 2004!!!)

For the first time since World War II our forces are receiving the credit, respect and appreciation from the country that they deserve. A major current focus is support for family members. As Chief of the Air Staff Lt.-Gen. Angus Watt has said "We recruit airmen and women; we retain families."

21,000 regulars have been recruited over the last three years. The CF were 61,000 three years ago; they are 66,000 now and still growing. All recruiting goals are being met, but not enough minorities are joining. Eighty percent of recruits are aged 18-29. There have been revolutionary changes in the speed of enrolling recruits.

The equipment acquisition process has undergone dramatic change--"faster is better" [though it still isn't a fast as it should be - MC]. Gen. Hillier gave his personal thanks to USAF Chief of Staff "Buzz" Mosely for his help in our getting the C-17s so rapidly and in the C-130J acquisition.

Afghanistan (earlier post here, won't go over the same ground): We have to knock the Taliban off balance to provide the security to enable development.

Things that could be done to help the CF:

*Some 25% of members can't find family doctors when they re-locate.

*Private industry could give preference to hiring CF spouses when re-located [good luck if someone complains to a human rights commission].

The CDS made a point of bringing up to the podium a non-commissioned member of each service (with a family member) to recognize examples of distinguished service. And he spoke on a speaker phone link to a ceremony at Valcartier where an Army private who had lost a foot in Afghanistan was being promoted to corporal. Gen. Hillier promised the soldier he could stay in the CF if he wished.

He said the speech was probably his last to the CDA as CDS--especially if he gets an offer to be the Maple Leaf's general manager [a joke with a message, I think].

Special Address – General Ray Henault, Chair of the Military Committee, NATO

Gen. Henault stressed he was speaking from a NATO perspective. It was he who had made the military recommendation to the government of Prime Minister Martin to deploy to Kandahar. Kosovo is NATO's other priority [and I'll bet first for many European members - MC].

Operational Mentoring and Liaison Teams (OMLTs) are SACEUR's top force generation priority; there are 27 under ISAF but more are needed. Gen. Henault was confident NATO will find the 1,000 additional troops for Kandahar that Canada is insisting on.

The counter-terrorism efforts of those forces--some 16,000--under US-led Operation Enduring Freedom are very effective at eliminating senior and mid-level Taliban commanders, and at sowing division and discord. For the years 2006 and 2007 70% of hostile events took place in 10% of the country's districts. The ANA now numbers around 50,000. They are planning and leading (with ISAF support) some operations. A very important example was at Musa Qala in Helmand. Reconstruction and development efforts began there right after the battle.

The Afghan National Police (ANP) are 18 months behind the ANA. The ANP are the key to local and municipal security. The EU police training mission is just arriving [!!!] and joining various PRTs.

NATO's strategic communications [with publics] are a major concern. A NATO strategic plan is to be considered at the early April Bucharest summit.

Panel I – The Impact on the Army and on Canada’s Reserve Forces

Moderator: Lieutenant-General (Ret’d) Michel Maisonneuve, Academic Director,
Royal Military College Saint-Jean

Panelists:
1) Chief of the Land Staff: Lieutenant-General Andrew Leslie
2) Director General Land Reserve: Brigadier-General Gary O’Brien

Lt.-Gen Leslie: The lessons learned from Afghanistan have been rapidly incorporated into training. Troops are blunt and outspoken about what they think is needed and what should be done. The Canadian Army is one of the most digitally-advanced in the world; many of the ideas to achieve this come from the ranks. The KAF command centre looks like the control centre of Navy ships. And CFB Wainwright now has the most advanced digitized training centre in the world.

Regular and reserve elements have never been closer. The reserve response has been magnificent. Civilians working at bases in Canada are doing a great and enthusiastic job. Basic training of soldiers has not much changed; it's the mission-specific training that has changed and advanced. Rifle companies now number 150 (18 reservists) compared to 100 during the Cold War.

Afghanistan is a marathon, not a sprint. Things must be done in a sustainable manner.

Brigadier-General Gary O’Brien: Afghanistan has been a catalyst for culture change among both reserves and regulars. All reserves train to the same standard as regulars during pre-deployment. Our Army is the best trained in the world.

Ten percent of effective reserves are now combat veterans--2,000 reserves have served in Afghanistan so far. The nature of reserve units is changing as a result of those veterans coming back.

The Canadian Army is in transition: "One Army, One Team, One Vision". Under new doctrine one must get out amongst the local population--which is dangerous. The tank's objective is to protect dismounted infantry and clear routes. Over the next twenty years the Army expects to do essentially what it is doing now, more or less [I expect future governments will favour the less - MC]. Training locals is an important skill. More explosive-protected vehicles are needed for both fighting and support. And the forthcoming helicopters and UAVs are certainly needed.

Panel II – The Impact on the Navy and the Air Force

Moderator: Brigadier-General (Ret’d) Don Macnamara, Past President CDAI

Panelists:
1) Chief of the Maritime Staff: Vice-Admiral Drew Robertson
2) Chief of the Air Staff: Lieutenant-General Angus Watt

Vice-Admiral Robertson: The admiral gave a Powerpoint presentation full of naval theory that amounted to an exercise in self-justification for the the service.

Lt.-Gen. Angus Watt: The main burden of Afghanistan of course falls on the Army. Nonetheless there are some 300 Air Force personnel with each rotation, with 300 more running Camp Mirage. One C-130 is stationed at KAF, with 75 flying hours per month allocated to ISAF. The crew is the best trained in ISAF [an earlier illustration of flying skills at immediately preceding link]. The Air Force would be glad to step up its contribution if the government wants or permits, i.e. Griffons, Hornets; uprated CF-18s are ready for Afghan service. Air Force personnel need basic soldiering skills for Afghanistan--they do go outside the wire. The Air Force is in a sense jealous of the combat experience so many in the Army are gaining.

Lessons: Air/land integrations needs improvement. JTACs (Forward Air Controllers) have a crucial role. We need the Chinooks and the Air Force is not trying to "gold-plate" them. If attack technology is not precise, don't show up. The best close air support platform is the B-1B with JDAMS. Overall in Afghanistan combined operations and strategic coherence are hard.

Netcentric warfare is the wave of the future--the Army in Afghanistan is a "wonder to behold". The Air Force needs to do the same. As for counterinsurgency, the Air Force has not done a good job on doctrine development and on how to be used other than as flying artillery. Professional military education in critical.

Writing a post like this reminds me of my days as a federal bureaucrat. Hope it's not too painful to read.

Fifty-fifty

I don't know how to take information like this:

Taliban militants blew up a telecom tower Friday in southern Afghanistan following a warning to phone companies to shut down the towers at night or face attack.

The militants fear U.S. and other foreign troops are using mobile phone signals to track insurgents and launch attacks against them.

A Taliban spokesman on Monday said militants would blow up towers across Afghanistan if the companies did not switch off their signals overnight.

Insurgents made good on that threat today, destroying a tower along the main highway in the Zhari district of Kandahar province, said Niaz Mohammad Serhadi, the top government official in Zhari.

Does it hurt the image of the insurgents or of the Afghan government and coalition forces more? One Kandahar businessman might curse the Taliban for making his life more difficult by interrupting the most important and widespread means of civilian mass-communication in the country. Another might blame the government and ISAF for not providing enough security to prevent such a disruption.

I guess it depends upon whose Information Operations are more effective on the issue. And if that's the case, I suspect it's theirs, not ours.

Afstan: Haroon Siddiqui is economical with the truth/MND tentative

The Toronto Star's most prominent opponent of our Afghan mission doesn't quite give the whole story:

...
NATO is not winning. As the head of U.S. National Intelligence told Congress yesterday, Kabul controls less than a third of the country...

Now I bet most Canadians would infer that means the Taliban control most of the rest. This though is what the Director actually said:

...
"The Taliban was able to control ... in the area about 10 to 11 percent [emphasis added] of the country," Mike McConnell, US Director of National Intelligence (DNI) said in testimony before the Senate's Armed Services Committee.

The US-backed Hamid Karzai government meanwhile, controls just "30, 31 percent, and then the rest of it was local control [emphasis added, tribal mainly]," McConnell told lawmakers...

And of course Mr Siddiqui plays the Bush card:

...the Conservatives have been as sure-footed as the Republicans. As advocates of war, both have had clarity of purpose [could have fooled us at The Torch].

Stephen Harper and Gen. Rick Hillier are also using the same unsavoury tactics as George W. Bush and the American commander in Afghanistan – namely, that any democratic expression of doubt about the war is tantamount to aiding and abetting the enemy...

Meanwhile the MND tells the simple truth--but in a rather tentative fashion:

There will be times after 2009 when Canadian troops will have to be engaged in combat in Afghanistan and the timing of such decisions are best left to commanders on the ground [I should hope so - MC], Defence Minister Peter MacKay said Wednesday...

...MacKay says he believes the Liberals are realistic and have come to the conclusion that there are times when fighting will be necessary.

"I think there is a general acceptance by the Liberal party, certainly an understanding on our part, that these operations decisions often do involve combat, that involve in engaging in fighting with the Taliban, when the Taliban confront them," he said at an update briefing Wednesday...

Rebadged CF mission for Darfur/Problems for hybrid UN/AU force

Just noticed this official news release:

Canadian Forces launches contribution to U.N.–African Union mission in Darfur

CEFCOM/COMFEC NR 08.008 - February 4, 2008

OTTAWA — A new Canadian Forces operation in Sudan began on January 28, 2008. Operation SATURN will support the new hybrid United Nations–African Union Mission in Darfur (UNAMID), which took over from the African Union Mission in Sudan (AMIS) on January 1, 2008. With the stand-up of Operation SATURN, the CF is phasing out its participation in AMIS, conducted under Operation AUGURAL.

“The significant and tangible contributions Canadian Forces personnel have already made in Darfur will continue in the new mission,” said Lieutenant-General Michel Gauthier, commander of Canadian Expeditionary Force Command. “The co-operative approach taken to mount the new hybrid U.N.–African Union mission in Darfur is an important development in efforts to bring peace to Sudan, and we are proud to be part of it.”

Authorized by U.N. Security Council Resolution 1769 of July 31, 2007, under Chapter VII of the United Nations Charter, UNAMID was created to support the implementation of the Darfur Peace Agreement. Comprising a large military force with formed police units and civilian support staff, once at full strength UNAMID will total about 26,000 personnel.

The Canadian contingent in UNAMID, called Task Force Darfur, is based in El Fasher and commanded by Lieutenant-Colonel Ken Moore. Its members include three staff officers who work at UNAMID’s Joint Logistics Operations Centre and Combined Integrated Support Services. Additionally, four non-commissioned soldiers will teach soldiers from Nigeria, Rwanda and Senegal to operate a fleet of Canadian armoured fighting vehicles that have been on loan since 2005 to three troop-contributing nations: Nigeria, Rwanda and Senegal. Canadian support to this loan, which began with AMIS under Operation AUGURAL, will continue with UNAMID under Operation SATURN.

But UNAMID is having a hard time deploying--the Sudanese government is doing its best to hinder things. Certainly no significant Canadian units would be agreed to by Khartoum:

...
UNAMID, which will be the world's largest U.N.-funded peacekeeping operation, received Khartoum's blessing after months of talks, threats and negotiations.

It was delayed by impossible deployment conditions initially set by Sudan and a lack of air support from donor nations.

At full strength, the mission should consist of 26,000 troops and police.

But two months since it took over, it has only 9,000 personnel -- just 2,000 more than the previous African Union force which it absorbed -- and is struggling to live up to Darfuris' high expectations that it will protect them better than its AU predecessor.

Scandinavian units were refused entry by Khartoum and a Thai battalion is ready but still waiting for permission to deploy.

"What we ask now is that any talk of non-African troops stops until after the African troops have all been deployed on the ground," Nafie told reporters in Khartoum.

"Any attempt to talk about Khartoum's obstruction to the hybrid force or any talk about a lack of ability of African troops to accomplish the task of UNAMID is an attempt to create another crisis between Sudan and the international community," he added.

He declined to say why Khartoum did not want non-African troops, but Sudanese officials have said Africa should be able to resolve its own problems and expressed suspicions about the intentions of former African colonialists sending troops into Darfur.

HMCS Charlottetown interdicts hash smugglers

First booze smugglers (Halifax Chronicle Herald story), and now drugs:

A Canadian frigate deployed in the Arabian Sea seized almost four tonnes of hashish from a Pakistani vessel last week after receiving intelligence that the small fishing boat was linked to terrorist activities.

Lt.-Cmdr. Mike Davie of HMCS Charlottetown said Wednesday that about 20 crew members boarded the Al Moula Madad on Feb. 18 following a tip that the traditional sailing vessel was tied to unnamed terrorist groups.

In an interview from the warship, Davie said the crew discovered a massive cache of the potent-smelling drug after peeling back decking and peering into hidden compartments in the vessel's fuel tanks.

"Once they started finding that stuff, they knew where to look and we eventually found quite an amount," he said from the Persian Gulf. "We had a happy crew that day, that's for sure."

Davie, the ship's executive officer, refused to reveal what terrorist groups the vessel might have been linked to or what kinds of activities they might have been engaged in.

Charlottetown was commanding eight coalition vessels and five aircraft off the coast of Pakistan as part of the ongoing anti-terrorist Operation Altair.

Davie said crew were allowed on board by some of the 11 men who were repairing fishing nets on deck, but found nothing on an initial search that took several hours.

As they began tearing up deck planks that appeared to have been laid recently, he said they discovered dozens of white bags about the size of large pillow cases stuffed in the underbelly of the boat.

They also found them in the fuel tanks, eventually uncovering 173 bags of hash that weighed about 70 kilograms each.

He said the boarding and seizure took about 17 hours to complete.

A Pakistani coast guard vessel, which had jurisdiction over the boat, apprehended the vessel and crew after the Charlottetown dumped the hash into the ocean.

The drug seizure was the largest for the coalition forces to date and the first one since a smaller operation in 2005.

Davie said crews of the fishing boats, known as dhows, have become sophisticated at hiding contraband and are being used increasingly to transport illegal goods.

"They have gotten into a very good routine and they're also very good at concealing their cargo," he said.

Charlottetown deployed to the Arabian Sea from its home port of Halifax last November to join the continuing U.S.-led campaign against terrorism, Operation Enduring Freedom.

Davie said the crew boarded another vessel in January, seizing a supply of illegal alcohol.

CF story with photos and video link is here. More on the Charlottetown's patrol here, here, and here.

CIDA to raise Kandahar profile

This should help at home and in winning Afghan good will; let's hope things are done effectively and efficiently (to the extent possible):

The government's overseas aid agency is overhauling the way it doles out development dollars in Afghanistan to make it quicker, more effective and better able to boost Canada's brand in Kandahar.

Plans are underway for a "signature" Canadian aid project in Kandahar, civilian staff in the region will be increased to 35 from 10, and officials on the ground will have more independence from slow-moving Ottawa bureaucrats to sign off on development work, said International Development Minister Bev Oda.

The agency was rapped in last month's report on the country's Afghan mission.

Former Liberal foreign minister John Manley said Canadian International Development Agency staff were cloistered behind the heavy walls of military bases and given only 15 per cent of Canada's total aid budget to respond independently to pressing needs.

Half of Canadian aid goes to multilateral agencies like the World Bank while 35 per cent goes to the Afghan government, with some of that lost to corrupt officials and institutions.

CIDA has had chronic difficulties displaying the results of Canadian tax dollars to visiting journalists and parliamentarians since officials accompanied the military south to Kandahar province.

Yet there is political pressure on the government to shift the Afghan mission toward development, reconstruction and training Afghanistan's military and police, issues that fall squarely in CIDA's court.

This week's budget earmarked an extra $100 million for the war-torn country, much of which will go to training efforts. Some of that money, and much of the other $180 million in next year's Afghanistan-bound aid, will be for more traditional development work, like digging irrigation ditches, paving roads and education.

Oda said Canada is actively searching for a "signature" aid project – an initiative recommended by Manley that can be "readily identifiable as supported by Canada."

"We are doing our due diligence currently to look at the most appropriate project, one that will make a significant difference in the lives of the Afghan people," she told reporters in a briefing yesterday.

Oda said any work must meet the standards of being effective and helping increase the capacity of local Afghans. Security takes a priority over aid, she said...

The key over the long run is for the Afghans to set their own priorities, to take charge of as much development work as possible, and to build their own "capacities"--both governmental and in civilian tasks more generally. And the work must be done throughout the country. That's why it makes sense for the great majority of our aid to go through the Afghan government and international organizations. But doing more ourselves at Kandahar specifically, with more Canadian civilian boots on the ground, also makes sense up to a point.

Noblesse oblige

I'm not blind to the many faults of our royal family, or of Harry in particular. But I must say, this story does my heart good:

Prince Harry has been serving on the front lines in Afghanistan since December, calling in air strikes and going on foot patrols, Britain's Defence Ministry confirmed Thursday.

...

A lieutenant in the Blues and Royals regiment, he has been serving as an air controller, co-ordinating pilots and forces on the ground and calling in air strikes on Taliban fighters.

...

A handful of journalists were invited to observe Harry on the battlefield under the agreement they would not report the information until the deployment had ended. The news blackout was intended to reduce the risk to the prince and his regiment.

BZ to Prince Harry for finding a way to serve with his mates that goes beyond symbolism, pomp and ceremony. And shame on those who decided their own circulation numbers or viewership ratings were of more value than his safety or those of his fellow soldiers.

Update: Well, the selfish asshats who broke this story have succeeded in getting Harry sent home. I hope there are negative repercussions for those publications. (Peaceful, but financially negative.)

Upperdate: For my money, the best line that's been written in connection with this entire incident:

As far as I'm concerned, if MoD really wanted to burn some Islamist britches and destroy enemy morale, then HMS Ark Royal should be parked in the Persian Gulf with Elizabeth, Phillip, Charles, Andrew and Edward flying daily missions from her deck. That would make a great object lesson to hand down to the next generation of terrorists. "Your father was killed by an 82-year-old infidel Zionist-Crusader queen". "And did we shoot her down?" "No, she bombed your uncle last week."

Farking brilliant.

Sales 101

I sell commercial insurance for a living. One of my cardinal rules is this: "Under-promise and over-deliver." That means if I think I might be able to get you a 10% discount on your policy this year, I don't tell you "Yeah, I can get you 10 points, easy." Because then if something goes sideways and I can't, you're automatically disappointed.

This is basic, basic stuff for a salesperson.

So why can't the Conservatives get it right?

In a letter dated June 28, 2005, Harper said: "A Conservative government would immediately extend the Veterans Independence Program services to widows of all Second World War and Korean War veterans — regardless of when the veteran passed away or how long they had been receiving the benefit prior to passing away."

Frustrated with no action by last spring, Joyce Carter brought her complaints to Ottawa, where she confronted Harper in the foyer of the House of Commons.

In a private meeting last June, Harper told Carter that the promise would be fulfilled in the next budget, which Finance Minister Jim Flaherty tabled Tuesday.

Veterans Affairs Minister Greg Thompson defended the decision, saying he never assured Carter or anyone else that the extension would cover all war widows. "It’s aimed at the people most in need, people who’ve waited 25 years in some cases for assistance," he said. "It’s a significant step."

Background documents show the new program will be restricted to low-income and disabled widows. A government official, speaking on background late Tuesday, said the extension would help about 12,000 individuals — far below the estimated 150,000 widows that Veterans Affairs bureaucrats estimated would eligible under the Conservative promise.

Don't write cheques you can't cash, folks.

Or, more accurately, since Canada remains a relatively wealthy nation, cheques you won't cash. Because it just doesn't matter to you enough.

Say it with me: RE - AL - I - TY

Mr. Dion, Mr. Duceppe, Mr. Layton take note: this is what "reconstruction" looks like in southern Afghanistan. It happens to be a Digger unit, but it could as well be one of ours.



Now, if we actually want to be engaged in development activities, we have two choices: we can either proactively go get the bad guys concurrently with the development work, or we can wait for the bad guys to attack our projects time after time. I'd say the correct answer is nothing more than common sense, but I'm not sure that would mean anything to you politicians. Instead, I want you to think of yourself in the place of one of the people doing the rebuilding work: do you want to tie one hand behind the back of the people keeping the misogynistic, torturing, fratricidal fanatics from killing you, or do you want them to have the freedom to defend you and your developing project in whatever way they believe works best?

So much for your caveats.

BZ to the Digger engineers putting their largely underappreciated tails on the line in order to help rebuild Afghanistan for Afghans. And thanks to Aussie reader FM for pointing us to the video in the first place.

What was the LAV Mulroney said he was flogging?

According to the former prime minister's website (see last document at following link) it was the private initiative Thyssen Henschel TH 495 MICV (mechanized infantry combat vehicle).

Here's one of the three pictures--towards the bottom--I can find of it; the others are here and here. As far as I can determine the vehicle never went into production. If anyone has more info, do provide it please. Since it seems never to have sold, no wonder Thyssen was pressing hard in Canada.

A knowledgeable friend of mine has commented:

It looks like a sort of Marder lite sans the firing ports (beloved of the PzGr generals who dictated MICV designs in the 60s and 70s...)

The CF clearly did not want to buy the vehicle; the Bundeswehr had no need for it. Not to stray into past politics too far, it does rather stretch credulity, for any number of reasons, that our former prime minister could have any belief that such a Canadian-manufactured vehicle could be sold to the Chinese, Russians, French or Americans--all manufacturers of their own such vehicles. Perhaps there was some so far undisclosed plan to have these UN Security Council members push for some so far undisclosed plan to have the vehicles bought on behalf of some then unformed (and not formed since) equipment park for future UN peacekeeping forces. Stranger things...

Afstan: Aussies not in combat...

Er, that's not in "proactive counter-insurgency". I wonder what M. Dion makes of these stories:

Diggers clash with Taliban in Afghanistan
...
The Defence Department says Australian soldiers have fought off a number of Taliban attacks over the past few days in southern Afghanistan...

Aussies turn big guns on Taliban
...
AUSTRALIAN troops have been forced to use some of their heaviest firepower to fight Taliban insurgents in Afghanistan during a series of recent skirmishes, the Department of Defence says...

Update: Duhh.

Combat will sometimes be part of Canada's extended Afghan mission: MacKay

Whither (whether) NATO

A long-standing question again rears its...

PARIS–A bleak recurring theme is emerging in the answers of European government insiders when pressed on the question of how far they might be willing to go to help Canada in the battle for volatile southern Afghanistan.

No matter whether you ask in French, German, Spanish or Italian, the pat response is to turn aside the question itself. And to ask a series of more difficult questions instead. Such was the case yesterday, when a senior French government source told the Star:

"The question is not `how far,' but simply `how?' – how are we going to rebuild and pacify Afghanistan? How are we going to cope with the present strategy? How are we going to win? And what do we mean by `win'?"

Though they are presented with the freedom of anonymity, the doubtful misgivings of European officials polled by the Star in recent days point to a hidden debate on whether the time has come for NATO to reconcile the international community's ambitious goals in Afghanistan with the drifting, uncertain reality of the mission on the ground.

One way or another, the issue will come to a head in early April at the NATO summit in Bucharest, where several European alliance members are hoping to persuade their counterparts on a revamped Strategic Plan for Afghanistan.

Two draft documents to that end are already circulating among NATO allies, but sources close to NATO headquarters in Brussels say it remains unclear whether the versions that reach Bucharest will entail a significant reassessment of the mission or mere window-dressing...

Some Western diplomats suggest the "Bye George Factor" stands as a deterrent to any dramatic commitments to Afghanistan by European allies. The thought process here is that European NATO partners may prefer to wait until U.S. President George W. Bush vacates the White House next January before substantially increasing their efforts.

"At a certain level that makes sense. The departure of Bush will remove some baggage from the Afghan equation," said Jean-François Daguzan, senior fellow at the Paris-based Foundation for Strategic Research. "But it doesn't remove the essential discrepancy in Afghanistan, where you have only the military foot and not the redevelopment and reconstruction foot that was supposed to be standing beside it all along.

"We understand the Canadian dilemma. But there is a strategy question here that needs to be answered."

Fifty Norwegian soldiers might end up in the south helping train the Afghans.

Update: An interesting topic thread at Milnet.ca:

Saving NATO II

And, sadly (IED):

2 Polish soldiers killed in Afghanistan

Budget 2008: Defence

Pretty thin gruel I'd say; the two percent automatic funding increase starting 2011-12 is just pie in the sky at this point (and note that one paragraph of four is about industrial benefits):

Canada First Defence Strategy [still to be officially unveiled]

In an unpredictable and volatile world, protecting Canadians and Canada is a fundamental responsibility of the Government. The foundation for building the Canadian Forces of tomorrow was laid with the $5.3-billion, five-year Canada First defence plan announced in Budget 2006. Significant progress has already been made, with several major procurement projects announced and being implemented.

Building on this foundation, the Government is developing a long-term Canada First Defence Strategy. The strategy will set long-term objectives and make a long-term commitment of support for the Canadian Forces. This is a new and innovative approach to rebuilding the military where predictable long-term funding will support the modernization and growth of the Forces. The result will be a stronger, more flexible and high-tech military for Canada.

The Canada First Defence Strategy will also strengthen Canada’s industrial and technological advantages by setting the foundations for a new relationship with industry. A stable, predictable and long-term investment program will create new, significant and long-term opportunities for communities and businesses across Canada [a current barrage of benefits here]. Canadian industry will have the opportunity to position itself as high-tech leaders, invest proactively in research, and develop technologies that can be used at home and exported to foreign markets .

This budget provides the funding stability and predictability that will allow for the successful implementation of the Canada First Defence Strategy by increasing the automatic annual increase on defence spending to 2 per cent (from the current 1.5 per cent) beginning in 2011–12. Over the next 20 years, this is expected to provide the Canadian Forces with an additional $12 billion...

Update: A post by the Ottawa Citizen's David Pugliese at his blog:

IS THE FINANCIAL TAP BEING TURNED OFF FOR THE CANADIAN FORCES?

At last: One new icebreaker for Canadian Coast Guard/Marine security

From the federal 2008 budget:

Protecting and Securing Canada’s Sovereignty

The Canadian Coast Guard’s most capable Arctic icebreaker, the CCGS Louis S. St-Laurent, is scheduled to be decommissioned in 2017. As such, the Government will replace this vessel with a new polar class icebreaker that has greater icebreaking capabilities. Budget 2008 provides $720 million for the procurement of this vessel...

Now what about CCGS TERRY FOX (built 1983), CCGS PIERRE RADISSON (built 1978), CCGS AMUNDSEN (built 1979), CCGS DES GROSEILLIERS (built 1982)? More here.

(Update: Links above no longer work, as noticed August 29, 2008--new links to CCG vessels are here.)

Some more marine news from the budget:

Marine Security—Great Lakes/St. Lawrence Seaway

The Great Lakes/St. Lawrence Seaway region is a key economic region with several international bridges and tunnels. It is a high marine security priority for both Canada and the United States. This area is also heavily travelled by both small pleasure craft and large commercial vessels.

In 2005, an interim Marine Security Operations Centre in the Great Lakes/St. Lawrence Seaway region was established. Budget 2008 provides $15 million over two years to establish a permanent facility. The operations centre will help departments and agencies work collaboratively to collect, analyze and share information on marine and transborder traffic that is important to the security of the Great Lakes/St. Lawrence Seaway region. A permanent operations centre will also allow representatives from provincial/municipal and United States law enforcement agencies to participate.

More on the current two Marine Security Operations Centres here.

CDA Afstan roundup

Latest from the Conference of Defence Associations (links given for full CPAC video coverage of the CDA's Feb. 21-22 meeting):

Afghanistan: continuing the effort

It includes this letter from Jack Granatstein to the Globe and Mail, on CDS General Hillier's speech to last week's CDA meeting, published today but only available to subscribers:

There's nothing improper about educating Canadians on defence
J.L. GRANATSTEIN
From Wednesday's Globe and Mail
February 27, 2008 at 3:27 AM EST

Defence – the very word seems to get under the skin of many Canadians. The Canadian Forces is expensive, its actions abroad sometimes involve casualties, and its military operations sometimes interfere with the Canadian perception that we are peacekeepers first and foremost. Defence is so, well, so American.

You could feel all these undertones in the article by University of Ottawa law professor Amir Attaran on this page last week, in which he attacked the Conference of Defence Associations and the Department of National Defence's Security and Defence Forum.

The Conference is an amalgam of defence organizations, most related to the reserve forces. The CDA has an advocacy and educational pro-defence role, and it now receives $100,000 a year from the Defence Department. The Security and Defence Forum is a Department of National Defence program that offers financial support to university centres that work on defence-related topics. Neither is secret, both operate publicly, and in Prof. Attaran's eyes, both do nothing but generate pro-defence propaganda.

If it was only one complaint, it might pass unnoticed, but David Pugliese, the Ottawa Citizen's defence correspondent, has published similar criticisms about the CDA, and so has Maclean's. Predictably, Steven Staples of the anti-defence Rideau Institute [more on the Institute at the immediately preceding link] has also complained that the SDF program constitutes a federally funded defence lobby in the universities. So what's going on here?

First, it needs to be said that the federal government funds many different kinds of activities. It finances scholarly research through a host of agencies (including the Social Science and Humanities Research Council that drops lavish annual funding into Prof. Attaran's pocket). It has funded the Court Challenges Program that gave funds to organizations to oppose the government in court. The Department of Foreign Affairs gives grants to non-governmental organizations, and a host of other departments fund associations and groups that lobby the government and educate the public. With the exception of the now defunct Court Challenges program, no one says a word about this. Nor should they: This is a proper use of public funds to create an educated, informed public on the issues that matter to Canadians.

Second, it also must be noted that the Conference of Defence Associations is not a tame mouthpiece for the government or the military. CDA publications have vigorously attacked government policy on many occasions, and in its educational efforts CDA has tried to push and prod policy-makers to act in ways that serve the national interest and enhance Canadian security. This is education, and there's nothing remotely improper with this.

Finally, the Security and Defence Forum is even more bulletproof. In the universities across the country where it operates, a host of professors and students have been granted funds to do research in the areas they choose. These range from climate change and conflict to international law and world religions. No one in Ottawa twists academics' arms and demands they study this topic or that one. No one orders them to spout a party line (as if academics could be made to do so). An independent peer-review process run by scholars decides which centres get – or lose – funding, and the decisions are properly based on their track record in publication and research.

DND's only reward for all this has been the creation of more experts out there who can praise – or damn –the department's work. The Defence Department's view, quite properly, has been that it is better to get informed criticism than none at all.

Why all the criticism of funding defence research or defence education then? The Canadian self-image is that we are a nation of peacekeepers, different from our more warlike American neighbours; that we have no national interests, such as other nations do, only universal values that we should propagate around the globe. It is, therefore, good for government to support NGOs with public funds since they uplift the downtrodden. But it is, by definition, wrong to fund any organization that might believe that defence is necessary to protect and advance the nation's interests at home and abroad or even that defence ought to be studied.

This is naive in the extreme. Canada has national interests to protect and advance. It has the Canadian Forces that can and should do peacekeeping when that is possible or necessary, but also must be prepared to do vigorous peacemaking when that is required – and when it serves our national interests. Learning how to define our interests and calculating how best to serve them is a proper role for scholars. So, too, is reminding Canadians that their Canadian Forces are a necessary adjunct to our government and, indeed, to all our lives.

J.L. Granatstein writes for the Canadian Defence and Foreign Affairs Institute, which gets no program funding from the Department of National Defence.

Political fingerprints

How is it that LGen Marc Dumais, Commander of Canada Command, recently signed a Civil Assistance Plan with Gen. Gene Renuart, Commander of NORAD and USNORTHCOM, and I have to learn about it at a pop-culture blog? Yes, it's the most eclectic pop-culture blog you'll ever run across, but still...

“This document is a unique, bilateral military plan to align our respective national military plans to respond quickly to the other nation's requests for military support of civil authorities,” Renuart said. “Unity of effort during bilateral support for civil support operations such as floods, forest fires, hurricanes, earthquakes and effects of a terrorist attack, in order to save lives, prevent human suffering and mitigate damage to property, is of the highest importance, and we need to be able to have forces that are flexible and adaptive to support rapid decision-making in a collaborative environment.”

“The signing of this plan is an important symbol of the already strong working relationship between Canada Command and U.S. Northern Command,” Dumais said. “Our commands were created by our respective governments to respond to the defense and security challenges of the twenty-first century, and we both realize that these and other challenges are best met through cooperation between friends.”

No mention at Canada Command.

No mention at DND.

Please tell me my instincts on this are wrong, and that our Conservative government has not caved in to the idea that reasonable cooperation with the United States on such a fundamental security issue is somehow politically unpalatable in Canada, and should be swept quietly under a rug if at all possible. Please tell me they haven't lost all pretense of a spine.

Please tell me that political fingerprints aren't all over the decision to let this announcement go completely unpublicized.

The lesson being taught is to keep one's mouth shut and let the PMO do the talking

When DND issues a press release dealing specifically with something you said to the media, you're generally sporting a new body orifice, recently chewed. May Major Moffat's next promotion rest in peace:

The views expressed to the Globe & Mail by a member of Joint Task Force Afghanistan concerning the need for a specified number of NATO soldiers were a personal opinion which do not represent the views of the Canadian Forces.

The Canadian Forces stand behind the Government's endorsement of the findings of the Independent Panel on Canada's Future Role in Afghanistan.

Never mind that a good many people, in uniform and out (Lew Mackenzie, anyone?), agree with the idea that more than 1,000 new fighting troops would be better. Never mind that a lot of "off the record" conversations will confirm that position.

But no, DND has to make an even bigger deal out of it, deepening the ongoing communications chill being felt all through the CF by slapping this poor sod's peepee in public like this.

*sigh*

A panel I'll just have to miss

Sadly, I'll be having lunch with a friend and probably end up talking tanks and suchlike things:

FORUM: AFGHANISTAN 2020
Achieving a Diplomatic End to the War
February 27, 2008
9:30–12:00
165 Sparks St, Room 2-2

Via Terry Glavin. Twelve years of jaw-jaw I guess unless the Taliban don't take over sooner. More on the Rideau Institute here.

Afstan combat switcheroo?

French to east rather than south, with some US troops from east to south (in addition to the Marine MEU, arriving in March?):

1) France to send troops into Afghan combat: Le Monde

France may send hundreds of ground troops to eastern Afghanistan where NATO-led forces are fighting al-Qaeda-backed insurgents, Le Monde newspaper reported on Tuesday.

It said the move would be part of a new Afghan policy being worked out by President Nicolas Sarkozy and his advisers.

France has about 1,900 soldiers under NATO's Afghan command, most of them based in relatively calm Kabul, and Le Monde said the fresh troops would be deployed outside the capital.

"Their destination would be zones of potentially fierce fighting, preferably the eastern region of Afghanistan close to the tribal areas of Pakistan," it said.

Early last year, France withdrew 200 special forces soldiers who had been operating under U.S. command in Afghanistan, but Le Monde said Paris was now expected to sanction the return of the special forces. About 50 remained to train Afghan commandos.

A presidential spokesman declined to confirm or deny the newspaper report. "The president has not made a decision. We are in discussion with our partners, inside NATO but not exclusively," he said.

Washington is heading a campaign for what it calls a fairer sharing of the burden in the fight against Taliban insurgents. Britain, Canada, Poland and others have backed the U.S. demand...

Earlier this month, senior Canadian officials had talks in Paris on a possible offer of French support for 2,500 Canadian troops in southern Afghanistan.

Le Monde said Mr. Sarkozy would announce France's extended military commitment at a NATO summit in Bucharest in April.

Since his election in May, he has sent more combat aircraft to Kandahar in southern Afghanistan and beefed up French efforts to train the Afghan army.

2) Military 'musical chairs' could aid Harper's Afghan plan: France expected to deploy 700 soldiers to volatile Pakistan border region

A possible plan to send French troops to eastern Afghanistan could provide Ottawa with the extra NATO support it's demanding as a condition to extend the Canadian mission in the region.

Canadian officials had been hoping that France would deploy a large number of soldiers to southern Afghanistan's Kandahar region, where 2,500 Canadian troops are already stationed...

That move could indirectly help the Canadian forces, NATO sources told CBC News.

A scenario the alliance has worked on envisions French soldiers replacing American soldiers in the east with the Americans shifting to support the Canadians in the south, the CBC's David Common reported.

"It's a game of military musical chairs," Commons said.

Sarkozy is said to still be mulling over the final decision, which will be announced when NATO heads of state meet in early April in Bucharest, Romania. France already has about 1,100 troops in Kabul.

In a NATO meeting earlier this month, French officials indicated that France could be prepared to send up to 700 soldiers to the volatile region of southern Afghanistan to help in the fight against the Taliban. Defence Minister Peter MacKay said he had received positive signals from France...

3) Why the French may want to go east--OMLTs (from the Le Monde story):

...L'option d'un déploiement français dans l'Est de l'Afghanistan aurait, selon Paris, l'avantage de faciliter la cohésion du dispositif militaire français, puisque c'est dans ces régions que sont déjà déployées quatre équipes françaises d'instructeurs militaires (Operational Mentoring Liaison Teams, OMLT), chacune comportant 50 soldats insérés dans des unités de l'armée afghane...

Dutch fighting in Uruzgan

Excerpts from a major Washington Post article; in the end the Dutch had to engage in serious combat:

TARIN KOT, Afghanistan -- Lt. Col. Wilfred Rietdijk, a 6-foot-7 blond Dutchman, took command of his military's reconstruction team in the southern Afghan district of Deh Rawood in September. Tranquil and welcoming, it seemed like the perfect place for the Netherlands' mission to help rebuild this country.

Intelligence reports indicated that the district was free of the Taliban, allowing the soldiers greater freedom of movement than elsewhere in Uruzgan province.

"We could go out on foot," Rietdijk said.

Reconstruction teams, escorted by a platoon of soldiers, fanned across the fertile countryside, building bridges over streams and canals, repairing irrigation systems, and distributing books and pens to local schools.

But the day after Rietdijk arrived in Afghanistan, his field officers reported hundreds of villagers suddenly fleeing parts of Deh Rawood. "Within a few weeks, everybody was gone," Rietdijk said. "We didn't understand why."

Now the Dutch say they realize what happened. Even as the soldiers believed they had won the support of the local population, the Taliban had secretly returned to reclaim Deh Rawood, home district of the group's revered leader, Mohammad Omar. It took only a few months for the Taliban to undermine nearly six years of intelligence work by U.S. forces and almost two years of goodwill efforts by Dutch soldiers.

In the year and a half since NATO took over southern Afghanistan from U.S. forces, its mission has changed dramatically. Dispatched to the region to maintain newly restored order and help local Afghans reconstruct their shattered communities, Dutch and other troops from the alliance now find themselves on the front lines of a renewed fight with a more cunning and aggressive Taliban.

More foreign soldiers and Afghan civilians died in Taliban-related fighting last year than in any year since U.S. and coalition forces ousted the extremist Islamic militia, which ruled most of the country, in 2001 [emphasis added]. Military officials here expect the coming year to be just as deadly, if not more so, as the Taliban becomes more adept militarily and more formidable in its deployment of suicide bombers and roadside explosives.

The Taliban's growing strength, which surprised Dutch forces here, helps explain why NATO members are reluctant to send more troops to an increasingly dangerous battlefield and have instead adopted a strategy based less on military force...

...on the advice of U.S. and Dutch intelligence officers, Hogeveen prepared a battle plan for routing the Taliban: "The intelligence guys said, 'If you go in with large forces, they will leave,' " Hogeveen recalled in an interview.

He sent larger contingents of heavily armored troops into the heart of the Taliban stronghold in northern Deh Rawood, a jumble of mud houses connected by mazes of narrow lanes.

"Everyone thought the Taliban would not fight," Hogeveen said. "The intelligence was wrong."

Taking up defensive positions in the warrens of mud compounds, the Taliban fighters didn't need large numbers to put up a strong fight against Hogeveen's men. In the darkness and chaos of the unexpectedly strong Taliban defenses, Hogeveen lost two soldiers. Two Afghan army troops also died in the fighting. The Dutch military is now investigating whether all four may have been killed by "friendly fire."

Today, after 2 1/2 months of often intense combat [emphasis added--and with some Aussie help], Dutch troops have reclaimed some of the villages of Deh Rawood and are helping villagers repair the damage caused by weeks of fighting between NATO forces and the Taliban. They have also started many new projects and are working more closely with tribal leaders, the Afghan army and local police to provide better security for the residents...

Our Leopards in Afstan

Some good information from the blog of the Ottawa Citizen's David Pugliese:

Word in from Afghanistan is that German tankers are impressed with the performance and robustness of the Leopard 2 A6Ms they lent to their Canadian counterparts [more here]. They are also impressed at the aggressive nature with which the Strathconas are employing the tanks. (As an aside, soldiers from the other armored regiments and the reserves are serving on the tanks as well and are gaining from the experience).

The Canadian armored crews love their Leopards and are driving them to the hilt. A significant number of modifications and improvements thought up by the Canadian NCOs for the Leopard 2s were taken very seriously by all parties concerned and most were adopted outright in preparation for the Afghan deployment.

The Germans are monitoring the tank situation closely since this is the first real sustained combat operation that the Leopard 2s have participated in. A Leopard 2 took part in a firefight in Kosovo….and Denmark has also reportedly [why the "reportedly"] used its Leopards in operations in Afghanistan but it’s generally recognized that Canadians are leading the way in this area.

In addition, it’s expected in the near future that Canada’s Leopard fleet in Afghanistan will continue to consist of the Canadian Leopard C2s and Leopard 2s. That’s because the mine plows and rollers in the Canadian Forces inventory are only designed to go on to hard points on the C2s (although this situation could change since modifications to the Leopard 2s are being looked at so the plows and rollers could be installed on them).

All the Leopard 2 use is, however, taking its toll. In late November, Lt.-Col. Perry Wells gave a briefing in Ottawa that outlined how the Leopards in Afghanistan were being driven up to 200 kilometres a week. I’m told that figure has now been easily surpassed. It makes sense that since the tanks are being used at a high rate not originally envisioned in the beginning of the deployment, there would be a corresponding shortage of spare parts. So the Canadian Forces is buying more used Leopard 2s to strip down for parts as was reported last week in news stories.

Military officials say this makes sense.

Indeed it does……but DND tried to pull a fast one in an attempt to hide the ongoing problems with parts. In early December, DND was claiming that there was no parts problem and that everything was just fine. “DND and PWGSC (Public Works and Government Services Canada) have established the necessary mechanisms to support the tanks in theatre,” was the official response at the time.

A little more than two months later word leaked out that more surplus tanks were being obtained so they could be stripped down for parts.

Canadian troops also training in Virginia

Looks like no-one in the Canadian media picked up this Feb. 21 AP story (via GAP at Milnet.ca):

About 300 soldiers from the Canadian Army Reserve will join troops from Virginia, New Hampshire and North Carolina on Friday for a training exercise at Fort Pickett in Blackstone.

The Virginia National Guard says the event will involve soldiers from Nova Scotia and Prince Edward Island, the New Hampshire National Guard, helicopters from the North Carolina National Guard, U.S. Navy units stationed in Norfolk and a Virginia National Guard aviation unit based in Sandston.

The exercise will simulate a peacekeeping operation in Afghanistan and will kick off with an air assault near a simulated village.

The training will be conducted in "Cherry Village." It is named in honor of Staff Sergeant Craig Cherry of Winchester, a Virginia National Guard soldier killed in action in Afghanistan in 2004.

Another story I hope the Liberals don't notice.

Afstan: Whom to believe?

The Ottawa Citizen?

Liberals to support Afghan extension
Dion applauds Tories for compromises

The Toronto Star?

Motion on Afghan mission hits snag
Liberals deliver ultimatum on ending combat operations

Our ace media at it again. In fact I think the Star's headline is more accurate--if the Liberals stick to their guns (as it were), which they likely won't given recent precedents.

The "C" word

In the Commons' debate today M. Dion said clearly that the 1,000 additional NATO troops at Kandahar the government is demanding would take over those things our troop would no longer do after February 2009, specifically "counterinsurgency" (the word he used).

...Dion made it clear Liberals have a different interpretation of the word "rotate." They want other NATO troops to take over the lead combat role, leaving Canadian soldiers to focus on reconstruction, security and training Afghan forces...

In other words (though M. Dion did not himself utter the "C" word) no combat in the usual sense of the term for the CF. I repeat:

1) What country will want to send troops to Kandahar to assume the "combat" aspects of the mission if we pull out of them? Moreover, the Manley panel said a new NATO battle group of some 1,000 troops is needed to augment the CF's battle group of the same size. The plain idea is roughly to double the combat capability in the area; M. Dion's position is directly contrary to the point of the Manley recommendation (all this with the Marine MEU aside since it's only supposed to be there seven months).

2) How will Canadian soldiers feel if they are serving alongside NATO comrades, allowed to fight properly when they are not? Bound by caveats, contrary to M. Dion's denial that the Liberal restrictions are in fact caveats?

3) How will Afghans feel about their Canadian comrades training them but not allowed to go on combat operations with them? Their morale will hardly be helped.

M. Dion also said it would be up to the Canadian military actually to determine how to conduct operations under the constraints the Liberals would place on the mission. That would put the CF leadership in a terrible, almost unresolvable, bind--coming up with ROEs that best serve the safety of our troops without being able to take the initiative against the enemy in a war zone.

In any event, why no "combat" when most of our casualties are caused by IEDs? Where's the logic? Joke.

Our political Fantasyland.

The wheels of war

First the road testing (the Canadian Army also now has Buffaloes and Cougars in Afstan):

...
A few weeks later in Charleston, S.C., I drove a hulking Buffalo at the instruction center for another MRAP [Mine Resistant Ambush Protected} manufacturer, Force Protection. A whining turbocharger signaled steady if not brisk acceleration to near the top speed of 60.

Another Force Protection MRAP, the 4-by-4 Cougar, is about 100 inches shorter than the Buffalo. Not surprisingly, when I drove the Cougar, it felt like a sports car by comparison, with quicker acceleration and a tighter turning radius. Still, with its roaring engine and climate-control system, you’d never mistake it for the smaller up-armored Humvee.

As a passenger riding in the back, I expected that the rear troop compartment in these vehicles would be cramped. But with comfortable seats mounted against the walls, each MRAP offered a fair amount of legroom, while the small windows let in ample light. Of course, had I been loaded with a gun, backpack, body armor and survival gear, my ride would have been a little different.

Now the main story:

Big Wheels for Iraq’s Mean Streets

Choosing what to print, revisited

Further to my earlier post about letters that don't make it into print...here's one that made it into the pages of the Globe & Mail so deeply abridged, it bears only a passing resemblance to the original.

This is what Vincent Rigby, Assistant Deputy Minister (Policy) at DND actually wrote:

Amir Attaran’s February 21 article (p. A17 When think tanks produce propaganda) fundamentally distorts the nature and role of DND’s Security and Defence Forum (SDF), an arm’s length organization that has been promoting academic research and debate on defence issues since 1967.

Involving 14 universities across the country, the SDF aims to foster domestic awareness of defence issues and to establish a body of Canadian expertise with an independent capability to analyze defence issues.

Academic freedom and objectivity are at the heart of the Forum’s mandate. A civilian review board of outside experts and academics is appointed by the Minister of National Defence to provide peer-review and ensure the program is managed at arm’s length. It is this board, and not DND officials, that evaluates the performance and funding of academics active at SDF centres.

The only expectation of recipients of SDF funds is to enrich the quality of debate in Canada through sound, independent research and analysis.

The SDF also funds various university conferences, projects, student scholarships and fellowships with the objective of broadening and deepening the dialogue on defence issues.

Mr. Attaran’s claims regarding the Conference of Defence Associations (CDA) are similarly misleading. The CDA is a national, non-political organization established in 1932 that educates and informs Canadians on issues related to national defence. The work of CDA has been supported for decades by successive governments. While they have traditionally been an advocacy group on defence issues, the CDA is not bound to support government policies in any way. In fact, on a number of occasions the CDA has been critical of government policy.

The annual grant to the CDA is no secret. In accordance with the principles of accountability and transparency, full disclosure of the CDA’s funding is publicly available through DND’s website.

While the CDA did receive $500,000 “last year” in funding, Mr. Attaran fails to point out that the grant is to be divided over a five-year period. The funds given to the universities cited in the article are similarly five-year figures.

Security and defence issues are among the most demanding and complex that a country can face. DND welcomes a full debate on these issues, and understands that, in academia, there are no greater values than independent inquiry and debate. Canadians can be proud that DND is helping to encourage that debate from coast to coast.

And this is what they printed:

Amir Attaran (When Think Tanks Produce Propaganda - Feb. 21) fundamentally distorts the nature and role of the Department of National Defence's Security and Defence Forum (SDF), an arm's-length organization that has been promoting academic research and debate on defence issues since 1967.

Involving 14 universities across the country, the SDF aims to foster domestic awareness of defence issues and to establish a body of Canadian expertise with an independent capability to analyze defence issues. The only obligation of recipients of SDF funds is to enrich the quality of debate in Canada through sound, independent research and analysis.

Security and defence issues are among the most demanding and complex a country can face. DND welcomes a full debate on these issues, and understands that, in academia, there are no greater values than independent inquiry and debate. Canadians can be proud that DND is helping to encourage that debate.

Attaran is given 900 words to propagate his misleading and inaccurate tripe. But a correction of the record is deemed by the Globe editors to be too verbose at 400 words?

Attaran's Globe & Mail hatchet-job was entitled "When think tanks produce propaganda." No mention of what to do when newspapers produce it.

Why I could never be a paid journalist: editors

I kinda like being the one who decides whether my thoughts get published or not, rather than depending upon the whim of an editor. Still, there are times when a letter to a publication is merited, if only to reach some of the same audience that read the original piece - in this case an editorial on mental health in the CF that missed the point.

Unfortunately, while the Ottawa Citizen called me about this one, they didn't see fit to put it in print. So this goes out to our not insubstantial Ottawa readership:

I found your editorial entitled "Invisible Injuries" somewhat disappointing, as it leaves the reader with the impression that Canadian soldiers are less likely than any other Canadian citizen to seek help for mental disorders and problems. According to the Centre for Addiction and Mental Health, this simply isn't the case: "One in five people in Canada has a mental health problem at some point in life. But only about 30 per cent seek help." This ratio is almost identical to the one-third of CF members in the quoted study who sought help for their own issues.

The stigma of admitting a mental health issue and the reluctance to seek professional treatment are neither unique to the CF, nor even worse in the CF, if these numbers are accurate. This is a societal problem, not one of military culture.

Having been personally and gravely touched by mental health issues in the CF on more than one occasion, I applaud efforts to draw attention to mental health challenges among our uniformed service members, and the systemic changes required to properly care for them. But I don't believe the average Canadian needs to be misled in order to achieve that goal.

More than one way to skin a cat, and all that.

If only there were more like Christie...

...especially at the Globe & Mail, where the irresponsibly misleading reports and headlines continue unabated. Blatchford, as always, is a must-read, today on the topic of Hillier's recent speeches and the spinning that has gone on around them.

I wonder if people like Campbell Clark have any shame at all about misinforming Canadians - like with this line:

Gen. Hillier also said that once there is a decision to extend the mission, parliamentarians should vote "overwhelmingly" to support the troops.

Did he really? Because as I understand it, he said that once a decision has been made whether or not to extend the mission, parliament should vote "overwhelmingly" to support the troops. And that's no small distinction, since Clark's version has Hillier stepping beyond his mandate into the realm of political interference.

Shame on the Globe. Although how much a concept like shame matters to them at this point, I don't know.

Tough times for US Army in one corner of Afstan

A major and gloomy article in the Sunday NY Times Magazine that should be read; one just wonders how typical this one unit's experiences are:

Battle Company Is Out There

There's a reason some people join the military

They actually want action and to achieve something:

SOLDIERING is more popular than it has been in years thanks to the Afghanistan mission, Canada's top general told a gala dinner Saturday night.

"There's a shine on the Canadian forces right now, which goes beyond all recruiting efforts, as good as they are," said Gen. Rick Hillier, chief of the defence staff. "More and more people are wanting to join and become part of this incredible family."

Hillier said the Canadian armed forces are attracting young people -- 21,000 at various stages of training in the last three years -- who are buoyed by Canada's role in Afghanistan. He said more young Canadians consider going to Afghanistan not only a "useful mission" but an "attraction."..

The general spoke passionately about the physical and mental challenges of joining the army, noting most significantly that young recruits "want to be part of something greater than themselves."..

In other words, they want to fight with the Canadian Forces.

Afstan: Some clear and honest thinking

I could not agree more:

A member of the Manley panel on Canada's role in Afghanistan says the government's proposed 2011 deadline for a military withdrawal is arbitrary and should not necessarily be binding.

Former TV journalist Pamela Wallin says the overall goal has to be a stable Afghanistan, and abandoning the country before that happens wouldn't make sense.

"I don't think any of us think that some arbitrary date is really going to be it," she said Friday.

"It's a process of getting to that stage where the Afghans will be in the lead. That's what they want, and that's what we want, and whether it's Tuesday or Thursday doesn't matter - we just need to get to that goal, which is everybody's goal."..

...Prime Minister Stephen Harper agreed with the Liberals on Thursday to set a firm 2011 end date on the mission in the troubled Kandahar region of southern Afghanistan. That was a significant concession for Harper.

He introduced a revised motion on extending the mission beyond next February and also adopted the Liberal demand that the mission focus on training and reconstruction.

The motion adds that the extension is conditional on the Canadian Forces getting helicopters and unmanned surveillance aircraft and on NATO finding a battle group of about 1,000 troops to "rotate" into Kandahar by next February. Those were two of the conditions Manley laid out in his report.

Even if the motion is adopted by Parliament, it is not entirely binding. A change of government or a future parliament could set another timeframe for the mission...

Prime Minister Stephen Harper agreed with the Liberals on Thursday to set a firm 2011 end date on the mission in the troubled Kandahar region of southern Afghanistan. That was a significant concession for Harper.

He introduced a revised motion on extending the mission beyond next February and also adopted the Liberal demand that the mission focus on training and reconstruction.

The motion adds that the extension is conditional on the Canadian Forces getting helicopters and unmanned surveillance aircraft and on NATO finding a battle group of about 1,000 troops to "rotate" into Kandahar by next February. Those were two of the conditions Manley laid out in his report.

Even if the motion is adopted by Parliament, it is not entirely binding. A change of government or a future parliament could set another timeframe for the mission...

As for our politicians:

Confound their politics,
Frustrate their knavish tricks

Brits increasing fighting strength in Afstan

They certainly are taking things seriously:

THE elite infantry unit made famous by the television series Sharpe, which starred Sean Bean, is to be deployed to fight the Taliban on the front line in Afghanistan.

Military commanders say that the battalion, 1 Rifles, consisting of 450 crack troops and support, will be deployed alongside 3 Commando Brigade of the Royal Marines in September.

The move, to be announced by Des Browne, the defence secretary, this summer, will mean that there will be more than 8,000 troops in Afghanistan [emphasis added] - a significant upgrading of Britain’s fighting capability.

It heralds a tacit recognition by ministers and military chiefs that the situation in the province of Helmand is precarious and may deteriorate further if Britain’s presence is not reinforced.

Senior officers say the Rifles will fight alongside two other battalions of Royal Marines, which will take on the Taliban in Helmand this autumn.

The command of the Rifles is set to be transferred from the army to the navy in five weeks’ time. The move has led some in the military to suggest that the Ministry of Defence (MoD) is trying to beef up the marines on the cheap.

However, supporters of the Rifles believe the decision to deploy them will signal to the Taliban that British forces will not flinch in their determination to press them back high into the mountains.

Troop numbers increased last year by 1,400 to 7,000. In a recent statement to parliament Browne said that overall force levels in Afghanistan would remain “broadly unchanged” for the next few months.

However, the number of frontline fighting units is expected to increase substantially when Browne formally confirms the deployment of the Rifles and other fighting units in July.

The Rifles are a historic regiment which fought in the Napoleonic wars and at the battle of Balaclava. They became part of the Royal Green Jackets in 1966 but were reformed last year. Their exploits were dramatised in the ITV series Sharpe, in which Bean played the role of Richard Sharpe, a fictional British soldier in the Napoleonic wars...

Meanwhile the CF are helping Kandaharis to play...

...a beautiful game:

KANDAHAR CITY, Afghanistan - Violence, poverty and myriad forms of serious crime plague this city, among the world's most dangerous, but there is one means of escape that doesn't involve AK-47s or drugs: the beautiful game.

Soccer is resurgent in Kandahar, thanks to an assist from Canadian soldiers and philanthropists back home.

Soccer balls-5,000 of them, paid for in Canada and shipped here recently from Pakistan - are kicking around everywhere, and putting smiles on faces too often plastered with grief...

People here never quit the game, but for years they played under difficult, if not impossible, circumstances. Secretly, sometimes.

Equipment was scarce; so were playing fields. But the biggest problem was politics and a perverse take on religion. When the Taliban ruled Afghanistan, its theocratic leadership issued directives from an armed camp in Kandahar. Preposterous rules were applied to many activities, including the game. Girls were forbidden to play. Males also faced severe restrictions.

They were not to wear pants hemmed above their knees. Players in violation of this dress code were subject to arrest and humiliation by Taliban agents. A visiting squad from Pakistan once violated the knee ban: The players' heads were shaved clean.

Unbridled expressions of joy on the pitch - after, say, a pretty goal - were frowned upon. Play was confined to certain areas. And kicking a ball after four p.m., anywhere, was expressly forbidden...

But trust a Canadian reporter to play up the dark side:

None of his players look back on those days with fondness or nostalgia, says Breshna's gregarious coach, Aman Kamran. But the general situation in today's Kandahar may be even worse.

Unemployment, a lack of security and basic services, and rising discontent all spell gloom.

It's a sad thing, he says, when his players "have kind of accepted this way of life. It's been going on for 30 years. It's not a new phenomenon."

A native of Kandahar, Kamran worked for years in New York and became an American citizen. He returned to Kandahar a few years ago, expecting to build a thriving business and something like a normal life. That hasn't happened...

There is a bright note buried in the final sentence:

Kamran blew his whistle. His players formed a cluster. Time for knee bends and more stretching. "Look at their faces," says Kamran. "You see? They are smiling. But underneath I know there are frustrations."
They aren't world-beaters, but Kamran says the players inspire him.

"They have hard lives. Just getting out to practice can be dangerous.

But, they're here. It says something about the guts of these people.

They still have spirit. And they won't surrender to terrorism [emphasis added]."

How many troops are needed at Kandahar? The Globe keeps spinning

Globe and Mail headline:

Canada urged to double troop strength

In absence of NATO reinforcements, Canadian commander seeks brigade of 5,000 to keep Taliban at bay in Kandahar province

In fact, as I read his remarks, the Canadian major did not "urge" a doubling of Canadian troop strength (which he would well know is both a practical and political impossibility):

...
He listed five Kandahar districts and suggested Canada needs to double its current troop strength of 2,500 to keep the Taliban away from those important areas.

"Easily you could have a brigade of 5,000 Canadians here just for Zhari, Panjwai, Arghandab, Shah Wali Kot and Khakrez, because to be honest, we haven't been to a few places in Panjwai yet," he said...

He did not suggest a need to double Canadian numbers. Rather he simply said a force of 5,000 Canadians would be nice to have. That's something very different, but the Globe just loves its sensationalist spin that undermines our mission. And the story actually begins:

Canada needs as many as 5,000 professional NATO soldiers [including the Canadians one assumes]...

Not Canadians, NATO total. That 2,200-strong Marine Expeditionary Unit would seem to go a long way towards meeting the need during the seventh months they are scheduled to be in the south. I wonder why the reporter never mentions them.

Here's an interesting comment thread at Milnet.ca.