Debates of Feb. 5th, 2013

Conflict in Mali

[Jack Harris, NDP, St. John's East, NL]

Mr. Chair, I do not know how far it got, but one of the notions that was being floated around in the last few weeks was the suggestion, and I think the French were talking about this, of the possibility of UN observers participating in monitoring the situation to ensure respect for human rights as an integral part of any operations that were being undertaken between the Malian troops and the French troops. I do not know whether that is something whose time has come and gone. That is a suggestion that has been made.

Obviously, as the member has pointed out, if we have a situation where there is an army that is seeking to secure the country that we believe should have security, and it is not following human rights principles and rule of international law, then all is lost. That does not provide security to the population, the people of Mali.

As my colleague has pointed out, it is a very complex situation. The exact solution is not in sight at this point, but we do know that the AFISMA organization, which is not primarily obviously Mali forces, is seeking to take a strong role. It will be taking control over this from the French government and it should get all the support it needs, starting, in this instance, with what it asks for, which is financial support, and which so far the government has failed to provide.

Maybe we should take one step at a time and see what the later asks are and see what other efforts come from the—

[The Assistant Deputy Chair, Conservative, Bruce Stanton]

Order, please. Questions and comments, the hon. member for Ottawa Centre.

[Paul Dewar, NDP, Ottawa Centre, ON]

Mr. Chair, actually I am quite flattered by the fact that the Parliamentary Secretary to the Minister of Foreign Affairs takes such a keen interest in watching me on Power and Politics. I will not react to his misquoting, but my colleague did do a good job of explaining the complexities of peacekeeping and peace building. We sincerely hope that the government, and all members and Canadians for that matter, looks at the January 21 explanation of peacekeeping and peace building that was passed and presented at the United Nations.

I want to touch on the road map. The government asked for feedback from us. One of the things I think is key when we are looking at the situation is getting Malian democracy back on track. The government says great things about it, but as was noted by my colleague from Quebec, other countries have contributed, Britain to the extent of $3 million.

Would the hon. member not think it would be a good idea for Canada to contribute to the road map, both in resources and perhaps with human resources as well, because we have some of the best in the world in terms of doing governance and certainly doing democratic development?

[Jack Harris, NDP, St. John's East, NL]

Mr. Chair, it is of primary importance that we provide some assistance. One of the encouraging things we have seen as a result of recent events is that the MNLA, the Tuareg group which was partnered with AQIM, obviously has decided that it made a bad decision and is now seeking to integrate and is willing to enter into negotiations and discussions with the rest of Mali and seek a road map to peace.

That is something in which we do have some expertise, and we ought to be contributing. Unfortunately, as has been pointed out earlier in the debate, Canada is one of the few nations that does not seek to engage in that. Instead we had the Minister of Foreign Affairs engaged in finger wagging. I do not know if that term is any worse than “whacking”. It clearly means that all one is doing is standing up and wagging one's fingers and saying, “You folks should get yourselves to be more democratic”. That is not much help from this distance, I should say to the members opposite. There has to be engagement, and Canada has failed in that, although we do have that capability.

[Dean Allison, Conservative, Niagara West—Glanbrook, ON]

Mr. Chair, as I have been watching the debate all night, I thought I would just make a few observations before I get into my notes on the humanitarian situation. The first one is that the Prime Minister reached out to the opposition. He said this is what is going on in Mali and if the opposition was interested in discussing it further that by all means it could be studied at committee. We have been doing that. We have had one meeting on it so far and we plan to have, I believe, another two or three meetings on this over the next week or so.

I do want to thank the officials who came out to see us and brief us. They were there last Thursday. We had Kerry Buck, who is the political director and assistant deputy minister from the Department of Foreign Affairs. She brought along Patricia Malikail and Lisa Helfand, who is the director.

From the Department of National Defence, we had Major-General Jonathan Vance. I want to thank him.

From the Canadian International Development Agency, we had David Morrison and Leslie Norton. I want to thank them for their briefing last Thursday.

We are going to continue to talk about this situation over the next few days. The Prime Minister reached out to the leaders of the opposition to keep them informed and to offer up any discussion they may want to have in the House.

As I have been listening over the last couple of hours, I realized that not all of this relates to Mali. Some of this relates to some of the things that we are doing as a government that the opposition does not like. I get that. That is what the opposition is there for. The members will challenge the government and the direction.

It was raised that maybe we did not have enough troops on the ground. I heard that coming from the opposition. I heard that maybe we need to spend more money. I guess the challenge will always be whether there is ever enough money that we can spend. If we have troops on the ground, will the question be why we put troops on the ground, when we look at what happened in Afghanistan? It was a war that was not started by us. The Liberals put our troops there, and then when they became opposition, they asked when were we going to bring the troops home.

Once again, we understand that when a party is in government it makes decisions and will be challenged on them. Look at the F-35. It was a process started by the opposition. It was sole sourced and picked by the Liberals as the best plane. Now that they are in opposition, they challenge the government, asking why we chose the F-35. Regardless of what happens, there is always going to be noise coming from the opposite side about what our government is doing.

We have taken a measured approach. What we have done has been great. The opposition talks about maybe not enough money. The last speaker said maybe we could give more money, but I look at what the Canadian government has contributed to the region. It is over $100 million. We did not just show up in Mali. We have been there for a number of years. Therefore, when we look at how we can help out, whether it is the $13 million that the Minister of International Cooperation announced, or whether it is the $18 million in kind that we are contributing for the military strategic airlift, we have been there. We realize there are all kinds of parts. Someone mentioned that the Japanese contributed $100 million.

These are all great things, but it is important that we be strategic and look at what we are doing, so we are not just saying “me too” there, so that we can pick spots where we have been.

I may comment later, if I have time, on some other things. Someone mentioned the fact that we are looking at trade deals in Africa and asked why that is the case when we should have been looking at some of these other things.

I want to talk a bit about the humanitarian situation and the fact that we are gravely concerned about the current crisis in Mali and the repercussions this is having on the neighbouring countries in the Sahel region. This has been mentioned many times tonight, that it is not just Mali that we are concerned about. We are concerned about the whole region.

Malians living in the north have, over the last year, been subjected to brutal treatment by armed groups and terrorists seeking to impose a very strict form of Sharia, prompting mass displacement. Since the crisis began, over a year ago, more than 385,000 people have been forced to flee their homes. More than 8,000 have fled to neighbouring countries, and many more have been internally displaced. The conflict and the activities of armed groups, terrorists and rebels are making relief efforts more difficult.

In order to meet the needs of those affected by the conflict in Mali, it is imperative for the humanitarian workers to have full, safe and unhindered humanitarian access to those in need. Secure access is necessary to provide lifesaving assistance.

Until recently, terrorists, extremists and other armed groups have patrolled nearly two-thirds of Mali's territory. They took advantage of a power vacuum in the capital and occupied the remote villages and Malian Sahara, and terrorized Malian men, women and children.

I would like to detail for hon. members some of our government's activities in building the capacities of local governments to combat terrorism and insecurity in the region.

Canada contributes to counter-terrorism efforts in the Sahel by providing training, funding, equipment and infrastructure to developing states. In 2010, our Conservative government devoted new resources specifically to the Sahel. The new fund targets 11 states in the Sahel over 5 years. Mali is one of those states.

I would also note that under Canada's G8 presidency, the Sahel region was identified as a priority region for counter-terrorism and was mentioned specifically in the Muskoka declaration. As chair of the counter-terrorism action group, CTAG, Canada hosted a large multi-stakeholder meeting in Bamako in October 2010, aimed at encouraging greater regional co-operation in the fight against terrorism.

Our government was active and interested in Mali before recent headlines took other parties' attention there. Since 2010, we have provided $18 million to countries in the Sahel to strengthen their capacity in the key areas of law enforcement, military, and intelligence, and the legal and criminal justice regimes against terrorism.

We co-chaired the Sahel counter-terrorism working group focused on countering violent extremism and supporting better border management. Prior to the coup, we provided Mali with important support for its security forces and worked to strengthen the country's legal regime against terrorism. We expect that a return to democratic rule will see these efforts bear fruit.

The instability brought by the security and the humanitarian crises in northern Mali has an impact on Canadian interests from a security, commercial, democratic, human rights and humanitarian perspective. It is in Canada's interest to contribute to the stabilization of Mali and to support efforts in combatting terrorism. That is to say, northern Mali and the whole Sahel must not become a safe haven for terrorist organizations. Assuring the territorial integrity of a free and democratic Mali is in Canada's interest. Our government stands ready to help a democratic Mali build a better, brighter future for all Malians.

These beliefs are at the core of Canada's foreign policy, one where democracy, freedom, human rights and the rule of law are invaluable principles. Our government has worked to combat the scourge of terrorism in the Sahel region and will continue to do so.

As we have heard tonight, we have been working there. Despite the talk about money not being delivered, we have been contributing funds to Mali, as I said, of over $100 million. When the coup against the government took place, we looked at getting that aid money to organizations on the ground.

We believe it is important in that region. We believe it is important to help the people of Mali and will continue to do so.

[Paul Dewar, NDP, Ottawa Centre, ON]

Mr. Chair, I thank my colleague, the chair of the foreign affairs committee, for his work on the committee and his intervention this evening.

We have been talking tonight about the present situation. Some have given an historical perspective along with that. It is clear that everyone agrees that Canada has to play a significant role in the region, and certainly in Mali. The question is how we do that. One of the things that we on this side of the House have mentioned is that it is absolutely critical that Canada support governance in Mali so that Mali can be revitalized as a resilient state. It is a difficult situation because of the grievances of the Tuaregs in the north, which go back to the beginning of Mali, as I am sure my friend knows.

The question is what more can Canada do than it has done? I will put aside my criticisms of the current government and its lack of action in Africa and the region, as I have put those on the record already.

Would the member agree that two things should be done? The first is that we should be contributing to the road map that the government has supported. The second is that the government should live up to its promise in the Speech from the Throne a couple of years ago to invest in an institute for the development of democracies abroad. We know that something is happening at the religious freedom office and one day we will hear about when it is going to be put together, but clearly an institute of democratic development is something that we can do. The government promised that it would do that and should do it.

[Dean Allison, Conservative, Niagara West—Glanbrook, ON]

Mr. Chair, I thank my hon. colleague from Ottawa Centre for his work on the committee as well. I certainly will not speak for what the government may do in the future in terms the road map or in looking at a centre for democracy. I know that we did commit to an organization for religious freedom. That is one of the things that we are moving forward with. We believe and understand that where the rights of minorities and religious freedom are preserved, democracy also flows from that.

I have some of the figures of what has been contributed recently. I will not go through all of the details, but in 2009-2010 over $117 million was contributed to Mali. In 2010-2011 more than $109 million was contributed. It dropped this past year to $61 million, as we tried to avoid directly funding the government, which we did not think would be responsible, but instead the organizations on the ground. We will continue to do that and look forward to the time when Mali holds elections so that we can again support a government there.

[Stéphane Dion, Liberal, Saint-Laurent—Cartierville, QC]

Mr. Chair, my colleague started his speech by saying that the opposition was asking for boots on the ground, yet no one has suggested that. It is a pure invention. The only one who spoke about boots on the ground was the Minister of National Defence before he was muted by the government.

After long hours of debate, we are still waiting for answers from the government on questions that were asked earlier in the debate. First, why in the context of this crisis is Canada not investing in AFISMA? Why are we not committing to offering training for the African troops? Why are we investing only $13 million, or so much less than many other countries with fewer links to Mali than we have? Indeed, Mali is a country in the Francophonie that we know very well. Moreover, why are we not committing to help the democratic process?

I know we do not want to get too close to an unelected government, but that government now has a road map for an election in July. What will we do to be sure that this election will be held in a proper fashion?

[Dean Allison, Conservative, Niagara West—Glanbrook, ON]

Mr. Chair, not everyone from the opposition suggests that we should have boots on the ground, but there were some thoughts that we were not doing enough. I thought the approach that the government has taken has been fairly measured. We have responded to the French. They asked us for a cargo-lift plane for a week and then said they would like it for a month, and we have been working with them to do that.

People talk about more money. How much is enough? The point is that we have been training soldiers and elite guards. We have been working on a number of different fronts and have been doing that for a number of years. We have sent almost $300 million over the last three years. I do not think anyone can say that as a government we have not been contributing, that we do not care or that we have not been concerned about the area.

I read about some of the initiatives we are involved in. We realize counterterrorism is a very sensitive area and an area that needs help. Therefore, before any crisis was happening in Mali, we were making those investments as a government. I am sure there will be more asked of us and there will be more requests.

Strategically, Canada wants to be able to do its part. We have been doing our part and I think we will look for other opportunities as this unfolds. It is unfolding differently every day. When we had our briefing, we heard from the officials that things are changing rapidly on the ground, so we need to continue to wait to hear what is happening.

[Lois Brown, Conservative, Parliamentary Secretary to the Minister of International Cooperation]

Mr. Chair, my colleague mentioned that on January 31 we had Kerry Buck at the committee. One of the things that she said was that:

—current projects in West Africa include military training with Niger on armed forces in the context of exercise Flintlock, provision of training by police, and regional training projects for law enforcement and border security through Interpol.

I wonder if my colleague would like to comment on that?

[Dean Allison, Conservative, Niagara West—Glanbrook, ON]

Mr. Chair, we continue to talk tonight about the fact that Canada has been contributing to the region. It has been involved in humanitarian aid and training. It has been involved in a number of different initiatives. One of the reasons a briefing was held in consultation with the Prime Minister and the Leader of the Opposition was to get some of this information out to the people of Canada. That has been pretty much the tack we have taken. We have been there for a number of years and we will continue to be there to help the people out.

[Hélène Laverdière, NDP, Laurier—Sainte-Marie, QC]

Mr. Chair, I would like to take this opportunity to thank our honourable chair of the Standing Committee on Foreign Affairs and International Development, with whom it is always a pleasure to work.

The hon. member talked about all the investments that we have made in a number of areas in Mali, including security, health, education and agriculture. If we want to look at this issue from an investment point of view, since this is the term that was used, if we want to ensure that all the efforts made are not wasted, it is important to help Mali overcome the crisis that it is facing, and we must do so right now.

Earlier today, another member said that the African-led International Support Mission to Mali, AFISMA, is a key mission. Why do we not provide financial support to this mission?

[Dean Allison, Conservative, Niagara West—Glanbrook, ON]

Mr. Chair, it is certainly nice to have a member of the committee who has had some foreign affairs experience out in the field. We always appreciate the comments and the input that the hon. member for Laurier—Sainte-Marie provides to the committee.

I would just say that as we continue to listen to what the requests are and what comes in, we are supportive of the road map and what will happen. We will continue to look at what we have been doing over the last number of years. As I said, the average that we have spent has been over $100 million annually in order to build democracy, help with humanitarian aid and work on training. We will continue to look at ways that we can do that. We were there long before this situation happened. We will continue to be there to support Mali and its people.

[Ève Péclet, NDP, La Pointe-de-l'Île, QC]

Mr. Chair, this will be 10 minutes of torture for everyone who is listening to my wonderful voice this evening.

Tonight, we are exploring the issue of Mali. The situation in Mali and in the Sahel region is far from rosy right now. After over 20 years of democracy, Mali is currently in a state of serious instability. As a Canadian and a member of this House, I am wondering about what Canada is doing to help the people of Mali.

Canada has a longstanding tradition of being a world leader when it comes to African countries, whether through its presence on the ground, its network of embassies or its NGOs, although that tradition now seems to have come to an end. In fact, Canadians have slowly been withdrawing from their participation in Africa.

From its new foreign policy to its international development assistance policy, this government is setting a dangerous precedent. It is important to be careful about such precedents since critics of our traditional allies are speaking out more and more. They are watching Canada and are confused about what is happening.

The changes are so draconian that the Minister of International Cooperation had to create a new oath for his department's employees in order to silence them about what seems to be a makeshift policy, as mentioned by many of my colleagues during this debate. The government seems to view the UN as more of a parasite than a necessary tool.

Around the time of the second world war, Canada was one of the founding members of the UN because, at the time, we believed that an organization made up of all the nations was necessary to bring peace to the world and that, together, we were—and still are—capable of preventing poverty and enhancing respect for human rights throughout the world. In short, we believed that the nations could help one another.

The French presence in Mali seems to have proved its mettle by driving back extremist and radical troops, almost without any real combat. In fact, France was able to drive back rebel groups in northern Mali. We are happy about that and we hope that Mali will be able to return to the democratic state it has enjoyed for the past 20 years as quickly as possible and that, above all, it is able to restore constitutional order. It is very important to mention that.

However, it seems that these troops have entrenched themselves in neighbouring countries, which does not bode well for the situation in a region that is already weakened by a major humanitarian crisis.

I would like to talk about some of my concerns. From Senegal in the west to Somalia in the east, the Sahel region has become a breeding ground for extremist and radical groups. Given the instability in Mali, we should be concerned about the surrounding countries. Niger appears to have a fragile balance, and according to some analysts, Mauritania could also be the next target of Salafist and Wahhabi groups.

We must therefore consider the serious humanitarian crisis that Mali is experiencing, but we must also look at a long-term solution. The same goes for the Sahel region. United Nations agencies and their humanitarian partners have launched a consolidated appeal for 2013. We are talking about 2013, not previous years.

About $1.5 billion will be needed to help the millions of people affected by the food crisis in the Sahel region. In Mali alone, UN agencies estimate that a consolidated appeal for $370 million will be needed for 2013. Once again, we are talking about 2013, not the previous years that government members keep mentioning.

We are not denying the fact that Canada has always been a strong partner to Mali, but right now, Canada has made a very weak contribution in response to the growing demand resulting from this terrible situation. I think we can agree that $13 million out of $1.5 billion is a rather small amount. I will let you do the math.

Access and security are some of the priorities. Although the Office for the Coordination of Humanitarian Affairs has noted an improvement, supplies of food and other basics in the north remain very unstable, and food insecurity could get worse in this zone.

Access to food is just one example of something the Government of Canada could try to focus on.

According to the World Food Programme, over 585,000 people are at risk of suffering from food insecurity. So, we are not talking about participating in an armed conflict or sending troops, but about protecting people against famine. These numbers are constantly increasing.

A number of players in the field are worried about the disruption of market supply in the north. The humanitarian community is asking for the co-operation of Malian authorities to facilitate the movement of commodities and humanitarian assistance to the north. Moreover, several explosions of mines in the Mopti region, along the main roads leading to the north, are threatening civilians and could block relief operations.

On October 12, the Security Council had already adopted resolution 2071 dealing with cases of abuse, sexual violence, human rights violations and, above all, the recruiting of child soldiers in northern Mali. Many concerns continue to be voiced in Mali regarding the protection of human rights, after some organizations reported summary executions and abuse. Ethnic-based reprisals targeted civilians in certain areas formerly controlled by armed groups.

Moreover, some people living in the north are said to have fled, for fear of reprisals. Amnesty International said that the Malian army arrested and executed more than 20 civilians in the north. We see an opportunity for Canada to provide monitoring and training to avoid this kind of abuse of human rights violations. This could be done through AFISMA, the mission led by the African Union. In fact, it is possible to contribute to this mission but, as we mentioned a number of times, Canada refuses to do so.

As for Human Rights Watch, it has also accused the Malian army of summarily executing at least 13 alleged pro-Islamists, but also armed groups of executing at least seven Malian soldiers. Consequently, this organization asked at the end of January that international observers be sent to Mali.

I must also mention the issue of child soldiers. Several NGOs in Mali have reported that children are forced to join armed groups. Under the Rome Statute, the recruiting of children under the age of 15 by armed groups is a war crime. This crime has terrible consequences for all populations, for children and for the families. I think these abuses deserve special attention and action, by Canada in particular.

Another troubling fact: according to CARE International, a specific service for the protection of women and children has not been established. For its part, the Office for the Coordination of Humanitarian Affairs points out the urgent need to strengthen response capacity, primarily in order to educate people about the danger posed by mines, to provide psychosocial support and to address gender-based violence.

Current resources are not enough to provide minimal prevention and response. As my colleague from Laurier—Sainte-Marie stated, prevention is important. She also said that the government does not seem to know what prevention is.

At present, no child welfare project has received funding. Thus, not even Canada has provided funding or created a project to protect children. We have to take action, and Canada should be a leader in that area. Canada must do more than just closely monitor these problems. It is fine for the Minister of International Cooperation to go to Burkina Faso. However, we have to take action, not just proclaim our good intentions.

I would also like to quickly address the question of the Sahel and the long-term future of Mali. We have 21 embassies in Africa, a continent of 53 countries.

My time has expired and I have only managed to say part of what I had to say. I will now take questions.

[Chris Alexander, Conservative, Parliamentary Secretary to the Minister of National Defence]

Mr. Chair, let us be thorough and precise. The hon. member encouraged us to fund food security. The $13 million announced by the Minister of International Cooperation is largely dedicated to meet that challenge. That amount is in addition to the $57 million already announced for the entire Sahel in 2012, an amount that will continue to fund operations in 2013.

However, aside from food security, aside from child safety, which is a concern for all agencies funded by the $13 million announced by the Minister of International Cooperation, what would the hon. member like us to do in Mali exactly, because her colleagues, the hon. members for Ottawa-Centre and St. John's East have caused a little panic. I was on the panel looking into peacekeeping. The resolution does not provide for a peacekeeping operation. The United Nations resolution provides every measure necessary and authorizes the Malian authorities to retake regions under terrorist control. It is a combat operation.

Would the hon. member like Canadian soldiers to be involved?

[Ève Péclet, NDP, La Pointe-de-l'Île, QC]

Mr. Chair, I would like to begin by talking about the $13 million and $57 million. The $13 million is part of the $1.5 billion that is needed for 2013 alone. I can see just how good Canada's intentions are when I see that all of our traditional allies have given at least four or five times more. I think that it is a pittance, given that the need is so much greater: $1.5 billion.

As for what Canada can do, I spoke at length about that in my speech. We should focus on children, women and food security.

We are talking about a peacekeeping mission. During the 20th African Union summit on January 27, Ban Ki-moon spoke about the possibility of deploying peacekeeping forces in Mali. We are not saying that we will participate, but Canada could play a part. We could contribute financially to the European Union mission and participate in a potential peacekeeping mission.

That is part of the Conservative policy that we are criticizing. We should not be trying to fix the problem, we should be trying to prevent it. That is what a government does. It prevents these issues. We should not wait until someone falls, then help them up and offer a band-aid. We should try to keep them from falling in the first place. That is what we have been trying to do for months, in fact, for the two years since we were elected.

[Dominic LeBlanc, Liberal, Beauséjour, NB]

Mr. Chair, I thank my hon. colleague from La Pointe-de-l'Île for her speech.

My question is as follows: would she agree with us, with the comments made by our colleague from Toronto Centre, our interim leader, when he asked the government to look a little further ahead than just a week or a month when it comes to Canada's commitment?

There are many ways Canada can make commitments. I agree with my colleague regarding the fact that, financially, we could be doing a lot more. We could contribute more to the United Nations, although this government often hesitates. There are so many ways we can participate.

But would my colleague agree that this should be an open commitment, in the sense that we say to our allies, our African allies, the African Union, the European community, that Canada is fundamentally interested in solutions that will help Mali, that will make this African region more secure? We will not make any decisions based on the schedule of one plane for a week or a month, but we will support the people of Africa and our allies in order to come up with a lasting, long-term, regional solution, and not just in a conflict zone that we desert at the first sign of improvement, as my colleague said.

[Ève Péclet, NDP, La Pointe-de-l'Île, QC]

Mr. Speaker, I am not sure what kind of answer the hon. member is looking for. Would he like me to say I agree with what the Liberal leader said?

I believe my speech was very clear on that topic. Of course, humanitarian aid is important, as is financial aid. But Canada's role has always gone beyond financial aid. When it comes to peacekeeping missions, for example, Canada's soldiers do more than keep an eye on the situation; they also monitor elections, protect civilians and educate people.

We recognize that to facilitate the peace and democracy process, we need to offer more than financial or military aid; we need to contribute our practical expertise in democracy, as my colleague from Laurier—Sainte-Marie pointed out.

The Minister of Foreign Affairs indicated in a statement that our tradition of sending peacekeepers and contributing to peacekeeping missions was nothing but a footnote to Canadian history.

In a simple statement about Canada's contribution to world peace, he completely denied our Canadian values. This shows the Conservatives' complete disregard for democracy around the world.

[Hélène Laverdière, NDP, Laurier—Sainte-Marie, QC]

Mr. Chair, in very difficult situations like the one happening now in Mali, women and children often suffer the most.

Not only is this true in time of conflict, war or military operations like the current one, but last year's events also showed it clearly: women and children often suffer the most. Our first thoughts should probably go to them.

My hon. colleague mentioned child soldiers earlier. Could she expand a bit on that?

[Ève Péclet, NDP, La Pointe-de-l'Île, QC]

Mr. Chair, women and children are often the victims of war.

I have repeated this many times, in particular at the hearings of the Subcommittee on International Human Rights, a sub-committee of the Standing Committee on Foreign Affairs and International Development. I asked the committee to study the use of rape as a weapon of war.

In such conflicts, women and children are victims in the long term. For example, children are often left to fend for themselves when they turn 15. When wars end, these children, who have been trained as soldiers and to kill, often consider their armed groups as their family.

I talked about initiatives that provide psychosocial help to families, children and women. Not one organization has been funded and no action has been taken.

It is important for Canada, as a country that respects the rights of women and children, to provide its expertise to Africa in order to help these women and children break the vicious circle created by conflicts. They are truly the forgotten victims in these conflicts. We talk about the armed groups, but we very seldom talk about the civilians, the women and children who are truly affected by these conflicts.

This would be one way for Canada to show leadership, especially with respect to women and children.

I believe that all MPs will agree with me because we truly have to help these most vulnerable groups.

[Corneliu Chisu, Conservative, Pickering—Scarborough East, ON]

Mr. Chair, I am pleased to lend my voice to today's important take note debate as a humble parliamentarian and a former Canadian military member with service in Afghanistan.

The situation in Mali is of serious concern to all of us. Our government has long been committed to combatting terrorists worldwide. The Department of Foreign Affairs has been leading our government's approach in Africa and elsewhere to help build the capacity of countries so they are better able to protect their populations from the threat of terrorists. The Canadian armed forces has also played an important role in this whole of government approach, training security forces in west African countries.

Terrorist groups and criminal networks have recently been gaining ground in northern Mali, posing not only a threat to the security and stability of Mali, but also to the Sahel and wider western African region. The terrorist presence in the north was reprehensible, sowing fear and destruction village by village. For example, in the historic city of Timbuktu, these extremist groups desecrated tombs, smashed graves and holy shrines and destroyed irreplaceable monasteries from the 13th century.

Just before Christmas, the United Nations Security Council recognized the gravity of this situation as a threat to the international community as a whole and passed resolution 2085.

In January the security situation in Mali deteriorated rapidly even further as heavily armed Islamist groups began to press south. This also had the potential to endanger Bamako, the capital of Mali, with a population of almost two million people. At the request of the Malian president and in line with United Nations Security Council resolution 2085, the government of France launched a military operation on January 11 to stop that advance and stabilize the security situation in the country.

This operation enables the African-led international support mission to Mali to take over the lead and help Mali recover its territorial integrity and full sovereignty.

Currently the French-led response in support of the Malian forces involves the participation of neighbouring African countries from the economic community of west African states, or ECOWAS. It also has the support of key allies and partners such as the United States, the United Kingdom, Belgium, the Netherlands, Denmark and the European Union.

For our part, Canada is undertaking a coordinated wall of government response. That has always been our government's approach to unstable areas suffering insurgent activities and will remain so. As the Prime Minister stated, we are committed to working diplomatically with our allies to determine the best course of action. At the same time, Canada continues to provide humanitarian aid and development assistance to the region, with a particular emphasis on food security.

Our government has also clearly set out the parameters for Canadian military contribution to this mission. Canada is prepared, consistent with UN Security Council resolution 2085, to provide limited and clearly defined logistical support to assist the forces that are intervening in Mali. Our government is not and will not be considering a direct Canadian combat role in Mali.

In fitting with these parameters and the response to an urgent request from our French partners, our government agreed to provide heavy lift aircraft to France for a limited period and we provided it with lightening speed. A C-17 Globemaster was quickly deployed on January 15, with approximately 40 military personnel for an initial period of one week. The Minister of National Defence was at CFB Trenton to wish the crew and personnel a safe departure. At the future request of the government of France, Canada extended the commitment of its C-17 Globemaster aircraft until February 15.

As we speak, members of the Canadian armed forces are working with their French colleagues, flying essential equipment, supplies and personnel between France and Bamako. They have already transported over half a million pounds of cargo. Canada is making a critical contribution. In fact, France's ambassador to Canada recently said that logistics was something essential and really invaluable in the present situation.

Canada is one of only a small number of countries that can provide this very important capability on such short notice. It is a contribution that has allowed our French and African partners to stop the terrorist groups from moving south and to make important gains on the ground.

French troops are now refocusing on the north, progressively securing key villages and towns, such as Timbuktu, and they conquered the last stronghold of the insurgents, the town of Kiddal.

This mission reflects the high degree of readiness of the Royal Canadian Air Force. It has proven this ability time and time again, proudly showing the Canadian flag and supporting operations over Canadian territory, Haiti, Libya, Afghanistan and now over Mali, as well as in some 15 other ongoing missions, whether at sea in the Arabian Gulf, or on the ground, training in Afghanistan.

The Canadian Armed Forces' effort in Mali underscores the continued importance of having an agile and versatile expeditionary force for the future. This is why our government is committed to investing in the modern equipment it needs.

Early on, our government was quick to recognize that the changing and uncertain global environment required Canada's military to have its own reliable, independent access to strategic airlift. I would note that in the time I was deployed in Afghanistan, I was thankful that the government provided this capacity.

As members may recall, our government went ahead and acquired the C-17 Globemaster transport aircraft, so we are not relying anymore on the AN-24s or Russian aircraft.

Only 12 days after entering service with the Canadian Armed Forces, Canada's first C-17 carried out its initial mission, delivering emergency relief supplies to the people of Jamaica in the wake of Hurricane Dean. It was called upon yet again to transport troops and deliver supplies in Haiti's darkest hours during Operation HESTIA. It has done yeomen service in Afghanistan, alongside other key investments, such as the Hercules and Chinook aircraft, the light armoured vehicles and the Leopard 2 tanks that helped save countless Canadian lives.

Once again, we are seeing these investments pay off, to the benefit of Canada, to the benefit of our allies and, today, to the benefit of our efforts in Mali. We are proud that the Canadian Armed Forces are able to make such a critical contribution.

As the Minister of Foreign Affairs has indicated, we will continue to monitor the situation closely, consult with allies and update Parliament as events unfold.

However, let me emphasize that Canada's commitment to countering the global cancer of criminal networks and terrorists is steadfast, because it is important to the security of Canada, to the safety of Canadians.

I know that the members of this House will agree, and I encourage them to express their support.

[Paul Dewar, NDP, Ottawa Centre, ON]

Mr. Chair, we have been talking a bit tonight about what the causes were for the situation in Mali, an overview of a year ago with the coup, of course, and then a perfect storm that allowed for some of the extremists to intervene.

However, one of the things we have to consider is that we are also dealing with environmental issues here, and I would like comments from the member on this. We know, from people having studied failed states and weak states, that it is because of many different aspects. One of the concerns in the Sahel area is that there is drought, severe drought, not just drought that has happened recently. Many have observed this has been because of climate change.

It is one thing to look at what is happening right now with the intervention of extremists in Mali, but it is also another thing to understand that there is an issue around climate change, the fact that the climate has really devastated this area and that we need to do more to help people there adapt to climate change.

I would like to hear his thoughts about the fact that there is the environmental aspect to this, as well as the human aspect, and what we should be doing to ensure people can withstand and adapt to climate change, so that they are not as vulnerable from outside variables and, in this case, from outside extremists.

[Corneliu Chisu, Conservative, Pickering—Scarborough East, ON]

Mr. Chair, I would like to answer my colleague's great question.

First, to be able to work on the climate, we need to have a safe and secure environment. That means we need to get rid of the terrorist activities. We need to establish peace in the country first, and that is the main going on right now.

Right now, with lightning speed, the French, followed by the African troops, re-secured and basically liberated the territory from Islamic forces. However, another problem is now keeping that land. In the military it is not enough to defeat enemy forces, but all the ground has to be kept

Once a safe and secure environment is established, Canada is there to help, and I heard tonight that a lot of funds have been committed to Mali. They were committed before the situation deteriorated with the Islamic forces.

Absolutely, I think that the government is monitoring the situation. I am not a member of cabinet, but I am quite sure that persons who are more competent than I am are doing the monitoring in this regard.

[Stéphane Dion, Liberal, Saint-Laurent—Cartierville, QC]

Mr. Chair, I thank my colleague for his speech so late this evening, but I would like him to comment on the inherent contradiction of the government that has been exposed by this debate.

The government is saying that Canada has invested in Mali in the past, that Canada has been there for decades. Now that the country is in crisis, we are told that we do not need to do much more, because we have done so much in the past.

Why, for example, when it is time to offer logistics to an ally, to friends, do we offer a plane for a week, or maybe a month? Why do we not want to invest in AFISMA and in training, and not want to be a part of it? We did a lot in the past. That is why we are not proposing any help for the democratic process for the restoration of democracy. We will wait for July. Until then, we will have nothing to do with that. That is why we are investing only $13 million when countries that have been much less involved with Mali in the past are now helping much more than we are.

How come we are doing so little?

[Corneliu Chisu, Conservative, Pickering—Scarborough East, ON]

Mr. Chair, I can tell the hon. member that we are investing in the country. We are monitoring the situation and how it is evolving on the ground.

I can walk the walk and talk the talk and tell the hon. member what is going on right now on the ground. Basically there was a meeting with the West African chiefs of staff, who committed 5,000 troops. They committed more troops to AFISMA and to help rebuild Mali.

The situation is being monitored and we committed money for that, and we will see how the situation evolves.