I certainly think NATO should be doing more of that. If we're not doing it with NATO, we should do it bilaterally in some circumstances.
There are two issues in dealing with militaries like the Iraqis. The first is helping the government of the day to ensure their loyalty, which is easier said than done. It's been an ongoing problem with the Iraqis. The second is to provide them with what I call the staff capacity to function as a modern military. It's one thing to provide them with new guns and whatnot, and teach them how to shoot them, but I remember that when I was still working, there were constant requests to Canada for staff officers, because we have very, very able staff officers. If you don't have good staff officers, you're not very effective on the battlefield in most cases. Providing countries like Iraq with staff training that supports the military capacity behind the scenes is very important.
The other area where it's very important for us to provide training missions is in helping those countries integrate their military. You'll know as well or better than I that one of the characteristics of the Iraqi military was that there was the military, there were some people from Iran, there were some people from Kurdistan, there were some people from here, there, and everywhere, so their military was a bit of a hodgepodge, in stark contrast to the militaries of the west. To the extent that NATO countries, or Canada as a stand-alone, can go in there and teach them some modern operational principles, it's worth its weight in gold.