Afghanistan Committee on March 25th, 2010

[Deepak Obhrai, Conservative, Calgary East, AB]

Mr. Minister, today Mr. Rae asked the question here and you were asked the question in the House about Canada's engagement, as to when the military engagement will come to an end. You made it very clear, here and in the House, that Canada's military engagement will come to an end in 2011. However, this document has indicated the progress. We still have a year to go, and we'll continue doing that. But now Canadians are interested in knowing what Canada will be doing after its military engagement in 2011 is done. What would Canada's focus then be, where would Canada be going, and what are we looking at post-2011? I think all Canadians are very interested in moving forward and seeing what will happen. Perhaps you can shed light on that.

[Lawrence Cannon, Conservative, Pontiac, QC]

Let me first remind you of what was said in the Speech from the Throne:

In Afghanistan, the Canadian Forces prepare for the end of the military mission in 2011 with the knowledge that – through great sacrifice and with great distinction – their efforts saved Kandahar province from falling back under Taliban control. After 2011, our effort in Afghanistan will focus on development and humanitarian aid.

So we're in the midst of reviewing Canada's development in that regard, as well our diplomatic efforts post-2011. But, colleagues, our focus right now is to continue to deliver on our six priorities and three signature projects.

[The Chair, Conservative, Kevin Sorenson]

Thank you, Minister.

Mr. Obhrai, you have another four minutes.

[Deepak Obhrai, Conservative, Calgary East, AB]

Minister, while you're talking about the security situation, which is critically important to continue with the development process we have here, the benchmark indicates that there has been a decline in the Afghan force's strength. To what would you attribute that decline? Does that work in the situation where we are working with the international forces to continue providing that security umbrella that we need for development purposes?

[Lawrence Cannon, Conservative, Pontiac, QC]

I think it's indeed due to the courage, the stamina, the determination, and the will of our troops, the coordinated effort that has been put forward among our allies and the military strategy that has been put forward, which I think have been fine examples of what the increased surge in American troops has done. It has indeed been welcomed by all of our partners, and I do think we are making progress in that regard, contrary to some of assumptions of some colleagues around the table.

Maybe I'll let Deputy Minister Greta Bossenmaier continue and elaborate on that specific issue as to how we're working with our allies.

[Greta Bossenmaier, Deputy Minister, Afghanistan Task Force, Privy Council Office]

Thank you very much, Minister Cannon.

Mr. Chairman, with reference to the question about why we saw a decrease in that particular benchmark, it's noted in the report that during this particular period there was the Eid holiday, and it was also after the presidential election. Some members of the Afghan National Army had some leave in that period, so that contributed to the lower percentage of folks available.

I will give you a little peek into the next quarterly report. We are starting to compile that information now, and you will see in the next quarterly report that the number has gone back up, as folks have come back from that. It also highlights the challenges of doing quarterly reporting. Not everything follows in a straight line, in linear progression. There are changes that happen; this is one of those changes that didn't quite work over this particular period, but I think you'll see in the next quarterly report that this temporary shift has gone back up.

Thank you.

[The Chair, Conservative, Kevin Sorenson]

Thank you.

Mr. Obhrai, you have another minute.

[Deepak Obhrai, Conservative, Calgary East, AB]

Mr. Minister, I was in Tajikistan about a month ago. We are doing border helping in Tajikistan and we are border-helping in Pakistan in relation to customs and smuggling and everything. These are many of the things that Canada is doing out there to help build capacity for the Afghanistan government and to help them ultimately become a complete state that can take care of its own. These are the good-news stories of what Canada is doing that do not get out because the opposition is bent on going after this one little subject and does not want to talk about the excellent work that Canada is doing in many other fields there.

May I suggest that at the next meeting we do a more comprehensive report on the good things we are doing and focus on the situation after 2011?

[Lawrence Cannon, Conservative, Pontiac, QC]

I think that's a good suggestion.

[The Chair, Conservative, Kevin Sorenson]

Thank you very much, Mr. Obhrai.

We'll move to Mr. Harris, please.

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

Thank you, Chair, and thank you, Minister, for joining us today.

First let me join with you and all Canadians in recognizing the tremendous sacrifices and commitment that we have received from both the troops and the civilians acting on Canada's behalf in Afghanistan, and their sacrifice of life and limb, most recently highlighted by the weekend death of Corporal Darren Fitzpatrick. We all join in mourning all of their deaths.

The debate within this country about Afghanistan has to do with differing views about Canada's role internationally and about making sure that Canada's values and international obligations are upheld, so this debate is about important matters of state.

I won't engage in the debate about how long it took your government--you weren't the minister--to react to the concerns about torture in Afghan prisons, but I will say that recently our committee was told by a representative of Amnesty International that they still have concerns about prisoner transfers in Afghanistan. We have seen prisoner transfers stopped by our government in the fall of 2007 and twice in 2009. Despite your 200 visits that you talked about, not one of these reports has been made public or made available, even in confidence, to this committee.

As of June 2009, Britain stopped transferring detainees and doesn't engage in that.

I'm wondering, Mr. Minister, why these reports aren't public and why Canada hasn't followed the same path as Britain. Obviously they have concerns about their international obligations as well.

[The Chair, Conservative, Kevin Sorenson]

Thank you very much, Mr. Harris.

Go ahead, Minister.

[Lawrence Cannon, Conservative, Pontiac, QC]

Let me, for the record, straighten something out here in terms of information that's been circulating: the U.K. is still transferring detainees. That has not stopped. I believe it's Mr. Rae who first put this out, so I want to reassure you on that point of information.

As well, in terms of this prisoner transfer and the detainees, the Afghanistan government is primarily responsible for ensuring that the rights of detainees are respected. As you know, Canada has been assisting the Afghan government for years in meeting its domestic as well as its international obligations with respect to the treatment of detainees, and we remain committed to ensuring that detainees are handled, transferred, and monitored in accordance with our obligations under international law. That is what we are pursuing. That is the nature of the transfer agreement that we put in place. That is exactly what we are doing.

Maybe if someone wants to--

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

I'll take that as your answer, Minister Cannon, although it has been made clear to this committee and to the House that the international obligations of Canada don't end with the passing over of prisoners.

I would like to get to another issue that I think is important to a lot of people.

It's been said in many places that this war cannot be won or that the situation in Afghanistan cannot be resolved by military means. I want to present to you a position put forth in December by the Canadian Council of Churches in an ecumenical brief on Canada's role in Afghanistan. They called for reconciliation actions and peace and development, but they called for something further:

We further call for a Canadian diplomatic surge to persuade the international community to encourage and support Afghans in intensified and persistent dialogue or engagement efforts towards a military ceasefire and a sustainable political settlement. In short, we encourage Canada to mount a peace mission and to accord it the same level of political energy and commitment, along with requisite material support, as has been accorded the military mission to date.

I regard that as a very powerful statement of hope that Canada would equally engage in efforts towards a ceasefire and settlement. I'd like you to tell this committee what you as minister and your government have done, and what efforts you have made to pursue this particular route.

I know we're engaged with the Americans on the military side. What are we doing as a country, at the diplomatic level, to pursue what the Canadian Council of Churches calls here a hoped-for “diplomatic surge”?

[Lawrence Cannon, Conservative, Pontiac, QC]

Thank you for that question, Mr. Harris.

One of Canada's six priorities for moving forward in Afghanistan is to support the Afghan-led political reconciliation efforts. That's aimed at weakening the insurgency and, obviously, fostering a sustainable peace.

We're encouraged by recent plans announced by President Karzai to launch a new political process for reconciliation in Afghanistan. I think it's important that any national reconciliation process be based on the acceptance by all groups within Afghan society of the central government's legitimacy and authority, as well as respect for the rule of law. I mentioned this in my remarks a few moments ago. We think that's important. Of course, these groups have to indicate that they will put aside their arms and work towards a peaceful political process that, at the end of the day, will enable us to have an Afghan society that is free from conflict. That is an objective.

Now, you're putting forward a suggestion. We're operating here on a mandate that the Government of Canada holds as being extremely important, a mandate and a motion that the Parliament of Canada adopted. Among the priorities that the Parliament of Canada adopted was this priority, and that is what we are doing.

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

Sir, there can be no reconciliation without peace, and in my view there can be no real development without peace. You yourself have referred to the difficulties in undertaking development and reconstruction projects in the middle of war. We've got minimal progress, I would say, in terms of our goals. We have completed 14 out of 50 schools. I think we've got 300 teachers trained, out of an expectation of 3,000 by the end of 2011. It seems to me, sir, that as long as we are engaged with the military struggle and war, this won't happen.

Aside from encouraging the Afghans to pursue this, a lot of other actors in this neighbourhood have a very strong interest in what's happening in Afghanistan. What international diplomatic efforts are being made to engage all of them in a process to ensure that there can be peace in Afghanistan, that the borders can be secure, that it won't be something that's going on for many years to come, and that in fact there could be peace by 2011?

[Lawrence Cannon, Conservative, Pontiac, QC]

You asked what other international diplomatic efforts are being made. I think the international community is committed to that. If you followed what has taken place at the London conference, you will know of the initiative that has been put forward by my colleague David Miliband in the United Kingdom, as well as the Prime Minister. I think all this points to a better engagement strategy to be able to ultimately, as I mentioned, make sure that the Afghans themselves will be able to lead this transition and to assure all of the partnership of that outcome.

That is the purpose we are all pursuing. We want to be able to see this state become stable. We want to be able to see this state free from terrorism. Whether those are Canada's objectives or the objectives of other parties that are involved, this is what we all wish to see occur.

[The Chair, Conservative, Kevin Sorenson]

Thank you, Minister.

Mr. Harris, you have about 30 seconds left, if you want to use them.

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

No, you can't do very much with 30 seconds, except—

[The Chair, Conservative, Kevin Sorenson]

Well, then we can pass it on to someone else.

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

—make a statement. I think we can be playing a leadership role. You have told us what others are doing, and I'm very concerned that Canada should be in the forefront of this.

[Lawrence Cannon, Conservative, Pontiac, QC]

We've talked about the border initiative. Let me say that in the leadership role we're playing, we lead by process. Leading by process is something that has been looked at by a lot of our colleagues, and with a great deal of interest. We were able to bring together the Afghans as well as the Pakistanis at the same table to discuss border-related issues, and from that be able to put in place a structure that will lead to other initiatives. That's part of my G-8 discussions with the foreign ministers next week.

These are initiatives that Canada does well at. We've led the way, we're mentoring, we're acting as a catalyst, we're bringing sides together to discuss common interests. We have the largest border in the world, with the United States of America. We have best practices that we can share, and that is exactly what we're doing. Canada is well regarded among not only our colleagues but among the Afghans themselves.

[The Chair, Conservative, Kevin Sorenson]

Thank you very much, Mr. Minister.

We have a couple of minutes left. We'll go into the second round.

Mr. Hawn.

[Laurie Hawn, Conservative, Edmonton Centre, AB]

Thank you, Chair.

Speaking through you to the minister, no sane person doesn't want peace and stability in Afghanistan. But Mr. Minister, can you give me your thoughts on what the Taliban view of the unilateral Canadian ceasefire might be?

[Lawrence Cannon, Conservative, Pontiac, QC]

Let me say, colleagues, that as long as there are terrorists who are killing our troops or injuring our people, whether they be civilians or military, we will continue to do the job we've been asked to do. Let me point out that when we talk about reconciliation, it is one of our objectives, and we look for a solution there. But the condition for it to take place has to be that the terrorists, the insurgents, put down their arms and want to do this.