National Defence Committee on June 8th, 2006

[Steven Staples]

I think there has been a debate, and there continues to be a debate. This was what the Dutch were debating. It was about what role they were going to be undertaking in Afghanistan. Was it going to be a peace support mission, similar to what we would consider UN peacekeeping? It is similar, and I think Canadians are....

In fact, generally all UN peacekeeping missions are under chapter 7 these days, or 90% of them are under chapter 7. So it's robust; they can fight back or shoot back, but it is not as combat capable. As one colleague of mine at the Canadian Forces College described it to me, there's a difference between being able to engage in a fight and trying to pick one. So in a NATO mission, you are able to fight back, but in a counter-insurgency mission, you're out looking for a fight. The rooting out, the purposeful engagement--that's the difference.

Because there was so much concern about this, I just want to note that one of the outcomes of the Dutch debate was the prisoner transfer agreement. Some very tight conditions were set on that agreement. Even though the parliament did approve it, it was not a blank cheque, and their agreement is much better than our prisoner transfer agreement. I'm not going to get into that, because I think you should have Amir Attaran or Michael Byers, perhaps, here to discuss that. But just as an example, that's one of the positive outcomes.

I think this debate is going to come back in Riga in the fall, at the next NATO summit in November.

[David Christopherson, NDP, Hamilton Centre, ON]

I'm curious, but what will happen if NATO doesn't come to an agreement and agree to take over?

My second question is that I understand that Canada has offered—I'm sure they had to beat off those in front of them who wanted it—to take over leadership of the mission. I assume it's the NATO mission that they're going to take over in 2008?

Maybe respond on those two things. One, hypothetically, what happens if NATO continues to disagree and is not ready to nicely take over, so Canada can make the neat little transition? Secondly, what role have we offered to play in 2008, which nobody else, it looks to me, wanted? But anyway, how does that fit into things?

[Steven Staples]

It's not entirely clear to me.

I thought it was 2009 in the proposal—which sprung out a couple of days before the debate.

[David Christopherson, NDP, Hamilton Centre, ON]

I could be wrong.

[Steven Staples]

But you're right in general terms that we might be taking over that mission. It's unclear what that essentially means, but it is fairly clear that NATO is prepared to take over the south. There is a staged approach in terms of taking over one province at a time, the south, and then finally, I think, the east is the last one, which they call stage 4. So that is moving.

However, that being said, there has been reluctance in NATO to take over. When the Liberals approved our moving to the south under Operation Enduring Freedom, the timeline was supposed to be very short; we would essentially move to the south and then transition to NATO almost right away. But there has been a delay. The British have been slow to come in, the Dutch are not there yet, and are not going to be there until the fall. That's why there's no firm date.

I'm getting this second hand, but I was with Major-General Lewis MacKenzie, who said he had actually spoken to SACEUR and NATO, and he said there was reluctance to see exactly what was going to happen and to get the troops up to strength in the south, before NATO was willing to take that over—which is curious, because it speaks to a question of whether we were way out in front, ahead of NATO, and left hanging out there. But there's more investigation that could be done on that.

[David Christopherson, NDP, Hamilton Centre, ON]

Is that my time, Chair?

[The Vice-Chair, Bloc, Claude Bachand]

Yes, it is. Thank you very much.

Who will speak on behalf of your party? Go ahead.

[Cheryl Gallant, Conservative, Renfrew—Nipissing—Pembroke, ON]

I'd like to move that we adjourn this meeting.

[The Vice-Chair, Bloc, Claude Bachand]

All right. Your motion is in order.

Is there anybody who wishes to support this motion?

[Blaine Calkins, Conservative, Wetaskiwin, AB]

Are you asking for a seconder, or are you calling the question?

[The Vice-Chair, Bloc, Claude Bachand]

I'm calling the question. I'm told there's no debate.

I'm told that there's no debate on the motion. Therefore we can proceed immediately to vote.

[Blaine Calkins, Conservative, Wetaskiwin, AB]

Are you calling the question?

[The Vice-Chair, Bloc, Claude Bachand]

Yes.

(Motion agreed to)

The meeting is adjourned.