Evidence of meeting #19 for Special Committee on the Canadian Mission in Afghanistan in the 40th Parliament, 2nd Session. (The original version is on Parliament’s site, as are the minutes.) The winning word was afghan.
A recording is available from Parliament.
3:35 p.m.
Conservative
Laurie Hawn Conservative Edmonton Centre, AB
I have a question, a clarification on witnesses. I'd just like to—
3:35 p.m.
Conservative
3:35 p.m.
Conservative
Laurie Hawn Conservative Edmonton Centre, AB
I have a question about clarification on witnesses. I would like to request the status of the previous Liberal ministers that we invited to appear before the committee today.
3:35 p.m.
Conservative
The Chair Conservative Rick Casson
From what I understand, former minister Graham and former minister Manley were both invited. We had a response from former minister Manley that he was travelling and a response from former minister Graham that offered alternative dates, as he wasn't available on this one.
3:35 p.m.
Conservative
The Chair Conservative Rick Casson
This is the 19th meeting of the Special Committee on the Canadian Mission in Afghanistan. Today, members, we have three witnesses with us, but we also have a motion of privilege to be dealt with. So I'm suggesting that we keep the witnesses until five o'clock and then take the last few minutes to deal with the motion. I'll give you a chance in a minute.
I also understand that something is happening in the House and we could have bells here at any time. I'm not sure what's going on, but that was the word I got.
Today we have the Honourable Lawrence Cannon, Minister of Foreign Affairs; the Honourable Peter MacKay, Minister of National Defence; and the Honourable Gordon O'Connor, Minister of State and Chief Government Whip. I think everybody is familiar with the process.
Go ahead, Paul.
3:35 p.m.
NDP
Paul Dewar NDP Ottawa Centre, ON
Thanks, Chair. As to when we get to committee business, can we do our usual rounds and and then go to committee business, as we have done in the past?
3:35 p.m.
Conservative
The Chair Conservative Rick Casson
This is a 10-minute round, so it takes 40 minutes to get through the first one. So we should almost make it for two full rounds.
3:35 p.m.
Conservative
The Chair Conservative Rick Casson
Welcome, all of you. You are familiar with committee proceedings. Do you all have opening statements?
3:35 p.m.
Central Nova Nova Scotia
Conservative
3:35 p.m.
Conservative
The Chair Conservative Rick Casson
That's good. We'll start with Mr. O'Connor and move down the line, and then we'll open it up to questions.
Mr. O'Connor, Gordon, Mr. Whip, the floor is yours.
3:35 p.m.
Carleton—Mississippi Mills Ontario
Conservative
Gordon O'Connor ConservativeMinister of State and Chief Government Whip
Thank you very much, Mr. Chairman.
I was Minister of National Defence from February 6, 2006, to August 14, 2007. During that time, my primary focus was to implement the new government defence policy, especially with respect to equipment and infrastructure. With the support of my cabinet colleagues, I was able to commit a historical level of funding to start the rebuilding of our naval, land, and air forces. This involved the acquisition of equipment such as strategic and tactical airlift, medium to heavy helicopters, tanks, howitzers, armoured combat vehicles, armoured trucks, improvised explosive device road-clearing vehicles, personal equipment, Arctic patrol vessels, and joint support ships. It also involved the upgrade of the armoured personnel carrier fleet, the frigates, and the submarines, as well as infrastructure.
During my time as minister, military operations in Afghanistan were extremely intense. Shortly after we took responsibility for Kandahar province, the Taliban challenged our military by trying to encircle Kandahar City. They amassed their fighters in the area and engaged in conventional-style attacks. Our troops took them on and defeated all their attacks. The Taliban suffered large numbers of casualties and learned that they could not fight the Canadians in a straight-on battle and hope to win. They had to give up their goal of seizing the city of Kandahar and reverted to harassing our forces by using improvised explosive devices and suicide bombers.
To support our troops, our government accelerated equipment deliveries and provided new capabilities that helped them fight the insurgency. While I focused on rebuilding the Canadian Forces, each day I received a briefing on current operations and intelligence, and normally the primary item of these briefings was Afghanistan. In general terms, I was advised of what was happening, what was being planned, and whether we had any detainees. With respect to detainees, I was usually informed of their state of health, whether they were getting medical care, and how long we anticipated detaining them. I believe that NATO had asked that we transfer detainees to the Afghan authorities within 96 hours of capture, subject to their specific medical needs.
Our military has responsibility for the supervision of detainees from the moment they are detained up until the point at which they are transferred from the detention site at Kandahar to Afghan authorities. During my time as minister, I do not recall ever being advised of any abuse or torture of prisoners by Canadian Forces members or any abuse or torture of detainees that they handed over to the Afghan authorities.
The members of the Canadian Forces are professional and ethical. Their military operations are guided by the rules of war, and each soldier is instructed to treat all detainees to the standard of humane treatment as set out in the Geneva Convention. I find it outrageous that members of the opposition go on and on in the House of Commons talking about a cover-up of abuse and torture. In effect, what they are saying is that the government and Canadian Forces are in some form of collusion on abuse and torture. But for this fallacy to occur, up to eight levels of the army would have to be involved through three or four rotations. This involves thousands of people. This would be the cover-up of all cover-ups and is a premise that simply goes beyond common sense. The opposition may not like how we are conducting this war, and that is their right, but to in effect accuse the government and the entire chain of command of the military of a cover-up is irresponsible.
I visited the troops in Afghanistan four times while I was minister, and during my third visit I visited the Afghan prison in Kandahar. I was accompanied by a few Canadian military and civilians, one of whom was from the Correctional Service of Canada. The prison had three categories of prisoners: political, criminal, and youth.
Seeing the prison first-hand was like stepping back in time. It was medieval-looking, with stone culverts on each side of the main access. I asked to look in cells at random, and their prison cells held many prisoners and were very grubby. I went into areas that housed political and criminal prisoners. I also asked to see the guards' quarters, which, to my surprise, were no better, except that they did not have locked doors. At no time did any Canadian accompanying me or any inmate make any accusation of abuse or torture. In fact, during my four visits to Kandahar and three visits to Kabul, I do not recall anyone, military or civilian, ever mentioning the abuse or torture of prisoners. And during my time as minister, I do not recall ever reading correspondence from Mr. Colvin.
I'm very proud of our government's achievement during my time as Minister of National Defence, and I was honoured to lead the department with such high-quality servicemen and servicewomen, as well as dedicated public servants.
In Afghanistan, the performance of our troops has been magnificent. They have defeated and disrupted Taliban activities since arriving in the province in 2006. They have helped deliver aid and reconstruction to the local communities and have trained and mentored large numbers of Afghan soldiers.
Without a doubt, we have the very best army, soldier for soldier, in the world. Because of their bravery and their commitment to the mission, they have suffered many casualties. They have offered and continue to offer all that a country can ask of them, and I thank them for their sacrifice on our behalf.
In closing, I want to say that as a current member of the government and a former Minister of National Defence, I am proud of what we have already done and continue to do in Afghanistan. Further, military operations in Afghanistan have been conducted in accordance with international laws, and there's no evidence whatsoever of the involvement of our troops in the abuse or torture of detainees or the condoning of any theoretical abuses by Afghan authorities. I do not recall ever having been advised, as minister, of any involvement of our troops in participating in or enabling abuse or torture of detainees, and I find the effort to claim a government-military cover-up of abuse and torture of Taliban detainees the lowest form of politics.
Thank you very much.
3:40 p.m.
Conservative
3:40 p.m.
Conservative
Peter MacKay Conservative Central Nova, NS
Thank you, Mr. Chair.
Colleagues, I'm pleased to be here with you, along with my cabinet colleagues, Ministers Cannon and O'Connor, to address the very important dimension of our country's mission in Afghanistan.
I began my tenure as Minister of National Defence in August of 2007. I succeeded Minister O'Connor. Prior to that, I served as Minister of Foreign Affairs. I have been to Afghanistan nine times, most recently over the Remembrance Day weekend, and was proud to be there with family members of our fallen soldiers.
To begin, I want to set the record straight on two important issues.
Torture is abhorrent and can never be tolerated. It is not only contrary to international law but to our own Canadian values in a free and democratic society. Let me be clear: the Government of Canada has never been complicit in torture or any violation of international law by wilfully allowing detainees—Taliban prisoners—taken by the Canadian Forces to be exposed to abuse. No one ever turned a blind eye. The disclosure of information is done in accordance with Canadian law and is free from political interference.
Mr. Chair, I can clearly and firmly state, and in good conscience, that our military, our diplomats, our development officers, our police officers, and our corrections agents have acted and continue to act in accordance with the highest ethical and professional standards in the most challenging of circumstances. As was described by Minister O'Connor, this was a difficult, dangerous mission, and it continues to be so.
Having said that, I'm extremely proud, not only in my career as a member of the political class, but proud as a Canadian, to have associated myself with the men and women in uniform and those diplomats who continue to perform brilliantly in this mission, as they do in other missions around the world.
Mr. Chair, I'm proud as well that in the two capacities I've had the opportunity to see first-hand the extraordinary efforts that are being made by these exceptional Canadians. In Afghanistan we have a unified whole-of-government effort towards an overarching goal that was defined by the UN Security Council mandate establishing this mission: to build security, stability, and prosperity, and the hope that will come with them, for the Afghan people.
We are in that country at the invitation of the Afghanistan government, with over 60 nations, 40 of whom contribute militarily. Since late 2005, Canada has been operating in one of Afghanistan's most dangerous regions, namely Kandahar province. We have been there facing constant violence, attacks, and a ruthless insurgency intent on killing Afghans, killing Canadians, our allies, and partners participating in this international mission.
Mr. Chair, this mission is complex and difficult. We are engaged in an armed conflict. And we are working with others to create the conditions that will help Afghans rebuild their country and exercise fully their sovereignty.
This requires the Canadian Forces to go out in the countryside; the mountains; the villages; the streets of Kandahar city and the villages of Kandahar province. We do this in support of our development and governance work—to provide security for Canadians engaged in the task of rebuilding Afghanistan.
In the course of our mission, the Canadian Forces—like other coalition partners—take detainees. It is one of the realities of armed conflict.
The policies and practices around this issue have been—and remain—a major focus of the whole-of-government effort and a subject of constant attention and scrutiny because of the seriousness of this issue.
Mr. Chair, let me begin with the fundamentals.
Canada's military operations and practices are grounded in our commitment to international law, including the law of armed conflict, or as it is also called, international humanitarian law. This includes, of course, the Geneva Convention. There is not a Canadian Forces member deployed to Afghanistan who is not fully familiar with the fundamental legal framework and the obligations for conducting operations. This is part of their basic training.
Let me state clearly, Mr. Chair and colleagues, that when our personnel in theatre—military, diplomatic, or others—have raised concerns, as a government we have acted. This is part of what we do; this is part of what we expect; this is part of the chain that comes from the people in theatre. It is part of the values and ethics, commitment, and professionalism that permeate the Canadian mission and the actions of Canadians serving on this mission.
Mr. Chair, you've heard from others on the complexity of issues we were dealing with at the time when we first deployed into Kandahar province. Notwithstanding the dangers and challenges of these early days, Canadians on the ground carried out their many responsibilities in partnership with the fledgling Afghan institutions and their players. This included meeting our obligations and our expectations regarding Taliban prisoners.
Canadian soldiers and civilians worked within the framework of the initial 2005 agreement put in place by the previous administration and with the Afghan government on the issue of Taliban prisoners. They acted within our legal obligations. Canada obtained assurances from the highest levels of the Afghanistan government in the course of our regular and constant engagement with them, from the level of president to local officers, that Canadian-transferred detainees or prisoners would be treated humanely.
Even so, clearly the situation on the ground evolved, as it continues to evolve. Our military and civilians on the ground and their teams in Ottawa received information from a wide variety of sources: from Canadian officials, our allies, embedded media, international organizations, and others. We carefully considered this information and used it to think about how we could improve the arrangement with the Afghan government. That's why we acted decisively.
In May 2007, a supplementary arrangement with the Government of Afghanistan was concluded and signed by our ambassador at the time, Arif Lalani. We negotiated this supplementary arrangement because we had, like our international partners, shared concerns regarding the conditions in Afghan detention facilities. The supplementary arrangement drew on the lessons we had learned from 2006 to 2007 and reflected the evolution of the facts on the ground and the information received from various sources. It was designed to enhance Canada's ability to meet its obligations and to assist the Afghan government to meet their responsibilities. It is a sovereign country.
The arrangement introduced a number of new provisions, Mr. Chair, including full and unrestricted access by Canadian officials to Canadian-transferred detainees, provisions for facilities for monitoring detention conditions as well as the well-being of Canadian-transferred Taliban prisoners within those Afghan detention facilities. It also included a specific provision that Canadian-transferred detainees would be held in a limited number of facilities; a reinforced role for the Afghanistan Independent Human Rights Commission, which includes full and unrestricted access to Canadian-transferred detainees; and the reaffirmation of the International Committee of the Red Cross's unrestricted right under international law to visit detainees in the context of armed conflict.
Canada put real resources to work within the Afghan prison facilities and the Afghan system to build the capacity they needed to exercise their responsibilities. We have made it a core objective to help Afghans rebuild and strengthen their justice system, and we have remained vigilant. We have taken allegations of abuse seriously, Mr. Chair, and we have acted when required: on the battlefield, in Kandahar, and in Kabul with the Government of Afghanistan. That includes directly communicating with Government of Afghanistan officials, up to and including the President, when issues arose. We have worked assiduously to ensure that the Afghan authorities were fully aware of Canada's expectations regarding their responsibilities and the treatment of Canadian-transferred Taliban prisoners.
We must remember again that we are in a sovereign country at their invitation. We are there to support, train, monitor, mentor, build, but not replace the sovereign authority of the Afghan government. In accelerating their capacity, we also accelerate our return home.
It's important to note that Canada is not alone in this approach. ISAF allies and partners work in support of the Afghan government's sovereignty, and I believe that is within the spirit of the UN mandate and the Afghan Compact, which lays out with the international community the Afghan government's objectives and priorities for international assistance. That does not mean we are uncritical or undemanding. We are not. We are, in fact, critical and demanding. But we are also respectful of Afghanistan and its sovereignty. And this means we must rely on the Afghan government to fulfill its commitments and work with the Afghans to give them the capacity to do so where that capacity is lacking. It's our responsibility and obligation to ensure ourselves that we are not transferring detainees into a substantial risk of abuse. And that is what we did, Mr. Chair.
3:50 p.m.
Conservative
The Chair Conservative Rick Casson
I have to interrupt. The bells have started, and I understand, unless there is unanimous consent to continue, I must adjourn the meeting for the vote.
3:50 p.m.
An hon. member
So you could continue for at least 20 minutes.
3:50 p.m.
Conservative
The Chair Conservative Rick Casson
Is there unanimous consent...?
I have no option but to suspend the meeting until after the vote.
