Evidence of meeting #18 for National Defence in the 40th Parliament, 3rd session. (The original version is on Parliament’s site, as are the minutes.) The winning word was conflict.
A recording is available from Parliament.
Liberal
Keith Martin Liberal Esquimalt—Juan de Fuca, BC
On the intelligence structure--the capability for us to know what's taking place abroad, where would such an organization...? Would it be a strengthening of CSIS, an extension of CSIS?
What do we do with those groups that are actually instigating and contributing to conflicts, for example, in the DRC, Uganda, Rwanda, Zimbabwe formerly?
Executive Director, Peacebuild
As far as countries intervening in DRC--the neighbours, for various reasons--one of the few avenues we have is diplomatic pressure on the Ugandans or the Zimbabweans. That's very limited, but sanctions are another possibility in these kinds of situations. I think there is a range of diplomatic instruments that could be used in those situations.
I'll pass to Ann on that.
Vice-President, Research, Education and Learning Design, Pearson Peacekeeping Centre
Again, using the bully pulpit Canada has, using pressure of all kinds, is an excellent way to stay the regional neighbours into their own borders.
As to the intelligence, the UN is no longer thinking intelligence is a dirty word, so there's quite an appetite for learning and understanding more about what intelligence-gathering is and what it really means for a mission. But I'm not equipped to talk about intelligence-gathering.
Thank you.
Conservative
The Chair Conservative Maxime Bernier
Thank you very much.
I will give the floor to Mr. Braid for five minutes.
Conservative
Peter Braid Conservative Kitchener—Waterloo, ON
Thank you very much, Mr. Chair, and thanks to both of our witnesses for being here this morning for two excellent presentations.
I wonder if I could start by asking a couple of questions to allow you to further elaborate on some of the points you made.
Ms. Livingstone mentioned that one potential role for the Canadian Forces would be to provide mentoring or support for regional associations or organizations like the Organization of African Unity. I have a couple of questions about that point.
First of all, do you feel that those regional associations have the capability to have primary responsibility in peacekeeping operations?
Vice-President, Research, Education and Learning Design, Pearson Peacekeeping Centre
As much as I would like to say yes, I have to say no, if we look at UNAMET, UNMIS, and some others. However, most of the countries of the African Union are 60 years old and independent, so they're quite new at this game. I think that's where the mentoring, advising, and provision of support are extremely critical if we really want the African Union to become robust enough to handle African problems in African ways.
Conservative
Peter Braid Conservative Kitchener—Waterloo, ON
In terms of that mentoring and support role, what might that role look like in terms of size, scope, and responsibility on our part? Do you have any thoughts there?
Vice-President, Research, Education and Learning Design, Pearson Peacekeeping Centre
I think it would require a fairly robust response of seconding individuals in over a long time. It would again be whole of government, helping the African Union with capability, with staffing, with planning, and with understanding how that works, and all in the cultural context. It's so very different, so it takes enormous time. I think it would be a long-term commitment with a substantive array of military, civilian, and police personnel to stay the course in that kind of environment in order for them to then be able to take over.
Conservative
Peter Braid Conservative Kitchener—Waterloo, ON
Very good.
Ms. Livingstone, you referred to the valuable lessons that we've learned from Afghanistan. Could you outline what those key lessons have been, in your mind, for our Canadian Forces?
Vice-President, Research, Education and Learning Design, Pearson Peacekeeping Centre
I think one of the key lessons is the role of patience and intercultural communication and understanding. Nothing happens quickly. We are taking a 13th- or 14th-century environment and trying to propel it to the 21st century. There are a whole range of activities that require patience, due diligence, deliberateness, relationship-building, and trust-building that are sometimes viewed as outside the purview of a force. I think that is probably the most critical lesson we are all learning from the Afghanistan experience.
Conservative
Peter Braid Conservative Kitchener—Waterloo, ON
Mr. Lord, you mentioned that one of the factors we should consider before deploying the Canadian Forces is to have a determination of the risks. Do you have any thoughts or suggestions on how we assess those risks? Would it be through a particular framework or specific criteria? Can you give us any elaboration on that point?
Executive Director, Peacebuild
There are different frameworks, different criteria that have been developed within the Canadian bureaucracy by academics and so on. I think these need more work, and they need more weighting in particular areas. The risks will be different in different situations, and all these different components relevant to Canadian interests, capacities, and risks have to be considered at the same time, so I can't give you a particular set of risk criteria to be used in any circumstances. It has to be I think related to the specifics of a particular situation, and certain types of risks will rise to the top. Based on the information that's available, you'll necessarily have some priorities in terms of what the risks are, but in the abstract I can't answer your question.
Conservative
Peter Braid Conservative Kitchener—Waterloo, ON
Thank you.
In my remaining time, I'll present this final question to both of you. We've had two previous witnesses suggest that there should be a period of downtime post-Afghanistan and that Canadian Forces should have a respite before re-engaging.
Could both of you please comment on that?
Executive Director, Peacebuild
I respect the military officers and analysts who have made the case for a respite. I wonder if it's going to be possible, though, and I wonder what degree of commitment and engagement is going to be needed in the short to medium term. I can understand the need, with the tempo of deployments to Afghanistan, the many people who have gone through that process, the wear and tear on equipment, and so on, but the world does not stand still, and there could be considerable pressures for Canadians to be deployed elsewhere in the near to medium term.
Vice-President, Research, Education and Learning Design, Pearson Peacekeeping Centre
I think it's extremely important that the military personnel have a chance to reflect and rest, but I also agree with David that there probably will not be time for that.
Conservative
The Chair Conservative Maxime Bernier
Merci beaucoup. Thank you very much.
Go ahead, Monsieur Bachand.
Bloc
Claude Bachand Bloc Saint-Jean, QC
I would like to focus a little on the importance of Parliament in decision-making. I have often noticed that, when members first join a committee, we are told that there is a lot we do not understand, and that is true. We sit opposite scholars who have been scholarly forever. Great generals with 30 years' experience come and tell us exactly how things are as they understand them. There are civil service mucky-mucks called deputy ministers who have been around for decades. There are also distinguished experts like yourselves.
But I cannot help recalling that none of them has been elected by the people. So we have responsibilities, including a $250 billion budget, though our responsibility is not just for financial management. When Canadian soldiers die in Afghanistan, we are partly responsible. As elected officials, we decided that they should go there.
Because it may be said that parliamentarians do not have sufficient understanding, do you believe that it should be up to the executive to decide to send Canadian forces into a conflict, or not? Do you not feel that the decision would be much more sound if parliamentarians and Parliament as a whole made that decision? That question follows up on what Mr. Hawn said.
The environment must also be appropriate. The government must be transparent with Parliament and must provide us with all the information we need to make an informed decision. But the fact remains that the informed decision is ours to make. Most of all, we have to live with the consequences of that decision.
Even if, legally and constitutionally, the executive must make the decision to engage in a conflict, would the decision be sounder if, as Mr. Harper has in fact done during the last two extensions of the mission in Afghanistan, the decision was made by Parliament as a whole rather than just by the executive?
Executive Director, Peacebuild
With that kind of issue, consensus is much more empowering for all. The executive and Parliament have a shared responsibility. They have to consider and analyze the problem and propose options.
Bloc
Vice-President, Research, Education and Learning Design, Pearson Peacekeeping Centre
I'm always hesitant to speak on politics, because it's not my forte. In a democracy, where you have the selection of government by the people, it is a shared responsibility. I have never been elected, so I don't walk a mile in your shoes. I do know how difficult it is to make the decisions that you do for the treasure and talent of your country. So I have a lot of respect for it, but I think it can't be one or the other; it's both.
Bloc
Claude Bachand Bloc Saint-Jean, QC
I am not very clear on what you are saying. Is it Parliament, cabinet, or the executive that should decide on a country's involvement? Democratically, which is the most sound?
Executive Director, Peacebuild
I feel that the Prime Minister and the cabinet were also elected. In our system, ultimately, they have the responsibility for the decision. The responsibility is shared, but it lies with the Prime Minister and the executive. In terms of the analysis, the discussions, the options, the positions taken by MPs, everyone is equal and has the same responsibilities for decisions as an elected official, even on a personal level.
Conservative
Conservative
LaVar Payne Conservative Medicine Hat, AB
Thank you, Mr. Chair.
I'd also like to welcome the witnesses here today and thank them for their presentations. I have a couple of questions to ask through the chair.
First of all, we did talk briefly about the national interests, and particularly the peacekeeping operations or peacemaking operations. In particular, we talked a little bit about Afghanistan. It was mentioned that these operations are much longer and much more costly. Again, how do we ensure that the public is on board to make sure that our national interests are looked after?
That question is for both of you.
Executive Director, Peacebuild
As I said earlier, I think it's an ongoing process. It's an ongoing process for you as MPs, for the media, and for non-governmental organizations, and so on, who are interested in these issues and have a sense of a stake in them as well, to continue to communicate what's going on, to try to put forward ideas, and to look for solutions to problems. That's the way to engage the public and to make some progress on some of these issues. They are large, complicated, and long term, but I think Canada's reputation in the past has been as a constructive player and a constructive and creative innovator in some of these situations. That's what needs to continue. We can't give up on them.