National Defence Committee on Oct. 27th, 2011

[Matthew Kellway, NDP, Beaches—East York, ON]

Thank you very much.

I was surprised to read, in light of comments we've heard today—and I think what we know through reading the media and what we can imagine from witnessing events over the last number of months—that in this context of tremendous instability, uncertainty, devastation of infrastructure on the ground, our Minister Baird went over to re-establish contacts and was accompanied, as the statement says, by four Canadian business organizations.

It seems to me—and it's a general comment and I don't mean to use this against anybody—that it seems to be, in a sense, a bit obvious that we're on a journey here and that we're only at the beginning of that journey. I worry and wonder about the priority that emerges from our minister taking four Canadian business organizations to be reintroduced to a new government that hasn't even really established itself. Can you comment on that for me, please?

[Barbara Martin]

I would say he took four business organizations and an NGO. He would have taken more people with him, but the logistics on the ground and the security requirements limited the number of people he could take, so I would underscore that.

The reality is that there are a number of Canadian companies with longstanding business engagements in Libya and a number of the contracts and the work they were undertaking in actual fact was contributing to the long-term development plans of the country. They were doing things—helping with the water pipelines, helping to build areas around the airport—that would facilitate the movement of people and the movement of goods as well. This business engagement is actually important to the revitalization of Libya's economy, going forward.

The other element to underscore is that Libya is fundamentally a very wealthy country. They are now at roughly 25% of the oil production of pre-conflict days. Libya had relied predominantly on its oil exports for this wealth. So being able to re-establish that capacity, for Libya to produce its oil and to export it, is critical for Libya to be able to build its own way forward.

What we're looking at is a mixed approach to Libya, helping it on those elements like the de-mining and the removal of unexploded ordinance immediately—things which endanger the people of Libya and their own ability to get their economy moving again—and then engaging with them on a business platform of mutual interest. But the market forces often determine the best allocation of resources. So it's a mixed approach to helping Libya stand on its feet again in the future.

[The Chair, Conservative, James Bezan]

Thank you.

Moving on, Ms. Gallant, you have the floor.

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

Thank you, Mr. Chairman.

To the witnesses, the NATO air strikes, as we've discussed before, were very accurate and precise. A fabulous job was done of minimizing any collateral damage. Were there any safeguards developed to prevent those civilian casualties?

[BGen Craig King]

I'll speak to that generally, ma'am, if that's all right.

We have a very elaborate process, which we refer to as targeting. That takes into account the definition of a legitimate military target and it does a very thorough assessment of collateral damage. I don't mean to dehumanize this in any way, but it takes into account the potential in a strike for civilian casualties and the expected degree of infrastructure damage we would cause by striking that target.

That process is run through a military filter to ensure the effort we apply is suitable for the target we are striking. It is run through a legal filter to ensure we're operating within the legal realm of our mandate. And it is subject to approvals at various levels in the chain of command by designated command authorities, ultimately under the NATO command of Lieutenant-General Charles Bouchard, and in some cases back in Canada, where it's necessary.

You can appreciate that the details of that are not discussed in an open forum for reasons of operational security, but I can assure you.... One of the jobs I have is to make sure this process is very carefully managed, certainly from the Ottawa level, and those officers who are charged in positions of responsibility, be they operations or legal or intelligence or other, are similarly highly trained, highly professional, and very proficient.

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

There have been some critical reports over the past couple of weeks claiming that Canada did not fill its share of the burden of the NATO military commitment in Libya. General King or Mr. Grinius, can you please describe for the committee how Canada not only lived up to but surpassed its NATO expectations in Operation Unified Protector?

[BGen Craig King]

I can certainly address that. Ma'am, I've got to tell you, I haven't heard any criticisms of the Canadian participation in the operation, or any suggestion that our contribution to the mission was insufficient in comparison to others.

The first point I'd like to make is that as we go into these alliance operations—and we've been in NATO from the outset—we approach these in a team environment where everyone contributes. Our contribution has been valued. The Secretary General has gone on the record highlighting Canada's role, and certainly by having General Bouchard in command, our role has been highlighted.

In terms of statistics, we flew 6% of all sorties that were flown, and a higher percentage, almost 9%, of all strike sorties flown. Those are ones that are delivering ordnance on the ground in Libya to enforce the UN Security Council resolution. We carried out a like number of air-to-air refuelling missions, dispensing scores of millions of pounds of fuel to keep other allies in the air. Our maritime contribution was something in the neighbourhood of 460-odd hailings, and a number of boardings to enforce the arms embargo.

As we've discussed with our allies, I think the consensus is that Canada has answered the call, that Canadian force of arms in this operation has been a significant contribution to the effectiveness of Operation Unified Protector, and it's for that reason, as I said at the outset, that we derive a lot of pride.

So I haven't heard anything....

Marius, did you want to add something?

[Marius Grinius, Director General, International Security Policy, Department of National Defence]

If I may, General King talked about the consultative process, etc. What has been, shall we say, somewhat different in this operation is the fact that the United States had deliberately said it would step back a bit and not necessarily lead the charge, as it has in many other operations—you just have to look at the numbers in Afghanistan, for instance. So we did see some of our NATO allies, particularly the United Kingdom and France and Italy, really step up in many different respects to take up that share, and certainly Canada was front and centre in so many different ways, as General King described.

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

I'd like to give my remaining time to Mr. Alexander.

[The Chair, Conservative, James Bezan]

You don't have any remaining time. Your time has expired.

Mr. Alexander, it is your turn anyway.

[Chris Alexander, Conservative, Ajax—Pickering, ON]

Thanks, Chair.

Obviously our thanks, our congratulations, our really heartfelt praise to all of you, and the men and women behind you, in Unified Protector and in all aspects of the mission. In many ways it has been a textbook success--to this point; we know that many of the harder issues only start to be fully visible today. Most of them are on the civilian side. We know that our counterparts on the foreign affairs committee and all of us in Parliament will continue to follow this issue.

I want to make three quick comments before asking you a couple of questions.

First, on the question of Gadhafi's demise, obviously our Prime Minister and our ministers have been very clear that we expect the NTC, their forces, to prosecute this campaign in accordance with the laws of war, to respect human rights, and to be accountable for their actions. Clearly in the chaos at Sirte something happened to Gadhafi that shouldn't have happened. The circumstances are still being clarified. We're all happy and satisfied that the NTC has agreed to investigate this. There will be international support for that effort, obviously, and we'll be watching what happens next.

On the question of extension, I just wanted to thank our witnesses for not speculating too much, because NATO has been very clear that the mission will end on Monday. There is a meeting today. There's obviously a request for some aspects of the mission to continue, but any assessment of those needs would have to be made by the staff inside Unified Protector, who are closest to these issues. For now, those of us who are around this table are not privy to those discussions. We'll just have to see. But we have our plan as of today, and that's an end of the mission on October 31, as agreed by Canada on October 21.

In the view of many of us around the table, I think perhaps the most important feature of this mission has been its success in avoiding civilian casualties. I really do think there is no person who deserves more credit for that than Lieutenant-General Charles Bouchard himself, personally, with the responsibility that was on his shoulders and his staff.

I just wanted that to be on the record of this committee. It will probably be an example that is studied in military colleges and in “operational lessons learned” exercises for some time to come.

My question for you is about the police and the army. We are handing off to them, in effect. I know there are many questions, and there are assessments yet to be done, but what is our current Canadian assessment of the capabilities of the Libyan police, to the extent they exist, and the Libyan army? The NTC forces are irregular forces. Some of them are going to disband. There were regular forces, obviously with the imprint of Gadhafi on them. What's our assessment of the extent to which those institutions can play a role now?

[Barbara Martin]

I think an awful lot remains to be seen as to what will happen in the future, but I think some of the strongest indications are what is happening on the ground in Tripoli.

Tripoli is a relatively stable and safe environment right now. There have been some incidents. There have been some clashes between the militias--sort of power struggles--but when those incidents happen, the Libyan security authorities establish roadblocks within hours around the community in order to bring control. That signals a very significant degree of sophistication and capability.

So in the short term, they're not decimated in the way that, for example, the security forces in Afghanistan were. There is significant capability. There's also significant capability that switched its loyalty.

[Chris Alexander, Conservative, Ajax—Pickering, ON]

Right.

[Barbara Martin]

So it's a question of assessing how quickly they're able to unify command and build on what they have.

[Chris Alexander, Conservative, Ajax—Pickering, ON]

My last question has two parts to it.

[The Chair, Conservative, James Bezan]

You won't have time for two parts, Mr. Alexander.

[Chris Alexander, Conservative, Ajax—Pickering, ON]

Could you comment on the fate of our $2.2 billion that was released to the Libyan authorities? To what extent is it being used or made available under appropriate accountability frameworks?

Also, having a constitution within months is a very ambitious timeline. Is there a model on which the NTC has indicated it will be fashioning its constitution, or are they starting from scratch?

[Barbara Martin]

I'm not aware of a model on which they're basing it, so I can't comment on that.

On the $2.2 billion, the assets are available to the NTC for their direction. They will go into the transitional financial mechanism. The constraints imposed on the use of those funds were imposed by the UN Security Council sanctions committee, which permitted us to release the funds. Those are the mechanisms that are looking after those funds.

[The Chair, Conservative, James Bezan]

Thank you.

We'll go to the third round.

Ms. Davies, you have five minutes.

[Libby Davies, NDP, Vancouver East, BC]

Thank you very much.

I want to come back to what you said, Ms. Martin, about the framework agreed upon with the NTC. I'm having some trouble with the vagueness of the replies. If, as the parliamentary secretary says, we have a successful textbook case here, then one would assume that part of it is looking forward as a military mission begins to come to an end. I can only imagine that there must be all kinds of plans laid for what we'll do. That's the question we have: what is Canada actually going to do from this point on?

We know the minister was there, and we know he took businesses with him. You've said it's important to have a reinvestment, and that's certainly understandable. When Marie Gervais-Vidricaire laid out the UN role, she specified very clearly that the UN would do this, other elements would do a social assessment, and some people were going to look at electoral functions. It seems that there is some specificity for other organizations or countries, but we don't yet have any understanding what it will be for Canada.

Can you give us any direction on what the focus will be? Will it be on building the military or the police? Will it be on civil society and women? I don't have a sense of where we're headed, from the answers you've given today.

[Barbara Martin]

Minister Baird announced, when he was in Tripoli, that we will be contributing $10 million to deal with the unexploded ordnance and weapons of mass destruction. That's a very clear priority for Canada's engagement in response to clear Libyan requests.

There were a number of other requests that the minister received at that time. They're still under consideration, so I can't speak publicly about them.

When we use the term “framework” we are talking about the plan and the priorities established by the Libyan authorities. They've made it very clear that they do not wish to have bilateral donors going in and driving their own agendas within Libya. They want to be in control of it. They don't even want the UN to drive that agenda. That is why they've said “Slow down. We need time to get our cabinet in place. Then you'll have the people with the authority to be able to tell you what our priorities are, and we would like you to be able to respond to them.” So when we're vague, it's because we're waiting for that process to play out.

[Libby Davies, NDP, Vancouver East, BC]

How long will that be? Do you have a sense of the timeframe?

[Barbara Martin]

They must form the new cabinet, what they call the transitional government, within 30 days. The expectations are that they will probably do that within about two weeks.

[Marie Gervais-Vidricaire]

If I may add, the UN-led process of assessing the needs with the Libyans will take a couple more months, unfortunately.

[Libby Davies, NDP, Vancouver East, BC]

I think you said the UN was making social assessments, so is Canada involved in that?