Evidence of meeting #104 for Veterans Affairs in the 44th Parliament, 1st Session. (The original version is on Parliament’s site, as are the minutes.) The winning word was gulf.

A video is available from Parliament.

On the agenda

MPs speaking

Also speaking

Nina Charlene Usherwood  As an Individual

The Chair Liberal Emmanuel Dubourg

Welcome to meeting number 104 of the House of Commons Standing Committee on Veterans Affairs.

Pursuant to Standing Order 108(2) and the motions adopted by the committee on March 9, 2023, and December 5, 2023, the committee is resuming its study on the recognition of Persian Gulf veterans and wartime service.

I would like to welcome Ms. Jean Yip to our committee. She's replacing Mr. Miao.

Before we begin, I would ask everyone participating in the meeting, whether in person or by video conference, to avoid bringing their earpieces close to their microphones when speaking, because this creates feedback that can cause hearing injury, especially to interpreters. So I ask everyone to be careful.

Today's meeting is being held in hybrid format, in accordance with the Standing Orders.

I remind you that all comments from participants must be addressed to the chair.

Now I would like to welcome our witness today.

We have, as an individual, Ms. Nina Charlene Usherwood. She's going to be with us by video conference.

Before I give you the floor for five minutes for your opening statement, I have to go to Mr. Blake Richards.

3:35 p.m.

Conservative

Blake Richards Conservative Banff—Airdrie, AB

Mr. Chair, I'm just looking for some clarity on what our meetings are going to look like.

We agreed to four meetings on this study, and we obviously have a report we've been working on. However, I noticed that, with both this meeting and the previous one, we've done one hour with a witness and one hour of committee business. I'm wondering if these are being considered full meetings.

I guess I'm trying to get some sense as to what's left in the study we're working on. Is this meeting and the previous one being considered as meetings so that we, therefore, only have two left? How is this being structured?

I'm looking for some clarity on that.

The Chair Liberal Emmanuel Dubourg

I understand.

In consultation with the committee, I can tell you that we have the report. We said it's about two meetings for the report. Maybe we're going to finish it this afternoon. For that study, we said four meetings. It was an hour and an hour, so it's considered as one meeting for now. Each meeting is two hours.

You can understand that we have six more hours to do in that stretch.

3:35 p.m.

Conservative

Blake Richards Conservative Banff—Airdrie, AB

Thank you very much, Mr. Chair.

The Chair Liberal Emmanuel Dubourg

You're very welcome.

Ms. Nina Charlene Usherwood, the floor is yours. You have five minutes for your opening statement. After that, we're going to ask you some questions to clarify or go through your presentation.

Please, go ahead.

Sergeant Nina Charlene Usherwood As an Individual

Good day, Mr. Chairman.

I want to thank the committee for inviting me and listening to my experience as a Gulf War veteran. I was deployed to Doha, Qatar, with the Desert Cats from November 30, 1990, until March 3, 1991.

When the government decided to join President Bush's coalition of the willing, the CAF had until recently been focused on the Cold War and the predicted Soviet invasion of western Europe. Our training, our exercises, our equipment and even our uniforms were geared for operations in Germany. While the navy sailed the world, the air force's jets were only deployed to Europe.

From the moment I was notified of my pending deployment to the Middle East, it was clear that the CAF was improvising. The CAF never considered that it would be required to deploy the air force anywhere except Europe, and certainly not to operate in the Middle East without desert uniforms or the necessary equipment or facilities.

Before the first Canadian was deployed to the Middle East until the last Canadian came home, the CAF improvised its participation in Desert Storm. This improvisation was reflected in the treatment of the Gulf War veterans before, during and after the war. I experienced this improvisation from when I was selected to deploy until I returned to Germany following the war.

Here are some examples of improvisation.

Jungle boots were the only tropical boots available for the Canadians, so we wore jungle boots in the desert. We had no wide-brimmed hats, so we purchased Tilley hats for use in the desert sun.

As an experienced technician, I was asked to develop the CF-18 maintenance program for months of deployment without the facilities we would have had available in Canada and Europe. The CF-18, like the navy's ships and helicopters, was rapidly modified for Desert Storm. While in Doha, I had to improvise repair solutions for malfunctioning CF-18s because of the lack of supporting equipment and facilities.

I can give other examples if you wish.

On my return from the Middle East in March 1991, a bus came to the airport to drive me back to Baden, Germany. Arriving in Baden, no one greeted me, except for a medic to secure my three atropine injectors. At 2 a.m., I was left outside a dark building with only my barrack box and duffel bag. I insisted that the medic reopen the building so that I could call one of the few friends who had a phone. Most Canadians at the time had no phones, as German landlines were very expensive.

This improvisation was also evident when the Gulf and Kuwait Medal was given to other veterans. Because my unit was aware that I had served in the gulf and was entitled to the medal, I was told twice to report to receive the medal from an officer. Each time, I was told I was not on the list of recipients. When I challenged my orderly room to explain why I had not received the medal, I was told I was not entitled to it. Eventually, I would receive my medal in a plain, brown envelope.

Gulf War veterans and I received the Kuwait Liberation Medal issued by Saudi Arabia in a ceremony in front of spectators and our peers. I received the Kuwait Liberation Medal issued by Kuwait from the Kuwaiti ambassador in front of spectators and peers.

Neither the CAF nor Canada ever thanked me for my service during Desert Storm. My service record for Desert Storm only reads “009803 MANNING LIST CATGME”. It does not mention the Middle East or a conflict.

Thank you for listening to my Gulf War experience. I'd be happy to answer any questions.

The Chair Liberal Emmanuel Dubourg

Thank you very much.

Let's start the first round of questions. I invite Mr. Richards to begin his six minutes.

3:40 p.m.

Conservative

Blake Richards Conservative Banff—Airdrie, AB

Thank you.

First of all, thank you for being here today. Secondly, and most importantly, thank you for your service to our country.

You had a brief opportunity of five minutes for an opening statement. You mentioned the experience you had with regard to being delayed, at the very least, in receiving your due recognition in terms of a medal for your service in that particular conflict. I think this is something that we hear frequently, in various ways, from a number of veterans. I know that the Afghan veterans, for example, right now feel like the recognition of their service is being delayed, because they're still waiting for a monument to be built, which they've expected for a decade now, essentially.

I wanted to start with that. I have a couple of questions for you, but I want to start with that because I know you've been involved with the organization that's in place to assist with the monument for LGBTQ+ veterans. I believe so, anyway. I believe you're involved with that in some way, are you not?

Sgt Nina Charlene Usherwood

I am just a member. I pay dues and keep track. When it is completed, I hope to go and be there for the opening.

3:45 p.m.

Conservative

Blake Richards Conservative Banff—Airdrie, AB

Okay. You're a member, but you're not really involved too much with it.

Sgt Nina Charlene Usherwood

No.

3:45 p.m.

Conservative

Blake Richards Conservative Banff—Airdrie, AB

The reason I wanted to ask you is that they've been far more successful in advancing their monument than the Afghan monument has been. I was hoping to get some insight from you as to how the Afghan veterans can better push for what they want to see, but maybe that's not a fair question to ask you then.

Sgt Nina Charlene Usherwood

The only thing I can point out is that the monument is actually directed to all federal employees of the LGBTQ community, as opposed to just the military.

3:45 p.m.

Conservative

Blake Richards Conservative Banff—Airdrie, AB

Fair enough. That's fine.

Let me move to the other question. I have a number of them, but the other one that I really hoped to touch on was this one. You obviously have an extensive military background. I know that you can briefly explain, to the committee and to any of those watching, the difference between strategic and tactical planning. If you wouldn't mind, just give us a brief explanation.

Sgt Nina Charlene Usherwood

As a technician, it's only from my reading. I was never educated by the military on the difference. My final rank was sergeant. Most of my career it was corporal, and I wasn't really concerned about “tactical” or “strategic”. Probably most of what I did was more tactical than strategic planning.

3:45 p.m.

Conservative

Blake Richards Conservative Banff—Airdrie, AB

No problem, and maybe what I can do, not having a military background myself, is just to give my best attempt at explaining the difference. Essentially, tactical planning would be more like immediately dealing with an event on the ground—maybe something like, “Let's take out that machine gun position.” Strategic planning would obviously be dealing more with the long term, the bigger picture of the strategy, things like the D-Day landings in World War II, for example.

I want to get your sense of whether you believe that a war can be waged without strategic planning in place.

Sgt Nina Charlene Usherwood

Just to clarify, because actually I did.... I'm an amateur student of history. There are three levels that the Canadian Armed Forces recognizes. There's tactical, like taking out a machine gun or something like that. There's operational. The D-Day invasion itself was actually an operational mission. The strategic level would be the whole war.

3:45 p.m.

Conservative

Blake Richards Conservative Banff—Airdrie, AB

That's perfect. I appreciate that clarity.

Sgt Nina Charlene Usherwood

Could I have your question again? I forgot.

3:45 p.m.

Conservative

Blake Richards Conservative Banff—Airdrie, AB

On the American-led coalition that included us as Canadians and that liberated Kuwait and destroyed the fighting capacity of Saddam Hussein's Iraqi army, I guess what I'm trying to get a sense of is, does the scale of that operation not reflect the implementation of strategic planning and, therefore, does it not—should it not—qualify as a war?

Sgt Nina Charlene Usherwood

Absolutely, it was a war. There was lots of strategic planning. Just like the Canadian operation in the example you gave, the invasion of D-Day, most of the high-level planning was actually done by Americans and British, not Canadians. There were Canadians involved in various different...but we were, because of the amount of commitment we were giving and the number of forces and equipment and stuff like that.... Generally, the people who get really into the strategic are the people providing the most.

3:45 p.m.

Conservative

Blake Richards Conservative Banff—Airdrie, AB

I think I got a sense from you that you would agree with what I'm saying—that everyone calls the Persian Gulf War a “war”, yet somehow it doesn't seem to be recognized.

Do you agree it should be recognized as a war?

Sgt Nina Charlene Usherwood

Yes, it's a war. There were over a million military personnel involved in it. That's a war.

3:50 p.m.

Conservative

Blake Richards Conservative Banff—Airdrie, AB

Why do you think it hasn't been recognized as such by the Canadian government?

Sgt Nina Charlene Usherwood

Frankly, I believe the Canadian government doesn't like to think of us as war fighters. It wants to think of us as peacekeepers. It has minimized our involvement in various things, such as the Medak Pocket in Yugoslavia. The government wasn't even talking about that when some of the Canadians were killed. It falsely claimed how they were killed, despite the fact it knew within hours how they were killed—things like this.

The Canadian government on both sides of the aisle, as far as I'm concerned, doesn't like to talk about us as warriors.