Foreign Affairs Committee on April 25th, 2007

[The Chair, Conservative, Kevin Sorenson]

We'll go to Madam McDonough, please, for ten minutes.

[Gen R.J. Hillier]

I was going to say that we in uniform defend democracy; we don't practise it, normally. This is a rare case, obviously, where it is being practised.

[The Chair, Conservative, Kevin Sorenson]

Madam McDonough.

[Alexa McDonough, NDP, Halifax, NS]

Thank you, Mr. Chair.

Thank you, gentlemen, for appearing today.

I'd like to direct a brief question to General Watkin before I turn to the minister, who is supposed to be in charge and who, I'm sorry to say, I think has lost the confidence of a great many Canadians, including a good many military in this country today.

General Watkin, you're an acknowledged expert in the law of armed conflict discipline in human rights. You're well aware of Canada's flawed agreements respecting the transfer of detainees, and I know you've written about this subject extensively in the past.

These agreements have created substantial grounds for fearing that our troops are being placed in an untenable legal and moral position that they deserve to be protected from and also that is causing a great deal of damage to Canada's reputation internationally.

I have two brief questions. Does the government not, in your view, have an obligation to protect our armed forces personnel from being placed in this untenable position? And secondly, what specific measures would you prescribe for bringing Canada into compliance with our obligations--obligations under both the Convention against Torture and the Geneva Convention.

[The Chair, Conservative, Kevin Sorenson]

Thank you very much, Madam McDonough.

Mr. Watkin.

[Brigadier-General Ken Watkin, Judge Advocate General, Operations, Office of the Judge Advocate General, Department of National Defence]

Thank you very much, Madam McDonough, for the compliment at the beginning.

I have written a bit on international--

[Alexa McDonough, NDP, Halifax, NS]

I have several articles here where it was very persuasive and impressive.

[BGen Ken Watkin]

--humanitarian law and human rights law. I have not written about the arrangement, so I may have just misunderstood the way you phrased the question.

This is a very complex environment, and there is much that you've put forward that I want to clarify in terms of the issue of putting Canadian troops...as to what their legal obligations are.

We are operating, as you can just see on TV, in a very complex security environment. We are also operating in an exceedingly complex legal environment.

When our troops deploy overseas on any type of operation, whether it's to Afghanistan for engagement in armed conflict or on a peacekeeping mission, we traditionally deal with four different bodies of law: international humanitarian law, or the law of armed conflict as we would call it in the military; international human rights law; Canada's own domestic laws; and the domestic laws of the state within which we're operating. So in that context it's an exceedingly complex environment.

And I have no doubt there are a number of learned lawyers in the room, and I note the Honourable Irwin Cotler at the far end of the table.

In that sense it's complicated, but in some senses it's very simple in terms of what we require our soldiers to do.

For example, there has been much in the media about the issue of torture and the question of torture as prescribed not only by human rights treaties, not only by international humanitarian law, Canadian domestic law...it's also in the constitution of Afghanistan. And the question is even much broader than that, because we're not simply limited to torture. We're talking about inhumane treatment, abuse, and all of those issues.

The Canadian Forces have taken tremendous strides in the past decade, and the leadership of the Canadian Forces have taken tremendous strikes--and hopefully my office has been able to help them--in setting out the rules and regulations that govern the conduct of the Canadian Forces.

In every pocket of every deployed soldier is a prescription against torture and against the abuse of people who come in their care. In the pocket of every soldier who deploys is a requirement that they report war crimes and abuses.

I think we've seen in the past week, in terms of what's in the media, the extent to which that effort by the leadership within the Canadian Forces has gone--the tremendous steps--to ensure that Canadian Forces members are not exposed to the liabilities and the Government of Canada is not exposed to those liabilities.

[Alexa McDonough, NDP, Halifax, NS]

I wish I could pursue it further because the question is not about our Canadian soldiers engaging or even being directly observant of torture and abuse in any way. It's a question of whether they are finding themselves placed by this government in a position of being complicit in handing over prisoners where we cannot be assured abuse and torture are not taking place.

But I'd like to turn to the minister, because I know my time is short, and with all due respect, to the man who should no longer be minister of this department, in my view.

Mr. O'Connor, I think there is very widespread reasoning for feeling that you have failed, starting right back with failing to read your briefing notes, which you admitted before this committee. You've failed to follow procurement rules. You've failed to fix flawed detainee transfer agreements, even though the NDP began hammering on this issue literally in the first week of the sitting of Parliament and brought this to light after your government was elected.

Again today I think you've really failed to acknowledge the horrors of the increasing civilian deaths and the numbers of displaced persons. And certainly in referring to the Afghanistan combat, you have failed to accurately reflect the many, many serious problems that have been cited in the evaluation that has taken place.

I'm just going to briefly refer to the report coming out from the recent review that took place in January, and this is with respect to Kandahar:

...the spiralling violence has exacerbated tendencies among the government and its international backers to favour short-sighted, quick fixes such as auxiliary police, which risk being little more than poorly trained militias, and to work around, not through, the new democratic institutions.

Why should you not resign, and why will you not resign, given all this evidence of failure?

[Gordon O'Connor, Conservative, Carleton—Mississippi Mills, ON]

Ms. McDonough, what I'd prefer to do is talk about your stand and your party's stand. You are basically hypocrites--

[Alexa McDonough, NDP, Halifax, NS]

You can ask me questions on another occasion. I'm here to ask questions to the minister about the seven items I identified.

[Gordon O'Connor, Conservative, Carleton—Mississippi Mills, ON]

The NDP are basically hypocrites because of what they want. They want us to pull our troops immediately from Kandahar. If we pulled our troops out of Kandahar--and I assume they want the rest of NATO to pull out of Afghanistan--the Taliban would return. A murderous regime would return to Kandahar province and impose the rules of the past, where women had no rights, executions were a regular diet.... They don't give a damn about human rights. And your party allegedly stands for the rights of women and for human rights, but you're hypocrites because you want us to--

[Alexa McDonough, NDP, Halifax, NS]

Mr. Chairman, I directed questions to the minister about the seven areas of major concern--

[The Chair, Conservative, Kevin Sorenson]

Order.

Madam McDonough--

[Alexa McDonough, NDP, Halifax, NS]

--and he's refusing to address any of those questions about the flawed mission.

[The Chair, Conservative, Kevin Sorenson]

Madam McDonough, just let him finish. He sat and listened to you go through quite a tirade on what you were bringing forward. Now let him finish his statement.

[Gordon O'Connor, Conservative, Carleton—Mississippi Mills, ON]

The NDP's position on Afghanistan is just not logical. They should go either one way or the other. Either they don't stand for human rights and the protection of women or they do. Okay? And if they stand for the protection of human rights and the protection of women, then there's need for a solid security environment in Afghanistan so the Taliban don't return.

If they don't care about human rights or women, then let us come home, and then I guess the NDP's position will be declared illogical.

[Alexa McDonough, NDP, Halifax, NS]

Mr. Chairman, my question concerns seven aspects of the flawed mission and the failure of leadership to deal with the flaws in this mission. If the minister refuses to address any of those items I raised, then I rest my case as to why he no longer deserves to be minister and why he's not prepared to acknowledge that there are flaws in this mission that need to be addressed, and hence the waning confidence.

[Gordon O'Connor, Conservative, Carleton—Mississippi Mills, ON]

There are no flaws in this mission, Madam. This is a very well-run mission. The Canadian Forces are doing an excellent job in Afghanistan. Security has improved, the development situation has improved, and governance has improved. There is improvement there on a constant basis.

You can make these assertions all you want, but those are not the facts on the ground. The facts on the ground are that the situation in Afghanistan is improving, and it's improving in the whole country. Afghanistan is a success story.

It doesn't matter what positions you've made--

[Alexa McDonough, NDP, Halifax, NS]

Mr. Chairman, could I ask the minister to respond specifically to the facts that have been widely established, many of them documented in this report that just came out on the Afghanistan compact? There were 2,732 fatalities between September 1, 2006, and February 25, 2007. Violent incidents in January 2007 were more than double those in January 2006. There were 15,000 families displaced in the south from ISAF military operations. And according to recent reports, popular support for the Taliban in Kandahar is growing. Why? Because with some of our actions we're fuelling the support for the Taliban rather than the opposite.

I ask the minister again, on what basis would he ask parliamentarians and the people of Canada to have confidence in his continuation as minister?

[The Chair, Conservative, Kevin Sorenson]

Thank you, Ms. McDonough.

[Gordon O'Connor, Conservative, Carleton—Mississippi Mills, ON]

On what basis would I have confidence in your report?

[Alexa McDonough, NDP, Halifax, NS]

Well, I'm not the minister. This is the report.

[The Chair, Conservative, Kevin Sorenson]

Your time is up.

[Alexa McDonough, NDP, Halifax, NS]

The minister asked me a question, Mr. Chair.