Sometimes you just have to smile

Found on Windsor's AM800 website:

MILITARY TRAINING 2009-02-28 17:34:48
Boblo Island is the training site for the Windsor Regiment this weekend. 15 soldiers are carrying unleaded weapons. The training ends Sunday afternoon.

Another point of view

The Kingston Whig-Standard has been publishing Ian Elliot's perspectives on our shared Afghanistan trip in bits and pieces, much more spread out than for the rest of us on the trip. His piece on Correction Canada's Kevin Cluett can be found here, echoing some of the sentiments I wrote about here, but filling in some different details as well.

Midshore patrol vessels for Canadian Coast Guard: some movement on project

Returning from the drawing board, er, CAD terminal (one hopes):

Midshore coast guard patrol vessels back on Ottawa radar

The Conservatives’ on-again, off-again plan to build new midshore patrol vessels for the coast guard appears to be on again.

The federal government quietly scuttled a plan last summer to build 12 midshore patrol vessels for the coast guard. Bids had been received for that program, but in August, Public Works said they exceeded the anticipated $340 million allocated to the project.

Ottawa issued a notice this week indicating it intends to put the project for "up to 12" midshore patrol vessels back out to tender.

"These vessels, which are to be used for marine security and conservation and protection, are to be capable of sustained operations out to 120 nautical miles (220 kilometres) offshore," says the notice published Thursday.

After the initial project ran aground, a source told The Chronicle Herald the coast guard was considering buying 10 midshore patrol vessels, instead of the dozen originally planned, to reduce costs [much more here on the project].

The source said the government was also looking at changing the specifications for the ships’ propulsion systems as a cost-cutting measure.

The coast guard had asked that the ships be able to operate at their peak speed at 90 per cent power when they are new. Changing that to 100 per cent would mean the vessels would be cheaper to build. But they would also get heavier when more equipment is inevitably added, said the source. Without the extra power in reserve, that means the vessels would slow as they age.

Three companies, including Irving Shipbuilding, were interested in building the vessels.

Eight of the coast guard patrol vessels were announced in the federal 2006 budget and four were part of the 2007 budget. They were to be up to 43 metres in length and travel at speeds up to 46 kilometres an hour.

The notice published this week indicates the ships are to be 37 to 43 metres long.

At least no-one in Canada builds big hovercraft:

Largest export hovercraft on trials

The latest addition to the Canadian Coast Guard’s hovercraft fleet is undergoing trials off the Isle of Wight. Mamilossa, Abenakis Indian for ‘he who goes from water to the land’, was built at St Helens on the Island by hovercraft manufacturer Hoverwork Limited and will be the largest hovercraft ever exported from the UK.

Mamilossa is seen during trials off the Isle of Wight.

The aluminium hull, 75 ton Mamilossa will be based in the St Lawrence Estuary, where it will be utilised for the deployment of buoys and ice breaking duties.

The vessel is fitted with a Palfinger 650002 marine hydraulic knuckle boom crane with a 12m outreach for lifting buoys up to 5.6 tons.

Power is supplied by four Caterpillar C32 twelve cylinder marine diesels, each producing 1,125hp. The engines are electronically controlled and meet Tier 2 emission standards. They will take the craft to a top speed of 45 knots, or 40 knots fully loaded, with a range of 660 nautical miles.

The Canadian Coast Guard has been a faithful customer to the Isle of Wight Hovercraft Industry since the 1960s, when it took delivery of its first five ton SRN5 manufactured by Saunders Roe at Cowes. This latest order will be the seventh designed and built at Hoverwork for the Canadians.

Canadian Coast Guard project manager Frank Jess said, ‘It has been a pleasure working alongside the Hoverwork Ltd management team and staff during the construction of the hovercraft. I am confident that the craft will be a valuable asset to the Canadian Coast Guard.’..

More:

...the new, 28.5-metre machine will become the flagship of a fleet of four Coast Guard hovercraft stationed on the Atlantic and Pacific coasts...

[Ron Miller, the Coast Guard's Ottawa- based director of operational support] said the air-cushion vessel will be used to: break up harbour ice, clear outlets along the St. Lawrence River in spring to prevent flooding, deploy buoys and other navigation aids in summer, and provide support for search-and- rescue and security operations throughout Atlantic Canada.

The Mamilossa is slightly larger than its east-coast sister, CCGS Sipu Muin, and the CCGS Siyay, stationed in B.C.

The new vessel will replace the 22-year-old hovercraft CCGS Waban-Aki, which Miller said is scheduled to carry out icebreaking duties this month along the St. Lawrence but is nearing the end of its useful life...

Later-upping

The CF want their people back:

Forces want to hire a few good retirees
Defence chief promises to fast-track re-enrolment in drive to pump up dwindling military ranks

The Canadian military wants to lure recent retirees back into uniform to stop the retreat from its ranks.

Gen. Walter Natynczyk, the chief of defence staff, said yesterday soldiers, airmen and sailors who have taken early leave from the Forces will be allowed to have their old jobs back if they're having second thoughts about their new careers.

The new policy aims to get members who have been out of the Forces for five years or less re-enrolled within 30 days, expediting a process that usually takes between six months and one year.

"Industry is hiring my early retirees because of the great leaders that they are. What I have to say to them is that if their new careers don't work out for them, I would be pleased to welcome them back into the force as long as they remain fit," Natynczyk said in a speech to an Ottawa defence conference [Feb. 27 here].

"If they want back in within five years, we'll expedite their re-enrolment. I want them back in serving within 30 days."

The move is an attempt to stop the high rate of departure from the military at a time when the Conservative government wants to boost overall numbers. Attrition from early retirement or for other reasons jumped to 9 per cent from 6.5 per cent last year, the Department of National Defence announced last month. Overall personnel growth in the military last year was just 628.

Natynczyk later told reporters his pitch to recent retirees is the expansion of an offer the air force has been making for several years to pilots and technicians who leave the force to work for private airlines and then consider coming back when the industry falls on hard times [more on the Air Force efforts here].

"The air force has been doing this on an active basis because every one of those pilots represents millions of dollars in terms of experience and skill sets and so on, so we want to get them back," Natynczyk said. "The current effort is to expand that across the board."

He added in his speech that the Canadian Forces must also do a better job of making the military life easier for families, citing the grievances of spouses and children concerning health care, education and employment as among the top reasons for personnel opting for early retirement.

"We've got to make sure that we address our family issues because it's also part of retention," he said. "I am dedicated to addressing these shortcomings with all of the leadership of the (Canadian Forces)."

The real numbers/experience problem stems from minimal recruiting in the early-mid 90s. So when people who enlisted 20 years ago (1989) retire, there are very few people who joined after them to take their places. There's about a five/six year hole, as it were, in personnel numbers, affecting in particular senior non-commissioned members (sergeants and warrants are most especially the heart of the Army).

Afstan: Quebec City mayor has the right idea

Good words for most of the next roto; pity none of the federal Conservatives speak so clearly:

Off to fight the 'barbarian' Taliban
'Know that you are our brave,' Quebec mayor tells troops going to Afghanistan

Soldiers leaving on a six-month deployment to Afghanistan walk in single file after a ceremony at CFB Valcartier, north of Quebec City, on Friday. The troops will begin deploying to Kandahar in mid-March and will completely take over from the current rotation by the beginning of May. (CLEMENT ALLARD / CP)

QUEBEC — Canadian troops in Afghanistan are waging a noble war against the "barbarian" Taliban, Quebec City Mayor Regis Labeaume said Friday during a stop in Valcartier where he met a group of soldiers preparing to deploy.

The war in Afghanistan is an unpopular mission among many in the province.

However, during a ceremony to mark the departure of some 2,000 soldiers from the base near Quebec City, Labeaume affirmed his support for Canada’s military intervention.

He urged the soldiers and their families to ignore the pacifist discourse and all those who oppose the mission.

"Ignore those armchair babblers, safe in their living rooms in a secure Quebec, with their anti-military quibbling and ideas about Canadian politics and the role of the military," he said.

"Know that you are our brave."

As part of the UN-sanctioned mission, he said Canadian troops in Afghanistan are engaged in a crusade against barbarism.

"You will fight barbarians, barbarians who close schools, barbarians who destroy books, barbarians who destroy heritage, barbarians who degrade women," he said.

"In Afghanistan, according to the Taliban, women are no more important than goats. . . . By my standards, that’s barbaric."

He said it’s up to the Valcartier troops to "fight that barbarism in a country where children don’t have the right to dream."

The troops will begin deploying to Kandahar mid-March and will completely take over from the current rotation by the beginning of May.

While the six to nine month tour will be a first for some, for others it will be familiar terrain. Military officials say this will be the third rotation for about 70 soldiers...

Crying "Bear!"

The Conservative government really is getting too silly:

'We will defend our airspace': Harper warns Russia
Two Russian bombers were intercepted near Arctic
...
In Saskatoon, Harper said Canada would continue to fulfil its obligations to defend North America's continental airspace.

"We will respond every time the Russians make any kind of intrusion on the sovereignty of Canada's Arctic [see below--no sovereignty intrusion]," he said. "That's our obligation and that's what we'll do."

The incident was disclosed Friday morning at a joint news conference on Parliament Hill with MacKay, Gen. Walt Natynczyk, the chief of the defence staff, and U.S. Gen. Gene Renuart, the commander of Norad.

Natynczyk said the incursions started about one and a half to two years ago "when we had not seen anything for decades."

He declined to say how often they occur or where exactly this particular incident took place.

"It's sporadic. That's the best way I can describe it," he said...

So such intercepts have been going on for a while--see here and here. So why is the Canadian government now going so bananas, with the PM and MND spouting off? Perhaps part of their perfervid effort to pose, for political gain, as defenders of our--non-threatened--"Arctic sovereignty'? Certain Arctic waters are in dispute, though I can't see the TU-95s' relevance to those issues. Once again, this government is jingoistically and shamelessly trying to take advantage of our public's and media's ignorance of the details.

More:

Russian bombers intercepted on eve of Obama visit
CF-18s turned back planes as they approached Canadian airspace

Four Canadian and U.S. fighter jets were scrambled to meet a pair of Russian bomber planes found flying on the edge of Canada's Arctic airspace hours before President Barack Obama arrived in Ottawa for his first foreign visit, Canada's defence minister said.

Peter MacKay wouldn't say whether he thought the Feb. 18 flight of two TU-95 Bears, long-range Russian bombers, was designed to create mischief for a Canadian security system that was already stressed by the presidential visit. But he said the response of Canadian pilots operating under the command of NORAD sent a clear message to Moscow.

"I'm not going to stand here and accuse the Russians of deliberately doing this during the presidential visit, but it was a strong coincidence which we met with the presence ... of F-18 fighter planes and world-class pilots that know their business and send a strong signal that they should back off and stay out of our airspace," he told reporters.

MacKay initially said there was a single Russian bomber but a NORAD spokesman and the minister's officer later said there were two.

Prime Minister Stephen Harper said in Saskatoon that the incident was a real cause for concern that will not intimidate Canada.

"This government has responded every time the Russians have done that. We will continue to respond. We will defend our airspace."

The Russian planes broke no international laws [emphasis added] when they encroached on the 200-mile Canadian perimeter, 190 kilometres northeast of Tuktoyaktuk, but experts say it was a clear attempt to test defence systems in the disputed Arctic territories.

"Russia has become more active than in the past," said Ray Henault, formerly Canada's chief of defence staff.

Henault, who served as chairman of NATO's military council until last year, said the bomber flights are a "legitimate activity" [emphasis added] that have nonetheless complicated relations with other Arctic nations in recent years.

"To call it a threat is probably a little bit stronger than I would call it."

If the Arctic equation helps answer why Russia would be increasing its activity in the high North, the question of why Canada chose today to draw attention to a fairly common occurrence is less clear...

See above for motive. Pitiful. A CP video report here.

Update: Bear growls back:

This undated file photo provided by the U.S. air force shows a Canadian CF-18 escorting a Russian TU-95 Bear heavy bomber away from Canadian airspace, according to U.S. military. (U.S. air force / CP)

OTTAWA — Moscow and Ottawa are engaged in a war of words after Defence Minister Peter MacKay announced Friday that Canadian and U.S. fighter jets intercepted a Russian bomber and signalled it to "turn tail" over the high Arctic on the eve of American President Barack Obama’s visit.

MacKay suggested the timing of the incident was suspect, but the Russians called the flight routine and indicated they were baffled by the fuss.

The announcement Friday morning of the Feb. 18 encounter raised questions about why MacKay chose to highlight it. Norad said there have been about 20 such aerial contacts between Russian and American or Canadian planes since 2007.

The Russian Defence Ministry was categoric.

Russian planes have not approached Canada’s borders and Canadian authorities were informed about the flight, it said. A spokesman called MacKay’s statements "nothing but a farce."

No Russian aircraft actually entered Canadian airspace, but MacKay suggested the timing of the incident was worthy of note...

Russian air force spokesman, Lt.-Col. Vladimir Drik said the flight had been planned in advance and was part of routine patrols. His statement carried by the state-owned RIA Novosti news agency said the crew acted according to international agreements and did not violate Canadian air space.

The Russian Defence Ministry also issued a statement in response to MacKay’s claims.

"During the flight, Russian bombers strictly followed international flight regulations and excluded the very possibility of violating Canadian air space," Russian Defence Ministry spokesman Alexander Drobyshevsky said. "Border countries have been notified about the flights."..

Upperdate: As far as I can see the story, which got huge play here thanks to the government's pushing it (and our gullible media?), was treated very lightly by the US media. Guess they weren't too bothered by a routine incident--even with the Obama card played.

Government: Afghan mission incremental costs $11.3 billion

Lower than some have suggested:

Canadians can expect a $11.3-billion pricetag once the government wraps up its decade-long effort in Afghanistan, the Department of National Defence says.

In a newly released accounting, the federal government said that DND estimates a 10-year pricetag of $9-billion while other departments including the international development agency, foreign affairs and veteran's affairs will be on the hook for $2.3-billion.

The estimated costs do not include the costs of disability and healthcare for veterans once the mission is finished, something that parliamentary budget officer Kevin Page factored in when he calculated total costs in 2011 at $18.1-billion [No! That was an upper limit].

Page's report, released in the final days of last fall's federal election, suggested up to 7,000 Canadian soldiers who have passed through the war torn country could make disability or healthcare claims.

This is the first time that the federal government has released a total estimated cost of the Afghan effort, which Canada has been engaged in since 2001.

The Tories had previously pegged costs at about $8-billion.

The new information from DND was tied to the release yesterday of estimated spending for 2009-10, in which total spending on Afghanistan is projected to run to $1.9-billion.

The estimates point to a new civilian push in Afghanistan, but also more controversy around the execution of the mission. There is an extra $4.1-million to put 50 Royal Canadian Mounted Police officers in Kandahar in the coming year to help train the country's rag-tag police forces [a Good Thing, no?]...

Just for comparison, DND's 2008-2009 expenditures have been put at $18,293,756. Not that an expensive mission for the government as a whole, over ten years, in my view.

Pakistan: Civilian politics in real trouble

Further to this post, one wonders how long the new, elected, civilian government may survive:

Pakistan court bans Nawaz Sharif from elective office
The decision on the former prime minister, perhaps the most popular politician in the nation, is likely to set off further turmoil.

Codifying lessons already learned

I haven't yet seen the new CF counterinsurgency manual, but from what LGen Andrew Leslie said in this interview, I think one aspect of the news should be clarified:

"The key point is that the military is but one component of a variety of complex mechanisms that try to seek security solutions and it doesn't necessarily focus on Afghanistan."

The manual, Leslie said, tells soldiers that such problems cannot be solved solely through military intervention.

"What the manual says is that there has been no recorded case in history, that our researchers and myself are aware of, in successfully defeating a counter-insurgency which has been predicated solely on the military solving the problem," Leslie said.

"The key point is that it's a blend of political, diplomatic, economic, societal activities that all lead to successful conclusion."

Those aren't new lessons to either the CF or the Canadian government. The "whole of government" approach that you hear about whenever a government official talks about our work in Afghanistan is a reflection of that approach, as was the less integrated "3D" approach before it.

I can tell you that the senior leadership in Afghanistan already understands their part in all of this. I've mentioned it before, but Col Jamie Cade, the DCO of our Task Force Afghanistan said quite clearly to me at KAF: "NATO forces are her for two things: to buy time for the Afghan people, and to build capacity." So that perspective on the military's role in defeating the Pashtun insurgency is already well established.

I'll know more once I've had a chance to read the source document myself, but I suspect it simply lays out in a structured and official way lessons that have already been learned and implemented on the ground. This isn't a new direction, it's the official endorsement of a strategy already in place.

AfPak: Some of the UK's enemies

One wonders if there is any parallel for the CF:

Exclusive: Army is fighting British jihadists in Afghanistan
Top Army officers reveal surge in attacks by radicalised Britons

British soldiers are engaged in "a surreal mini civil war" with growing numbers of home-grown jihadists who have travelled to Afghanistan to support the Taliban, senior Army officers have told The Independent.

Interceptions of Taliban communications have shown that British jihadists – some "speaking with West Midlands accents" – are active in Helmand and other parts of southern Afghanistan, according to briefing papers prepared by an official security agency.

The document states that the numbers of young British Muslims, "seemingly committed jihadists", travelling abroad to commit extremist violence has been rising, with Pakistan and Somalia the most frequent destinations.

MI5 has estimated that up to 4,000 British Muslims had travelled to Pakistan and, before the fall of the Taliban, to Afghanistan for military training. The main concern until now has been about the parts some of them had played in terrorist plots in the UK. Now there are signs that they are mounting missions against British and Western targets abroad. "We are now involved in a kind of surreal mini-British civil war a few thousand miles away," said one Army officer.

Somalia is also becoming a destination for British Muslims of Somali extraction who have started fighting alongside al-Qa'ida-backed Islamist forces. A 21-year-old Briton of Somali extraction, who had been brought up in Ealing, west London, recently blew himself up in the town of Baidoa, killing 20 people. The head of MI5, Jonathan Evans, has raised the worrying issue of British citizens being indoctrinated in Somalia, and Michael Hayden, the outgoing head of the CIA, warned that the conflict in the Horn of Africa [latest here] had "catalysed" expatriate Somalis in the West...

Another sort of participation in Somalia, by a Canadian:

Canadian approved as prime minister of Somalia

Predate: This had skipped my mind:

...his defence was that he wanted to aid and someday join Muslim insurgents fighting Canadian and other NATO troops in Afghanistan...

JSS delay fall-out--Note: see Update thought

The consequences of the government's putting the Joint Support Ship acquisition on hold:

Canada's navy may soon be left with one supply ship -- for East, West coasts

Defence planners are scrambling to figure out how the Canadian navy will be able to operate on the East and West coasts next year when it is left with only one ship capable of providing fuel and supplies for the service's frigates and destroyers.

Among the proposals being looked at is an arrangement with an allied nation to have one of their vessels resupply Canadian warships at sea. In addition, planners at Ottawa headquarters might decide to limit the types of operations the frigates and destroyers can conduct, making sure the vessels stay close to port.

The navy finds itself in the predicament because one of its two supply ships, HMCS Preserver on the East Coast, will be out of commission starting in March 2010. The 40-year-old ship will be upgraded so it can continue operating until at least 2015. Preserver will be out of commission until January 2011.

That only leaves HMCS Protecteur, the navy's other supply ship, based in B.C., to handle duties for the fleets on both the East and West Coasts.

The supply ships are especially critical to the navy's ability to take part in international missions or long-range patrols.

The supply ships are used to transfer fuel, food, ammunition and other stores to warships while at sea, allowing those vessels to operate for longer periods without returning to port for supplies and maintenance. The ships also provide medical and dental services to crews of other navy vessels.

The ships were to have been replaced in 2012 by new vessels to be acquired under the Joint Support Ship program. But that $2.9-billion project ran aground last year when shipbuilders told the federal government they couldn't meet the requirements set out for the new vessels.

The three joint support ships would not only do the job of Protecteur and Preserver, but they would also be given added roles of hauling army vehicles, a hospital, and a command centre that could be used to direct ground forces during an international mission.

Navy officers and defence analysts had been hoping that January's federal budget would have contained up to $500 million in extra funding for the Joint Support Ship program so the project could be completed.

In addition, Defence Minister Peter MacKay suggested in December that the budget stimulus package would deal with the navy's shipbuilding needs. There was no extra money for the Joint Support Ship project and the stimulus package did not address the navy's shipbuilding programs...

Update thought: Stupid me. No "consequences". The immediate Preserver/Protecteur situation has nothing to do with the JSS project delay since any new ships will be quite a few years down the road(s). Moreover the 2012 date for replacement mentioned in the story was from a June 2006 government announcement--"with delivery of the first ship targeted [emphasis added] for 2012" [i.e. not actual in-service replacement of the two "Ps"]. Not a realistic date when that announcement was made and certainly completely unrealistic by August 2008 when the project deferral was decided.

US air strikes in Afstan/Pak goverment swatted

My key excerpt from a NY Times story:

To support ground troops in Afghanistan, the United States flew more than 19,000 combat missions in the country in 2008 [almost 14,000 Jan.-Sept.] — more than ever before, surpassing even the number in Iraq over the same period. But over all, American pilots dropped slightly fewer bombs and other munitions, perhaps as a result of more restrictive rules imposed in September after an uproar about civilian casualties [2008 figures here].

Also interesting:

The Navy says the pilots on the Roosevelt fly about 30 percent of combat missions over Afghanistan; the majority of the flights are handled by the Air Force from bases in Afghanistan and elsewhere in the region. The Navy was called in last summer when attacks on American and NATO supply lines were on the rise and military commanders decided they needed to get the trucks off the roads and use more air transport.

The pilots fly many other missions for reconnaissance, using sensors to take pictures from the air of, for example, how many Taliban fighters are on the other side of a wall, or how many might be ahead of a NATO convoy. The pictures go directly to the laptops of troops on the ground. “So if there are three warm bodies in that compound, we will know that there are three warm bodies in that compound,” Commander Luchtman said.

Meanwhile, across the border:

Pakistan's extremist triumph
The government has caved in to the Taliban in the Swat Valley to avert more violence.

Confusion hangs over Pakistan's pact with Taliban
Terms of the controversial deal remain sketchy as Pakistani officials push for more U.S. military assistance. Critics say the agreement could give brutal militants new safe havens.

And from Celestial Junk:

Hope and Change in SWAT

Plus what might have been between India and Pakistan--an agreement missed (by Steve Coll of Ghost Wars):

A Reporter at Large, “The Back Channel”

Update: Note Terry Glavin's contrarian (surprised?) comment.

Upperdate: More from Mr Glavin (via a later comment):

"He will kill us. He will throw acid on our face. He can do anything."

CF counterinsurgency manual finally released

About a year and half late, it would seem--after some 'malicious, gutter, yellow "journalism"' from the Globe and Mail in an effort to stir up controversy (I'm not saying that caused the delay). And now the National Post (!?!) prints a headline that itself seems aimed at undermining the Afghan mission:

Afghanistan victory unlikely, says DND manual

The Department of National Defence has released a counter-insurgency manual that manages expectations for victory, urges troops to understand their adversaries' grievances and pushes for political and social solutions in concert with military force.

The guide, obtained by the National Post, was signed by Chief of the Land Staff, Lieutenant General Andrew Leslie, and formally went out yesterday by e-mail and hard copy.

The 241-page document arrives as the Islamist Taliban forces are making further gains against NATO and Canadian troops in Afghanistan, the latter of whom are scheduled to withdraw in 2011.

"It is unlikely that the conflict will be suddenly ended with a major military victory against the insurgents, who will rarely offer the opportunity for decisive military engagement and are typically organized into small clandestine cells," the document says.

This should not be construed as the language of defeat [emphasis added--but that headline sure can be so construed], cautioned Bruce Hoffman, a leading expert in counterinsurgency who teaches at Georgetown University. He said it is a way of mitigating expectations, which is typical of these manuals.

"This is not pre-emptive, but it is timely," he said. "You have to commend the department for their foresight."..

Insiders say the book has been in the works for two years [a lot longer than that, the draft was developed in 2005--see first link in this post; what lousy reporting].

A compendium of modern military thinking informed by colonial misadventures and successes, the manual calls for a co-ordinated attack by both political and military forces. "Insurgency is a political problem," reads the introduction. "The mere attrition of insurgents is highly unlikely to result in [their] defeat."..

Prof. Hoffman, whom the book references, said that several allies have already produced similar manuals with much of the same philosophies, most recently the United States.

"The situation in Iraq was going to hell in a handbasket, and there was a recognition that the United States forces were too conventionally oriented," he recalled. "Again, [the manual] was not pre-emptive, but it was timely. It arrived just around the time of the surge," he recalled, referring to the buildup of troops in Iraq advocated by General David Petraeus -- who also co-authored his army's new official manual on counterinsurgency warfare [full text here]. "It had an important role overall in improving U. S. operations in Iraq."

Like its U. S. counterpart, Counter-insurgency Operations takes issue with the conventional notions of the victors and the vanquished. "Military forces do not defeat insurgencies; instead they create the security conditions necessary for the political resolution of the conflict," it says.

Prof. Hoffman noted the manual's insistence on understanding the enemy's "narrative" might be its biggest accomplishment. Defined as a plausible story that illustrates real or perceived injustices and grievances, the narrative could also be described as an uprising's founding cause.

"Similar to propaganda, most narratives will possess, at the very least, a kernel of truth but may also include substantial amounts of mythology," the book says. Regardless of their origins and their ideology, the manual continues, the grievances can be legitimate, and a "certain amount of empathy may be justified in dealing with insurgents."..

The manual (CF not DND) sounds pretty reasonable and thoughtful to me.

A little goes a long way

One of the most noticeable aspects of any Canadian social area at KAF is the abundance of visible support from home. Signed banners from factories, hockey teams, and schools adorn walls and bulletin boards - as cherished as the ubiquitous Silvia Pecota artwork.



At Canada House, there's a table with postcards and letters on it addressed "To Any Soldier." Troops grab a few when they need a boost, and read through them. Oftentimes, they answer them as well. I thumbed through a number of them myself, and marvelled at the difference in support between now, and when I got looks wearing my uniform on the bus or train to and from Kingston almost twenty years ago.



I tell you, after having seen them in action firsthand, these troops deserve all the support we can give them.

When my trip over to Kandahar was confirmed, there wasn't much I could tell people beforehand. But my wife and I wanted to make sure that if there were any sort of issues with our kids at school while I was away, the teachers knew what was going on. So we informed my son's grade two teacher and my daughter's kindergarten (oops...senior kindergarten!) teacher that I'd be going, although I couldn't say exactly when.

Well, the next day I was given a couple of poster-sized sheets of paper done up by my daughter's SK class with their best wishes for the troops, a class picture, and their adorable signatures. The teacher asked that, if it wasn't too much trouble, I could give it to some troops over there. Needless to say, that wasn't a problem.

With the Air Wing just stood up, I figured they wouldn't have as much stuff on the walls as the Battle Group, or HQ, or Canada House, so I gave it to them.



One of the senior NCM's in the group pulled me aside after the photo was taken, and told me in the clearest terms possible that this sort of public support made all the difference in the world to the morale of the troops. And he wasn't the only one to remark upon that during my visit: every time I stopped to look at something posted on a wall, sent to the troops by Canadians who cared enough to take the time, a soldier would invariably let me know just how grateful they all are for the visible signs of support they receive from us back home.

We're past the Christmas season, and into the pre-spring doldrums. So, if you have a moment, take some time and write a soldier a letter. Send a postcard. Let them know you're thinking about them, and that you want them to succeed in their mission and come home safely. It's such a little bit of time out of your day, and it will make theirs.

* * * * *

Your contribution helps make this trip possible:

Afstan: Extra brigade of US trainers to come

This will help building up the Afghan security forces, the key to any real stabilization of the country--from ISAF (via Moby Media Updates):

Rise of the Phoenix in Afghanistan

KABUL, Afghanistan - Brigadier General Steven P. Huber, commander of Combined Joint Task Force Phoenix VIII and native of Chicago, Ill., visited the 33rd Infantry Brigade Combat Team in Herat, Shindand and Bala Baluk to evaluate his concerns about force protection, troop safety, manning, soldier care, communications and property accountability, Feb. 18-20.

Before returning to Task Force Phoenix Headquarters in Kabul, he met with ISAF Regional Command West Commander Italian Army Brigadier General Paolo Serra at Camp Arena in Herat. They discussed cooperative efforts surrounding the influx of new troops to the region.

“TF Phoenix is basically going to double,” said Huber in regards to troop increases. “Right now we have one brigade-sized element that comes in and resources with additions from other sources like Air Force, Navy, some Marines, and then contractors. Soon they are going to have two brigades [emphasis added] doing what we are doing with one, and it is going to be a huge shot in the arm for Phoenix. It will allow us to fill the gaps we are experiencing today.”

According to Huber, the inflow of troops will begin in April and will conclude when the last of the second brigade, an active duty brigade, arrives in September...

Task Force Phoenix is currently run by a U.S. Army Guard unit from Illinois [that's the 33rd Infantry Brigade Combat Team , main mission training]. It has almost 3,000 personnel assigned to it in country and commands and controls approximately 5,000 others.

Task Force Phoenix is under the US-led Combined Security Transition Command-Afghanistan, and is not part of ISAF:

The mission of the Combined Security Transition Command-Afghanistan, in partnership with the Government of the Islamic Republic of Afghanistan and the international community, is to plan, program and implement structural, organizational, institutional and management reforms of the Afghanistan National Security Forces in order to develop a stable Afghanistan, strengthen the rule of law, and deter and defeat terrorism within its borders.

More here on CSTC-A's training mission and its current commander. See also the Update here for more on Task Force Phoenix, which also has a combat role.

Some help from other countries too:

Japan has said it will pay the salaries of about 80,000 Afghan police officers for the next six months as part of its drive to help regeneration there.

Japan would also help fund the construction of schools and hospitals and support teacher-training, a foreign ministry official in Tokyo said.

Tokyo has pledged about $2bn in Afghan reconstruction funds since 2002.

Separately, New Zealand announced it would keep its deployment of about 140 troops in the country for another year...

Japan has no troops in Afghanistan but has maintained a refuelling mission in the Indian Ocean in support of the US-led "war on terror".

Tokyo has spent almost $1.5bn of the money it pledged back in 2002...

Update: The additional training unit:

Lt. Col. Kenneth Baldowski says about 2,400 of the Georgia National Guard's 48th Infantry Brigade will be heading for a one-year deployment to Afghanistan in the coming months.

Citizen soldiers from the 1st Battalion, 108th Cavalry Regiment will head to Ft. Polk, La., next month for training. Guard spokesman Baldowski said Tuesday that once in Afghanistan, the Georgia Guard members will be training Afghan police and military forces. Baldowski said the brigade's soldiers will deploy overseas in waves between March and June.

The 48th Brigade spent a year deployed to Iraq in 2005. The brigade of 4,000 troops is headquartered in Macon, with units based across the state.

"All the News not Necessary to Print"

NY Times headline February 22:

U.S. Unit Secretly in Pakistan Lends Ally Support

Title of of a Torch post October 25, 2008:

US already training Pakistani paramilitaries

NATO and the blogosphere: Input sought by German organization

An e-mail I've received; comments welcome (or respond directly yourself, info@atlantic-community.org):

ATLANTIC-COMMUNITY.ORG

NATO'S NEW PUBLIC DIPLOMACY INITIATIVE

Dear Mr. Mark Scollins,

NATO Deputy Assistant Secretary General for Public Diplomacy Strategy, Dr. Stefanie Babst, argues that public diplomacy needs to respond to the challenges of the Web 2.0 world and is encouraging NATO to be "more courageous in using digital tools to directly interact with the public":

NATO's New Public Diplomacy: The Art of Engaging and Influencing

"Why not widen the debate about NATO's new Strategic Concept beyond the 'usual suspects' and try to obtain new thinking through, for instance, online discussions with citizens on specific aspects of NATO's future role?"

I would appreciate your thoughts on this issue. Perhaps your readers would like to weigh in as well. I believe this is a real chance for us to demonstrate to NATO's leadership that the public is interested in a direct and transparent dialogue with policy makers.

• Do you think NATO would benefit from engaging the blogosphere?
  

• Do you think bloggers have constructive advice for NATO's specific challenges?
  

• How could NATO identify and listen to the discerning bloggers and their readers? What form should such an exchange of ideas take?
  

Best regards,

Ben

E. Ben Heine
Head of Outreach
Atlantic-Community.org

Atlantische Initiative e.V.
Wilhelmstrasse 67
10117 Berlin
Germany

Amtsgericht Berlin Charlottenburg
Registernummer: VR 23583Nz
Vorstand: Dr. Johannes Bohnen, Jan-Friedrich Kallmorgen
--------------------
Atlantic-community.org is a project of Atlantic Initiative e.V., a Berlin based non-partisan, non-profit organization dedicated to furthering transatlantic cooperation.

Griffons fly by night--and it's no big deal

Taking it to the Taliban--supposedly some sort of great scoop:

Air missions aim to defuse IED toll
Nighttime patrols by Canadian choppers target insurgents planting roadside bombs
By MURRAY BREWSTER The Canadian Press
Mon. Feb 23 - 4:46 AM

" Cpl. C. Hinds, a Canadian gunner aboard a CH-146 Griffon helicopter, looks out over the Afghan countryside during a daytime escort mission on Friday. (Murray Brewster / CP)

KANDAHAR, Afghanistan — Two CH-146 Griffon helicopters lifted off into the dim, grainy dusk above Kandahar Airfield one night last week and made straight for the mountains, in a new and completely unheralded chapter in the Afghan war.

This mission and the handful of ones before it are not something the air force eagerly broadcasts in its public relations campaign [emphasis added], but it is perhaps one of the most important life-saving duties the new air wing carries out.

Aircraft running lights were switched off once they cleared "the wire" allowing the grey and black camouflaged Griffons to blend in with the night sky.

Armed with night-vision goggles and a pod of darkness-piercing sensors, including high-definition cameras, the aircrews had set off on a deadly cat-and-mouse chase with the Taliban.

Two gunners on each aircraft leaned on their weapons through open doorways and looked down impassively as the lights of Kandahar city unfolded below them like irregular multi-coloured jewels cast on black velvet blanket. The helicopters rose swiftly, brushed past the soaring volcanic peaks and then burst out over the desert, dropping to 152 metres, where the total blackness of the countryside enveloped them.

Although officially relegated to escort new CH-47D Chinook transport helicopters, the Griffons belonging to 408 Squadron were quietly given a new, more dangerous role soon after they deployed in December.

Their orders were to hunt insurgents who lace the roadways with home-made bombs, missions that depend on the murky world of classified intelligence [emphasis added].

Roadside bombs have over the last three years exacted the single most deadly toll on Canadian soldiers, accounting for half of the 108 deaths.

That the Griffon could be useful in reducing the carnage has long been recognized in air force circles...

Mr Brewster unfortunately, in all-to-frequent Canadian media style, over-hypes his great revelation of this type of Griffon mission. From Archie McLean in the Edmonton Journal, February 1:

...
The Griffons are smaller helicopters whose primary role will be to escort the Chinook, which is a much larger target for ground fire. They can also conduct armed reconnaissance and surveillance when needed...

And here's an interesting comment at Milnet.ca, pointing out a number of errors in the story.

Poor Peter II: Boy is he confused

The Air Force has two separate major UAV projects. The first is called NOCTUA; it's a short-term urgent move that resulted in the leasing of Herons now flying in Afstan:

Immediate Needs:
...
The Government has secured the two year lease of a Heron UAV tactical system to be delivered in Afghanistan by early 2009. Under Project NOCTUA, the two-year $95 million contract was awarded to MacDonald Dettwiler and Associates (MDA) of Vancouver, BC on August 1, 2008...

The second is JUSTAS; it's a long-term project, started under the Liberals, to purchase a fleet of UAVs to perform a variety of roles for the CF (also from link in first paragraph):

Beyond Afghanistan:
A long term UAV solution, in the form of the Joint UAV Surveillance Target Acquisition System (JUSTAS) Program, is currently being developed that will include domestic and deployed operational UAV capabilities.

There's lots of detail on JUSTAS at this post.

MND MacKay however does not seem to realize there are two distinct Air Force UAV projects (unless an unannounced decision has been made to keep the Herons after Afstan and cancel the JUSTAS project):

...
Defence Minister Peter MacKay told me late last year that newly acquired Canadian spy planes will be redeployed in 2011 from Afghanistan to keep watch on Canada’s coastlines.

The CCU170 Heron spy planes are built by Israeli Aerospace Industries and entered service with the Canadian Forces in Afghanistan in late 2008. They’re being used to keep track of suspected threats to Canadian troops and development projects and Afghan government facilities.

But defence planners are looking beyond the Afghanistan deployment, which will be scaled down drastically in 2011.

"We’re going to have a fleet of those things when the Afghanistan mission is over and they can be used in Arctic sovereignty patrols, they can be used in coastal patrols," MacKay said.

Combined with other new technologies, Herons can be used to help map the Arctic, for search and rescue and to track submarines and shipping. A base could be set up at CFB Goose Bay, Labrador, for long-range patrols into the far north...

Earlier:

Poor Peter

Poor Peter

The MND seems not to know the difference between a US Marine Expeditionary Brigade and a US Army Stryker Brigade Combat Team (details available here):

...
"A large majority of those troops will be coming into southern Afghanistan and Kandahar province, where Canada has over 2,800 soldiers serving," MacKay told CTV's Question Period on Sunday.

"This will clearly reinforce our effort to bring security on the ground, particularly on the border area, where they're going to send about 8,000 marines -- a striker [sic] brigade -- with high mobility...

This is the video; the story reports what I myself heard the MND say (at 1:21). Under the circumstances I'd say this Toronto Star story some two and a half weeks ago has it about right:

MacKay's NATO bid off to a dubious start
Unofficial campaign to be secretary general called 'little bit strange'

AfPak: Northern suppy route rolling

The train has left the station:

Tajikistan allows NATO cargo transit to Afghanistan

DUSHANBE (Reuters) - Tajikistan has allowed the transit of NATO non-military cargo to Afghanistan by land, a U.S. military commander said on Friday, and pro-Moscow neighbor Kyrgyzstan formalized the closure of a U.S. air base.

Washington is seeking to diversify supply routes for its troops in Afghanistan as militants in Pakistan step up attacks on supply convoys.

"Tajikistan has allowed (NATO) to use its railways and roads to transit non-military goods [emphasis added] to Afghanistan," Rear Admiral Mark Harnitchek of the U.S. Transportation Command said on Tajik state television.

He added that Uzbekistan, another Central Asian state that is part of NATO's new supply route to Afghanistan, had also allowed cargo transit, indicating agreements with countries along a new transit land line have now been secured.

An official at Latvia's Riga port said on Friday the first batch of U.S. cargo was already on its way to Afghanistan.

"The first train is out of the port. It left last night," the official said.

From Latvia, NATO's non-military cargo will travel along a planned railway supply route dubbed the Northern Distribution Network which will run across Russia, Kazakhstan, Uzbekistan and Tajikistan [emphasis added].

Tajikistan's Central Asian neighbor Kyrgyzstan sent the U.S. ambassador a formal notice on Friday demanding that Washington close its military air base in the country and giving U.S. troops 180 days to leave -- in a final step to shut down the base.

Kyrgyz President Kurmanbek Bakiyev signed the base closure decision into law on Friday and the Foreign Ministry sent the eviction notice later in the day.

The decision removes one of the U.S. military's air supply routes into Afghanistan as Washington prepares to send more troops.

Harnitchek is in Tajikistan with a U.S. military logistics delegation to work out the details of the plan.

"We plan to ship 50 to 200 containers a week from Uzbekistan to Tajikistan and then to Afghanistan," Harnitchek said. "Tajikistan is very important because it is closest to our bases."

The United States has said that cargo such as building materials, medicines and water would be delivered to Uzbekistan by rail via Russia and Kazakhstan [emphasis added]...

Major Asian rail lines--note that none enter Afstan:

As for trains and stations:

Update: Reaction to the supply situation at Military.com.

AfPak: Brit views

Tough year ahead:

...
While British commanders insist the Taliban is nothing like the force it was when British troops first deployed to the lawless Helmand province in southern Afghanistan in the spring of 2006, the constant supply of recruits and equipment from neighbouring Pakistan means they still remain a formidable threat. And as British forces prepare for what many senior officers expect to be a summer of intense fighting, commanders are warning that this could be the year in which British troops suffer their highest casualties so far.

"We've inflicted a series of heavy defeats against the Taliban, taken out a lot of their senior commanders, and generally got them on the back foot," said a senior British officer at Nato headquarters in Helmand. "But now we've got to take advantage of our strong position and finish them off, and that could mean a significant spike in casualties. For all the success we have had recently, the Taliban remain a determined and deadly foe, and they will not give up without a fight."

And as David Miliband, the Foreign Secretary, discovered when we visited the headquarters of British forces at the forward military base at Lashkagar, Taliban fighters are receiving assistance from British supporters who are sending them remote control devices to help build the roadside bombs that are used to attack British troops in southern Afghanistan...

"The British military has done an outstanding job and is a credit to the nation," said Miliband, during a brief respite from his 48-hour schedule, during which he toured the front lines of British and American forces in the south and east respectively, while also having discussions with Afghan officials, including the beleaguered president in Kabul. "But this is a vital year for Afghanistan and clearly we can't have more of the same. We need to make much faster progress on all fronts – political, military and economic. Put simply, we have to do much better all round, or else public support for what we are trying to achieve is simply going to evaporate in the West [emphasis added]."

The enormity of the task facing both British and the other coalition forces based in Afghanistan after four years of combat – and significant casualties – was graphically brought home on a variety of fronts.

In strictly military terms, it must be said that the British campaign is going reasonably well and, after a difficult start when there was much confusion over policy objectives, British commanders have succeeded in their fundamental objectives of severely disrupting the Taliban as a fighting force and securing most of the populated areas [what new US forces are supposed to do at Kandahar] they are mandated to control.

But that is only half the story. The Taliban may have suffered significant defeats in Afghanistan, but there is no shortage of eager young Islamist recruits streaming across the border from the lawless tribal areas of Pakistan to join the jihad against coalition forces...

The main reason that coalition forces find themselves in this invidious position is because of the failure of President Karzai's government to bring proper governance to areas that have been liberated from Taliban control. Worse than that, some coalition commanders believe the president's government is actively seeking to undermine the coalition's efforts by spreading perverse, black propaganda to the effect that the coalition is actually aiding and abetting the Taliban.

The ineffectiveness of the Karzai government is fast becoming a cause célèbre for the coalition, which is particularly concerned about the looming constitutional crisis over Karzai's delay in setting a date for presidential elections, which are due in May, when his five-year term expires.

By all accounts, Richard Holbrooke, the Obama administration's new special envoy to the region, pulled no punches during his first encounter with Karzai at the presidential palace in Kabul this week, telling him he must hold elections by August at the latest, and that Washington would take a very dim view of any further attempts by his government to undermine the coalition...

Update: Brit military planning troop increase:

Defence chiefs believe the 8,300 troops currently serving in the south of the country need to be bolstered by an extra battle group of between 1,500 and 1,800 men within a year.

The deployment will push the Britain's Armed Forces to the very limit of its fighting capability and will raise fears that the entire operation has now fallen victim to "mission creep".

It is understood that the Army's top generals have given their support for the plan and are now awaiting approval from the Treasury and other areas of government.

The so-called "mini-surge" has been ordered in a direct response to a decision by President Barack Obama to send an extra 17,000 combat troops to counter the growing threat posed by the Taliban...

The new British battle group will consist of an infantry battalion, composed of around 700 troops, bolstered by at least one rifle company of 120 troops. The force will be supported by signallers, medics, engineers and elements of the Royal Artillery.

The Army has notched up a series of major successes against the Taliban, including the retaking of Musa Qala in northern Helmand, a former insurgent stronghold, as well as the operation to create a functioning hydro-electric power station at Kajaki [with some Canadian help - MC].

But the much vaunted plans to bring reconstruction to the region have stalled, following the deterioration of security in the province.

The Ministry of Defence (MoD) has now increased troops numbers in Helmand every six months since 2006, when just 3,300 troops were sent to southern Afghanistan to secure the area and to allow reconstruction to begin..

Afstan: "Still alive, still well"

Update from Bruce Rolston:

Got about another 2 months to go in what has become a 7.5 month tour in Afghanistan. Going to reserve my comments on just about everything until that time is done: better that way; I think I'll want to be able to speak more freely about some things. Suffice it to say I will look forward to returning to Canada, but also regret the end of what has been a uniquely rewarding experience working among the Afghan National Army. Khuda hafiz.

Should be very interesting stuff forthcoming.

Afstan: "Kesterson at War"

More about the piece Feb. 2 on CBC's "The National": a post at Bouhammer's Afghanistan Blog (an American milblog)--note the podcast link, well worth the listen:

Scott K comments about At War feedback

February 19th, 2009

It has recently been brought to my attention that several blogs and websites in Canada have been chatty about the CBC story on Scott and his Documentary, At War. I forwarded the sites to Scott so he could read them. Last night while he was at Ft. Bragg, NC doing screenings for members of that base he took some time to talk about the chatter from our cousins up north and about the feedback he has received from the half-dozen screenings he and David have done across the country.

Of course with the President’s trip to Canada today and this announcement, http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2009/02/19/obama-future-afghan-troop-levels-uncertain/ it makes this interview even more relevant.

Some of the “chatter” that Scott and I are talking about in this Podcast Interview are at

http://toyoufromfailinghands.blogspot.com/2009/02/curse-upon-canadian-broadcasting.html

http://toyoufromfailinghands.blogspot.com/2009/02/afstan-more-reasons-to-curse-mother.html

http://forums.milnet.ca/forums/index.php?PHPSESSID=8niu5kqvnkt42u3mgfsu4jr2o1&topic=83794.15

To Listen to the Podcast/Interview, click below.

Scott Interview #3

1. membrain says:

   February 20, 2009 at 1:52 pm

   Hi Troy. Thanks very much for this interview with Scott. I’m going to link to it at: http://membrain.blogspot.com/ I’m looking forward to seeing At War. I like Scott’s point about the fact that this being the first footage of the Canadian Forces in combat since Korea. In that context it’s historical footage.

   Very good response about the CBC coverage. He makes a good point about the relevance of contreversy in the context of the CBC,s slant.

   Reply
2. Mark Collins says:

   February 20, 2009 at 4:11 pm

   Thanks, Troy. For the benefit of others, an excerpt from an e-mail to you, Feb. 19:

   “Indeed the gripe was with the spin the CBC reporter put on the footage–”Oh my God! We’re not doing peacekeeping anymore!” As if Canadians needed reminding of that after the CF have been in combat at Kandahar since 2006.

   As for Canadian feelings, I would think it safe to say that at least half the population (much more in Quebec) are not happy to have the CF engage in actual combat rather than “peacekeeping”–a sentiment the CBC piece was playing to. Plus the fact that we have been fighting as allies of the dreaded Dubbya has only hurt support for the mission. But with President Obama that negative American baggage may be relieved to a large extent.”

   The CBC’s showing Scott’s footage this month was not exactly opening Canadian eyes to combat in ways never before seen, even on the CBC. In fact on January 5 this year the same news program, “The National” (their flagship news broadcast), ran a 16 minute video, “Fighting Ghosts”, by a Canadian Army non-commissioned infantry soldier about his reality fighting in Afstan (with combat footage). The soldier ends saying “It’s very important to see this through.” And adds more on why he thinks the mission worthwhile.
   http://www.cbc.ca/national/blog/special_feature/fighting_ghosts/fighting_ghosts.html

   More:
   http://toyoufromfailinghands.blogspot.com/2009/01/fighting-ghosts-in-afstan.html

   To my suspicious mind it’s almost as if the CBC realized that “Fighting Ghosts” might have been seen as, gasp, “pro-war”, and then decided to run a month later the piece based on Scott’s footage as a corrective measure. And they’d had footage from Scott in the can for some time.

   In fact the CBC had already used some of Scott’s July 2006 footage (04:31, Chapter 6: “Tracking the Taliban”)
   http://www.cbc.ca/doczone/popup.html?/mrl3/8752/doczone/afghanistan_6.wmv
   http://www.cbc.ca/doczone/afghanistan/video.html

   as part of a major two-hour documentary, “AFGHANISTAN: BETWEEN HOPE AND FEAR”, that was broadcast on March 23, 2008:
   http://www.cbc.ca/doczone/afghanistan/index.html

   Reaction (mixed) to that documentary at Milnet.ca:
   http://forums.milnet.ca/forums/index.php?topic=72276.0

   Mark
   Ottawa

Afstan: Turning chopper tables

Nice to be able to pitch in in this way:

Canadian Chinook carries U.S. troops to battle

KANDAHAR, Afghanistan -- Time was, Canadian troops were among those having to hitch rides around the Afghan battlefield on board the transport helicopters of other NATO allies.

Not any more.

A single Canadian CH-47D Chinook, flanked by two CH-146 Griffon escort helicopters, turned the tables Friday as it delivered a section of U.S. troops to a forward operating base west of Kandahar, its first such mission in support of allied countries...

Murray Brewster, the Canadain Press

Friday's mission went off without a hitch, save for the trio of birds that smashed into the windshields of both Griffons, causing a slight mess but no damage.

The arrival of the helicopters marks a significant, if somewhat symbolic, change for Canadian troops, who had until very recently been forced to rely on American, British and Dutch battlefield helicopters to ferry them between widely spaced desert outposts.

That won't change -- the Canadian choppers are being added to the pool of aircraft that are used by all NATO forces in the region. But at least now, Canada's contingent won't have to feel quite as dependent as it has in the past.

Since taking possession of six used Chinook helicopters from the U.S. Army at the end of December, Canadian pilots and flight crew have been engaged in a demanding series of training exercises.

Both the transport helicopters and their armed Griffon escorts have practised what pilots call "dust-ball landings" in the desert where the aircraft touches down in a plume of churned-up sand and then takes off again.

Gunners on both types of helicopter have also conducted target practice in the desert.

Both aircraft are flying operational missions here and there, but [Col. Christopher]Coates [commander of the Canadian air wing] said there is still some more training to do before the wing is declared fully operational.

"We're really well advanced in terms of training, but there are still some things we want to do to make sure we can use the aircraft to the full extent of their capabilities," he said.

"We're not quite there yet."..

Update: Combat Camera photo of Chinook in Afstan:

And an on-board C6 MG (note the shoulder patch):

C6 details here.

As for anyone else sending more combat troops to Afstan...

Three headlines:

US demands for more troops in Afghanistan ignored

Nato members offer Afghan support
Up to 20 Nato countries have offered to boost their civilian, military or training commitments to Afghanistan, US defence secretary Robert Gates says. [read the details, though]

Britain 'has no plans' to deploy more soldiers to Afghanistan [at least the Brits are doing a whole lot already--and note the "we have had no request to increase the number of our troops"]

Then there's this wonderful initiative:

Standing NATO force for Europe proposed

Oh dear.

Gloom at Kandahar/US troops not to be under Canadian command

Stark talk from the outgoing CF commander--but there is some light in Afghan attitudes:

Kandahar residents feel less safe, says Canada's outgoing commander

The sense of security among people right across Kandahar province has "absolutely plummeted," the outgoing commander of Canadian troops in Afghanistan said Wednesday [Feb. 18] in a brutally frank summation of the war during his nine months on the ground.

Public opinion surveys conducted by the Canadian military suggest confidence has evaporated in the face of what Brig.-Gen. Denis Thompson described as a "twisted and extreme" insurgency that thinks nothing of "brainwashing" a 12-year-old boy into becoming a suicide bomber.

"It should come as no surprise to any here that these past nine months have not been sufficient to win the war," Thompson said at the outset of his farewell statement to journalists at Kandahar Airfield.

Ultimately, the war is up to the Afghans to win, Thompson said, who also praised the courage and tenacity of his own troops...

"Afghans are frustrated by the lack of progress of their own government and the international community, that is true," Thompson said. "But they are even more horrified by the atrocities committed on a daily basis by the insurgents."..

In the end, all of the bloodshed has won the Taliban nothing and only served to isolate them from the Afghan people, Thompson declared.

Over the last 18 months, the Canadian military has conducted several public opinion surveys in the war-ravaged city of Kandahar, asking residents about their level of support for the Afghan government, the Taliban and their perception of public safety.

Surveys conducted in late 2007 and early 2008 found 55 per cent of respondents saying they lived in a secure environment, but Thompson said that figure is now down to about 25 per cent.

Support for both Karzai's government and the Taliban have remained largely static, he added: Roughly 70 per cent of those asked said they support the government, while the Taliban pulls down between 15 and 20 per cent support at any given time [emphasis added].

Thompson's candid assessment was a reflection of the changing face of the war in southern Afghanistan, where the ranks of local militants have been depleted by three years of heavy fighting.

Increasingly, those local commanders are being replaced by hard-line Islamists, such as those with the Haqqani network - full-throated terrorists with no connection to the communities they remorselessly attack...

He said reconstruction activities have made gains - especially in the building of roads, where progress is measured metre by metre - but in the end conceded that development remains "painfully slow by Western standards."..

Then the incoming commander effectively confirms what one had anticipated, that US troops coming to Kandahar province will not be under Canadian command:

U.S. troop buildup no threat to Canada's Kandahar accomplishments: general

Brig.-Gen. Jon Vance officially took charge of the 2,850 soldiers, aircrew and support staff in Kandahar today and he said he welcomed the influx of fresh American troops.

With so much Canadian blood, sweat and treasure poured into Kandahar over the last three years, Vance said Canadians back home shouldn't view the U.S. buildup as the Americans taking over.

"I see no threat at all to Canada's pride of accomplishments and pride of place in the future as long as we're here," Vance said following a ceremony where he formally took over from Brig.-Gen. Denis Thompson, who ended a nine-month tour Thursday [Feb. 19].

U.S. President Barack Obama announced this week that 17,000 extra American soldiers and marines would be sent to Afghanistan this year to bolster the fight against the Taliban.

Although details have yet to finalized, Thompson said it's expected a new U.S. combat brigade will be deployed in Kandahar province [see Uppestdate here]...

Vance said he believes the incoming U.S. troops will not overshadow the Canadian contingent and will likely operate in their own area of the province - in places where it's been impossible to station NATO troops [i.e. much of the province].

They will "definitely be an addition," he said...

Vance said he expects the new American soldiers will report independently to NATO's southern command and not fall under Canadian command [emphasis added].

[So not even under formal Canadian control, even though I suppose we retain theoretical responsibility for Kandahar province--so much for what Brig.-Gen. Vance said less than two weeks ago. I'd bet command relations and postioning of US troops were high on the agenda when CDS Gen. Natynczyk and Joint Chiefs Chairman Adm. Mullen met in Ottawa eight days ago].

As part of the bargain that saw Canada get some relief and Parliament extend the country's mission to 2011, the U.S. agreed to place one infantry battalion under Canadian control last year [the battalion of which MND MacKay seemed strangely unaware last November].

That unit will remain as part of the Canadian task force, said Vance.

Update: A Globe and Mail headline gets it right:

Canada to focus on protecting Kandahar city

Richard Holbrooke on AfPak

Video of a forthright and extensive interview with the president's new special representative, from the PBS "Newshour", Feb. 18