Afghanistan Committee on Oct. 21st, 2009

[Laurie Hawn, Conservative, Edmonton Centre, AB]

I'm glad you brought that up. It's quite true that this war, or the peace, will not be won solely with weapons, but it will surely be lost without them, especially at this stage.

I'm glad you brought up General McChrystal's report and our experience there, because I believe that in his report he pointed to our efforts or to the kind of thing we're doing, saying that is the future of this mission. Is that your reading of his report as well?

[Stockwell Day, Conservative, Okanagan—Coquihalla, BC]

He's clearly of that mind. We're watching somewhat at arm's length. I believe the size of the American forces that will come in there is going to be a significant factor. The overall international force there is about 68,000, with 32,000 being American, and then there are about another 36,000 who are under American command.

General McChrystal's observation is that the goal of having 210,000 men in the Afghan forces being trained and responsible is woefully short. He says it has to be more like 440,000. This is uphill, and we aren't at the top of the hill yet.

In fact, as we know from watching what's happening in the U.S., it appears the debate about the size of the armed forces is still going on within the administration. General McChrystal is saying one thing in terms of the type of campaign, and we understand Vice President Biden is out there with another view. We wish them well and hope they settle that internally. It's an important debate that they have to have, and we're not going to get involved in it, but clearly increased security forces from the U.S. and other countries are going to be required to do what has to be done.

[Laurie Hawn, Conservative, Edmonton Centre, AB]

We concentrate on Kandahar for obvious reasons, but Kandahar is only one of 34 provinces. Do you have a feeling that we're not there just for Kandahar? We--NATO and the rest of the folks--are there for the entire country. Do you have any insight on the progress in the country as a whole, and not just Kandahar?

[Stockwell Day, Conservative, Okanagan—Coquihalla, BC]

Some areas of the country are seen as very secure. In fact, huge areas of that country are very secure. But the areas in which we are involved are those that are most prone to this activity. They are the target areas. Including the Kandahar area, we have two other districts for which we are responsible. For a lot of reasons, historical and otherwise, we're in the thick of it. You don't hear about the relative peace and security in other areas because this is a large country. I guess that's understandable.

Over a million aircraft today will land safely. There's not going to be a news story on that in any newspaper or on television. If one crashes, quite rightly it's going to be a big story. I'm not saying that in a pejorative sense relative to reporting, but all we hear about—and we do need to hear about it—are the security problems, the deaths, the fact that suicide bombers still walk into crowds of children and blow children to pieces. That still happens. That needs to be reported. It underlines the gravity of our mission there.

[Laurie Hawn, Conservative, Edmonton Centre, AB]

Just touching on the election for a second, I liked your comparison to voter turnouts in Canada. There was fraud, obviously, in the election over there. That's pretty clear. You listed 23,000 or so polling stations, 210 of which had serious fraud problems. That's less than 1%. I have no idea what it is in Canada, but it's safe to say in your experience, and certainly in mine, there is election fraud in Canada as well. There's fraud in every election in the world. It's a matter of degree. Obviously over there it's much higher than we'd wanted to see, but again, some perspective is required.

[Stockwell Day, Conservative, Okanagan—Coquihalla, BC]

I understand from election to election, and we all watch it carefully, that in any robust democracy, even a mature one like Canada's, not an election goes by without complaints being filed, accusations of fraud. Sometimes those are proven and sometimes they are not. We shouldn't be surprised to hear of similar accusations in a place like Afghanistan where this is brand new, nor should we be dismissive. We have to take it seriously, and I believe the commissions are taking it seriously: they disqualified candidates; they disqualified large numbers of polls; and they told the president, as close as he was to 50%, he was not close enough, apparently. There's going to be a runoff.

[Laurie Hawn, Conservative, Edmonton Centre, AB]

It's the glass half full, half empty discussion.

In a similar vein, I'd like to get your thoughts on the Shia law being watered down. It was proposed and then sent back, and it finally did go through, which we obviously, fundamentally, disagree with. The fact that women got away with protesting it—to me that's a glass half full, not a glass half empty example.

[Stockwell Day, Conservative, Okanagan—Coquihalla, BC]

We'll all agree this law, quite rightly and thankfully, could never exist in Canada, even in its redrafted form. We also, quite rightly, acknowledge the right of other nations to come up with their own laws. I look for the day in Afghanistan when women won't just get away with protesting; it will be a matter of course, and they won't even have to think about retribution.

Aspects of that law were changed because of Canadian concerns and concerns around the world. Violence against women, upon which the law is predicated, is something we take very seriously. We want to see ongoing progress. The fact is that it was changed. Even though everyone is acknowledging it's their law, we don't like what we're paying a sacrifice for—many times in the extreme case—and we want a serious second look at that. It got a second look, and some changes were made. This is progress, but it's incremental. I don't think I for one, and others around the table, would be cheering wildly that women have full rights in Afghanistan. I don't believe that's the case.

There are also other countries with whom we deal in a very open, diplomatic process. We trade with them, we exchange embassies with them, and they have similar laws. We want to work in appropriate ways with women and others in all those countries to see true equality one day become a reality in those countries also.

[The Chair, Conservative, Rick Casson]

Thank you, Mr. Hawn.

Mr. Dewar.

[Paul Dewar, NDP, Ottawa Centre, ON]

Thank you, Mr. Chair, and thank you, Minister.

I want to start off with your comments about communication and getting the message out. I want to be precise. In looking over the shop that you chair, the Afghanistan task force, something came up that caused me considerable concern. When I asked officials responsible for training military and police whether they were able to read the Afghan Independent Human Rights Commission's report, a wonderful project that we helped fund, they told me they couldn't read it because it was in Dari. I was happy to provide a translation for them.

I looked into this, and I asked an order paper question about translation and the capacity of the task force. You talked about getting the message out, and that's fair enough. What came back was rather stunning to me. Not one person in the PCO, the Afghanistan task force, knew Dari or Pashto. In this country, I'd think we'd be able to find someone—I have. Those six communication assistants in that shop are doing something. From 2006 to 2009, the government spent a total of $4,512 on translation into Dari or Pashto, whereas in this same time period they spent $9.2 million on communications about the war.

I point that out to you because I think there are a lot of deficits. It's about priorities. I don't think we should be spending $9.2 million on getting the message out about the war. We should spend more on translation services. We have a critical role. If we can't even find people to translate the Afghan Independent Human Rights Commission's report about torture by the people we're training, we have a problem, Minister.

I will leave that with you as a concern, because you asked for advice. It's not acceptable, from my point of view, and I'd like to know the response. I think it's an area where we have failed.

There's been a lot of attention paid to the transfer of prisoners. I'm going to make a motion to have this committee talk to people about this and bring people before the committee. Are the transfer agreements that the government brought in and we signed onto being followed by Afghan government officials? Are we certain that they're following the procedure we put in place?

[Stockwell Day, Conservative, Okanagan—Coquihalla, BC]

It's my understanding that they are. I'll get back to you on how we came to that understanding and what gives us that sense of confidence. Then you can judge whether it's a good checking process we have.

On the issue of translation, there actually is a Dari speaker on our task force. This may not have been true when you asked for that information, but there is somebody there now who speaks Dari. Is one person enough? I don't know.

You've raised some good issues on translation. I'll get some information back to this committee, because I know we receive it from other sources. We get the reports of those human rights—

[Paul Dewar, NDP, Ottawa Centre, ON]

But you understand the disproportionate nature of the numbers.

[Stockwell Day, Conservative, Okanagan—Coquihalla, BC]

With respect to communication itself, I'll come back to you with the costs. The cost of printing and distributing these reports—that's got to be fairly significant. There are quite a number of other communication methods that are used. More communication was one of the key recommendations of the independent panel that looked at Afghanistan. In fact, it is the reason we're here today: communication, communication, communication. It was very strong. So I'll get back to you on that.

[Paul Dewar, NDP, Ottawa Centre, ON]

Fair enough.

I want to get back to the transfer. When the Afghan government releases a prisoner, one of the things that is of concern to all of us is whether we are being notified by the officials. Is that part of the protocol? Are we being notified by the officials when those prisoners are released from jail?

[Stockwell Day, Conservative, Okanagan—Coquihalla, BC]

I'll have to get back to you on that. I'm not sure what the notification process is. I don't know whether that would be our responsibility, but—

[Paul Dewar, NDP, Ottawa Centre, ON]

But we should know.

[Stockwell Day, Conservative, Okanagan—Coquihalla, BC]

—let me check on it. I have visited the principal prison under our jurisdiction. I went through pretty well every area of it and talked with a number of the individuals who were kept there.

[Paul Dewar, NDP, Ottawa Centre, ON]

I appreciate that. Please get back to us. For obvious reasons, this is something I think we should know .

We're training the military, the Afghan National Army, and that's an important job. I've had concerns about the police. I wonder if they know the human rights criteria of their own country, of their own constitution. That's a serious concern, and I've mentioned it before in committee.

I found it very surprising that the AWOL rate for the Afghan army is 10%. Is that your understanding? If so, how is it being dealt with by our military? If 10% of 94,000 men are AWOL, that's quite a significant number. What's our response to that?

[Stockwell Day, Conservative, Okanagan—Coquihalla, BC]

Whether it's 10% today or not--I can't say--any rate at all is of concern. Are we going to look at it in comparison to the Canadian Armed Forces, which results show are the best in the world, in a mature parliamentary democracy, with incredible training? We hold this brand-new Afghan army to high standards, but if we expect the same kind of attendance rate, we may be disappointed. So we have to measure it in terms of progress. The number of those being trained and staying are higher than they ever were, but this is fairly new. So it's a concern. It's something we'll work with in our mentoring and training.

Also remember that if you're a member of the armed forces in Afghanistan, you are a target within your own country. In Canada, when our soldiers walk down the street, they are greeted with respect everywhere they go. In that country, if you're a soldier, your family is at risk and you are at risk.

[Paul Dewar, NDP, Ottawa Centre, ON]

We're not at war, though, and I guess that's the point. It was reported by Persian BBC a couple of weeks ago that ANA and others are handing over their arms to the Taliban. So this is a critical piece. I'd like to know that we have something in place to track the soldiers we train. If they're going AWOL, where are they going?

[Stockwell Day, Conservative, Okanagan—Coquihalla, BC]

Remember, this is a culmination of us working with Afghanistan. They have to get to the place where they are controlling their own security and learning the methods and processes. Sometimes it's a simple matter of pay. They're getting paid more than ever, but in some areas of the country, where the narcotics economy is strong, it's pretty easy to buy them away from where they are.

So a 10% AWOL rate is not something a modern-day, sophisticated armed forces could tolerate. But we have to remember that 90% of them are staying on the job under threat of death and their families being slaughtered every day.

[Paul Dewar, NDP, Ottawa Centre, ON]

But we want to make sure that 10% of them aren't going to the other side. You mentioned Iraq, and that was an issue there. So do we have a strategy to deal with that? If we don't, we darn well should. We could be indirectly fueling the insurgency, and I don't think anyone wants that.

[Stockwell Day, Conservative, Okanagan—Coquihalla, BC]

Clearly these are things that make up part of the overall security matrix. We are seeing a maturing in Afghanistan of their capabilities, not just on the military side but on social development, in virtually every area. But you can't compare it to where we are.

[Paul Dewar, NDP, Ottawa Centre, ON]

I'm not.

[Stockwell Day, Conservative, Okanagan—Coquihalla, BC]

I know you're not, but we have to look at the progress and the fact that they are learning. They are also learning how to go after these types of inconsistencies.