Afghanistan Committee on May 28th, 2008

[Arif Lalani]

To me, one is very clear. Parliament has decided that our military contribution in Kandahar will end in 2011. That means we need to start thinking about which areas we should focus on between now and 2011 to make sure, as best we can, that Afghans will have self-sustaining institutions by 2011, and be realistic about the goals we are trying to achieve.

We hear a lot of talk that it's a 20- or 30-year process to achieve the goals we have in mind. That is true for long-term development goals, and it is true to create the kind of economic prosperity and conditions that I think Afghans want. But between now and then we need to create a base to allow them to pursue those long-term goals.

That means focusing on the Afghan National Security Forces, the army, and the police; focusing on local governance so the Afghan government is providing services at the district level—the Canadian equivalent is the municipal level; and focusing on the regional issue. I think the international community should do more to address the Afghanistan-Pakistan border issue, and I can talk about what we're doing.

But it is reasonable to assume that in 2011 we will have an Afghan National Army that is trained and equipped, with Canadian and international support, to actually take the lead in its own security operations. It is even reasonable to assume, on policing, that we will have an Afghan national police force that will be better trained, better equipped, and better able to enforce basic law and order than it is now.

If we're able to do those things and include local level governance, in 2011 the question becomes much easier. If Afghans can hold that and build on it, we can be supportive, as opposed to being in the forefront on some of those issues. I think those objectives are achievable, as long as we're realistic about what we're trying to achieve there.

[Bob Rae, Liberal, Toronto Centre, ON]

I'm going to share my time with Mr. Ignatieff.

[Michael Ignatieff, Liberal, Etobicoke—Lakeshore, ON]

Ambassador, to get to the two issues that have bedeviled your time as ambassador, what specific measures has the Government of Canada undertaken through Corrections Canada, the RCMP, your office, and the civilian side to guarantee that detainees handed over by Canadian Forces are not subjected to abuse? Are you satisfied that we can now hand over detainees to Afghan authorities in Kandahar without risk of abuse or torture?

Two, what measures is Canada taking to reduce the incidence of corruption in the Karzai government?

[Arif Lalani]

On detainees, I actually think the Canadian effort and the international effort at this stage are quite well documented.

First of all, it is not only a Canadian issue. There are five or six other countries that have signed memorandums of understanding with the Afghan government on detainees. So it is a shared issue between the international community and the Afghan government. The first thing we've done is to sign agreements with the Afghan government that make clear Afghan responsibilities for the treatment of detainees, as well as their obligations under international law and under their own laws.

Second, we are also undertaking and implementing a very rigorous--many people have called it the most rigorous--monitoring regime of the detainees who are transferred to Afghan authority. There are a number of other countries also doing it, so we are into the facilities where we have detainees. We are working with Afghan authorities on the information sharing, but we have people physically going in and monitoring to ensure that we are actually satisfied with the treatment.

Third, we also realize that the long-term solution is again to build Afghan capacity, in terms of their institutions and their training. So we are undertaking now our own mentoring and technical assistance and training of Afghan officials, as are other countries.

So there is actually a much more coordinated approach here than might be apparent as we focus on Kandahar, but there are a number of other countries doing exactly the same, and there is a positive cumulative effect. I am actually satisfied that we are actually doing everything possible, and the evidence on the Afghan side is that they take the agreement seriously. President Karzai has made the commitment publicly, and they have responded when issues have been raised.

Regarding corruption, one of the issues is that there is not a silver bullet. We can't simply legislate away corruption. The Afghans are very clear that they understand, and they accept, that corruption is a real issue.

I think there are two other things we can tackle that will help corruption, and I think it's very apparent. One is that in the civil service they have to get better training and better pay, and if we're able to do that, then that will address some of the corruption. The second thing is that I think it is quite right and quite legitimate for Canada and other countries to continue to urge--even to pressure--the Afghan government to take some of its own decisive steps to better vet the candidates they appoint to senior positions in the civil service, to take more action. I believe the Afghan ambassador himself, when he appeared before your committee, also talked about what he thought his own government needed to do on corruption, including looking at the judicial process and being able to prosecute people who clearly are found suspect of corrupt activity.

We are doing that through funding training programs in different ministries. We are doing that in some ways, as I mentioned, by helping to address the salary issues in the Afghan police force, for example. This year they are now better paid than they were last year. Their salaries are equivalent to the army's salaries, and we know that makes a difference. I don't think there is a short-term solution, but I do believe we should keep the pressure up.

[The Chair, Conservative, Pierre Lemieux]

Thank you very much, Ambassador.

We now move to Madame Barbot.

[Vivian Barbot, Bloc, Papineau, QC]

Thank you.

Ambassador, there has been a lot of criticism that Canada's reputation has been weakened because of too close an association with Mr. Bush's policies. The guest who spoke just before you said exactly that. I would like to know what you, as Canada's representative in Afghanistan, think about that. It has been suggested that we are not doing enough in Afghanistan on the democratic front.

As Canada's representative, how do you protect Canada's reputation, and how do you personally do your work with the appropriate authorities?

[Arif Lalani]

I do not think that this is just an American endeavour, a United States endeavour. As we said, 60 countries, organizations and institutions are in the country working with us. Coordination between us is good. There are a number of players. Policy in Afghanistan is not just American policy. There are policies on development, on good governance and on human rights. These are not just American values, they are Canadian ethical values as well. I feel that the mission is truly an international one.

As to Canada's role, our presence and our diplomacy,

we have certainly raised our game, as have other countries. The embassy there is now one of our most senior in terms of its civilian deployment. The Canadian embassy in Afghanistan is now among the top five embassies that Canada has in terms of our civilian personnel. We have tremendous influence because we are one of the largest donors. We ended last year as probably the fourth-largest donor to Afghanistan. That has meant that on any given issue, whether it's policing, or education, or governance, Canada is actually one of the leaders. The U.S. and the U.K.—which is usually one of the top ones—and others actually look to us to help solve the problem, and they also look to us to make sure we are in agreement on some of these issues.

We have a very good relationship with the Afghan government. I see President Karzai almost weekly, and I see him more than that in multilateral meetings with other key ambassadors.

We also have a certain amount of credibility that some other countries don't, because I think Afghans know we are not there because of any past history. They also know we are not there because we are really trying to carve out any permanent future role. I think they respect that we are really trying, in some ways, to build stability there that will benefit Afghans, but which will clearly also benefit security for Canadians.

Frankly, leadership is not a position Canadians are used to, but Afghanistan is a place where we are actually one of the leaders. One of the implications of that is that it's not easy, and as Canadians we need to come to terms with that too. Leadership means that sometimes we do things that are tough and difficult, and I think we're doing that in Afghanistan.

[The Chair, Conservative, Pierre Lemieux]

Mr. Bachand.

[Claude Bachand, Bloc, Saint-Jean, QC]

Thank you, Mr. Chair.

Mr. Lalani, you started by saying that you wanted to give a presentation that was as provocative as the one given before you. I do not think that you succeeded. Earlier, with Mr. Fuller, we were talking to a man who got off the beaten path. For several years, we have always heard the same speeches, to the point that I could have given parts of your speech before you did. As an example, when you mentioned six million children going back to school, I said to myself that you would then say “one third of them girls”, and that is exactly what you said.

I do not mean to be impolite to you, but we, as members of Parliament, have the impression that the military, the diplomats and the public service are controlled to the extent that key spokespeople like yourself follow in each others footsteps and use the same script.

Am I being too hard on you? Or would you be prepared to tell me that I am right and that you are required to follow the party line?

[Arif Lalani]

You're not being too hard on me. But with all due respect, let me suggest to you that the truth doesn't change, and it doesn't matter what my target audience is or to whom I'm speaking. The fact is that there are six million children in school--more children than have ever been in school in the entire history of Afghanistan. And they wouldn't be in school if we weren't there and the international community wasn't there. I will say the same thing tomorrow. I hope that a year from now I will say seven million. So I think some things are facts.

I will also tell you that you are right that there are a lot of challenges. This is a story of successes in some parts of the country--sometimes around the country--real challenges, and even issues where people need to admit failure. It is clear that we need to do more to have the Afghan government fight corruption. The international community has learned that we need to focus more on the national police force, which is what we have been doing over the past year.

So I am not restricted. If you want to talk to my colleagues in the Department of Foreign Affairs, and I think some members of Parliament with whom I've worked, they will tell you that I'm about as blunt a diplomat as you will find. Let me therefore also be blunt. I could have also finished most of Graham Fuller's sentences, because there is a perspective and a narrative that says nothing is working. The fact is that some things are working and some things are not.

It is also a fact that if we were to leave, it would be worse. There are some things that only we can do right now to help Afghans, and that is to help them build their institutions so they come to a point where they can address their own challenges. It doesn't mean that three or five years from now we should be thinking of a state that looks like Switzerland or even Bangladesh. But what we should be aiming for are Afghan institutions that can address the challenges.

I hope that was blunt enough for you.

[The Chair, Conservative, Pierre Lemieux]

Thank you very much.

Ms. Black.

[Dawn Black, NDP, New Westminster—Coquitlam, BC]

Thank you.

Thank you, Ambassador. I think you're aware that in Parliament we passed a resolution not too long ago about an Afghan journalist who's been sentenced to death. I have a letter from friends of his in Afghanistan who indicate that his appeal was delayed once again and his health is failing.

What specific steps have you or our embassy taken to ensure that he will be spared the death penalty? That hasn't happened yet. He's appealing and it's being delayed and delayed. Are you monitoring his condition in any way? The information I'm getting from Afghanistan indicates that he's deteriorating, and his brother is also under threat now.

More than that, what are we doing there as Canadians? What is our embassy doing there to ensure that people who are involved in human rights work in Afghanistan are not sentenced to death and are able to do the kind of work around human rights that we expect they would do, with the assistance they're getting from the international community?

[Arif Lalani]

Thank you, and thank you for asking.

Mr. Kambaksh is the journalist you're referring to, and it is a case that I've taken a personal interest in. It is a case that we have monitored very closely. We're aware of the recent court case and the delay that Mr. Kambaksh has asked for because of his health. I have raised the matter personally with President Karzai. Other countries have done the same thing. I've also raised it with the foreign minister, the national security advisor, and others.

There is no doubt, on the part of the Afghan government, about where Canada stands on this issue. It is an issue of freedom of expression and human rights. And the Afghan government certainly understands our position on the death penalty.

We are monitoring his personal situation. I want to respect his right to privacy and the work we are doing. I should probably stop by saying you can be assured this is a case we have followed and I have personally followed very closely. We will continue to follow it closely and work with the Afghan government.

There is a process, and so far the process is taking its course. None of us are happy with the charge and none of us are happy with the sentence, but the fact remains that it has not been implemented. He is going through the process, and we are watching and working very closely to make sure he is able to come out of that process with the right results.

[Dawn Black, NDP, New Westminster—Coquitlam, BC]

I'm pleased to hear that you're following this so carefully and that you are involved in it and speaking to the president about it.

Can you tell me if you feel some optimism about the case, and also about family members, who've been under threat as well, and whether you've raised that with the Afghan authorities?

[Arif Lalani]

I don't want to comment on it, only because I don't want to prejudice the process that the Afghans are undertaking. I think we need to let that process work. For me to comment now will be seen as perhaps prejudicing that process.

[Dawn Black, NDP, New Westminster—Coquitlam, BC]

Okay, fair enough.

There's been a lot of concern in Afghan, and I think internationally, around the number of civilian casualties. It's an issue that obviously needs to be dealt with. Our previous witness talked about how it feeds the insurgency when civilians die or they are injured.

In your discussions with the Afghan officials, can you tell me whether our allies are committed to ensuring that Afghan civilians are not losing their lives in aerial attacks and in other ways? Where is that now?

[Arif Lalani]

This is an issue that I think NATO and the alliance and the commander of the ISAF force, COMISAF, have taken very seriously. NATO forces have rules of engagement. They have reviewed them over the course of the year that I have been there, specifically in response I think to President Karzai and others who have raised this. It's a difficult issue. Every civilian casualty, anywhere, is a terrible thing. But there actually has been a different approach from the forces over the year that I have been there.

I can give you an anecdote. I don't want to underplay it, but I think the person that is most involved in this is the commander of ISAF forces. He may hate me for stealing his story, but he tells a story of an incident that happened this year, where there were civilian casualties as a result, I think, of some aerial activity. He went to the site himself and met with the village elders and tribal leaders for several hours, and for several hours he heard their concerns and their angst about the situation. At the end of it, he said, “Well, I've heard you. I've given you my piece of it. I've told you what we do and the precautions we take, and that's about as far as we can go.” He was getting ready to leave, and, as he tells it, they all stopped him and said, “No, we want one more thing from you.” They said, “We want more of your troops. If you have more of your troops there, we actually don't think some of this is going to happen.”

I'm not saying that to make an argument for more or less troops. I'm simply saying that I think even Afghans understand it's complex. Military operations are not easy, but even the Afghans themselves in that situation suggested to him—

[Dawn Black, NDP, New Westminster—Coquitlam, BC]

I want to also ask you about the situation with the global food crisis--

[The Chair, Conservative, Pierre Lemieux]

Ms. Black, I'm sorry, we're out of time. It's over to the Conservative side.

[Deepak Obhrai, Conservative, Calgary East, AB]

Thank you, Mr. Chair.

After I'm done, my colleague Laurie will ask a question, as he has just returned from Afghanistan.

Before I start, Mr. Lalani, I want to respond to Mr. Bachand.

Mr. Bachand, as I have been the parliamentary secretary for foreign affairs for two years, I know Mr. Lalani very well. I've worked with him, and I can tell you he is one of those professionals. The diplomacy that we have in Canada is very professional diplomacy, and he is one of our best diplomats in telling us how it is, as a professional.

Mr. Lalani, I'm not just pumping you up. I know because I've worked with you. Mr. Lalani, it's good to have you back here and to hear your assessment, as our ambassador to Afghanistan.

In the last ten days I've been travelling with the former Minister of Foreign Affairs to Croatia and to Italy. Today I met with the Germans. All the NATO countries have a very keen interest in having a successful Afghanistan mission. From what I heard from all of them, they're committed to making Afghanistan a success, so there is international goodwill out there.

In my talks to them, I stated that Afghanistan could become a model, if it's successful, for bringing peace to other regions of the world, like Somalia and everything. So there is a lot more vested interest in our coordination effort in making Afghanistan a success story.

Interestingly, the Saudi foreign minister said to me that one of the reasons Pakistan is surviving as a state is because of its professional armed forces, the building of this institution. I asked why that cannot be applied to Afghanistan's building of its institutions so that then Afghanistan can carry on with it.

I think you are the number one ambassador, and today as you talk to the committee and to all Canadians via television, I think Canadians want to know, since we have been there for a while and will be there for a while, what the Afghani people are feeling. They've sacrificed, and they ask whether they are confident about the future. What do they want, on the ground?

We have people who are making all kinds of statements. The one before you said that.... I think Canadians still want to feel what is going on in Afghanistan. Travelling to Afghanistan is very tough. My colleague and I just came back from there.

As our ambassador, tell Canadians what Afghanis feel. Do they feel confident about their future or not?

[Arif Lalani]

Thank you, and thank you for your kind comments.

What is surprising to me is that Afghans actually say they have hope for the future. There have been polls conducted in which Afghans have said they are still very concerned about security, and yet in the same poll they have said they have confidence in the future and in their government. When we dig deeper and ask what it is about security that concerns them, interestingly, often they talk about law and order, tribal politics, and governance issues--and not necessarily about al-Qaeda and the Taliban. This tells us again that that's what we need to focus on and what Afghans themselves need to focus on.

In terms of daily life, we should also remember that life for Afghans is different from life for us as an international force. I have a certain security regime. I won't go into the measures that we take for me, but I take certain precautions. But in the year I have been there, I have seen that life in Kabul has actually moved on and intensified. There is more traffic on the streets. If you get up at nine and you're on the street, you see boys and girls going to school. There is a guy I drive by every day who plants a little corner of his field, and he's gone through three or four harvests of whatever it is he is planting. I say that just to say there are aspects of Afghan life that are normal.

What Afghans want to do is no different from what Canadians want to do. They want to have some kind of house and shelter. They want employment. They want their kids in school. They want health care, and they want to be able to go down to the corner with some confidence that the local police officer or legal authority is somebody they can trust.

[Deepak Obhrai, Conservative, Calgary East, AB]

Are we having success then?

[Arif Lalani]

I think we are getting there, because if you look at those factors.... We are employing Afghans.

Canada is one of the largest contributors to the micro-finance program, which gives small loans to Afghans. A majority of them are women. They're starting their own businesses; they're becoming independent. They're taking care of themselves and their families. We have more kids in school than ever before. This year we're going to train more teachers. We're going to have new textbooks and a new curriculum. Housing is being worked on in terms of construction. We are digging wells; we are building bridges; we are paving 4,000 kilometres of roads. So we've got those aspects.

The part that I think we really need to work on is that personal security part, of being able to go to the government and the police force and have confidence in it. I think that's really our focus.

We see so many images of the challenges we're fighting, and it's natural because that's what you're seeing. I have travelled throughout most of the country now--to the north, to the east, to the west, to the south. There is normal life for Afghans. We should not think that because we take certain precautions, their movement is as restricted as ours. They're walking on the street; they're driving on the street; they're playing sports; they're watching television. There are new programs starting and local television stations. I think there is normal life, and that is why they have hope.

The final point I would make is that Afghans are used to a level of insecurity and they're used to a level of challenge, because, unfortunately, that has been their history, in everyone's recent memory.

I have just one last point. If you look at where they were in 2001 under the Taliban and at where they are now, there's a light year's difference. Under the Taliban, nobody was in the streets, nobody was in school, there was no economic activity, nothing. Now all of that has returned. It's not where they want it to be, but it has returned.

[The Chair, Conservative, Pierre Lemieux]

Mr. Hawn, there's just time for a very short comment.

[Laurie Hawn, Conservative, Edmonton Centre, AB]

It will be a short comment, and I think the answer will be very short.

We just got back, and we consistently heard a frank discussion of the challenges. We also heard consistently about the measurable progress that's been made. We heard it from the Canadian embassy folks; we heard it from five other ambassadors; we heard it from the United Nations in the person of Chris Alexander; we heard it from President Karzai; we heard it from the Speaker of the House, who is effectively the leader of the opposition; we heard it from the Kandahar provincial council; we heard it from the PRT; we heard it from the Joint Task Force Afghanistan leadership; we heard it from the soldiers. All of these people have lives on the line, their own lives or the lives of their countrymen. Is this just a massive plot to mislead the world on progress in Afghanistan, or is the story simply the truth?