Debates of March 26th, 2015

Military Contribution Against ISIL

[The Acting Speaker, Conservative, Barry Devolin]

Order, please. The hon. parliamentary secretary.

[Paul Calandra, Conservative, Oak Ridges—Markham, ON]

Mr. Speaker, the Liberal position on this is really obscure. What the member just said is that the Liberals support deploying the Canadian Armed Forces to the region, but they voted against the motion that sent them there six months ago. That is what the Liberals are saying now.

This is what I think the Liberal Party understands. The Liberals understand that Canadians realize that this is very important. It is important to our national security that we are there, and it is important to Canadian safety and security that we be there. The Liberals understand that they are on the wrong side of Canadians and now are trying to pretend that they are on the right side and are trying to find all kinds of ways around it. They want to deploy the soldiers but not that far and not the way we have done it.

Here is the reality. The Liberals have an opportunity next week to vote in favour of a motion that sends Canadian troops and that continues to expand our mission in an area where we can protect Canada's national interests and can provide the best opportunity to save millions of lives. I hope the Liberals will reflect on that and will actually join us in this, as opposed to talking out of both sides of their mouths.

[Peter Braid, Conservative, Parliamentary Secretary for Infrastructure and Communities]

Mr. Speaker, it is a privilege for me to rise in the House this evening to speak to and support our government's motion to expand and extend our campaign against ISIL in Iraq.

This so-called Islamic State has threatened and attacked those who stand up to their barbaric form of Islam across the globe. It has also indicated that it is specifically targeting Canada and its allies. It has made it clear that Canada is a target. Why? It is for the same reason it targets most of humanity: in ISIL's view, anyone who does not accept its perverse interpretation of religion should be killed.

That is why we are in Iraq with our allies. It is to fight the threat that ISIL poses not just to the region but to Canada as well.

Our motion clearly lays out precisely what military activities we will be undertaking in Iraq to degrade and destabilize this so-called Islamic State. I would like to go into some detail about the contributions being made by Canadian air assets.

To date, our very capable CF-18 Hornets have conducted over 416 sorties, resulting in the destruction of vehicles, heavy weapons, checkpoints, buildings, and bunkers. By damaging or destroying assets like these, the Canadian Armed Forces are not only degrading ISIL's combat capabilities and preventing ISIL fighters from establishing safe havens but also enabling Iraqi forces to go on the offensive. Ultimately, it will be for the Iraqi security forces to bring sufficient pressure to bear on ISIL and eliminate the grave threat that it represents.

Our CP-140 Auroras, outfitted with advanced imaging systems, radar, and other sensors, have conducted over 116 reconnaissance missions, collecting the critical intelligence, surveillance, and reconnaissance data that is used to identify and strike targets accurately as well as to assess battle damage. The modernized Aurora really is a cutting-edge platform. The information that this aircraft collects not only enhances the effectiveness of air strikes but also helps avoid collateral damage by ensuring that targets are limited to military objectives. In fact, our Auroras have made crucial contributions to what is considered the most precise close air support campaign in history. This is a specific capability that the U.S. views as extremely useful for Canada to provide in the fight against ISIL and Syria.

Lastly, the CC-150 Polaris refueller has conducted over 105 sorties, delivering more than six million pounds of fuel to coalition aircraft. By delivering fuel to fighters in the air, it acts as a force multiplier by allowing these aircraft to lengthen their sorties and fly further into the battle space. Our Polaris is helping the coalition to maintain pressure on ISIL throughout Iraq.

Moreover, our special operations forces, who are so incredibly capable, are on the ground. They are working hard to advise and assist the Iraqi forces and make them more effective. They are increasing their confidence and ability to plan, mount, and execute operations against ISIL, and they are making a real difference in helping to professionalize the Iraqi security forces.

Any operational mission carries with it a degree of risk. We all recognize that, but I am confident that the men and women of the Canadian Armed Forces are as prepared as they can be to face these challenges. They are rigorously trained prior to deployment overseas, equipped to the highest standard, and operate within specific rules of engagement that mitigate risks where feasible. They are also provided with the required intelligence and legal advice to ensure that all Canadian Armed Forces activities comply with international law and Canadian law.

Moreover, risk to Canadian personnel is also alleviated by a dedicated coalition personnel recovery capability, which includes a high-readiness combat search and rescue capacity prepared to respond should it prove necessary. Thank goodness we have such brave, courageous, highly skilled, professional Canadian Armed Forces members.

However, there is no either/or between military action and humanitarian aid. As members know, military operations enable the flow of humanitarian aid and other assistance programming by creating secure conditions on the ground. In order for aid to be delivered effectively, we need security. Therefore, along with our military contribution to assist the people and the Government of Iraq, Canada has taken significant steps to address the suffering of Iraqi civilians.

In fact, Canada is at the forefront of international efforts in Iraq. We have committed funding for humanitarian aid, stabilization, and security programming to Iraq over the past year. This support includes over $67.4 million to address humanitarian needs in Iraq, $15 million to strengthen front-line security measures and combat the threat of foreign fighters and violent extremism, and $10 million to address sexual violence and additional human rights abuses perpetrated by ISIL—human rights abuses the likes of which we have never seen.

All of this support is helping to feed 1.7 million people in Iraq, providing shelter and relief supplies to 1.25 million people, and giving some education to over half a million children.

Iraq has also been designated as a partner country. This means that it qualifies for bilateral assistance to enable it to meet long-term development objectives and build resilience to withstand the ongoing conflict. We are working swiftly to deliver new development assistance programming in Iraq, both to address short-term needs during the continuing crisis and to contribute to support and stability over the long term.

However, ISIL is a group that decries modern civilization. It equally abhors anything that does not accord with its twisted world view. As part of its relentless campaign to eradicate culture, over the last few weeks we have witnessed the destruction of the 3,000-year-old Syrian city of Nimrud; the 7th century statues from the ancient city of Nineveh, housed in a museum in Mosul; and, most recently, the bulldozing of the ancient city of Hatra, which dated to the 2nd or 3rd century BC.

The head of UNESCO has declared that this “...deliberate destruction of cultural heritage constitutes a war crime.”

ISIL is not nearly content to threaten the present and the future of the people in the Middle East; it is determined to erase their culture and their past in an attempt to revise history.

In conclusion, this is why I am supporting our government's motion, which provides for military support to degrade and destabilize ISIL as well as significant humanitarian aid in the Canadian tradition to ensure that displaced people are taken care of.

I would ask that all of my colleagues in the House support this very important motion.

[Tarik Brahmi, NDP, Saint-Jean, QC]

Mr. Speaker, the member mentioned the special forces helping Iraqi security forces. He mentioned the term “advise and assist”. When I received my basic military training in the French army in 1992, it was clearly explained to me what the role of the special forces was. The role of special forces is to carry out special operations.

I wonder if the member opposite really believed the Prime Minister when he said that they would only advise and assist. Did he believe that the Canadian Forces would only advise and assist Iraqi security forces, which, by the way, are not even aware sometimes that they are being trained?

[Peter Braid, Conservative, Kitchener—Waterloo, ON]

Mr. Speaker, it is clear that it is our very skilled and highly capable CF-18 pilots who are in a combat role. Our special operations forces, who quite literally are among the best soldiers in the world, are on the ground not in a combat role but in an advise and assist role. Should our special operations forces be fired upon, of course they would be expected to defend themselves.

However, that is the purpose of those two aspects of our military mission. It is very clear.

[Kevin Lamoureux, Liberal, Winnipeg North, MB]

Mr. Speaker, if the member were to go onto National Newswatch right now, he would see an interesting article. The article headline is “Syrian airstrikes could help Al-Qaeda”, which I thought was an interesting headline.

Like ISIL, Al-Qaeda was, and still is, a threat to the world in terms of its terrorist behaviour. I would ask the hon. member to provide a comment on that.

Second, over the last number of years, Syria has literally had almost half of its population displaced because of the current regime. To what degree does the hon. member believe that the Government of Canada has done its homework in regard to everything from the compassionate side of dealing with refugees to the issue on which I posed a question to the member and his caucus earlier with regard to how we might be able to best fight ISIL? One of the ways might be to better support the Kurds.

[Peter Braid, Conservative, Kitchener—Waterloo, ON]

Mr. Speaker, on that final point, we are providing significant support to the Kurds.

This mission has been and will continue to be a mission against the depravity of ISIL, whether ISIL is in Iraq or in Syria. This is a cult of violence, and the purpose of our mission is to degrade and destabilize ISIL.

The power base of ISIL, the nerve centre of ISIL, is in Syria. That is why it is appropriate at this time that the government consider extending our mission, which is clearly against ISIL, into areas of geography within Syria. This is for the express purpose of destabilizing and degrading ISIL, because ISIL represents a threat not only to Iraq but to Canada's security. That is why Canada is participating. That is why our forces are part of this important coalition effort.

[Pierre Lemieux, Conservative, Parliamentary Secretary to the Minister of Veterans Affairs]

Mr. Speaker, I rise today to speak to the motion the government moved to ask the House of Commons to recognize that the terrorist group called the Islamic State of Iraq and the Levant, or the Islamic State, has called upon its members numerous times to attack Canada and Canadians. I would also like to express my support for our government's decision to extend Canada's military mission in Iraq.

The Islamic State is a serious threat not only to the security of the Middle East, but also to international peace and security. The group has caused a serious humanitarian and security crisis in Iraq and neighbouring countries. It has displaced over 2 million people. It persecutes religious and ethnic minorities and has killed thousands of innocent men, women and children. It has committed acts of incredible barbarity by beheading journalists and humanitarian workers on camera and burning a Jordanian pilot to death.

The Islamic State's behaviour is sending us a clear message. By destroying the remnants of ancient civilizations, it is showing its contempt for culture and history. Every time it enslaves a woman, it shows its contempt for human equality. Every time it kills an innocent person, it shows its contempt for the sanctity of life.

ISIl claims to have established a caliphate in the territory it controls. It sees this as a means to legitimize its rule, enact sharia law and provide a rallying pride to foreign fighters who believe it is their duty to live under the aegis of the Caliph. They are extremists who believe that anyone who follows a different interpretation of Islam, including moderate Muslims, are all apostates. ISIL seeks to eradicate all people thus identified in the Middle East. We have seen extremely disturbing examples of the atrocities it has committed in the territory it controls, including the death of more than 10,000 civilians.

This terrorist group has called for direct attacks against Canada and Canadians. It inspired and applauded the terrible tragedies in Saint-Jean-sur-Richelieu and Ottawa and was delighted by the attacks against innocent people in Sydney, Paris, Copenhagen and, just recently, Tunis. Its propaganda incites terrorists to attack civilians and encourages potential fighters to join its fighters on the battlefields of Iraq and Syria.

It is clear that the Islamic State poses a real threat to Canada and Canadians. Our government, together with our allies, has resolved to address this threat directly. We want to respond with force and show that, individually and collectively, we have the necessary determination to significantly degrade their operations.

Last August, the Royal Canadian Air Force began transporting essential military equipment provided by our allies to the Iraqi forces. In total, 25 Hercules transport flights and one Globemaster strategic airlifter delivered more than 700 tonnes of equipment, which was desperately needed.

In September, at the NATO summit held in Wales, the Prime Minister announced that Canada's special operations forces would be deployed as part of an advise and assist mission and would provide tactical and operational advice to improve the effectiveness of the Iraqi forces and the Kurdish peshmerga on the ground.

Then in early October, the government moved a motion asking Parliament to support the extension and expansion of Canada's military contribution to the Government of Iraq.

Canada's current military efforts are part of Operation Impact. This mission is composed of approximately 600 Canadian Armed Forces personnel and it includes a strike force of six CF-18 Hornet fighters, with associated aircrew and logistical support elements, which conducts air strikes against ISIL targets in Iraq in co-operation with coalition partners. An aerial enabling force, comprised of a CC-150 Polaris aerial refueller, up to two CP-140 Aurora aerial surveillance aircraft, and an associated support crew, as part of a key coalition reconnaissance and support capability, contributes to situational awareness, command and control, and logistical support as well as assist with coalition air strikes against ISIL targets in Iraq. The contributions of the Canadian Armed Forces have not only been highly effective but are also highly valued by the coalition.

Over the past six months, the coalition has seen real signs of progress. Through the aerial campaign, the coalition has destroyed ISIL targets in central Iraq and north and northwest of Baghdad in areas that are both controlled and contested by ISIL. These efforts have reduced ISIL's freedom of movement and territorial gain. Thanks in part to Canada's military efforts, ISIL's ability to raise funds for its reign of terror has taken a major hit. Iraqi forces have wrestled the city of al-Baghdadi back from ISIL control and are working to regain Fallujah. In northern Iraq, Iraqi forces are gradually taking back ground east of Mosul, where ISIL is now in a defensive posture.

This progress proves that the situation is improving, but there is still work to be done. More than ever, we must remain steadfast. More than ever, we must demonstrate our commitment, and more than ever we must recognize the importance of continuing this fight that will define a generation. We are combatting a radical interpretation of Islam, an interpretation that results in innocent people being subjected to unbelievable violence and that inspires terrorist threats against Canada and our citizens.

That is why our government is asking Parliament to approve an extension of the Canadian Armed Forces mission in Iraq for a maximum of 12 months, until March 30, 2016. We are also asking Parliament to approve the expansion of the scope of the mission.

As we all know, the Islamic State poses a serious threat to regional security and peace. Although the coalition has managed to stop the advance of the Islamic State, it continues to control a vast territory that covers part of Syria and Iraq. It draws its strength from its presence in these two countries. Since the coalition's air strikes have depleted its reserves and weakened its strongholds in Iraq, it has no choice but to rebuild its forces, take refuge and resupply in Syria.

If we stop the fight at the Iraq border, we will never be able to eliminate these support bases and we will never be able to eliminate this threat. That is why our government is calling on Parliament to support an extension of the air mission so that we can hit targets in Syria. We will not be alone in this mission. The United States is already carrying out air strikes in Syria, with the co-operation of Jordan, Saudi Arabia, Bahrain, Morocco and the United Arab Emirates. We will certainly make a considerable contribution, especially if we consider our targeting capabilities with precision munitions.

There are those within the opposition parties who would reject such action in Syria for fear of even indirectly helping the barbaric regime of Bashar al-Assad. What the opposition MPs refuse to admit is that ISIL is a threat to Canada and Canadians and that we must therefore engage ISIL not only in Iraq, but also in Syria. We continue to hope the Assad regime will be replaced by one that respects human rights and democracy, but in the meantime, we will not allow ISIL to take advantage of the situation in Syria to further victimize people in the region and we will not allow it to continue its threats against Canada.

The terrorist group that we call the Islamic State in Iraq and the Levant has asked its members to attack Canada. The Islamic State targets ethnic and religious minorities, commits crimes of sexual violence and massacres civilians. That is why we, together with our coalition partners, must deny them freedom of movement in Iraq. We must eliminate its hiding places in Syria and we must do everything in our power to put an end to the horrific violence that it is inflicting on innocent civilians.

We cannot let the hate and fanaticism of the Islamic State spread, take root in the weak and the easily influenced, and create terrorists ready to attack those who do not share their beliefs. That is why we are asking Parliament to support our government's decision, a decision that will continue to help the people of Iraq, a decision that will weaken the Islamic State's threat that looms over Iraq and Syria as well as the threat it poses to Canada, and, lastly, a decision leading to action to combat the atrocities that the Islamic State is committing in the name of a jihad that seeks to spread nothing but death.

[Alain Giguère, NDP, Marc-Aurèle-Fortin, QC]

Mr. Speaker, I listened carefully to my distinguished colleague's presentation and I have a major problem with it. He is asking us to go and wage war on terrorists, barbaric in the extreme, I agree, but who have been created, financed and armed by our current allies, Saudi Arabia and Qatar. There is a problem here. The government is asking us to go and disarm barbaric individuals who got those arms from our so-called allies. How many times is he going to tell us that joke before we realize that we are not cannon fodder for a bunch of oil dictators?

[Pierre Lemieux, Conservative, Glengarry—Prescott—Russell, ON]

Mr. Speaker, that question proves that the NDP does not understand what is happening with the Islamic State in Iraq and the Levant, and the threat that it poses here in Canada.

The NDP is completely disassociated from Canadians and their understanding of what is going on with ISIL. As I mentioned in my speech, ISIL presents a very clear and present danger to the people of the region in which it operates, and it presents a very clear and present danger to Canadians.

Just before Christmas, we saw the results of its threats to Canada. I do not know why the NDP will not admit that ISIL has targeted Canada. It has to account for that to Canadians.

The NDP members will have the opportunity to vote on this motion. I ask them to change their ways, be reasonable and support the motion we have put forward in Parliament.

[Kevin Lamoureux, Liberal, Winnipeg North, MB]

Mr. Speaker, I know the member would be aware that al Qaeda was the organization that ultimately caused and precipitated the 9/11 attacks, the collapse of the twin towers, and heightened terrorism to a level that was never really recognized until that incident.

I am looking for an opinion from the member. There is a headline that I think is causing concern. I raise it just to get feedback from the member. The headline is, “Syrian air strikes could help al-Qaeda”. “Experts warn that the West's focus on attacking ISIS is boosting its equally dangerous rival”.

As Canadians might be following the debate, or are reading or hearing what CBC is reporting, I am sure they are asking questions. Could the member provide some understanding from the Government of Canada's perspective on that report, or does he feel there is no merit whatsoever to the report?

[Pierre Lemieux, Conservative, Glengarry—Prescott—Russell, ON]

Mr. Speaker, what I find very troubling about the position of the Liberals is that they would advocate, primarily, to do nothing, let the threat exist, let the violence continue, let terrorists attack Canada and do nothing.

The Liberal position, as well as the NDP position, is incomprehensible to Canadians. In fact, I believe the Liberals have only given two speeches on this topic tonight. It is an extremely important debate in the House of Commons. I believe they have only given two speeches because even they, and their MPs, do not understand their position.

Our position is very clear. It is ISIL that poses a threat, not only to the people of the region in which they operate, but also to the people in Canada.

As I mentioned in my response to a question from a previous colleague, Canada has experienced the tragic effects of ISIL reaching out to misguided Canadians, one of whom attacked Parliament and killed Nathan Cirillo and another who killed Patrice Vincent in Saint-Jean-sur-Richelieu.

I do not understand why the Liberals cannot see that, why they will not accept that, and why they will not push back against ISIL. Why will they not stand up and defend the interests of Canada and of Canadians?

[Alain Giguère, NDP, Marc-Aurèle-Fortin, QC]

Mr. Speaker, atrocities have been perpetrated in this world, and Boko Haram and ISIL are responsible for many of them.

Such barbaric acts can only be condemned. We have seen terrible things. A London taxi driver chose to serve his fellow humans by driving a truck to transport food to hungry people. ISIL punished him for his good deed by slitting his throat. It goes without saying that such things are reprehensible.

However, the members of this group are not the only ones. Saudi Arabia has committed atrocities too, such as sentencing a man to 1,000 lashes. Raif Badawi, whose family has sought asylum in Canada, would also like to be shown some compassion. There was a major problem when Muslim peoples learned that the American CIA had systematically tortured all of its detainees. It goes without saying that reports and information about the torture meted out by the CIA proved a powerful motivator for young Muslims to join the terrorist movement. That is dangerous. That is the worst thing that could have happened.

There is also Congo. Five million people have died there since 1998. That is more that the populations of Kuwait, Afghanistan and Vietnam combined. Nobody is asking us to drop bombs there. No, that place is not interesting. There is no oil there, just Africans, and they are not worth much. However, Boko Haram is in Nigeria. Members of that organization have declared war on the whole world, and they kill anyone who is not with them. No exceptions. Some groups have threatened Canada and Australia, but Boko Haram believes that everyone in the world is an infidel. We are not going to Nigeria though. There are terrorists in Mali and many other places. Libya is a good example, but we are not going there. We pick and choose based on what the Americans want.

However, we are Canadians here. We do not want to be a caricature of George W. Bush. We do not want our Prime Minister to be the clone of George W. Bush. Clearly, we do not agree with them. They had promised—a promise that smacks of George W. Bush—that Canadian troops would not participate in combat. That was promised, sworn up and down. On September 30, the Prime Minister said so in the House. We now know that this is not true and that Canadian troops were on the front lines. They were directly accompanying the troops into combat. However, we have just been told that Canada will make a big change.

For 11 years, the Americans dropped a lot of bombs in Iraq. They sent in an army of 250,000. The result is that we are now forced to go back. We should perhaps realize that the military approach and bombings do not give long-term or reliable results. When the Americans withdrew from Iraq, they told the Iraqi people to be democratic and respectful of rights. Influenced by an Iranian government, they did not really turn to democracy. In light of the Iranian influence in Iraq, Saudi Arabia and Qatar created a resistance force to combat the dangerous Syrian regime that was too close to Iran and the government that was sympathetic to Iran. They created the army of the Islamic State. On that day, frankly, they did not ask us for our advice. With friends like that, who needs enemies?

How is it that the Islamic State, which, with about 40,000 men, is not particularly big, was able to get to the gates of Baghdad? It is quite simple. The Iraqi army, with a force of 200,000 men, did not fight. We saw 60,000 Iraqi soldiers be beaten by 800 terrorists. With odds of 1 against 75, the 75 lost. They deserted in droves, and, anyway, those 60,000 men were not 60,000 men because in the very democratic Iraq, officers commanding battalions of 500 men really have only 250. They take the salaries of the 250 phantom soldiers and put the money into their own pockets. In the Iraqi army, officers' ranks are bought and sold. We can understand how, in the face of such corruption, Iraqi soldiers are not very motivated to fight.

There is a second problem. Not only does the Iraqi army have no interest in fighting, but Iraq's Shia population is also quite sympathetic to the Islamic State. People may well ask me what is happening: we cannot have any sympathy for barbarism. But there is barbarism on both sides of the border. People have been murdered and oppressed because they were Sunni. Sunni journalists, Sunni politicians, men and women, have been murdered by the Iraqi government. That is oppression. Christians have been oppressed by the current Iraqi government, a government that is neither democratic, nor very respectful, nor very civilized. This has led to the situation where, when the Islamic State appeared in many towns, the people were sympathetic to their cause. Bombing them is not going to stop them from being sympathetic. Perhaps they need something other than bombs.

When the machinery of government is destroyed, we see the rise of armed gangs and warlords—and, heaven knows, that machinery can so easily be destroyed in places like that, like Libya, Yemen, Iraq or Syria. Clearly, something has to be done about the situation.

Twelve years of American bombings created a new generation of young people who see the western world as a threat, not as a source of assistance, not as an example, but as an enemy who destroys everything, including water systems, power supplies and schools. Obviously they do not think we are very nice. What is more, people watch television. They see the barbaric acts of the Islamic State, but they also see the barbaric acts committed by the CIA, which tortures people. I do not need to say it. Everyone is saying it. Even the Americans themselves recognize it. That was the worst and most foolish thing they did. They created their own enemies. They provided them with free propaganda.

Of course, Canada has other more powerful weapons. Fortunately, the NDP is the historic heir, if you will, of Lester B. Pearson. We want peace and we are going to build it. We will get there not by going to war, but rather by preventing war and preventing terrorists from getting weapons. Some countries are providing them with weapons. It might be a good idea to stop that. Some countries are buying oil produced by the Islamic State in Iraq. Perhaps that needs to stop. That would be practical and useful action. In short, we need to take away their funding and their military resources; no weapons, no war. That is how we would intervene and it does not require bombing civilians.

This is the type of action that the NDP is going to promote. Of course, we are also going to promote food aid for all those in need. We cannot just donate a few tents and say that we are supporting the civilian population. We have to make that a priority. The Red Cross and the Red Crescent need and deserve support.

[Jason Kenney, Conservative, Minister of National Defence and Minister for Multiculturalism]

Mr. Speaker, the hon. member just said that we need to prioritize humanitarian assistance. I have good news for him: we have already provided a great deal of assistance.

We have already provided assistance to Syrian refugees by investing more than $700 million, which is the sixth-largest humanitarian aid contribution to Syrians in the world, and the largest per capita among developed countries.

We have spent nearly $70 million to provide humanitarian assistance through the Red Cross and UN agencies for people who are displaced in Iraq as a result of ISIL. That is the fifth-largest financial contribution and the largest per capita in all of the developed world. We have already done this.

My colleague shared all of the typical left-wing anti-American conspiracy theories, and he could not stop talking about George W. Bush, who has not been president of the United States for six years. He blamed the CIA and all of the conspiracy theories.

However, I must point out that the left-wing social democratic governments in Europe, in countries like France, Holland, Belgium and Denmark, as well as the Democratic Party in the United States and the Labour Party in the United Kingdom, Australia and New Zealand and almost all of our allies are involved in the military campaigns.

Why do all of the mainstream social democrats abroad, in the democratic world, support our policy of military action and why are the New Democrats the only western social democratic party that is against it?

[Alain Giguère, NDP, Marc-Aurèle-Fortin, QC]

Mr. Speaker, it is appalling to see the Minister of National Defence in such denial.

The U.S. Senate acknowledged in a unanimous report that the CIA systematically tortured its prisoners. This is not a fabrication or a conspiracy theory; it is from a report that was crystal clear.

Like it or not, it is a fact of history: the Americans bombed Iraq for 12 years. They occupied it militarily, and now we are seeing the result of that. Now we have to go back. Maybe some day the Conservatives will understand that bombs are not the best solution. We are proposing something altogether different.

They say that food aid is good, but that some military assistance is also needed. Instead we should be making sure that people cannot get their hands on weapons or munitions. Perhaps we should be convincing some governments to keep quiet.

We need to make sure that Turkey does not become a refuge for ISIL, that people cannot go and seek medical care or sell their oil in Turkey. That would be helpful.

These are the kinds of measures we should be taking to win the war. This is certainly not what the Conservatives did in Afghanistan.

[Kevin Lamoureux, Liberal, Winnipeg North, MB]

Mr. Speaker, if I may, at this point I would like to reiterate something I indicated earlier today.

The Liberal Party will not support the government's efforts to deepen this combat mission and expand into Syria. It is for good reason. The government is proposing an unfocused, unending combat mission for the Canadian Armed Forces.

The Conservatives have failed to clearly articulate the mission objectives, with the Prime Minister and the Minister of National Defence offering conflicting arguments. We believe that Canada has a role to play in the campaign against ISIL. The role must serve our national interests. The mission proposed by the Prime Minister fails to meet that test.

I am wondering if the member would agree with everything that I have just stated.

[Alain Giguère, NDP, Marc-Aurèle-Fortin, QC]

Mr. Speaker, that is a real problem.

When I said that this feels like another Vietnam, that is a fact. Earlier the Minister of State for Western Economic Diversification said that her objective was to destabilize the government, in order to weaken its position. That will not mean victory.

The real victory will come when people no longer want to support a terrorist movement. That will be the real victory. The only thing the Conservatives are proposing right now is limiting the influence of these terrorist organizations.

As with the Vietnam War and the war in Afghanistan, this strategy does not have a clearly defined objective, and more importantly, we do not know how we will get out of this mess once we are in it.

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

Mr. Speaker, I appreciate the opportunity to speak on this motion. As a veteran from the war in Afghanistan against the evil of the Taliban and al Qaeda, I consider it my sacred duty to raise my voice in this debate and warn that ISIL must be stopped before it causes any more destruction and claims any more innocent lives.

Let me speak to something that seems to have been lost to so many in this debate. ISIL has called for brutal attacks on Canadians, specifically Canadian civilians. Through its propaganda network, it has already inspired attacks here on Canadian soil. Within the last year, we have buried Canadian soldiers who died on Canadian soil. One of them was mere steps from this place.

Countering ISIL is a debate that concerns each of us here. This is something that in and of itself is beyond the scope of a humanitarian mission. I urge all members in this place to support the motion in order for Canada to extend its commitment to the multinational coalition supporting the Government of Iraq in its fight against the so-called Islamic State.

We have heard much about Canada's role in Iraq, its mission and the capabilities being brought to bear by the Canadian Armed Forces. It is the result of their work that ISIL is being pushed back. ISIL is now on the defensive in nearly 25% of the areas that it previously held. While ISIL made rapid advances last year, it is now on the defensive. In fact, ISIL has not made any territorial advancement in months as the direct result of the air strikes being carried out by the Royal Canadian Air Force and coalition allies.

In northern Iraq, the Iraqi forces are gradually taking back ground east of Mosul. In western Iraq, the city of Al-Baghdadi has been reclaimed by Iraqi forces, and they are working toward regaining control of Fallujah. In central Iraq, coalition air strikes have degraded ISIL's ability to conduct operations in those areas, and contribute to the gains made by Iraqi forces. These air strikes are saving lives.

Here is what United Nations Secretary-General Ban Ki-moon had to say about air strikes:

These air strikes and military operation which was done at the request of the government of Iraq was able to help the United Nations and other actors to ... save a lot of human lives.

He also said it is clear that Islamic State militants are “a threat to international peace and security, as has already been declared by the Security Council”.

What ISIL is carrying out is a complete assault on human dignity. The atrocities that it wages are beyond reprehensible. Its actions and values are those of complete savages. This is genocidal terrorist organization. It has explicitly stated its desire for genocide. It disproportionately targets ethnic and religious minorities with its sheer brutality.

Moreover, this is an organization that seethes with hatred for women in particular. It is estimated that 7,000 Yazidi women and girls are being kept as sex slaves by ISIL. These reports are numerous and they are troubling. Young women are captured and distributed as objects among ISIL fighters.

A recent report by the United Nations Office of the High Commissioner for Human Rights contains countless reports of abduction, rape and other forms of sexual and gender-based violence perpetrated against women and children. The report cites several ISIL sex slaves who have escaped, including one who said that the guards raped her three times a day for three days. The UN report also contained an account of an 8- or 9-year old girl being raped openly in the hall by ISIL members in a Tal Afar school, where ISIL reportedly kept more than 100 small children. Many of the women enslaved by ISIL, according to the UN report, are forcibly married to ISIL fighters or sold as slaves in auctions. They are subjected to sexual and gender-based violence.

This is a brand of hatred that they want to export to Canada. This is what they are advocating for. These are the sickening values they champion, for which they will murder, for which they will behead. They have called for attacks in Canada on Canadians, which makes it very much our fight.

Through the terror network, ISIL has been able to obtain weaponry and heavy artillery. They use these heavy weapons to stake claim to a swathe of land across Iraq and into Syria within which they carry out their atrocities. They cannot be allowed to have a safe haven in Syria to carry out these atrocities freely without fear of repercussions.

This is why a humanitarian response, and if the official opposition members were to get their way, the only response, is not enough on its own.

Canada is punching above its weight in terms of humanitarian response. We are the world's sixth-largest donor for humanitarian aid to Syria, and we are the fifth-largest for Iraq. In fact, through our aid efforts, Canada has provided food for 1.7 million people in Iraq, and 1.26 million people in Iraq have received and relief supplies.

Over 500,000 children have received education opportunities. We are countering ISIL through our humanitarian efforts also, but this alone does not stop the brutal savagery of ISIL. That is why our approach to countering ISIL is both humanitarian and military. We are facing the threat head on and also doing everything in our power to provide help to their victims who desperately need it.

This is not an either/or scenario. In fact, we cannot protect Canada by failing to acknowledge these threats, turning our backs and simply continuing to provide aid to those affected by ISIL's growth and expansion. ISIL must be degraded to the point where they no longer represent a threat to Canada. They are a direct threat not only to regional and international security, but a threat to the very security of Canadians right here at home. Through our military response, through the work of the brave men and women of the Royal Canadian Air Force, we are facing these threats head on and pulling our weight internationally. As Canadians, we have a moral obligation to our fellow men and women facing the onslaught of ISIL today, and a duty to protect Canadians from ISIL, who have declared war on us.

There is no splendid isolation in a troubled world, and that is why I encourage the opposition to vote in favour of this mission extension. Let us do the right thing. Let us get the job done.

[Tarik Brahmi, NDP, Saint-Jean, QC]

Mr. Speaker, I certainly commend the dedicated work of my colleague across the aisle at the Standing Committee on National Defence.

He is an engineer; I am an engineer. He served in the Canadian Forces; I served in the French forces. Knowing his military background, I wonder how he was able to believe that in the first place, Canadian special forces were in Iraq, not to carry out special operations, but to carry out training.

He is very knowledgeable about military operations. How can he explain that Sergeant Andrew Doiron was killed in action by the very people he was supposed to be training?

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

Mr. Speaker, when my colleague said the special forces are there for training purposes, that is by the rules of engagement, and that is very clear. They cannot do anything else but what is mandated for them to do. My colleague must know this also.

When they are speaking about the special forces, which are training, they are training, not doing anything else. As we know, accidents can happen in the military. My profession when I was in the military is not without danger. However, I can assure the House, what we are telling Canadians is the truth, that they are for training and to assist.

[Kevin Lamoureux, Liberal, Winnipeg North, MB]

Mr. Speaker, last weekend I had the privilege to participate in a very special event that was hosted by the Kurdish Association of Manitoba. I had the opportunity to have a number of discussions with people of Kurdish heritage. The Kurdish community in Iraq can have a very significant impact. These are the people who are fighting ISIL on the ground. One of their greatest needs is for expertise and support from Canada in different forms.

Would the member acknowledge that one of the ways we can fight ISIL is to support organizations or people such as the Kurds in Iraq who are doing the hand-to-hand fighting today against ISIL?

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

Mr. Speaker, I understand that my colleague was in the military and served for a couple of years. What my colleague should understand is to be able to deliver humanitarian and other aid, we need to create a safe and secure environment. The Kurds are fighting their enemy and we are supporting them.

[Kellie Leitch, Conservative, Minister of Labour and Minister of Status of Women]

Mr. Speaker, obviously our Canadian Armed Forces are doing outstanding work, so let me quote the Government of Iraq's statement with respect to the Canadian Armed Forces:

Ministry of Foreign Affairs condemns in the strongest terms the brutal criminal act carried out by a terrorist group targeting the innocent Canadians who were performing their daily duties.... The Ministry announces solidarity with the Canadian government, and expresses thanks for its participation within the international coalition in the campaign against terrorism and the brutal attack against Iraq, and through providing humanitarian aids and logistical support, in addition to its willingness to participate in providing air cover within the coalition.

What are those specific gains that the Canadian Armed Forces have been able to make in pushing back against ISIL and Iraq? They are doing outstanding work, but maybe the member could outline the specific gains that the Canadian Armed Forces have made?

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

Mr. Speaker, our Canadian Armed Forces stopped ISIL's capability to advance further and helped the Iraqi forces to hold their ground and to be able to regroup and fight the evil of ISIL.

[Mylène Freeman, NDP, Argenteuil—Papineau—Mirabel, QC]

Mr. Speaker, we are here this evening to talk about the government's motion to extend Canada's combat mission in Iraq in response to the atrocious acts of violence and serious human rights violations perpetrated by the Islamic State of Iraq and the Levant.

Before us we have the Prime Minister's request to shift the advise and assist mission that began in September to a front-line combat mission, after the air campaign that began in November 2014, during which Canada conducted 53 air strikes in Iraq.

After just completing our commitment in Afghanistan, where troop deployment was the longest in our history—12 years—resulting in 40,000 veterans, 160 deaths, thousands of injured and thousands more with post-traumatic stress disorder, we are now embarking on another conflict.

In the meantime, many of our veterans and their loved ones still do not have access to adequate health care, benefits and other types of support, because of how this government is managing Veterans Affairs.

Since the fall, the government has deployed 69 members of the special operations forces and roughly 600 additional Canadian Forces troops to Iraq. The government has maintained that this is not a combat mission, but we know that since January, the Canadian special operations forces have exchanged fire with Islamic State militants on Iraqi soil.

The death of Sergeant Andrew Joseph Doiron confirms to us that the situation is much more complex, and reminds us of the risks associated with deploying our troops to the front lines and of our duty as members of Parliament to take our role here seriously.

In light of the government's refusal to call this a combat mission, we wonder what impact that will have on the compensation and danger pay of Canadian Forces members. Let us not forget that in 2013, danger pay was reduced for our troops in Afghanistan who were training the Afghan army because of the supposed lack of danger.

Paul Heinbecker, Canada's last ambassador to the UN Security Council, said in The Globe and Mail on March 23 that our women and men in uniform have no place being in Iraq and they certainly have no place being in Syria.

Canada does not have to participate in this war. We should instead help save lives on the ground by finding solutions to the humanitarian crisis.

I will recall that the U.S. ambassador to Canada, Bruce Heyman, said on CBC's The House on September 27:

We'd like as much more as Canada is willing to contribute, whether it's...humanitarian, whether it's militarily, at every level. By the way military alone isn't going to solve this problem...we're going to need help at multiple levels to ultimately destroy and degrade ISIL.

Norway, South Korea and New Zealand, among others, do not have a combat role. They are making a strictly humanitarian contribution, which is truly needed. There are serious human rights violations, including attacks that directly target the people and civilian infrastructure, executions and other civilian murders, kidnappings, rape and other forms of sexual and physical violence.

To date, the violence has caused the displacement of 2.5 million people in Iraq alone, and 5.2 million others require humanitarian assistance. At least 20% of the 2.5 million people displaced by war have a crucial need for protection, especially against trauma and sexual violence. This situation is made worse by the effects of the crisis in Syria on the region, because neighbouring countries are desperately trying to deal with the refugees and violence in Syria.

Syria has been in turmoil for five years, mired in a war that makes no distinction between civilians and combatants. Hundreds of thousands of people have been killed and half the population has fled. Neighbouring countries, which normally would accept Iraqi refugees, are already overwhelmed by the high number of Syrian refugees.

How can we address this dire situation? As Nelson Mandela said, our greatest weapon in the struggle for peace is education. That is because education is key to security and economic opportunity. We know children are disproportionately affected by armed conflict and by displacement. More than 70% of internally displaced children in Iraq remain out of school. Canada should increase its focus on the welfare of children and access to educational facilities.

We need to ensure that immediate needs such as water, food security, shelter, health, and psychosocial support are met. We must fight against sexual violence, support survivors, and protect minorities. We need to support the development of social infrastructure, supporting the communities themselves, and that means addressing the structural inequalities underpinning the violence in order to eliminate the possibility of more extremism arising.

Secretary-General Ban Ki-moon said:

Over the longer-term, the biggest threat to terrorists is not the power of missiles—it is the politics of inclusion.

We know that peace and equality are linked. The empowerment of women is a powerful force behind economic growth, social and political stability and lasting peace. Women who are empowered are the foundation of communities that can fight radicalization and extremism.

For that reason, the NDP is asking the Government of Canada to work on contributing to the creation of responsible, democratic and peaceful governance in Iraq and to fight the threat of the group known as the Islamic State and other militant groups.

I want to cite for the House an article co-authored by the executive director of UN Women and Under-Secretary-General of the United Nations, Phumzile Mlambo-Ngcuka, and Radhika Coomaraswamy. This article in Foreign Policy is called “Women Are the Best Weapon in the War Against Terrorism”. It was published on February 10, 2015. It states:

Militarized counterterrorism operations disrupt economic and social activity, and destroy civilian infrastructure—the schools, markets, and medical facilities relied on by women in traditional caring roles. When governments focus resources on expensive military operations, social ministries like health, family services, and education are often the first to face budget cuts. Civilian displacement leaves women and girls vulnerable to sexual and gender-based violence, including, with grim regularity, crimes committed by the security forces supposed to be protecting them.

The failure to prevent these negative impacts constitutes willful negligence. It results in women’s re-victimization, and ultimately in more poverty, more desperation, and more radicalization. Militarized responses always risk civilian casualties and threaten to drive marginalized young people into the ranks of extremists. Indeed, as increasing media reports show, despite the brutal and well-known crimes committed against women by the Islamic State, teenage girls are reportedly running away from their homes to join it.

In closing, I must say what the leader of the opposition and of the NDP said so well during his speech on Tuesday:

ISIS has thrived in Iraq and Syria precisely because those countries lack stable, well-functioning governments capable of maintaining peace and security within their own borders.

Canada's first contribution should be to use every diplomatic, humanitarian, and financial resource at our disposal to respond to the overwhelming human tragedy unfolding on the ground and to strengthen political institutions in both those countries…

…the tragedy in Iraq and Syria will not end with another western-led invasion in that region. It will end by helping the people…to build the political institutions and security capabilities they need to oppose these threats themselves.

The Islamic State is already reacting to the air campaign by dispersing its troops, sheltering in civilian areas and frequently changing location. Air strikes elicit violent responses in local communities, leading to further instability and insecurity.

Instead of engaging in an unending military combat that is not supported by the United Nations Security Council, the NDP urges Canada's Conservative government to make its contribution on a humanitarian level.