National Defence Committee on Dec. 8th, 2009

[LaVar Payne, Conservative, Medicine Hat, AB]

So we've been doing a number of those projects to help them move forward.

[LGen J.G.M. Lessard]

Yes.

[Gen Walter Natynczyk]

To put it in perspective, the projects that General Lessard mentioned are very much in the local community, in advance of the signature project on the Dahla Dam. The area we're working in is the bread basket of southern Afghanistan, along the Arghandab River.

The Arghandab River is at the northern end of this Arghandab valley. There's a huge lake with a dam that was built in the 1950s, from the monument I saw on the site. But it's had no maintenance done on it at all. SNC-Lavalin has won a competition for about a $150-million project to renew not only the dam, but also the very intricate and sophisticated irrigation systems running from that dam out to those communities that General Lessard was mentioning.

If we get the irrigation system working again, the farmers can turn away from poppy crops and get on with pomegranates. This is an area that was known to be an incredible area for pomegranates.

[LaVar Payne, Conservative, Medicine Hat, AB]

Thank you.

I think it's important that Canadian people know what Canadians are doing in Afghanistan to help the population itself move forward.

As far as the staff you have in Kandahar preparing to develop the plans for removal of all Canadian troops, could you give us an indication of the number of individuals you have there?

[LGen J.G.M. Lessard]

I'll give you the rough number of people. There are a couple of hundred in the headquarters in Kandahar. But quite frankly, we're not at that stage right now.

The CDS gave direction in August and I gave initial direction in September. In fact, before Christmas I'll issue my warning order where we'll get into the details, and a lot of it will be talking with General McQuillan.

From my perspective, in the next three to six months most of the work will be done in Canada between my headquarters, which is responsible for international operations; General McQuillan, who is responsible for support command; and many other organizations in Canada, such as the assistant deputy minister for materiel. We'll be deciding what to do with the equipment, how to refurbish it, and where it goes.

Before I hand over to General McQuillan, I would say that a lot of the work to be done right now is in Canada.

Mark.

[Major-General Mark McQuillan, Commander, Canadian Operational Support Command, Department of National Defence]

Sir, thank you very much for the comment. It allows me the chance to provide some comments.

Very clearly, the sustainment of operations will be the focal point up until 2011 when we cease operations. What we will do is exactly as the generals have indicated.

In terms of our mission drawdown, and in terms of materiel, equipment, and priorities set, once we know what the operational plan is for the relief in place, and then once we understand the priorities for reset or reconstitution of the Canadian Forces for a be-prepared mission, that will set the conditions under which we will start the mission drawdown.

I'll probably be focused on three main areas. The chief has talked about this. Time is a significant factor in the mandate.

We'll also take a look at cost. Because as you're probably aware, based on the location of Afghanistan, it isn't easy to get materiel in or out, so it will be a combination of air bridges and/or sealift, and in some cases overland to sea bridges. All those factors, based on all the classes of materiel, will go into the consideration.

What we plan on trying to do.... Again, General Lessard is quite accurate. We are supporting him and his staff in terms of the conduct of how we will actually take a look at potentially drawing down materiel in terms of time and space. What we will clearly look at in terms of that direction, in terms of handing over, donating, disposing, selling, is that we will get the requisite authority and responsibility to do that and make sure it is in place to do so.

On the actual planning of staff and what I anticipate happening, again, a reconnaissance is in place right now. We will start to do a more detailed analysis in the spring with the intent of having a more formalized or finalized plan, hopefully by the late spring timeframe. My expectation on that, of course, in addition to the time, space, and materiel considerations, is what size of organization you need to conduct those functions based on the timelines provided.

We will provide recommendations at that time as to a force size that would be needed. As you can probably appreciate, the force that's in theatre now is supporting the actual operations. Also, a force will be maintained to sustain operations. This will be an additional task. My expectation is that we will have to phase in terms of people, focus, and orientation to make sure that this part of the operation at the tail end is executable.

[LaVar Payne, Conservative, Medicine Hat, AB]

Thank you very much.

Can I have another five minutes?

[The Chair, Conservative, Maxime Bernier]

No. There is no more time. Thank you very much.

I will give the floor to Mr. Wilfert.

[Bryon Wilfert, Liberal, Richmond Hill, ON]

Thank you, Mr. Chairman.

I have two questions. One will refer to a statement made by the general counsel for the office of the ombudsman for DND.

But on the first one, I was just intrigued by your response, General, to my colleague Mr. Dosanjh's questions with regard to the Noonan report. You gave an incredible amount of detail. I realize that you said you weren't on the ground, so you were well briefed, presumably. In the notes, they refer to the name and the unit of the platoon that originally captured that individual, and they took pictures, I understand, of him showing no injuries at the time, before they handed him over to Afghan officials.

The fact that this took place before the new agreement, or the enhanced transfer agreement, doesn't seem to matter in my view when it comes to whether or not this is a credible example of abuse of a Canadian-transferred detainee to Afghan officials. Can you comment on that?

[Gen Walter Natynczyk]

Again, from my perspective, having spoken to.... I mean, on May 4, 2007, here I am calling the platoon commander, okay? It's not often that the vice-chief of defence actually calls the platoon commander, but again, I wasn't there. Other people weren't there. I wanted to make sure that I understood the perspective and the context, and I also spoke to the commanding officer, Colonel Ian Hope, and refreshing my memory again last night: that our soldiers question, indeed, thousands of Afghans, each and every day. And while we question, we assess whether the individual is a person of interest that we should be taking into custody, because we have every requirement to ensure that we do not arrest people who are innocent.

[Bryon Wilfert, Liberal, Richmond Hill, ON]

Do we always take pictures and make notes every time?

[Gen Walter Natynczyk]

I would have to refer back to Colonel Hope why they would take pictures in this event. From my perspective, I didn't even know they took pictures, and again, I didn't see the notes from the military police who came in after the event.

[Bryon Wilfert, Liberal, Richmond Hill, ON]

Because I wonder if this is a normal procedure, to take pictures and take detailed notes before they transfer them over to the--

[Gen Walter Natynczyk]

I don't know. Again, I'll have to refer back to the battalion commander of the day, and perhaps we can get a response in that regard--

[Bryon Wilfert, Liberal, Richmond Hill, ON]

Can we get a follow-up, Mr. Chairman?

[Gen Walter Natynczyk]

—but again, from the information provided to me, and again, I wasn't there....

[Bryon Wilfert, Liberal, Richmond Hill, ON]

I appreciate that. Your response to my colleague triggered that question.

General, on a different note, the general counsel for the office of the ombudsman for DND and the Canadian Forces was before us back on February 25. The comment that was made, and this is with regard, I would assume, to withdrawal, was that:

The environment in which Canada's military has been operating in recent years has changed dramatically, particularly in light of the level and intensity of combat operations in Afghanistan. And it is evident that the Canadian Forces and its members are strained almost to the breaking point.

General Leslie made comments as well.

How critical is it for us to completely withdraw to regroup and refresh so we are able to then respond to future missions, whatever they happen to be?

[Gen Walter Natynczyk]

I'll just say that the Canadian Forces have a capacity to do operations around the world on a continuous basis--on a continuous basis. Indeed, equipment fatigue is often more significant than individuals' fatigue.

As I mentioned before, there are people who are on their second, third, and fourth tours, because they want to be. Everyone is generally expected to go on at least two tours to Afghanistan. We have 80 people currently on their third tour, and we have five people on their fourth tour, because they want to be there. Indeed, with respect to the fourth tour, I spoke to the commander in Land Force Western Area, Brigadier-General Mike Jorgensen. He personally interviewed the five people there on their fourth tours just to make sure, eye to eye, that these individuals were fine. His interview of one individual I think is worth recounting. He hauled the young corporal in, who was asking to go on his fourth tour, and he asked the corporal, “What is your major worry at this moment?” He said, “Sir, my major worry is that you won't let me go.”

Indeed, the men and women of the Canadian Forces, when they put on this uniform, want to go somewhere. I was in Shilo, in September of this year, speaking to about 750 soldiers of 2nd Battalion PPCLI and 1st Regiment Royal Canadian Horse Artillery. I said to folks, “Okay, you've all been there. Who wants to go back?” About 90% of the hands went up. I asked someone who didn't put up a hand what the issue was. He said, “Sir, I'll tell you what. If somebody else tells my wife, I'm there for you.”

Then I said that while we've been in Afghanistan, there have been other operations. There are UN operations, coalition operations, Africa, and wherever. I asked how many people wanted to go somewhere. Guess what. A hundred percent of the hands went up.

I spoke to soldiers in Gagetown in June. I spoke to those same soldiers when they were in Afghanistan in March. In March they were tired. They'd been on the tour, at that point, for six months and a bit. It's a long process, in terms of training and theatre. I remember asking them in March, “How are you guys doing? Do you want to come back?” They were looking down. They were kicking stones. They said, “Sir, we're kind of tired. We're kind of tired.”

I saw those same soldiers in June in Gagetown. What was their first question to me? What was their first question? “Sir, when can we go back?”

[Bryon Wilfert, Liberal, Richmond Hill, ON]

General, did you phone his wife? That's all I'd like to know.

[Voices]

Oh, oh!

[Gen Walter Natynczyk]

That's just to say that everyone is different. Today we have 67,300 members of the regular force and in the order of 25,000 in the reserve force, and they all put on their uniforms to go somewhere. We all have different family circumstances. We all react differently to stress. I am so pleased that we have made huge progress in supporting those who've gone through some stress and that we are also tailoring our personnel policies to accommodate especially those who have made significant sacrifices for our country.

[The Chair, Conservative, Maxime Bernier]

Thank you, General.

I will give the floor to Mrs. Gallant.

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

Thank you, Mr. Chairman, and, through you, our witnesses.

There is quite a significant amount of equipment we've gathered together since we first started our mission in Afghanistan. Indeed, the days have changed since Bosnia, when the soldiers would take off their frag vests on the tarmac and the new soldiers coming in would pick them up and use them. With respect to this equipment, and recognizing that some is kind of getting worn out, will there be any left in theatre when we leave?

[Gen Walter Natynczyk]

Mr. Chair, at this point in time, before the assessment that.... Again, General McQuillan's staff will involve also all those technicians who will descend upon the equipment and do an assessment of it—that equipment that is not worth bringing home from an economic standpoint, that equipment that is worth handing off to our allies or indeed the Afghans. We have computers that have been sitting there since 2002. We have a lot of equipment that's been sitting around, so it depends on what it is.

I'll ask General McQuillan to wade in on this.

[MGen Mark McQuillan]

Ma'am, we will go through a very pragmatic process of identifying equipment that is identified as surplus and/or disposal and/or to be brought back to Canada.

We have already set up what we call a mission materiel infrastructure board. That is sort of co-chaired right now between CEFCOM and my command. The intent of that is, again, to look at the full range of materiel that is in theatre and then to make an objective and rational recommendation as to what could be offered up under those various categories.

The intent of what will follow is that there will be some things we will have authority for and some things we'll have to go up through the respective chains to get authority for, depending upon the level of materiel that, for instance, is at a donation level. But that will all come together in what we call a materiel distribution instruction. We will try to be very pragmatic and make sure we have identified what we think are the key materiel pieces that potentially can go various ways, get the authorities in place, and then issue the direction, so we are executing that drawdown task in line with those priorities that have been established to set recommendations and approvals in place.