Debates of April 12th, 1999

Kosovo

[Some hon. members]

No.

[Art Eggleton, Liberal, York Centre, ON]

Mr. Speaker, this should be of no surprise to the hon. member because we discussed this in the House on February 17.

This is relevant to the peacekeeping mission that was foreseen in the Rambouillet talks. We indicated at that time that between 600 and 800 personnel, approximately 700 if you will, would be deployed for that purpose. They would come from our base in Edmonton. They would be equipped with Coyote reconnaissance, one of the best, state of the art, armoured personnel carrier vehicles that we have, Griffon helicopters and other necessary equipment to carry out a peacekeeping mission.

They are, as our troops are expected to be, fully combat capable. They are able to deal with a range of conditions. The kinds of conditions we are talking about for their deployment are the very ones we talked about in the House on February 17, and that is as a part of a peacekeeping mission.

[Daniel Turp, Bloc, Beauharnois—Salaberry, QC]

Mr. Speaker, I have a comment and a question for the Minister of National Defence.

I was present in October 1998, when we had a debate—as the minister will remember—and there were very few members in the House. Yet the government used that debate to claim it was entitled to take part in air strikes without a vote in this House.

What the opposition objects to when we are dealing with such important issues is that the debate should be followed by a vote. I would like to hear the minister's view on this.

My question, however, is this: Has Canadian military equipment been damaged during the 19 days of air strikes, and have Canadian or Quebec military personnel been injured or been harmed in any way?

[Art Eggleton, Liberal, York Centre, ON]

Mr. Speaker, we are grateful that there have been no casualties and no injuries. The military equipment being deployed is the CF-18 jet fighters, 12 of them. They are used frequently in carrying out the air campaign. They are well equipped. They have precision guided munitions that have been used extensively when the weather has permitted.

I might add that that is an important factor. They do not want to release the munitions against the target unless they can verify the target visually because they want to ensure that they minimize any possibility of civilian casualties.

They have been able to carry out their missions quite well. They are well equipped, well trained and they have carried out a stellar performance for Canada in this regard.

[Gordon Earle, NDP, Halifax West, NS]

Mr. Speaker, I would ask the hon. minister if he could check and inform the House if the U.S. or any NATO partner is using A-10 Warthog jets with depleted uranium shells.

[Art Eggleton, Liberal, York Centre, ON]

Mr. Speaker, I can only respond as I did when the question was asked during Oral Question Period today. I am not aware of any, but I would be pleased to inquire and advise the hon. member.

[André Harvey, Progressive Conservative, Chicoutimi, QC]

Mr. Speaker, I simply want to ask the minister if the House of Commons will be officially convened to vote on a formal commitment of Canadian ground troops, because I have the impression that our international role has been neglected in this whole scenario.

I remember all the efforts made by the former Prime Minister—

[The Deputy Speaker]

Order, please. I am sorry, but the hon. member's time has expired.

[Art Eggleton, Liberal, York Centre, ON]

Mr. Speaker, this has been talked about extensively today and in question period. The Prime Minister has appropriately answered the question with respect to a vote.

However, let me say that if there were any substantive change in terms of our involvement in this matter, as I think it has been said time and time again, we would come back to the House for discussion.

[Lucienne Robillard, Liberal, Minister of Citizenship and Immigration]

Mr. Speaker, the situation in Kosovo has a number of repercussions for Canada as a NATO member. One is the human tragedy of thousands of individuals so brutally forced out of their homes in Kosovo.

I remind members that the refugees did not leave their homes voluntarily, and that most of them want to return. And we see their despair daily.

As members know, Canada responded to UNHCR's appeal and set up the necessary infrastructure to take in 5,000 Kosovar refugees. This action was necessary because of the risks to which the refugees were exposed. Hundreds of thousands of Kosovars were forced to leave the region and all of them wanted to take refuge in neighbouring countries.

This unprecedented wave of refugees massed at the borders represented a risk bordering on the unacceptable. These people had been forced out of their homes and had already endured great suffering. That is why Canada joined with other countries and undertook to offer these refugees a safe haven.

Last Friday, the high commissioner, Mrs. Ogata, thanked those countries that had responded to UNHCR's appeal, but indicated to the international community that the planned program would be only an emergency solution to the problem of protection.

Mrs. Ogata stated clearly the position of the organization she heads, and I quote:

The majority of people should remain in the region to permit repatriation with security when the situation allows. Some individuals' resettlement would be appropriate to deal with special needs and family reunification.

There will therefore be situations where individuals needing special protection in order to be reunited with their families will have to be resettled in third countries, this time on a permanent basis. Decisions will be taken with the co-operation of international organizations specialized in this sort of intervention.

Canada's legislation makes provision for such situations. Already, our staff are in the region, ready to accept applications. This aid is beginning in the former Yugoslavian republic of Macedonia, with our international partners, and is continuing in Canada, with our local partners.

The situation in Kosovo remains volatile, but it has now evolved to the point where the refugees can remain in the area in relative security. Many members heard our ambassador, Raphael Girard, tell Canadians yesterday about the satisfactory conditions in five of the six main refugee camps in the former Yugoslav Republic of Macedonia.

Conditions in those camps are improving to the extent that Canadian purchased toys have been distributed to some children. Food, water and health supplies are arriving in part through the efforts of the men and women of the Canadian forces and Canadian NGOs. Shelters are being constructed and these refugees have the level of protection that was fundamental to the decision of the United Nations High Commissioner for Refugees.

The situation, I repeat, is in constant evolution. Canada will continue preparations and maintain a state of alert should the situation change in the days and weeks to come. In the event the UNHCR decides to proceed with an emergency evacuation we are ready. Canada has a proud humanitarian tradition. Canadians are compassionate people who have historically come to the aid of those in need.

Should emergency measures become necessary the UNHCR will be a key player in identifying persons who are in need of assistance, in deciding to which countries they should go and in providing the basic documents.

In addition to the UNHCR, the International Organization for Migration, the IOM, would play a key role in the registration and transportation of the refugees to Canada. Canada's capacity to respond to a major evacuation would be intimately tied to the structures that the UNHCR and the IOM are putting in place on the ground. I have every confidence that these organizations will succeed in their task.

Our partners at the Red Cross would play a critical role in any operation we might undertake. We must remember that many of these people are travelling from camps in which the Red Cross symbol appears on tents, trucks and food parcels. This recognizable symbol would be highly visible in the reception centres in Canada.

The Red Cross could also make its family messaging services available shortly to refugees through its international network. Red Cross officials assure me that they are ready to extend humanitarian services and that their personnel are standing at the ready. I am pleased to have the assistance of the Red Cross with its expertise in helping refugees from affected countries in Europe.

Our partnerships at various levels have been the key to success in this initiative. While the operation is led essentially by the Canadian government, the provinces have a crucial role to play, as is the case with many aspects of our refugee protection program.

We have daily contacts with provincial officials to solve issues of mutual interest and co-operation. I want to thank our provincial partners for their co-operation and for opening their doors to refugees.

I also want to thank the people in the communities around the military facilities that we are planning to use. They too have worked together and prepared to welcome refugees.

We are also continuing to work closely with NGOs whose expertise in the management of humanitarian crises is precious. Employees from my department have worked closely with employees from other federal departments who have shown dedication and flexibility in meeting the particular needs of refugees, while striving to improve the overall situation in Kosovo, and I want to thank them for that today.

I would be remiss if I did not mention the extraordinary generosity of Canadians, as our Prime Minister did earlier today. The toll-free line that we set up last week was flooded with calls. The offers of assistance that have been coming in steadily through this line since last Wednesday are simply extraordinary.

We have received more than 7,000 calls and 1,000 faxes. The assistance offered ranges from the large bedroom that the eldest daughter in a family is willing to make available to a family of refugees so they can sleep together to the free English lessons that a university student is willing to give.

This confirms my conviction that Canadians are compassionate people who are always willing to help those in need. Therefore, I want to thank all Canadians who have offered to help in so many different ways the refugees from Kosovo. We are sure that Canadians would open their arms and their hearts to make the refugees from Kosovo feel welcome in our country.

Canada is a caring society. Compassion is a strong element of our national character. The question of how best to respond to this crisis is one that we are answering at times as we go along. The situation is changing very quickly and could change again over the next few days, but I know that whatever happens in the coming days and weeks we have already witnessed a demonstration of Canada's humanitarian tradition in action within our home borders and in our homes.

I am satisfied that the Government of Canada and its many partners are ready to move quickly and effectively should the UNHCR renew its request to offer a safe haven to a large number of refugees. Furthermore, the UNHCR knows we are also ready to assist in individual cases of refugees who need protection in Canada. Our efforts are entirely consistent with the larger international effort in responding to the needs of refugees. As a Canadian I am proud that assistance has been offered to these people.

[Deepak Obhrai, Reform, Calgary East, AB]

Mr. Speaker, I rise on a point of order. Perhaps we could get unanimous consent to question the minister longer than just the five minutes allotted. Perhaps it could be extended to 10 minutes.

[The Deputy Speaker]

Is there unanimous consent to extend the time for questions and comments by 10 minutes?

[Some hon. members]

Agreed.

[Some hon. members]

No.

[Leon Benoit, Reform, Lakeland, AB]

Mr. Speaker, the minister made an extremely important point in her speech that Canadians truly are very generous. They have offered to open their homes and their lives to refugees. That shows a generosity that is quite amazing in fact. It has left a very positive impression on me.

I have a couple of questions for the minister. In her speech just now and before I have heard the minister say that she will rely on the United Nations High Commissioner for Refugees to make the decision on whether or not Canada accepts refugees. Is the minister allowing the United Nations to make that decision for Canada?

What process will be put in place to ensure that any refugees we choose will go through the proper security checks? There is some concern in that regard.

[Lucienne Robillard, Liberal, Westmount—Ville-Marie, QC]

Mr. Speaker, I recognize the fear the Reform Party has of criminals all the time. We are speaking about people in need who were forced to leave their homes and their country. We are here to speak about the help we can give them.

It is clear that we will act in co-operation with the UNHCR. We have always done so in the past. When there is an international crisis we work with the UNHCR. It is the expert in the field. UNHCR will refer these people to our immigration officers and of course we will do some medical and security screening.

[Daniel Turp, Bloc, Beauharnois—Salaberry, QC]

Mr. Speaker, here is my question for the minister.

According to the United Nations High Commissioner for Refugees, there are over 655,000 refugees abroad, but within Kosovo itself there are 800,000 displaced persons.

To your knowledge, are Canada and other countries able to help displaced persons inside Kosovo and is it enough to help refugees outside Kosovo?

When will we know whether the High Commissioner for Refugees will ask Canada to take in some refugees and how exactly do you intend to inform the population?

[The Deputy Speaker]

I ask the hon. member to address his comments to the Chair.

[Lucienne Robillard, Liberal, Westmount—Ville-Marie, QC]

Mr. Speaker, we are certainly concerned also by the situation of those inside Kosovo. The only way to help these people is for international organizations, especially the High Commissioner for Refugees, to be allowed into Kosovo, which is not the case currently. This is why the international community is extremely concerned.

As far as the time frame to bring people here is concerned, we already have two immigration officials in the field. We even have a Canadian doctor over there with them, and individual references through the High Commissioner for Refugees have started.

[John Herron, Progressive Conservative, Fundy Royal, NB]

Mr. Speaker, I would like to take this opportunity to speak about some of the comments that were made earlier by the member for Pictou—Antigonish—Guysborough. I know that he and the Prime Minister are both students of history. He was referring to Robert Borden's comments that we must ensure parliament always has continuous and meaningful consultation.

As was asked by the member for Compton—Stanstead earlier in question period, has the Government of Canada made a commitment to NATO to send in ground troops? That question was asked of the Minister of National Defence but he did not answer it. Does she have any knowledge that commitment has been made by any member of cabinet or by the Minister of National Defence?

[Lucienne Robillard, Liberal, Westmount—Ville-Marie, QC]

Mr. Speaker, I realize the question is for either the Prime Minister or the national defense minister, but I understand both my colleagues emphatically answered no to the question.

[Art Hanger, Reform, Calgary Northeast, AB]

Mr. Speaker, it certainly is my pleasure to address the question of Canada's involvement in the crisis in and around Kosovo.

We have heard from the leader of the Reform Party that the official opposition is strongly supportive of Canada playing a role in bringing this humanitarian crisis to an end. Reform wants to see a rapid end to Milosevic's campaign of ethnic cleansing. We want to bring stability to this troubled region as quickly as possible and as peacefully as possible.

This is why we support the NATO air strikes against Serbian military positions. This is why, if NATO deems it necessary, we will support the use of ground troops to enforce the resettlement of Kosovar Albanian refugees. Let me be clear. We stand united with NATO. We will not tolerate Slobodan Milosevic's campaign of ethnic cleansing and we are prepared to crush his military until he stops.

Canada has several responsibilities in this crisis. We have responsibility to the innocent Kosovar Albanians who are being driven from their homes, forced out of their country, stripped of their identity and in many cases killed simply because of their ethnicity. Canadians will not tolerate that.

In the past couple of days two polls have shown that a majority of Canadians want NATO and Canada to take decisive military action against Milosevic. Canada also has a responsibility to our NATO allies. We must stand shoulder to shoulder with our allies to demonstrate to Milosevic our resolve to end his hostilities against Kosovar Albanians. Canada also has an historic responsibility to restore peace through diplomatic means. We stress that attempts to bring a diplomatic end to this crisis should continue in spite of the ongoing military action.

We also have a responsibility to our troops and their families. We must ensure that any decision to engage Canadian forces has been carefully thought through as a clear definition of Canada's role and has a well defined goal.

I do not believe the motion we are debating has a clear defined goal when it comes to any involvement of the military. As the defence critic, however, I focus on the question of Canada's current military commitment to the NATO effort in Kosovo and the possibility of future ground force commitments in coming days or weeks.

I disagree with the government's unwillingness to address the issue head on. The use of ground forces is a very real possibility and Canadians deserve to know that parliament has had a full debate on this question. I understand the strategic imperative of not officially committing to ground troops yet, but that does not preclude a theoretical discussion of the issue.

The government has a responsibility to put all the facts on the table. The official opposition will continue to press the government on this point, as it will on the need for a vote should the issue become more paramount in the very near future.

Canadians should be proud of their troops. They have been carrying out a very difficult mission in Yugoslavia, far more in the last two weeks than previously. They have shown a tremendous degree of professionalism and confidence. On behalf of the official opposition I congratulate them on a job well done.

Since the first hints of NATO military action surfaced I have been in favour of Canada lending its support to the efforts to bring Milosevic's military to its knees.

Now, after several months of continued atrocities against ethnic Albanians, the need for more military action is even more clear. However, the massive refugee problem has likely changed the measures we need to take to ensure stability in the region. NATO military planners originally thought air strikes would be sufficient to bring Milosevic to heel. Ground troops would then have gone in only after a peace agreement was reached.

While it is too early to tell, it looks as though ground forces may be necessary before a peace agreement is reached in order to ensure the resettlement of over 500,000 ethnic Albanians who have been driven out of Kosovo. I stress that I think it is still too early to tell whether such action will be necessary. I also want to point out that it is up to NATO to determine what the military action would be at that point. That being said, we as members of parliament have a duty to discuss the possibility of a Canadian military contingent being sent to Yugoslavia as part of a NATO ground force.

As I said earlier, our position is clear on this. We will support NATO's decision to send in ground troops if they determine that is what is necessary to achieve our common objectives, that is, the resettlement of Kosovar refugees and an end to ethnic cleansing.

We called for this debate for two reasons. First, we believe parliament should be consulted before Canada participates in any escalation of NATO military action in Yugoslavia. Second, we know what our position is. We now want to hear what the government's outline is on its position.

There are a number of obvious questions raised by this crisis that need answers. Given the refugee problem has increased exponentially, the military mission may have changed or may be about to change and the objectives of this government may be changing to a degree. We want to know that.

We would like to know if this has changed the government's goals. Has the government changed its objectives since the beginning of the campaign? Furthermore, how far is the government willing to go to achieve its objective, that is the resettlement of Kosovar Albanians?

Are there projected timelines for Canadian participation? Are there anticipated roles for our troops? Will they fulfil reconnaissance, engineering, supply, medical, or combat roles? What specific preparations are our troops undergoing in anticipation of joining a possible NATO ground force both before and after a peace agreement is reached?

These questions beg to be answered. In spite of the fact that there is no commitment, it is incumbent upon government to be able to deal with questions such as those being presented here.

Are our troops outfitted with the equipment they need to do the job? I know there is always a role for Canadian troops in any theatre, but the more dangerous the situation is, the more high intensity of the combat area, the greater the needs of any military troops entering that field. What kind of equipment will our troops have when they walk right into that conflict, if they ever do walk into that conflict on the ground?

The auditor general has expressed concerns about Griffon helicopters, Coyote reconnaissance vehicles and other Canadian military equipment. Have these concerns been addressed?

Sending equipment and troops into this conflict also raises important questions about the new role of NATO and its role in protecting international stability but I feel these would be more appropriately raised at another time. Some of these questions would include an examination of the causes of Canada's diminishing role in international military decision making, an examination of NATO's changing role as an international police force and an examination of the command and control structure of NATO and how Canada fits into this framework. In the meantime, I want to stress that as a demonstration of our support for Canada's commitment to NATO allies, Reform remains committed to the present NATO course of action.

Let me elaborate on some of my earlier questions for the government. Has the government changed its objective in pursuing military action in Kosovo? Ending ethnic cleansing and resettling refugees are my main reasons for supporting NATO action. Has the government's role changed? I need to know from the government that we are on the same wavelength on this issue. Does the government have other plans? Does the foreign affairs minister have another agenda? Does he want to take military action a step further and try to establish a new independent Kosovar state?

We should know these things before more Canadian troops are committed. What are the expected time lines? Does the government have any idea how long Canadians will be committed? Does it expect that it will be a short engagement, say a few months, or is this something that could escalate into a timeframe of a decade?

All of this depends on the government's goals. Does the government have a particular role in mind for our troops? Will our troops be forming front line combat roles, or will they fulfil other important functions, for example in communications, supply, engineering or medicine? These are all roles which Canadian forces members have experience in. Canadians want to know if the government already has an idea how our troops will fit into the overall NATO plan.

I previously put a question to the minister after his presentation. We do know that around 700 Canadian troops in the west are preparing for engagement in Kosovo. We would like to have the government tell us how they are preparing. What sorts of circumstances are they planning for? Are they readying themselves for peacemaking, peacekeeping or both? There are obviously huge differences between the two roles.

We need to know about the equipment the Canadians will be taking with them. I understand there are some Griffon helicopters. I do not know how many. Are they being deployed and for what purpose? Do they have what they need to get the job done? Will they be protected to the greatest extent possible?

The men and women of the Canadian forces are well trained. They are brave beyond words. I have talked to many international soldiers in that regard about some of the circumstances under which they have served and which those of even greater military might may not have even ventured into. They are very professional. I want to be assured that the government knows what it is doing.

My sense is that for the time being at least we are all pretty much on the same wavelength. I would be surprised if there is a great gulf between the government and the opposition so far on this issue.

I ask these questions because it is crucial that we all spell out precisely what we have in mind before we get into the crisis any further. It is only fair not only for the opposition but for the Canadian public as well as the military. We owe that to Canadians in general. Most of all we owe it to the members of the Canadian forces who will put their lives on the line to carry out the government's orders.

History has shown that the threat of massive military action has frequently been the very thing that brings aggressors to the bargaining table. I think we all hope that this will be a similar case.

[Art Eggleton, Liberal, Minister of National Defence]

This is a unique experience, Mr. Speaker. I get to ask the defence critic a question.

I first want to preface my remarks by saying that I do very much appreciate the praise he gave to our troops, the support for the NATO action and for the action of this government in support of NATO.

I want to also assure him that there are no commitments. He was concerned that there might be commitments beyond those that have been publicly announced or those that have been discussed in the House. I can assure him that is not the case.

With respect to how long this might take, we are into a situation where it is not a question of end date, it is a question of end stage. It is a question of being able to achieve the successful return of the Kosovars and a peaceful and secure atmosphere in Kosovo.

I want to ask the member a question. He suggested that perhaps we should have a discussion, I think he said a theoretical discussion, in this House, on what if we did get into a situation where ground troops might be deployed prior to a peace agreement. Given the hon. member's comments with respect to NATO and solidarity with NATO, would that not be the place to start? After all, if our NATO allies do not think there should be any change, then obviously Canada would not be out of step with its NATO allies, would it?

[Art Hanger, Reform, Calgary Northeast, AB]

Mr. Speaker, I thank the minister for his questions.

I certainly agree that is the place to start. If the minister recalls throughout my entire presentation, I alluded to that point time and time again.

The debate on this topic is an issue that involves more than just a commitment of ground troops. It involves a commitment of an entire parliament with the information reaching the entire population of Canada. What we on this side of the House have sought to do is to keep people informed and have the full support of the House of Commons through a vote on that commitment, should it ever arise. That was our point right from the beginning.

[John Nunziata, Independent, York South—Weston, ON]

Mr. Speaker, I have two quick questions.

It seems to be assumed that in the event that some type of peace agreement is arrived at that Canada can take off its war hat and put on its peacekeeping hat. Would the member not agree that that would be somewhat difficult and one could possibly expect the Yugoslav government of Slobodan Milosevic not to accept some of those participants in the bombing to become peacekeepers?

The second question I have for the hon. member is assuming that Canada does commit ground troops, which I think would be sheer madness, what would the exit strategy be? Americans went into southeast Asia, into Vietnam, thinking it would be of short duration. Some 15 or 20 years later, they surrendered after 65,000 Americans were killed.