National Defence Committee on Feb. 5th, 2008

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

You mentioned several methods used by the insurgents--IEDs and executions--that indicate a tone of desperation on their part. You did mention propaganda, and that soldiers returning from Afghanistan have been expressing their frustrations over the misinformation that insurgents successfully infiltrate western and North American media with. The insurgents want ISAF forces out so they can once again take over the government and enslave the Afghans into servitude and the drug trade.

Would you please elaborate on the ways and the kinds of things the insurgents do and use in North American communications to sway public opinion away from North Americans fighting the war on terror in Afghanistan?

[BGen P. Atkinson]

That's a very complex question. I can answer part of it.

First of all, they are masters at information operations. Just because we are sitting inside the middle of Afghanistan, in the mountains, the desert, in areas where you could argue there is very little communications, there is cellular technology. They have access to the Internet through satellites. When there's a story printed in the Ottawa Citizen today, it's being read. If it's on the BBC News or somewhere else, they have it.

They know how to plant false stories and everything else. Their ability to react to things on the ground is something that is very practised. They have used it against us. It's something we combat and work on. It's called information operations. We do it to them; they do it to us.

In the military, there's a thing called the OODA loop. The OODA loop is trying to get inside the decision cycle of your opponent and stay one step ahead of him. We try to do this all the time.

As I said, through information operations they use everything at their disposal. They can make an allegation that we have bombed a mosque or shot civilians or done something. We have to then go and defend it. And it depends on how it is reported. They will use everything at their disposal to get into the Afghan news cycle, the international cycle. You can assume they have anything that is printed or reported, and they will attempt to use it to their advantage.

It's very complex, and it's something we work very hard at. It's something they are masters of. We want to be masters. We're not quite there yet, but we work on this all the time.

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

So part of the call for Canadian troops to return from Afghanistan is perhaps a result of this successful communications war by the Taliban. We're falling for it.

[BGen P. Atkinson]

I would say yes.

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

Thank you.

[The Chair, Conservative, Rick Casson]

Mr. Lunney.

[James Lunney, Conservative, Nanaimo—Alberni, BC]

Thank you very much.

Brigadier-General, it's great to hear about progress on the ground with bridges and infrastructure and also training with the Afghan National Army and police forces.

I want to pick up on the comment about the 3,200 marine forces. I think there was reference to helicopters being part of the equipment they may bring with them. I wonder if you could comment on that.

The second part is that the Manley report recommended a further 1,000 NATO troops and equipment. I wonder if you could comment on the assets that these additional forces and equipment would bring to our forces on the ground in terms of security and safety.

[BGen P. Atkinson]

The marine unit that is coming is a self-contained combat and combat support unit. They have their own helicopters, guns, and all the equipment they need. When they're operating as a part of the coalition, there will be an integration of assets. As I said, adding 25% of combat power in Regional Command South will make a huge difference.

The Manley report from the blue ribbon panel was reported to the government. I know the ministers are going to Vilnius this evening with the other NATO ministers. This will be an issue that will be discussed. The political part is working hard with our other NATO partners to get that.

There's no secret that we want a 1,000-man battle group in our area. I said we wanted additional Afghan forces. The call has been consistent to have another battle command in the south. That's important. It would make a difference on the ground, as we will see with the U.S. Marines when they come in the spring.

[James Lunney, Conservative, Nanaimo—Alberni, BC]

Do I have any time left?

[The Chair, Conservative, Rick Casson]

You have 40 seconds.

[Laurie Hawn, Conservative, Edmonton Centre, AB]

I have a quick question.

I spent Christmas looking at the Arghandab causeway, and I spent the next day speaking to a combat engineer in Mas'um Ghar. He talked about the development projects they are putting the Afghans on. His point was that the more they do, the more they take ownership, and the more, frankly, p.o.'d they're going to be if the Taliban come in and blow something up. How important is it that they take ownership and control of those facilities?

[BGen P. Atkinson]

This comes back to my comments earlier.

Taking ownership of their country and responsibility for their own security is the space we want to help them get to. Our success is their success. And our success is in helping them get there.

The local people are sick and tired. You saw it in the poll of all the violence that's overtaken them all these years. They want their kids to go to school. They want to have a life where they don't need to worry about getting blown up. They are taking responsibility. They're reporting corruption. They are telling us where IEDs have been placed in the ground, and they're telling us who the Taliban are. The night letters the Taliban send go both ways, and we get the reports about where the bad guys are. They are taking responsibility for their country. It's only through this that we will achieve the long-term success they want and need.

[Laurie Hawn, Conservative, Edmonton Centre, AB]

By the way, it was a U.S. Air Force fighter pilot who came up with the OODA loop, if you recall.

[The Chair, Conservative, Rick Casson]

We have confirmation of the correct spelling and what it means from Mr. Cox. We can give it to people to make sure it gets into the transcript correctly.

Thank you for that.

Before we go I have one question, if the committee will allow me. Are the IEDs put out by the Taliban strictly to target the military or to terrorize everybody?

[BGen P. Atkinson]

They have two targets. We are a visible target to them, but they want to cause instability. Some IEDs are command-controlled, so you can actually pick the target you want to harm, but a lot of them are indiscriminate. That's why we see civilian trucks, busloads of children, and other people getting killed by IEDs. If you're going to explode a vehicle full of explosives in downtown Kandahar, you're not just going to take out your military target. Invariably it is the locals--the civilians, children, people in the market and the stores--who end up being targeted. So an IED by its nature is indiscriminate and causes terror and instability. That's what they're all about.

[The Chair, Conservative, Rick Casson]

If an IED explodes, regardless of the target or the result, are you notified? Is that all calculated?

[BGen P. Atkinson]

We have a pretty good handle on everything that happens around the country. The short answer is yes. Working with the Afghan national security forces and in concert with them, we track where they all are, the trends, and everything else so we can continue to combat this in a very effective way through our intelligence-led operations.

[The Chair, Conservative, Rick Casson]

Thank you very much, sir.

Thank you for your presentation. We look forward to the next one. We'll suspend for a few minutes while we go in camera to deal with committee business.

[Proceedings continue in camera]