Foreign Affairs Committee on Feb. 14th, 2013

[The Chair, Conservative, Dean Allison]

Very quickly because we're almost out of time.

[John Siebert]

I wouldn't hold to a fast election date. There has been experience in war-torn countries where having elections too soon actually exacerbates conflicts. Obviously, it's for the Malians to decide ultimately, but if there are interim arrangements that are stable and that are still in the direction of democratic elections, that's helpful.

[The Chair, Conservative, Dean Allison]

Thank you, Mr. Siebert and Mr. Dechert.

We're going to move to Mr. McKay and Mr. Eyking for seven minutes, please.

[John McKay, Liberal, Scarborough—Guildwood, ON]

Thank you, Chair.

Thank you both for coming.

I'm going to split my time with my colleague, which is regrettable since I would really like to pursue a conversation with you, Mr. Siebert. You know I've been a huge fan of Ploughshares for years and will continue to be so.

As you know, Mr. Fowler was here earlier this week, and he probably had the clearest thinking in certainly all of the testimony we've heard. Like him or dislike him, ignore him or accept him, he certainly was clear. The government has chosen, for whatever reason, to just dismiss him as a former diplomat who is somewhat obsessive because of his kidnapping.

Nevertheless, he does join the point with you on, if you will, the initial stages of the military response. The point is that you see this conflict as an insurgency, an insurgency being, if you will, a claim for political territory or a claim for geographic territory, or some ethnic dispute.

Mr. Fowler's point, on the other hand, is that this is not an insurgency, that this is a jihad and they actually don't care about the territorial integrity of Mali, they don't care about the politics of Mali, they don't care about anything Malian. They have a greater mission, and that is to spread some sort of 7th century Islam across the Sahel.

Therein lies the difference. Where you describe the military response as kind of whack-a-mole, Mr. Fowler would say the only point at this point is that you have to degrade and decapacitate al-Qaeda and all of their friends to such a point that they cannot pose a national, a regional, or an international threat, and that is your military goal. Without achieving that military goal, all else becomes fantasy, i.e., the road map to democracy, the restoration of any economic semblance of activity, etc.

I'd be interested to focus on that difference between responding to a jihadist threat versus responding to an insurgency that may or may not have territorial or political ambitions.

[John Siebert]

Clearly there are a number of sides active in the north. There has been a civil war off and on with Tuaregs for many years. Some of the factions currently engaged in activities in the north are Tuareg and militant and might identify themselves, but others are not and others are willing to speak with Bamako, mediated by their neighbours.

The problem with focusing this as a jihadi terrorist sort of mission is that you give them too much credit. They can say what they want.

Being a religious person, I know many religious people who make quite grandiose claims. They're not necessarily true. Fundamentally, an insurgency or any kind of group active in a territory depends on the goodwill, or at least the passive support, of the local population. That's also true in northern Africa, whether it's Somalia, Tunisia, or elsewhere.

What you need to do, in my view, is to create as many of the conditions as possible to isolate those who have this foreign intrusion sort of jihadi apocalyptic approach and say that's not in the best interests of Mali. And Malians, no matter who they are, will say that's not in their best interests.

In Iraq—

[John McKay, Liberal, Scarborough—Guildwood, ON]

It's an excellent response.

I think, to be fair, Mr. Fowler would describe it as a naive response. I'm not being pejorative about that. You and I share the religious experiences, shall we say.

But if you look at the Arab Spring and the intense destabilization by various Islamic groups across the north of Africa down into the Sahel, this is déjà vu all over again.

Again, I don't want to disagree with General Vance, because I like and admire him a great deal. It's not entirely a kinetic response, I agree. But in this particular instance, a kinetic response in a very forceful fashion is the only thing that's going to stop this advance.

I appreciate what you say and I think that joins the issue.

I'm pretty mindful of my colleague's wish to ask other questions. I don't know how much time we have left, but not much, I'm afraid.

[The Chair, Conservative, Dean Allison]

You have a minute.

[John McKay, Liberal, Scarborough—Guildwood, ON]

Okay, well I'm going to have to pay for that.

Go ahead.

[Mark Eyking, Liberal, Sydney—Victoria, NS]

I'll be quick.

I want to get off the topic of the military role. I'd like to talk about the economy.

Former prime ministers Paul Martin and Tony Blair have done a lot of work on the Congo Basin...better economies, better peace.

You alluded to concern about a vacuum with our companies there. How can we as a country foster better economic activity in the area, not only helping our companies going through the transition, but also trade and buying goods. How can we do more? I really believe when the dust settles that if the economy is moving fast for them, it's better. How can Canada as a country do more in that region?

[The Chair, Conservative, Dean Allison]

Mr. Badet, there is about half a minute so could you be succinct.

[Lucien Bradet]

Okay, I will be fast.

It goes by the action we may or may not take. If we take no action, and I agree that we are already taking action, if we don't continue those actions and reinforce some of them, we're going to disappear from the scene and the people who are active will take the prize. I don't have to name who they are. I see that on a daily basis.

Other countries that are active in Africa have a better entry on the trade side than those who are not present enough. I'll be very careful about my words. If you want diplomacy to be there, if you want trade offices or companies to be there, you will have to involve yourself in that conflict one way or another. If you do not, then we will be forgotten. They will say, “Canada was not there so we'll go to a country that was really there.”

I went off on a bit of a tangent.

but that's the way I look at it.

[The Chair, Conservative, Dean Allison]

Thank you very much.

We'll start our second round.

Ms. Brown, for five minutes, please.

[Lois Brown, Conservative, Newmarket—Aurora, ON]

Thank you very much, Mr. Chair.

Gentlemen, thank you for being here. It's delightful to have the opportunity, Mr. Badet, to speak with you again. Mr. Siebert, I have followed the work that Project Ploughshares has done and I'm hoping to give you the opportunity to speak.

The first thing I want to do is dispel this myth that the opposition wants to perpetuate about how Canada is not active in Africa. That is the farthest from the truth. The fact is we have doubled our aid to Africa. Most importantly, we have untied our aid to Africa, first by untying our food aid, and now by the end of 2013, we will have untied all of our aid. We are giving Africans the opportunity to get the best bang for the buck, as it were, with the development dollars that we are investing there.

I want to talk about the presence in Africa, just purely on the presence of Canadian parliamentarians in Africa. We've seen Minister Fast there in the last two weeks. Minister Fantino has been twice in the last four months. The Prime Minister was in the DRC for the Francophonie summit. The Canada-Africa Parliamentary Association has had three parliamentary trips. Last year we were in Ethiopia and Senegal, Kenya and South Sudan, and most recently in Kenya and Malawi. So the presence of parliamentarians has been enormous.

[Lucien Bradet]

Many trips—

[Lois Brown, Conservative, Newmarket—Aurora, ON]

We have made contributions to the Global Fund, to the World Food Programme, to the GAVI Alliance. Our contributions to maternal, newborn, and child health are unmatched by anybody. We have put money into the drought relief in east Africaé This year we stepped up to the plate with the Sahel crisis matching fund with a contribution of close to $56 million. Canadians have to know that Canada is intimately involved with Africa, that we care deeply.

I know, Mr. Siebert, that your organization has received funding from CIDA. You've been active in the Sahel region. I wonder if you could tell the committee about some of the projects that you have undertaken, what successes you have had, and how you see Mali and the Sahel area in general moving forward.

[John Siebert]

Thanks very much.

We've actually not had projects funded by CIDA and by Foreign Affairs since about 2009.

[Lois Brown, Conservative, Newmarket—Aurora, ON]

You have had money in the past—

[John Siebert]

Yes, we have—

[Lois Brown, Conservative, Newmarket—Aurora, ON]

—and many of those projects are multi-year projects, so you can talk about some of the things that you have done there, if you would, please.

[John Siebert]

Yes.

We've been active in Sudan and primarily east Africa. You have this band across the north where the Maghreb and sub-Saharan Africa overlap. You have the dynamics of ethnic and other tensions, religious differences and those sorts of things, demonstrated in Sudan and other countries.

It's important work not only to engage in the humanitarian and development assistance, but to twin that with peace-building efforts. utilizing the resources of civil society, although it may be weak at times, partnering with folks to do that work, and also working on the small arms and light weapons control and reduction agenda that plagues most of Africa, but particularly this part of Africa.

At one point, in about 2009 or 2010, one of your colleagues in the House—they'll remain nameless, just to stay on the non-partisan side of things—said that the pivot from Africa towards Latin America by the federal government, which is basically a reality, can't be maintained, and for two reasons. One is that there is this arc of instability that attaches to the Islamist security aspirations, but also, Canadian mining and other interests are increasing in Africa. Canada can't stay away.

I think some of the things you mentioned just a minute ago are evidence of that reality.

[Lois Brown, Conservative, Newmarket—Aurora, ON]

We have been putting $110 million a year into Mali for the last three years as a country of focus, and that money has gone in great part to help build governance. We firmly believe...and we just did a study in this committee, and heard from many of the intervenors, that until we see institution building going on in these countries, the private sector is not going to have the opportunity to grow.

We've put $110 million a year into Mali. That's over $300 million. So when we hear other countries coming to a forum, saying, “Yes, we're going to come with all this money”, they haven't been present there in the past. Canada has a history; Canada has a long history in Mali, and we want to ensure that the country is safe and secure for economic growth to happen.

[The Chair, Conservative, Dean Allison]

Thank you very much, Ms. Brown.

We'll move to Madame Péclet, please, for five minutes.

[Ève Péclet, NDP, La Pointe-de-l'Île, QC]

Thank you, Mr. Chair.

My question is for you, Mr. Siebert.

As you know, on Tuesday, the committee heard from the Minister of Foreign Affairs so he could tell us a bit about what was going on. He said that Canada had received a number of specific requests, particularly in terms of logistics. He was unable, however, to tell us what the needs on the ground were and what requests Canada had received in that regard.

I think you're in an excellent position to tell the committee what Malians and organizations on the ground need urgently.

[John Siebert]

Certainly the humanitarian and development assistance for those Malians who are in most need is crucial and will contribute over time to the stability.

On the exact requests in terms of military engagement, I have no more awareness of those than what I read in the media or that you read in the media, but apparently there are discussions going on in the UN, at the AU and other places, in the EU. There are options. There could be a UN mission that directs all of this activity at both the political and military sides. It could be a combination of African Union and UN. Those things are to be determined.

I hope our contribution to the thinking about how Canada responds to this would be to say that there are certain types of activity we should engage in. That's why I described the policing-like action of the military forces and not engaging in this offensive military action against insurgents as a primary focus, etc.

In a fluid situation, with many people negotiating, clearly the French are going to be in the forefront; whether it's a UN or an AU mission, they're going to be participating. They apparently have 6,000 citizens in Bamako, which goes a long way to explaining why they would move so quickly in January.

So it's fluid. There will be choices to make.

[Hélène Laverdière, NDP, Laurier—Sainte-Marie, QC]

Thank you, Mr. Chair.

My question is for you, Mr. Siebert.

A few years ago, you used to send people through the young professionals international program to work in peace building in that region. Given the current situation in this overall region, do you think it would be useful to have such a program again?