Afghanistan Committee on March 28th, 2022

[The Chair, Liberal, Sukh Dhaliwal]

Good evening. I call this meeting to order.

Welcome to meeting number seven of the House of Commons Special Committee on Afghanistan, created pursuant to the House order of December 8, 2021.

Today's meeting is taking place in a hybrid format, pursuant to the House order of November 25, 2021. I would like to remind all those present in the room to please follow the recommendations from the public health authorities, as well as the directive of the Board of Internal Economy on October 19, 2021, to remain healthy and safe.

Should any technical challenges arise, please advise me, as we may need to suspend for a few minutes to ensure that all members are able to participate fully. Our witnesses should be aware that translation in English or French is available through the globe icon at the bottom of their screens. Please select it now, so that it's easier for members later on.

Before we begin, I want to flag a change in schedule to the honourable members. Unfortunately, the Minister of International Development, the honourable Harjit Sajjan, is not available on April 11, as we had reported. He's available to appear on April 4, along with the departmental officials.

On April 4, we will have Sean Fraser, Minister of Immigration, Refugees and Citizenship and officials for the first hour, and Minister Sajjan and the officials for the second hour.

Also, the Minister of National Defence is unable to appear before the committee on April 4, as proposed in the work plan, but is available to appear on May 9. The minister would appear for the first hour, with the Department of National Defence and Canadian Armed Forces officials appearing for the full two hours.

If everyone is in agreement, the clerk can confirm this with the minister's office. Do any of the members have any objection? I see none.

Madam Clerk, I respectfully ask that you follow up with the ministers. Thank you.

Now, on behalf of all committee members, I would like to welcome our witnesses for our first panel. This evening, we have Alison MacLean and Djawid Taheri. From the Tenth Church refugee ministry, we have Katherine Moloney, a representative for Afghan families.

Welcome to each of you. You will have five minutes for opening remarks. Please make sure that you respect the time, so the members can have their time.

It is my understanding that Ms. MacLean has a video. That will be part of your five minutes, Ms. MacLean.

Now let's start with Ms. MacLean. Go ahead for five minutes, if you're ready.

[Alison MacLean, Documentarian, Producer of Burkas2Bullets, As an Individual]

Thank you very much for allowing me to speak with the group.

I have spent a great deal of time in Afghanistan. I did four combat camera embeds with six NATO countries. I am currently helping to sponsor a number of families, two of which are in Pakistan. I have been struggling, of course, with IRCC's capabilities, etc.

I'd like to start off with a two-minute clip from Burkas2Bullets, which I want to show to bring everyone up to speed on Afghanistan and the reason we're here this evening.

I will finish up with the final three minutes. It's just two minutes, so we can start it now, please.

[Video presentation]

Thank you very much.

One of the reasons why I wanted to show that clip is the continual presence of ISIS-K and the attacks at the airport, which of course you know about, that happened in Kabul. My two families were at the airport at the time. Luckily, they were not injured. Sadly, I had to have them go back to the airport to attempt a military airlift, which they were not able to get on to, due to the Taliban blocking the terminal.

My main presence here this evening is because the so-called operation Afghan safety program has not expedited the refugee requests. IRCC is understaffed. We are not able to get families, who have been in flight for seven months in third countries, access to Canadian embassies, because the staff are overwhelmed with requests.

I have two families, as I said, who are being privately sponsored, and we have great help from Canadians and Rotarians, etc. Many of you know that Canada arrived late to the evacuation and left early with planes half full. We left our fixers and translators in limbo. The families I am currently supporting and helping are fixers I worked with for years. They're in flight because they are on Taliban lists.

Canada has left them stranded. The Taliban have Canadian blood on their hands. I do not believe we should be negotiating with them. Qatar should be doing a great deal more, and the UAE countries. I do not support Canada sending money to Afghanistan.

The Taliban are using starvation techniques to control the population—a standard war crime—and this is one of the reasons why we need to support IRCC more. We need to get money into the immigration program so that families such as the ones I've been helping for seven months, with Rotarians' help, will be able to get into Canada.

[The Chair, Liberal, Sukh Dhaliwal]

Thank you, Ms. MacLean, and thank you for your courage and your documentary.

Now we'll go to a lawyer by profession: Mr. Djawid Taheri.

Please go ahead for five minutes.

[Djawid Taheri, Lawyer, As an Individual]

Thank you, Mr. Chair and honourable members of the committee.

I appear before you as an Afghan Canadian lawyer who himself once was welcomed to Canada as a refugee, back in the 1980s. That was when Afghanistan was actually invaded by the then Soviet Red Army, much like the tragedy we witness in Ukraine today.

As a refugee lawyer, in the past 20 years I have had the honour of listening to some of the most horrific and heart-wrenching accounts narrated by Afghan refugees fleeing their homeland. Over the years, my colleagues and I have come to learn of the Taliban's propensity to some of the most horrendous violence imaginable, and how those targeted by the group end up being tortured and killed on the basis of no more than a mere suspicion.

Therefore, when Taliban forces took power in Kabul and entered the city on August 15 of last year, we had no doubt as to the terrifying future and atrocities that awaited those who stood for democracy, freedom, gender equality and human rights.

In the weeks that followed, my colleagues and I worked around the clock fielding hundreds of calls and emails from Afghans seeking resettlement in Canada in order to save their lives. We wrote letters to the government and, in the aftermath of the Taliban takeover, we attended several high-level meetings with ministers of the government and officials. There, we put forth recommendations and discussed Canada's response. We also found ourselves on the receiving end of a flurry of inquiries from the community as to the specifics of Canada's response and how the government intended to help.

However, once Canada announced its pledge to resettle 20,000 vulnerable Afghans, which was later increased to 40,000, the impediments appeared insurmountable to those of us in the legal community. For one thing, requirements for Afghans to be in a third country clearly shut the door to those targeted individuals who were still inside the country and moving from safe house to safe house to save their lives and evade the Taliban.

Furthermore, the eligibility criteria for the special humanitarian program turned out to be extremely narrow, excluding many at-risk groups, including women fearing gender-based persecution. Under the program, once prospective refugees somehow do make it to a third country, they are required to obtain UNHCR acceptance, UNHCR referral and, basically, refugee recognition by the UNHCR host country. The problem is that in none of the countries bordering Afghanistan is the UNHCR actually doing that. It's not available.

Also, none of the neighbouring countries have their own system of refugee determination. Tajikistan was the only one that was doing it before, but post-August 2021 they stopped, because I guess they were overwhelmed by the flood of refugees that ended up in that country.

While Canada's special resettlement program is set up with good intentions, in my respectful, humble opinion it is unable, in its current form, to respond to the crisis in Afghanistan in an effective and timely manner. What's more, the UNHCR prerequisite also makes it impossible for Canadians to resettle Afghan refugees through the programs that are designed for private sponsorship programs, such as the group of five private sponsorships.

There are currently literally hundreds of groups in Canada that are ready, able and willing to sponsor Afghan refugees from third countries, but they cannot do that, because of this particular requirement for the UNHCR recognition. This prerequisite is prohibitive and must be waived, as was done in the case of Syria back in 2015.

Having said this, however, when we look at the government and how the government is utilizing simple and expeditious measures to facilitate the resettlement of Ukrainians to Canada, one starts to wonder: Why isn't this possible for Afghan refugees? Since August 2021, only 8,500 Afghans have been resettled in Canada out of the 40,000 pledged. For Ukrainians, we have resettled over 7,000 in the first three months alone, since January.

By comparison, Canada resettled 25,000 Syrian refugees in a matter of about 100 days, meaning that when there's a will, there always is a way.

[The Chair, Liberal, Sukh Dhaliwal]

Thank you, Mr. Taheri. We appreciate your presentation.

We now go to the Tenth Church refugee ministry's representative for Afghan families, Katherine Moloney, for five minutes.

Please go ahead.

[Katherine Moloney, Representative for Afghan Families, Tenth Church]

Mr. Chair and honourable members, I'm immensely grateful for the opportunity to speak with you today.

I'm here representing Tenth Church refugee ministry and the community of over 150 Afghan refugee claimants we serve.

I am from Australia. My husband Samih is from Syria. We met in Lebanon and now call Canada home.

Samih is a grateful recipient of Canada's open-handed generosity to refugees. While I have never been a refugee, as a survivor of torture, I have an abiding respect for Canada, which is internationally recognized as a place of refuge and welcome for those fleeing conflict and crisis. Indeed, today is a monumental day for us. It is the three-year anniversary of Samih's arrival in Canada. He is now eligible for citizenship.

Samih and I serve two refugee ministries in British Columbia, where we live. He and I have formed and facilitate multiple refugee settlement teams to welcome refugees currently held in Australian immigration detention. We do this with organizational partners Mosaic and Ads Up Canada. We also serve the Tenth Church refugee ministry, which provides extensive settlement services and social support to Afghan refugee claimants. Indeed, some of our closest friends here in Canada are members of the Afghan community.

However, at the outset I want to acknowledge that most of my Afghan friends are themselves unable to appear before the special committee because of the extreme risk doing so would pose to their loved ones in Afghanistan. I come, therefore, with deep humility and speak out of relationships of respect, reciprocity and responsibility.

I refer you first and foremost to the document entitled “Defining Family”, which contains the voices of Afghans in Canada as compiled by Journey Home Community Association and Tenth Church refugee ministry. This is the message the Afghan community wish the Government of Canada to hear. Building upon this document is a second, which contains recommendations for a coherent and consistent family reunification policy specific to the Afghan crisis.

Canada defines family members as one's spouse and dependent children. This narrow definition places Afghan families at risk. Afghan families typically live together as multi-generational households, and thus immediate family includes parents, siblings and children of any age. As well as parents and unmarried siblings, other dependants include those in the household and those who are financially dependent.

The Afghan definition of “family” matters because the Taliban target family members. The Taliban hold an entire family responsible for the actions of one family member and operate under a revenge model, which requires the life of a family member in place of a person who has evaded capture. Thus, whole families face deferred risk for the actions of one family member, including a Canadian-based family member.

There is, however, current precedent for expanding the definition of “family”. The special family reunification program offers permanent residence for extended family members of a subset of former Afghan interpreters. Under this program, extended family includes parents, siblings and children of any age. Moreover, Afghans who assisted the Canadian government can apply to resettle their de facto dependants, where de facto dependants are defined as those who live in the same household or who are financially or emotionally dependent. Both of these initiatives more adequately reflect the reality of Afghan families.

Addressing the current policy gap requires an expansion of the special family reunification program beyond interpreters. Specifically, the expanded special family reunification program should offer permanent residence for the Afghan extended family members of Canadian citizens and permanent residents. In exceptional circumstances, and where there is evidence of risk, the expanded special family reunification program should include de facto dependants. To ensure fairness, the processing of applications should prioritize those with evidence of risk and/or the presence of additional risk factors.

In sum, Canada needs a streamlined extended family reunification policy to respond to the Afghan crisis. Expanding the definition of “family” for Afghan family reunification demonstrates both compassion for and cultural sensitivity to the particular risks experienced by Afghans.

Thank you.

[The Chair, Liberal, Sukh Dhaliwal]

Thank you very much, Ms. Moloney. Thank you for your compassionate work in the community.

We'll start with the honourable members.

First and foremost, we'll start with my own member of Parliament, Madame Findlay, for six minutes, please.

[Kerry-Lynne Findlay, Conservative, South Surrey—White Rock, BC]

Thank you, Mr. Chair. I don't know if that makes me responsible for everything you say and do, but I'll be careful about that. It's a good thing we're friends.

Alison, it's very good to see you again. I know that you've gone four times to Afghanistan and filmed there, at great risk to yourself.

I have some questions. I know you generally look through a woman-focused lens. Are women who served in the Afghan republic security forces being targeted by the Taliban?

[Alison MacLean]

Yes. This is one of my disappointments in Canada. I watched Afghan policewomen and military women rise and develop in Afghanistan over a 10-year period. Sadly, Afghan policewomen are being hunted down and executed. Most recently, a former policewoman, who was eight months pregnant, was dragged out of her home and executed in front of her children and neighbours. The Taliban continue the reprisal killings. I have families in hiding, both in Afghanistan and Pakistan, and they are on Taliban hit lists.

This is what's happening right now. The women are being targeted. Any woman who worked in the security forces is at risk.

[Kerry-Lynne Findlay, Conservative, South Surrey—White Rock, BC]

When you were embedded in Afghanistan, what signs, if any, did you see of the Taliban's resurgence and the republic's weakness to stop it?

[Alison MacLean]

I documented the Taliban extensively. Particularly in 2010, I was with Canada and the U.S. forces. In 2012, 2014 and 2016, I was supported by four other countries, primarily Germany. I was all over Afghanistan.

The Taliban were and still are, in my opinion, in lockstep with ISIS-K. ISIS-K is just an extension of the Taliban. NATO forces and the intelligence services, Canadian included, for whatever reason chose to ignore how serious the Taliban resurgence was.

In 2016, ironically, I went in with Russian forces into Kunduz. They were able to push back, with NATO forces, the Taliban resurgence in 2016. It took all of less than a week to do that. I was with six different countries on that mission.

However, after that moment, they should have realized that the Taliban were gaining regular footholds, and it was ignored. I don't understand why the intelligence communities, worldwide and NATO-wide, ignored journalists who were on the ground and warning about this issue.

[Kerry-Lynne Findlay, Conservative, South Surrey—White Rock, BC]

Thank you.

What impact do you think the absence of female police officers under the Taliban regime will have on public safety and women's rights in Afghanistan going forward?

[Alison MacLean]

Going forward, we know already that 14-year-old girls are being taken from their homes and forced into marriage. I know personally of many cases of Afghan young girls being traded to Pakistan Taliban. Not having Afghan policewomen to manage domestic violence.... The Afghan policewomen in the past were able to manage and work with young girls and women. That no longer exists. It's tragic. As well, with education, of course, the schools are closed again after grade six.

[Kerry-Lynne Findlay, Conservative, South Surrey—White Rock, BC]

Do I have any more time, Mr. Chair?

[The Chair, Liberal, Sukh Dhaliwal]

You have two minutes.

[Kerry-Lynne Findlay, Conservative, South Surrey—White Rock, BC]

Can you share with us the perspective of those women you've worked with and the women you still have some contact with regarding why the Afghan republic collapsed and how the international community should respond?

Do they feel heard, or do they feel lost right now?

[Alison MacLean]

No, actually one of the most exciting things for me in documenting the rise of Afghan women in general, as well as police and military women, is that I saw a confidence that I don't think has existed in other generations. The women I'm in continual contact with now.... I am helping to support five families with the help of Rotary and private citizens. We're supporting a number of women and girls in Afghanistan. They do feel betrayed. They are also very concerned about the international community even considering supporting the Taliban.

Qatar, unfortunately, in my opinion [Technical difficulty—Editor] one of the architects of the destabilization of Afghanistan. They should be doing more to push education. Qatar reveres education. Girls are allowed to have education. They should be applying pressure on the Taliban.

[The Chair, Liberal, Sukh Dhaliwal]

You have 25 seconds.

[Kerry-Lynne Findlay, Conservative, South Surrey—White Rock, BC]

Is there anything else you want to share with us, Alison?

[Alison MacLean]

I'd like to share my concern over the failure of operation Afghan safety. I have two fixers and their families at risk in Pakistan who cannot go back to Afghanistan. They're on a list. I am struggling trying to get them to Canada, although we have housing for them and private sponsorship. This is a failure. It's unacceptable. They kept me alive.

[The Chair, Liberal, Sukh Dhaliwal]

Thank you very much, Ms. Findlay.

Now we'll go to Mr. Sidhu for six minutes.

Mr. Sidhu, go ahead, please.

[Maninder Sidhu, Liberal, Brampton East, ON]

Thank you, Mr. Chair.

I'd like to welcome all the witnesses here with us tonight. Thank you for sharing your insights.

I'd like to go to Ms. Moloney first. You mentioned streamlining processes for family reunification. I know on this committee we try to be very forward-looking and I think as a committee we ought to think forward and learn from the past.

What processes do you think should be in place to help streamline things to help with family reunification? Please take your time.

[Katherine Moloney]

I'm not sure if you have received a copy of the policy recommendations that I sent out. In that document, I've detailed how we can potentially bring these processes together.

First, I think we already have some really great programs, which just need to be expanded. That would mean that the small subset of recipients for the current special family reunification program would be broadened to include all Canadian citizens and permanent residents who have extended family at risk in Afghanistan. That very program that is already in existence could be widened for all Afghan Canadians.

We can also learn from the other program that is for Afghans who assisted the Canadian government. This program is a wider program and allows de facto dependants—and de facto is quite widely defined. In certain circumstances, particularly where there's established risk, aunties, uncles, nieces and nephews who are specifically at risk should be considered under the same extended family reunification program.

I do propose that, because we need to have a streamlined and fair approach, we consider using the risk factors that are already in use by the Canadian government, which are particular to the special humanitarian program. The five categories listed are women leaders, human rights defenders, journalists, persecuted religious and ethnic minorities, and LGBTI people, but also Afghans who assisted the Canadian government.

Like the rest of the programs for Afghanistan, we need to prioritize the processing of family reunification.

Thank you.

[Maninder Sidhu, Liberal, Brampton East, ON]

Thank you for that.

Mr. Taheri, would you like to add something here?

[Djawid Taheri]

I'm in agreement with Ms. Moloney. Family reunification can be done quite easily. The definition of family, the way it is currently done in Canada, is quite restrictive. We're a very small group of individuals who actually fall under the word “family”, whereas, as was stated earlier, the family in the context of the Afghan culture is quite big. Even siblings are not allowed to come, let alone aunties and uncles. We're talking about some of the people who actually live together. They were dependent on each other at home.

Those people who have the means are in Canada. They were accepted as refugees, or they are permanent residents. They are unable to assist their family members. There has to be a way to do this because, by virtue of their connection to the west, these individuals and their family members would be targeted and are being targeted in Afghanistan.

I have a lot of refugee clients from Afghanistan who arrived here in the past six of seven months and have been accepted, but they can't sleep at night because ultimately they worry about their very close, immediate family members who are still in Afghanistan, and nothing can be done to bring them to safety.