Evidence of meeting #10 for Foreign Affairs and International Development in the 41st Parliament, 2nd session. (The original version is on Parliament’s site, as are the minutes.) The winning word was syria.
A recording is available from Parliament.
Conservative
Director General, International Humanitarian Assistance Directorate, Department of Foreign Affairs and International Trade
Should I mention the high-level group...
Director, Middle East and Maghreb Political Relations Division, Department of Foreign Affairs and International Trade
There is another meeting of the high-level group on access. Let's just say a word or two about that.
Director General, International Humanitarian Assistance Directorate, Department of Foreign Affairs and International Trade
There is another parallel process under way. I would characterize it as diplomatic. Coming out of the October 2 presidential statement at the UN Security Council, the emergency relief coordinator, Valerie Amos, with Australia and Luxembourg, set up essentially what is called the high-level group on access with seven key sub-working groups. Really they are all focused on elements of access.
It is an attempt to bring together the key countries that have influence over Syria or the opposition forces to try to improve access. The working groups are either on cross-line access or access to besieged areas, for instance, or the demilitarization of schools and hospitals. These are the things that they are focusing on. They've broken into working groups, and a number of the interested countries have joined these particular working groups and they are trying to work to get some real results.
There is also one on the vaccination campaign. At the end of January, Canada hosted a meeting in the mission in Geneva, again bringing together some of the key partners in the UN as well as interested member states to try to find ways to facilitate improved access for the vaccination campaign. So that's a bit of a parallel process, but it's really focusing on improving access.
And now, the emergency relief coordinator will brief, as I've mentioned, the Security Council on February 12, trying to put forward some real actions that we can implement now, today, to try to improve the lives of people in Syria.
Conservative
Lois Brown Conservative Newmarket—Aurora, ON
Is there somebody taking the lead on that diplomatic discussion?
Director General, International Humanitarian Assistance Directorate, Department of Foreign Affairs and International Trade
Luxembourg and Australia are, with OCHA and the emergency relief coordinator.
Conservative
Lois Brown Conservative Newmarket—Aurora, ON
You spoke about the funds that are coming in. Canada has been a major contributor and, Ms. Roy, you identified that we are the fifth-largest donor just in the chemical weapons, just in that part of it.
Acting Director General, Non-proliferation and Security Threat Reduction Bureau, Department of Foreign Affairs and International Trade
We are among the five top.
Conservative
Lois Brown Conservative Newmarket—Aurora, ON
So I put that aside because that's a special project, as it were.
Ms. Norton, I wonder if you could talk about where Canada fits in that? I know there was a funding conference in Addis Ababa last year, a year ago January, if I'm not mistaken. What I have understood is that the contributions have not come in as quickly as needed, and at one point I think that only 27% of the money had actually flowed. So can you talk a little bit about where contributions are at and if there is any pressure point that can be put on countries that have made a declaration for contributing? Is there anything that can be done to get that money in?
Director General, International Humanitarian Assistance Directorate, Department of Foreign Affairs and International Trade
I am happy to report it was in Kuwait One. We called the meeting on January 15 Kuwait Two, the second humanitarian pledging conference. In Kuwait One, about $1.54 billion was pledged of which $1.126 billion was received, 73% was received. The numbers are much higher than at first we thought, and many of the member states of the United Nations as well as participants in this particular conference have essentially looked at what regions they come from, whom they have influence on, and have made a lot of diplomatic démarches about basically pledges being fulfilled.
Canada—our minister—has also spoken on a number of occasions about trying to ensure that partners will pay what they had actually pledged. Currently since January 2012, Canada has disbursed $203.5 million and, as you know, there was $150 million in addition just announced, bringing our grand total to $353.5 million.
We are ranked sixth overall as a donor, but perhaps more importantly, if we remove the European Commission because it is of course made up of many countries, we are the fifth-largest country donor to the humanitarian response.
Conservative
Lois Brown Conservative Newmarket—Aurora, ON
Can you speak a little bit about how our humanitarian partners are targeting education, because you've talked about a lost generation? That has to be of deep concern to everyone who is looking at this situation. We've got children who are not in school and that doesn't bode well for the future of Syria when this situation gets resolved. Can you talk a little bit about what's happening there?
Conservative
Director General, International Humanitarian Assistance Directorate, Department of Foreign Affairs and International Trade
It has been very recognized by all of the actors in the region, and so that's why UNICEF, UNHCR, and some other NGO partners have come together to have this No Lost Generation campaign. It's a strategy they're going to implement throughout the region, and it's really targeting vulnerable Syrian children. It's not only looking at education, but also protection. I know you've probably heard about the recruitment of children as well. This is a way to ensure their protection.
Of the $150 million announced by the Prime Minister, $50 million will go towards this campaign. This complements some of the funding that we have already provided to some of our partners in the neighbouring countries as well as in Syria, to protect and assist children, as well as to bring them into schools.
Conservative
The Chair Conservative Dean Allison
Thank you very much.
Mr. Garneau, sir, you're going to finish off the first round. You have seven minutes, please.
February 5th, 2014 / 4:10 p.m.
Liberal
Marc Garneau Liberal Westmount—Ville-Marie, QC
Thank you, Mr. Chair.
Thank you for your testimony today.
I want to go back to the issue of Geneva II, and the fact that very clearly the Assad regime is not prepared to remove itself so that this transitional government can take place. That's very clear, and unfortunately it's very discouraging because, as you point out, the two sides are unfortunately in a stalemate situation, and maybe don't even know it.
My colleague from the Conservative Party referred to Russia and China. I'd like to know more about that, if I can. Russia and China have obviously taken the side of the Assad regime, in the sense of telling the rest of the world to stay out of it. Obviously, as long as they have that support, it is some sort of legitimization for them, and perhaps also the source of considerable assistance of a military kind. Are we putting any pressure on Russia and China, to the extent that we can, to face the fact that this misery and the continued death toll are going to rise, that nine million people need humanitarian aid, and that this is going to continue this way?
Director, Middle East and Maghreb Political Relations Division, Department of Foreign Affairs and International Trade
Again, while the Chinese are sort of lumped in with that group, they're less of an issue in this than Russia.
Certainly, Russia is their major international backer—actually, they are along with Iran, and we can get into that later, maybe. But certainly Russia is a principal supporter. We have spoken to the Russians. I have spoken to them personally as well. They have very firm views. Their concerns—in some respects their interests, but also their concerns—relate largely to the spread of terrorism and the degree to which that may spread back into Russia. There are all sorts of reasons they give. There's also the whole issue of interference with internal affairs and Orange Revolutions and all of this sort of thing. We've spoken to them, the Americans have spoken to them, everyone has spoken to them. They're not moving.
That being said, they were very helpful in getting the regime around the table and in supporting the Geneva I communiqué, which sort of lays out various principles, including a transitional governing body—with mutual consent, I should add. So they're not completely obstructive on this. They are in support of a process that can somehow bring an end to this. So that's encouraging, and we've been supportive of that, and certainly the Americans who work very closely with them.... But efforts to try to get them to abandon their regime are going nowhere, really.
Liberal
Marc Garneau Liberal Westmount—Ville-Marie, QC
Has there been an analysis to figure out if, for some reason, Russia stopped providing any military weapons to Syria, whether Syria would be in trouble? How important is that supply chain of weapons to Syria?
Director, Middle East and Maghreb Political Relations Division, Department of Foreign Affairs and International Trade
Do you have anything to say about that?
Acting Director General, Non-proliferation and Security Threat Reduction Bureau, Department of Foreign Affairs and International Trade
I'm guessing that you're referring to conventional weapons?
Acting Director General, Non-proliferation and Security Threat Reduction Bureau, Department of Foreign Affairs and International Trade
I'm not aware of any study, any recent review about that specific point. But I know that a few months ago there were reports about a new delivery of weapons, and Russia suspended that because it was considered as not being very helpful. So we could try to see if there have been some studies on the specific point, but so far I'm not aware of any.
Director, Middle East and Maghreb Political Relations Division, Department of Foreign Affairs and International Trade
I think the point is that certainly there will be other sources. Iran could be another source, as well; if not a source, it may be a conduit. It's difficult to stem the flow of arms to the regime. They're much better armed certainly than the opposition would be, and will remain so.
Liberal
Marc Garneau Liberal Westmount—Ville-Marie, QC
I'd be interested in knowing—they have fighter jets, helicopters, missiles—if it's all coming from Iran? I'd be interested in knowing how much they depend on those inflowing weapons. I don't think they have a huge weapons industry, perhaps, small arms and smaller stuff, but they're using some pretty big stuff as well.
Director, Middle East and Maghreb Political Relations Division, Department of Foreign Affairs and International Trade
They had a pretty good head start on this. They had a pretty well-developed and advanced—advanced in terms of size—military, which has taken a beating but not as much as we would think. They started from a pretty high base and they did receive some arms. Whether they continue to receive Russian arms, I haven't seen recently. I think it's very likely; if not Russian, then Belarusian or whoever. The Iranians do supply them with some material, not a lot, but with certain key material and advice, which is key as well in terms of advisors.
The weapons are there and they're of sufficient quantity. If things were frozen off right now, they could still last a fair bit.