National Defence Committee on May 30th, 2006

[The Chair, Conservative, Rick Casson]

I believe we have quorum to hear witnesses. We'll get started. The first item of business is to hear from the Minister of National Defence, the Honourable Gordon O'Connor.

Minister, welcome. You have some people with you, Mr. Minister. Would you like to introduce them and explain their roles?

[Gordon O'Connor, Conservative, Minister of National Defence]

I have Vincent Rigby, acting assistant deputy minister of policy, and Rear Admiral Murphy, who is in charge of operations.

[The Chair, Conservative, Rick Casson]

Thank you very much.

We'll hear the minister, who can be with us for approximately an hour. Hopefully, depending on the length of his comments, we can get through one round and then the second round as well. And we'll go through the list with the timing we've agreed as a committee, and the clerk will keep the speaking order. So if you're going to be speaking on behalf of your party, just let him know that. If you wish to split the time you have with someone else, please indicate that.

We'll turn it over to the minister. Go ahead, sir.

[Gordon O'Connor, Conservative, Carleton—Mississippi Mills, ON]

Thank you very much, Mr. Chairman.

Members of the committee, it's a pleasure to appear before you today to discuss Canada's mission in Afghanistan. This mission is a priority for this government, and I value every opportunity I get to inform Canadians about why we are in Afghanistan, about what we need to maintain, and why we need to maintain a strong military contribution there.

To put it succinctly, Canada is in Afghanistan to ensure the security of Canadians. Afghanistan was once a failed state that harboured and supported the terrorists who perpetrated the attacks of September 11, 2001. Thousands of innocent people died in those attacks, including 24 Canadians.

In Canada we can't pretend to be immune from threats like terrorism, simply because we live far away from trouble spots such as Afghanistan. We need to address threats to our security before they reach our shores. Canada therefore has a responsibility to ensure that the extremists who would harm us and our allies can no longer find refuge in Afghanistan.

Canada has a responsibility to protect Canadians. Canada has a responsibility to act.

We're also in Afghanistan in support of our friends and allies in the G-8, NATO, and the United Nations, who all consider Afghanistan a priority. As a responsible member of the international community, Canada must share the burden and do its part in Afghanistan. That's why we are currently there, alongside more than 30 countries that are as dedicated as we are to helping the Afghan people.

As part of our commitment to Afghanistan, Canada signed the Afghanistan Compact, which clearly outlines how the Government of Afghanistan, the United Nations, and the international community will work together over the next five years to ensure that the multilateral efforts in Afghanistan are successful. The compact also clearly identifies benchmarks against which to evaluate progress made in Afghanistan.

And third, Canada is in Afghanistan for the sake of the Afghan people. They have greatly suffered under the repressive regime of the Taliban and from decades of internal conflict, and they have explicitly asked us to be there. In line with Canada's tradition of helping those in need, we answered their call. That is why our mission in Afghanistan is not simply a military mission. It also involves diplomatic and development efforts.

In addition to our military contribution, we have established an embassy in Kabul to develop high-level ties between Canada and Afghanistan. Afghanistan has also become our largest recipient of bilateral aid. It is through this whole-of-government approach that we are helping Afghanistan become a secure and self-sufficient democratic state that will provide for the needs of its citizens, like any other country in the world.

So Canada is in Afghanistan to protect Canadians, to fulfill our international responsibilities, and to help the Afghan people. We have played a leading role in this mission, and together with our allies and partners we have achieved many positive results. But our job is not done.

As I said in the House during the debate on May 17, our military mission in Afghanistan will be successful when the country and its government are stabilized, when the terrorists and their local support networks are defeated and denied sanctuary, and when the Afghan security forces are well established and under the firm and legitimate control of the Government of Afghanistan.

It is because we are determined to accomplish these objectives that the government extended Canada's mission until February 2009.

This new two-year commitment will give the Afghan armed forces and the Afghan police the time they need to become operationally effective. It will ensure a smooth political transition in 2009 when the current mandate of Afghanistan's president ends. It's consistent with the timeline contained in the Afghanistan Compact. And it's what our allies expect and need from us.

Not only is it important that we maintain our commitment to Afghanistan, but it is also essential for us to maintain the right military capabilities to do the job. Our goals of security and reconstruction in Afghanistan are interdependent. Reconstruction cannot happen in an environment devoid of security, and a secure environment cannot be fostered without reconstruction efforts to help the local population build a stable future. Therefore, what Canada needs in Afghanistan is an integrated combat-capable Canadian Forces team that is composed of a provincial reconstruction team, an army task force and its supporting forces.

We need our personnel training the Afghan National Army in Kabul, as well as those who work at the coalition hospital at Kandahar airfield, and those who serve in ISAF headquarters. And we need the strategic advisory team that gives advice to President Karzai's government in Kabul.

We also need our military team to be able to function seamlessly within our “whole of government” approach. This means a team that can work closely with partners from the Department of Foreign Affairs, the Canadian International Development Agency, the Royal Canadian Mounted Police, and others. It is also important to understand that the configuration of our military forces in Afghanistan is the minimum required for the safety of the men and women of the Canadian Forces themselves.

As we have all seen in recent months, southern Afghanistan, and the Kandahar region in particular, is a complex and dangerous environment where the dedicated provision of security for Canadian troops by Canadian troops is critical.

We would not have been able to meet this requirement by deploying a provincial reconstruction team alone without an army task force there to protect it. A smaller military commitment would also have let our allies down.

Through our command of the multinational brigade for Regional Command South, Canada is currently leading the transition for Operation Enduring Freedom to the NATO-led, UN-mandated, International Security Assistance Force in the southern provinces of Afghanistan. When this expansion is complete, ISAF will be present in more than three-quarters of Afghanistan's territory. NATO and our allies are counting on our continued leadership during this transition period. It is particularly true of the Netherlands and the United Kingdom, who have made troop commitments to Afghanistan for two and three years, respectively, on the understanding that we would be there alongside them with the full range of capabilities that we have today.

So for these reasons, extending our military commitment to Afghanistan until February 2009 was the right and responsible thing to do.

Between now and then, we will keep Canadians informed of the mission's progress. The government will report to Parliament on the results we have achieved. And then, at the appropriate time, the government will decide whether or not to continue the mission beyond 2009.

Mr. Chairman, members of the committee, the Canadian Forces in Afghanistan are standing up for Canada's national interest. They are helping to protect Canadians from terrorism. They are fulfilling Canada's obligations to our allies. And they are helping the people of Afghanistan.

On May 17 the House of Commons recognized the importance of our commitment to Afghanistan and voted to extend it. With that support in hand, this government is more committed than ever to seeing our mission through.

Thank you very much.

[The Chair, Conservative, Rick Casson]

Thank you, Mr. Minister.

I erred in my opening comments; the first round is ten minutes when a minister appears. And we will be keeping very close to that ten-minute limit.

Mr. Dosanjh, do you want to start with a question?

[Ujjal Dosanjh, Liberal, Vancouver South, BC]

Thank you. I'll be sharing my time, not necessarily fifty-fifty, with one of my colleagues.

I'll be very brief, Minister. I would appreciate brief answers, but obviously as you see fit.

As you know, Liberal members have repeatedly asked the government what benchmarks it is using to evaluate the success and progress of the mission. According to the foreign affairs minister yesterday, the government is using the 40 benchmarks laid out in the Afghanistan Compact.

Is there any multilateral mechanism to evaluate the progress made towards achieving these benchmarks? If not, which mechanism is Canada using? And if Canada is not using any mechanism, why not?

[Gordon O'Connor, Conservative, Carleton—Mississippi Mills, ON]

I think what the foreign affairs minister was referring to is the benchmarks NATO will use to evaluate the mission. We have to look at this mission on different levels: what's going on in the whole country from NATO's point of view, and what's going on in our Kandahar district from our point of view. Essentially, I don't think all the benchmarks can be used in the Kandahar district, because the 40 benchmarks cover the whole country, and there are activities that may be going on elsewhere in the country that aren't going on in Kandahar.

But we promised, I think, at the last debate, and the Prime Minister committed, that at the end of each year—2006, 2007, 2008—we would go to Parliament with a report on the progress we are making in Afghanistan, so we're committed to doing that.

[Ujjal Dosanjh, Liberal, Vancouver South, BC]

First of all, I would suggest to you that if we don't have a mechanism that we've developed to assess our progress towards benchmarks, the report will be incomplete.

However, I want to make sure that, as you said, the government will report to Parliament on the results achieved. A once-a-year report, in a mission so intense and so closely watched by Canadians, I don't believe is appropriate. Would you commit to this committee that you will come before the committee at least four times a year for the life of the mission to update the committee on a periodic basis, every three months, to ensure that we—and Canadians, therefore—are able to hear from you directly what's going on and what progress we're making?

[Gordon O'Connor, Conservative, Carleton—Mississippi Mills, ON]

First of all, as the defence minister I'm aware of the other activities going on, but of course my primary interest is in defence and reporting the success in the defence area.

I'll take this as something to deal with. I don't know if three months is the appropriate time or not. I don't know whether in three months progress or the lack of progress can be registered. I certainly expect to be back to this committee on a regular basis, but today I couldn't commit to giving you an update every three months until I find out if it makes any practical sense.

[Ujjal Dosanjh, Liberal, Vancouver South, BC]

Perhaps the committee can decide whether or not it makes sense to hear from you every three months.

[Gordon O'Connor, Conservative, Carleton—Mississippi Mills, ON]

You can ask for me.

[Ujjal Dosanjh, Liberal, Vancouver South, BC]

Thank you.

[The Chair, Conservative, Rick Casson]

Mr. McGuire, you're next.

[Joe McGuire, Liberal, Egmont, PE]

Canadians have been asking quite often since the mandate was extended for two years in Afghanistan whether or not Canada is at war against a declared enemy—not in an anti-terrorist war, but an air-ground war against an enemy that has declared against Canada. Is there any way you can explain the situation we're actually in there as compared with other wars we have fought in the past?

[Gordon O'Connor, Conservative, Carleton—Mississippi Mills, ON]

Well, I don't categorize this as a war. We are there in Afghanistan to support the legitimate government and create a stable environment to reduce the activity of the various insurgent groups—and I believe there's more than one group in there that you have to deal with—to try to create some stability for that government and at the same time try to build up their army and their police force so that they can take over their own responsibilities and that eventually, at the appropriate time, we can pull out and leave their country to themselves.

So the military has to conduct a range of activities, from giving medical aid to people to assisting people in construction to advising police on how to do their job and, as I said, training the army and the police forces. But we also have to make sure we deal with the insurgents, whoever they may be. We also try, in concert with the Afghan army and the Afghan police—in nearly every operation you see, there is always Afghan army around, or Afghan police.... We have to conduct operations where we engage them with firepower, or whatever we require to engage them. So it's a whole range that we're going through.

I don't consider this war. War to me would be.... Well, I can start going into what war would be. I just don't consider this as war.

[Joe McGuire, Liberal, Egmont, PE]

How do you reconcile what happened in Kabul yesterday?

[Gordon O'Connor, Conservative, Carleton—Mississippi Mills, ON]

It was a riot.

[Joe McGuire, Liberal, Egmont, PE]

Getting rid of the Americans, Canadians, and so on.

[Gordon O'Connor, Conservative, Carleton—Mississippi Mills, ON]

I can only go on the news reports that I saw on TV, just the same as you saw. I don't have any inside information. As I understand it, an American convoy was rolling through Kabul and going at relatively high speed. I listened to the reporters saying that they're doing that because they don't want to slow down because they may get into difficulties. Apparently one of these vehicles hit a taxi and killed--I don't know if there's more than one--at least one individual, and a riot broke out. That's all I understand that happened there.

[Joe McGuire, Liberal, Egmont, PE]

We don't have a report from our commanding officer.

[Gordon O'Connor, Conservative, Carleton—Mississippi Mills, ON]

No, I don't.

[The Chair, Conservative, Rick Casson]

Okay we have three minutes left.

Ms. Sgro, you're next.

[Judy Sgro, Liberal, York West, ON]

Minister, thank you for being here today.

Can you tell us whether the government has received any requests directly from NATO or the United States for additional troops? And are you aware of any requests going to other allied countries, or are you considering sending additional troops of your own volition?

[Gordon O'Connor, Conservative, Carleton—Mississippi Mills, ON]

I'm not aware of a request. Our plan at the moment is not to exceed the level we're in now. We're in about 2,300 to 2,400. At the moment we have the provincial reconstruction team. We also have people in Kabul and a few places around there. We also have the task force. For the next six months or so we have command of the integrated brigade in the south, which costs us two or three hundred people to have this command. We will be giving up command of that some time later this year and handing it over to the Dutch, at which time our numbers will go down two or three hundred, but we're slated to take over command again some time in 2007-08, at which time our numbers would go back to where they are again.

We're also looking at the possibility of bidding--in NATO you bid on positions--for the command of ISAF in 2008, when they will be completely in control of Afghanistan. And if we were to do that, that could cost us a hundred people. That's where it stands.

NATO has not asked us for any other contributions, so no increases or anything like that.

[Judy Sgro, Liberal, York West, ON]

Has the United States asked us?