Afghanistan Committee on Oct. 27th, 2010

[Deepak Obhrai, Conservative, Calgary East, AB]

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

First, before I go on I would like, on behalf of my colleagues on this side, to ask General Natynczyk and the minister to thank very much your forces in Afghanistan for the excellent arrangements they made for us, both for our security and in looking after us. They went out of their way to ensure that we got a very good picture. It was one of the best trips we have made, despite all the challenges, and we found that they face challenges with all this situation.

Let me just put it in a very simple form and say that it is a theatre of war. You have to be on the ground there to realize that you are actually in the middle of a war. It's not a place to go as a tourist destination. We were very proud of what our soldiers were doing, and on behalf of all my colleagues here I want to say thank you very much for the excellent job they're doing.

[Gen Walter Natynczyk]

Thank you, sir.

[Deepak Obhrai, Conservative, Calgary East, AB]

Now, coming back to the question of our involvement in Afghanistan—we've been there for a while now—and the quarterly reports that give us the advances that have been made in Afghanistan, I'd like to ask the Minister of Foreign Affairs the question on transparency that came out yesterday from Berlin about Afghanistan being the second most corrupt nation in the world.

Canadians are extremely concerned about the fact that our combat mission ends in 2011, but we are going to be staying there for the development mission. Canadians really need to know now from us where their aid money is going and that it is being well spent. Perhaps you could give us an insight there, Minister.

[Lawrence Cannon, Conservative, Pontiac, QC]

Well, I think that in terms of accountability and transparency, colleague, these quarterly reports obviously help to understand where Canadian dollars are being spent and on what they are being spent. My colleague referred to the progress that has been made on our signature projects, whether it be the Dahla Dam or polio eradication. Incidentally, if one looks at the report, you will rapidly see that on those two fronts there has been enormous progress.

There's been progress as well in completing and building schools so that young women can go back to education. As you know, 2.2 million women now are in schools. This is something that previously was not taken into consideration.

No, I think that when you look at the quarterly reports you can see that there is momentum, that the Canadian dollars—money that Canadian taxpayers give to the government to make sure that development and aid is well used.... The Chief of the Defence Staff referred to the important work that's being done in training security forces as well as the Afghan National Army. Those are dollars of which Canadians can be very proud.

I'll conclude by saying that I not only participated in the Kabul conference but was also present in London, as well as at President Karzai's inauguration, at which there was a commitment by the president to address this whole issue of corruption. He has taken upon himself, as well as his government, to make this a priority. Needless to say, members of NATO as well as the ISAF membership are keeping a very close watch on what is taking place.

But I want to reassure Canadians that in terms of the tax dollars that they confide to this government, we are making sure through the quarterly reports that those dollars are accounted for and that they are getting the right amount of bang for the buck literally.

[Deepak Obhrai, Conservative, Calgary East, AB]

Thank you, Mr. Minister.

Just before I go to my next question, let me speak about the UAE, about which the opposition was asking, and your answer that we have excellent relations with the UAE. I think Minister MacKay has stated on many occasions, in his answers at the time we were down at Mirage, that the government of UAE took very good care of Canadians. You have on many occasions thanked them. So I gather it's appropriate to thank the Government of the UAE for allowing us to use the Camp Mirage and to say that they have been a good host.

[Peter MacKay, Conservative, Central Nova, NS]

Well, Mr. Obhrai, you're absolutely correct. We've been using both military installations as well as the port in the UAE for more than nine years, and to that extent they have been very supportive of the Canadian Forces and have always treated Canadians and Canadian forces with the utmost respect and dignity. They continue to support the drawdown at that particular base. We will have a closing out ceremony to thank them and acknowledge the support that they provided us in our operations.

That was without compensation, I should add: they were not charging us for the use of that facility or the port. So we are grateful and we do extend our thanks for the graciousness and the very practical and positive support they provided to Canadians during our time in their country.

[Deepak Obhrai, Conservative, Calgary East, AB]

Minister, from our trip I can state that it's a very hot place—Dubai is a very hot place—and the drinking water that they supplied us as a courtesy.... The Government of UAE did take care of us. I join you in thanking them.

Now, Minister Cannon, while we look at the overall mission in Afghanistan, not many Canadians also see what other things we are doing, aside from the school signature projects that we are doing. We are also involved in helping stabilize the region with Pakistan. No matter what we say, Afghanistan and Pakistan, with the big border that they have, face quite a challenge. I would ask you to advise Canadians, telling us about the role that Canada plays in ensuring that there is stability in that part of the world.

[Lawrence Cannon, Conservative, Pontiac, QC]

Thank you for the question, colleague.

One initiative that is noteworthy.... Well, perhaps there are two initiatives that are noteworthy in terms of regional cooperation. The first one is the Dubai process. Last year when I had the opportunity to come to speak with the members of this committee, I outlined the work Canada was engaged in to bring Pakistan and Afghanistan authorities together. You know that they have an important border between the two countries, but they don't have any infrastructure, don't have any way of managing that border. And so at the very outset, we engaged both parties, to bring them to the table to speak with each other, to recognize the importance of this issue. As time moved on, we were able to get them into not only a dialogue but into actionable items that eventually will serve, I think, the purpose of better managing the border between the two countries.

As well, one of the initiatives that stem from the G-8 foreign ministers' meeting that took place in the month of March here was the Afghan-Pakistan border prosperity initiative. This initiative, colleague, was put forward in order to strengthen the economic conditions in certain areas of Pakistan.

The World Bank had a number of feasibility projects between both these countries, whether feasibility projects to look at rail linkages between two communities or projects to look at highway infrastructure. The whole idea here is to make sure that the inhabitants of these regions can prosper from economic development and growth and can get out of the dire situation in which they find themselves.

Both governments bought into this process. Both governments recognized the importance of working in a collaborative fashion to strengthen the economic areas along the border regions so that it doesn't sour and become a haven for insurgents. On the contrary, it needs to be strengthened so that people can rely upon and get a good job from this.

[The Chair, Conservative, Garry Breitkreuz]

Thank you very much.

We'll now move over to the NDP, to Mr. Harris, please.

[Jack Harris, NDP, St. John's East, NL]

Thank you, Chair. I will be sharing my time with Mr. Dewar. I'll take about half the time.

First of all, General Natynczyk, I want to thank you and all of you for being here. But I want to say to all of you that our trip to Afghanistan last June was a real eye-opener. I think that like all of our committee, I was extremely impressed with the quality of our forces: with their competence, with their professionalism, with their commitment to serving their country. Each and every engagement was of the utmost level of professionalism—with Ambassador Crosbie and others we encountered as well.

I think all who were there were particularly impressed with the work of the individuals who were involved in the counter-IED efforts. The extreme courage shown by these people to save the lives of their fellow soldiers and others who were using these roads struck me as being particularly engaging. I think Canadians have every reason to be extremely proud of the soldiers: that the men and women who serve in our armed forces in Afghanistan are taking the risks and making the sacrifices that they have done. I want to acknowledge that up front.

I address this also to you, sir. Last November you appeared before the defence committee and I must say provided with terrific clarity the plans for the withdrawal from Afghanistan in accordance with the parliamentary motion: the end of the combat mission in July and the complete withdrawal of forces by the end of December.

At that time, you indicated that not only was the combat mission ending in July but that July was the beginning of the withdrawal of forces as quickly as possible. I just want to ask you—your statement today is not as specific as that, but then, you haven't been asked the question, so I'm asking it now—are we still committed to saying that once the combat mission ends, we are withdrawing our troops?

Obviously it's going to take people to...and six months is the expected timeline to get everything out and to get the equipment cleaned up and on board. If you're going to do what you say here—continue with the mission exactly until that date and in full operation—we understand that it would take time. But are you still committed to beginning the drawdown of troops immediately, and could you elaborate on that a little bit?

[Gen Walter Natynczyk]

Thanks very much for the question. Right up front, the answer is yes.

Let me just put forward a preamble. First of all, thank you and thanks to everyone for the great comments about the men and women in the Canadian Forces. I think we've realized once again through this experience in Afghanistan that we don't take a back seat to anybody. Man for man, woman for woman, and in what we do as a force, from the most junior private right up to our senior leaders in theatre, we have proven ourselves once again. Things that we knew before, we have proven once again.

Again, thank you very much for the special recognition of the counter-IED folks, because they save lives every day, and you realize the number of cases they respond to is absolutely tremendous.

We are still working to the transition of the military mission next summer. I use the word “military” mission; some folks say “combat”. But if you look at the PRT, the training mission, support, and development—all the things across the board involving what we in the military do—we call it the military mission. We are working with our allies, specifically Regional Command South, which is the ISAF headquarters in the south of the country, with respect to the transition dates. We're looking into the June-July timeframe next summer in order to meet the parliamentary motion's remit to be out of the country by the end of 2011.

So that's the timeline we're working to. We aren't specific yet on the actual dates of handover of various areas of responsibility, as we recognize that Regional Command South headquarters will be transitioning over the next little while from a British-led headquarters to an American-led headquarters. The new commander will get on the ground and develop his plans and then, with the troops he has allocated, will work on detailed plans in terms of what areas, such as Dand District and Panjwaii District, which you visited...at what point those areas are going to be transitioned to other NATO allies.

So we are still working to transition in the summer of 2011 and are putting that into June and July of 2011 in order to draw down, such that we are out of the country by the end of the year. Again, logistics is always tough; it's tough in this area. We saw how some of the routes into Afghanistan were interdicted these past few months. That will create challenges, if interdiction continues. But from our planning standpoint, we are working towards the end of 2011 date.

[Jack Harris, NDP, St. John's East, NL]

Thank you. I'll pass it over to Mr. Dewar.

[Paul Dewar, NDP, Ottawa Centre, ON]

Thank you.

Thank you to the ministers and to the general for being here today.

I want to come back to Minister Cannon and ask the question that Mr. Rae had probed.

I respect, Minister, your comments about meeting with the foreign minister, but I just have to say if I could give an example, if it had been the ambassador of the U.S. who said he wanted to speak with you and meet with you about an important issue regarding relations--and considering we've heard from everyone on the important relationship that we have with the UAE, on the fact that they've hosted us for free--would you actually say “No, I met with Secretary of State Clinton, I don't need to meet with you”?

I find it hard to believe that you wouldn't meet with Ambassador Abdullah. This March, he will have been here two years. Do you think it's reasonable if we're going to have a really robust relationship with a country as important as UAE that you would not meet with him?

One other thing is that there are other issues that have come to my attention. They're around visas. It's about tending to our garden, I guess. I know that he was posted before in France. He could pick up the phone and talk to Minister Kouchner. He could talk to President Sarkozy. But when he comes here, for some reason, there's no one on the other end of the line. I need to understand why that treatment with someone as important as the ambassador would be satisfactory.

[Lawrence Cannon, Conservative, Pontiac, QC]

The premise of your question, Mr. Dewar, is hypothetical when you compare it with the United States. It depends on the circumstances and it depends as well on the issues at hand. You're talking about high-level diplomatic relations with the UAE. I engage with my counterpart on the specifics of those kinds of discussions depending of course on the nature of what needs to be discussed and how we engage with the diplomatic corps. I meet the diplomatic corps on a regular basis here.

But as for your drilling down and wanting to find out whether or not on this specific issue I raised it with the ambassador, no, I didn't raise it with the ambassador. I discussed this issue with the foreign minister.

[Paul Dewar, NDP, Ottawa Centre, ON]

But I guess my question is how could you raise it with the ambassador if you haven't met with the ambassador, and I go back to--

[Lawrence Cannon, Conservative, Pontiac, QC]

I didn't--

[Paul Dewar, NDP, Ottawa Centre, ON]

I go back to--

[Lawrence Cannon, Conservative, Pontiac, QC]

Mr. Dewar, I didn't meet with the ambassador because there was no need to meet with the ambassador on this issue. I reiterate, I discussed these issues with the foreign minister.

[Paul Dewar, NDP, Ottawa Centre, ON]

But on a regular basis--

[Lawrence Cannon, Conservative, Pontiac, QC]

And on a regular basis--

[Paul Dewar, NDP, Ottawa Centre, ON]

--there are issues that come up. There are issues that got obviously out of hand for you, and one of them was us being able to be hosted by the UAE, along with visa issues and other issues that clearly you need to deal with with the ambassador.

I find it surprising and actually astonishing that you wouldn't meet with the ambassador. I just don't understand that, Minister.

[Lawrence Cannon, Conservative, Pontiac, QC]

I think, Mr. Dewar, you have to be able to recognize that the issues that are raised, depending on the level of the issues.... In certain cases if they're visas they can be handled by the Minister of Citizenship and Immigration and his people. Generally speaking, the ambassadors know full well who they need to address themselves to.

So I'm coming back to my first response: it depends on the issues that are raised. When requests are made to meet with me we evaluate them, and in some circumstances I will be pleased to meet with the ambassador, and in other circumstances officials in my department can meet with them. It all depends on the level of importance. But if you're talking--

[Paul Dewar, NDP, Ottawa Centre, ON]

It's a simple--

[Lawrence Cannon, Conservative, Pontiac, QC]

Stop cutting me off.

[Paul Dewar, NDP, Ottawa Centre, ON]

I'm not. I only--