I was the director of health service operations, so the commanders of all the medical units in Afghanistan reported to me in Ottawa at the height of the conflict. We're extremely highly respected by all of our allies for the speed and nimbleness with which we could modify our program. Our participation in that joint theatre trauma registry and system permitted us to essentially do research, with almost real-time modification, of clinical protocols and process that resulted in life-saving.
For example, through that system, the Americans in Iraq were able to reduce mortality by up to about 15%, simply as a result of that data analysis. We have developed tremendous lessons learned as a result of that operation. We've incorporated those into our process. We've published them as widely as we can, including in the NATO Joint Analysis and Lessons Learned Centre, so the whole alliance has that kind of benefit.
We need to continue conducting research and continue maintaining the capabilities we've developed, even at a skeleton level, so that will require us to maintain all of the capabilities. We don't know what will happen next. We can't base our lessons and our restructuring of the armed forces on the past conflict, because the next one will always be different.
We need to have a capability-based structure where we have at least a skeleton capability in virtually every area to be able to meet every kind of operational threat and health hazard, so that we're ready to magnify, expand, and deploy it should the next operation not be what we expect.
When the Americans went into Iraq, the last thing they expected was to have to perform offensive manoeuvre operations again with armoured forces, after the end of the Cold War, but they were ready and they were able to maintain those capabilities. We have to do the same thing. Publication, ongoing research, and maintenance of our current structure with capability in all different areas are what is required for us to be ready the next time Canada needs us.