General Vance, thank you very much for being with us again, and thank you for your service.
I would like to take you back to Iraq and take you up on the offer you made in your written submissions to expand a bit on peace support missions. Iraq is a country of great interest to me. I had the privilege of serving under the UN for almost seven years in Baghdad. I understand the complexity of the country. What wasn't a factor at the time that I served was ISIS. We're now moving into an environment where we're considering steps beyond ISIS being a predominant force in the theatre.
What I wanted to put to you is the tension that we're facing between, one, wanting to take action and systematically take action against threats to international peace and security—that includes the fight against international terrorism—and, two, the sense that we don't nation build, which I don't want to present as a Canadian doctrine or want to attribute to U.S. officials who may have used it. We intervene against terrorism, but we don't necessarily stay for the long haul and reconstruct the country. In some cases, a country resists our becoming too heavily involved in the governance and reconstruction issues that would actually pull a country like Iraq out of the morass and move it into the paradigm of resurrected nations, if that's the right term.
Could you talk a bit more about where you see the role of the Canadian Forces between those two policy constraints? How would the Canadian Forces intervene on the one hand when there is a clear threat against international peace and security, but also see the effort through to the point where a country is back on its own two feet?