GoC: No evidence Canadian Made LAVs Used in Saudi Civil Conflict

By: Melanie Marquis, The Canadian Press

OTTAWA -- The federal government has not been able to determine with any certainty that Canadian-made light-armoured vehicles sold to Saudi Arabia were used by that country to suppress the Shiite minority in the eastern part of the country.

A Canadian Army LAV III deployed in Afghanistan in 2010. 

Foreign Affairs Minister Chrystia Freeland confirmed Thursday that officials from her department did not find conclusive evidence that the Canadian-made vehicles have been used in human rights abuses.

That independent opinion from public servants was communicated to her after a "rigorous investigation" launched last August at her request.

"Officials at Global Affairs Canada found no conclusive evidence that Canadian-made vehicles were used in human rights violations," Freeland told members of the Commons foreign affairs committee.

"That was the independent, objective opinion of our public service and the advice given to me as minister."

At the time, Freeland said she was deeply concerned by reports last summer in the Globe and Mail that Saudi Arabia had used Gurkha armoured personnel carriers, made by Newmarket, Ont., based Terradyne Armoured Vehicles Inc., against its own people.

She vowed to "respond accordingly" if that was the case, but wanted to ensure a through investigation so as to act on credible, trustworthy information.

According to a report in Montreal's Le Devoir last month, since opening the probe, a Global Affairs spokesman said Ottawa suspended all arms exports to the Saudi kingdom last summer.

That included a contract for armoured vehicles designed by General Dynamics Land Systems, which won a $15 billion contract in 2015 that the Liberal government honoured by issuing export permits a year later.

Freeland's office did not respond to a query about whether Thursday's finding meant the shipments have already resumed or would begin anew.

The government is being questioned about the issue of exporting arms to nations with spotty human rights records after another deal concluded between Bell Helicopter and the Philippines has raised concerns.

Freeland is expected to announce during testimony at the Standing Committee on Foreign Affairs and International Development later Thursday that the government is proposing two amendments to Bill C47 on export and import acts when it comes to licensing weapons.

The toughest of the measures is the legal requirement for the Canadian government to consider human rights, peace and security risks in any pre-export licensing assessment.

In the future, if the government finds there is a "substantial risk" the conditions could be violated, the law will require that export be refused.

The proposed amendments, approved Tuesday in cabinet, are not retroactive and won't apply to General Dynamics Land Systems, based in London, Ont.

On Wednesday, the government ordered a review of a 2012 deal between Bell Helicopter and the Philippine government after similar concerns surfaced.

The government is concerned about the use of the choppers by the government of President Rodrigo Duterte, who has been accused of extrajudicial executions in connection with a war on drug traffickers and terrorists.

The helicopters are manufactured in Mirabel, Que.

A senior member of the Philippine military said the aircraft would also be used in "internal security operations," prompting a review.

On Thursday, the Philippine defence said Thursday that the military would not use 16 helicopters being bought from Canada to attack insurgents, as had been feared by Canadian officials.

Defence Secretary Delfin Lorenzana said the Philippine government could buy elsewhere if Canada decides to scuttle the sale of the Bell helicopters, which he said would be used to ferry supplies and troops, including those wounded in combat, and to respond to disasters.

The office of International Trade Minister Francois-Philippe Champagne said those comments do not change the government's plan to order an assessment of the deal with Canadian Commercial Corp.

-- with files from The Associated Press.

Canadian Tactical Gear used by Saudi Security Forces in deadly house raid

By: Steven Chase, The Globe and Mail

Canadian-made tactical equipment that helps authorities blast their way into buildings has surfaced in Saudi Arabia at the scene of a violent house raid by government security forces in late June that left one man dead in a region home to the country’s oppressed Shia minority.

It is another example of how Canadian-made military, security and tactical gear sold to the Saudi regime can be used in circumstances well beyond Ottawa’s control and during raids that some believe are attacks on dissidents. The Trudeau government in April approved export permits to supply Riyadh with combat vehicles made in London, Ont., a deal that has been sharply criticized by human-rights activists.

The house raid on June 22 took place in the Qatif region of Saudi Arabia’s Eastern Province, where the largest concentration of Shiites live in a country ruled by an overwhelming Sunni majority. Rights groups regularly report on how Shiites face major discrimination in Saudi Arabia, where they only make up 10 per cent to 15 per cent of the population. Shiites chafe at this second-class status, making Qatif a hotbed of opposition and trouble for the reigning House of Saud.

On the night of June 22, Saudi security forces stormed a Shiite-owned house in the town of al-Awamiyah. A man named Abdul-Rahim al-Faraj died as a result of gunshots, Saudi-based media reported. Authorities said in a statement, as they often do in similar cases in Eastern Province, that they only fired their weapons after being fired upon and that the deceased and one of his brothers were wanted for “terrorist crimes.”

After security forces departed, local residents found explosive breaching equipment with “Made in Canada” stamped on it at the targeted house in al-Awamiya, according to the European-Saudi Organization for Human Rights. The residents say the gear, which had been blown apart, was used by Saudi forces to blast their way through a gate that provided access to the house.

The black plastic equipment’s label and model number obtained at the scene correspond to gear produced by Gryphon Engineering Services of Ottawa that allows military or law enforcement to quickly force their way into a building.

The Canadian company places restrictions on the sale of this gear on its website, saying this product “is only available for government use.” This specially designed “entry frame” breaching equipment, patented by Gryphon, is designed to be lined with explosive and filled with water – which helps direct the ensuing blast into a structure.

Gryphon Engineering Services did not respond to e-mails from The Globe and Mail. A man who answered the door at the company’s east-end Ottawa office said the company has no comment.

Ottawa doesn’t control or track the use of this type of tactical equipment overseas.

Adam Coogle, a Middle East researcher with Human Rights Watch, said Saudi Arabian authorities over the past half-decade have taken to framing all Shia protesters and dissidents as terrorists. “That’s definitely a trend we’ve seen over the last four to five years.”

A fundamental tenet of Canadian export-control policy is the question of whether goods sold to foreign customers might be used to commit human-rights violations. If products shipped abroad are being used for this purpose – or present a high risk of enabling human-rights violations – a country is supposed to block or cease these transactions.

Mr. Coogle said Canadians should be specifically worried about this in relation to sales of tactical and military equipment to Saudi Arabian government forces.

“I think this absolutely meets that standard” of warranted concern, Mr. Coogle said of sales of breaching equipment to Saudi Arabia.

Saudi Arabia is Canada’s biggest overseas arms buyer, thanks to a $15-billion deal struck by Ottawa to sell weaponized armoured vehicles made by General Dynamics Land Systems Canada to Riyadh. The Liberal government has taken heavy criticism for its decision to stick with the contract and for approving the bulk of the exports in this deal despite what watchdogs such as Amnesty International say has been an eroding state of human rights in Saudi Arabia.

Similar raids to the one on June 22 in Qatif happen on a regular basis, often resulting in the deaths of Shia residents.

As with past incidents, the Saudi government explained the June 22 incident by saying that Mr. al-Faraj died because Saudi forces were fired upon while trying to search the dwelling. In a statement, the Saudi Ministry of the Interior alleged he and his brother were “involved in a number of terrorist crimes” including “shooting at security forces” and “armed robbery.”

The Saudis frequently cite terror threats when they go after the area’s dissidents, some of whom are more militant than others.

Shia activists say local police had three times summoned Mr. al-Faraj to the local police station for questioning about the whereabouts of one of his brothers.

Foreign Minister Stéphane Dion’s office referred questions about Canadian exports of this explosive breaching equipment to civil servants in the Department of Global Affairs. The “items are neither explosives nor arms,” said Diana Khaddaj, a spokeswoman for Global Affairs.

She said Ottawa does not monitor or restrict exports of this specialized breaching equipment because it is not sold with explosives loaded in it.

Human-rights groups have already called on Western countries to stop selling military equipment to Saudi Arabia given its bloody intervention in a civil war in neighbouring Yemen. A United Nations panel has alleged that Riyadh has violated international humanitarian law for indiscriminate bombing of civilians in Yemen.

Mr. Coogle, however, said the Saudis’ treatment of their own people, and in particular minority groups, should be a major red flag for exports. “These domestic policing actions – there are real concerns as to whether the Saudis engage in excessive use of force and there’s also concern about the people they target in these raids – whether they are actually perpetrators of violence or not because the Saudi justice system is so unfair, people don’t get a fair hearing and we never really know what the truth is.”

Mr. Coogle said he has analyzed eight full Saudi trials of people who were involved in Eastern Province uprisings and protest-related activities. “Every case I read, and the way the trial process occurred, was absolutely ludicrous,” he said.

“They don’t even make an attempt at due process. They basically arrest them, torture until they sign a confession.”

The arrest, and ultimate execution, of Shia cleric Sheik Nimr al-Nimr in January has further inflamed tensions between Qatif and Riyadh. An outspoken critic of the House of Saud who called for its removal, he supported anti-government protests in Eastern Province.

His trial and sentencing – for disobeying the ruler, inciting sectarian strife and encouraging, leading and participating in demonstrations – reignited criticism of Saudi Arabia’s justice system.

Human Rights Watch, citing figures from local activists, estimated recently that more than 200 people from Shia-majority towns and villages in Eastern Province have gone to trial for alleged protest-related crimes since 2011.

In May, The Globe and Mail published footage from Shia activists in Qatif showing Riyadh’s forces using armoured vehicles against civilians. The vehicles that were deployed are not Canadian-made, but they demonstrate the Saudis’ proclivity to use such machines against their people.

Ottawa Watching Saudi Arabia-Yemen Arms Transfer

By: Steven Chase, Globe and Mail 

The Trudeau government says it’s watching “very closely” what is unfolding in Yemen, the site of a Saudi-led war where Riyadh is handing over military equipment to Yemeni forces.

Ottawa won’t say, however, precisely what measures are in place, if any, to stop Saudi Arabia from transferring its Canadian-made combat vehicles to Yemeni allies.

A leading human-rights researcher warned a Senate committee in Ottawa this week that the Saudis are training, funding and equipping Yemeni forces under the control of General Ali Mohsen, a military commander from Yemen who’s been repeatedly accused of laws-of-war violations.

Were Saudi Arabia, a long-time customer of Canadian light-armoured vehicles, to be lending or giving these machines to Yemeni allies, it could jeopardize Ottawa’s ability to proceed with a $15-billion arms sale to Riyadh. Typical end-user certificates in arm sales prohibit the transfer of arms to a third party.

Pamela Goldsmith-Jones, parliamentary secretary to the Foreign Minister, said Thursday that Canada is “very concerned” about Yemen. A shaky ceasefire in the region has been regularly violated and the aerial bombing has yielded to an increasing ground campaign backed by Saudi Arabia.

Her comments come one day after Belkis Wille, with international rights watchdog Human Rights Watch, alerted Canadian senators to the possibility that this country may inadvertently be dragged into the conflict.

Ms. Wille, who lived in Yemen for 3 1/2 years, urged Ottawa Wednesday to suspend a $15-billion sale of combat vehicles to Saudi Arabia if Ottawa fails to obtain guarantees that Canadian-made combat vehicles are not among assets being handed over to Gen. Mohsen’s army.

Canada has sold Saudi Arabia hundreds of light-armoured vehicles over the past 25 years and videos and photos appearing on social media since 2015 show Canadian-made machines being deployed in the conflict with Houthi rebels in Yemen.

It’s not clear whether the Saudis, or Yemenis, are driving them.

Human Rights Watch has for years chronicled laws-of-war violations under Gen. Mohsen.

Ms. Wille said during earlier wars against Houthi rebels from 2004 to 2009, Human Rights Watch documented numerous violations under his watch “including indiscriminate attacks, killing civilians, as well as arbitrary detention and forced disappearances,” she said, referring to abductions. “The idea that this man is leading a force armed by the Saudis and crossing into Yemen is of extreme concern to any country that is arming the Saudis given the fact this force will be needing more and more equipment,” she said.

Ms. Goldsmith-Jones said Ottawa is monitoring the conflict, when asked whether Canada is worried about Canadian-made fighting vehicles being handed over to Yemeni forces and what measures are in place to stop this.

She said the sale deal with Saudi Arabia states that the vehicles cannot be used against non-combatants.

“The agreement stipulates … the goods must not be turned, as you know, against civilians.”

“We’re concerned about the Yemeni situation, of course, and human rights there, yes,” she said. “We’re very concerned about the human-rights record of Saudi Arabia and we’re following the situation with regard to Yemen very closely,” the MP said.

The department of Global Affairs declined to say whether it has any evidence that combat vehicles produced by Canada have already been used in this manner.

“Canada … calls on all parties to comply with their obligations under international humanitarian law,” Global Affairs spokeswoman Rachna Mishra said, adding that Foreign Minister Stéphane Dion “raised relevant issues” when he visited Saudi Arabia last week.

Cesar Jaramillo, executive director of Project Ploughshares, a disarmament group that tracks arms shipments, said raising concerns with Saudi Arabia is an inadequate response, particularly given recent reports chronicling eroding human-rights conditions in the Mideast country.

He said Canada must obtain, or demonstrate that it’s obtained, assurances from Saudi Arabia that place limits on how the armoured vehicles are being used.

“The likelihood of further human-rights abuses does not simply call for issues to be raised, but for specific assurances concerning the end use of Canadian-made goods to be sought and received.”

Black: Sell the Arms to the Saudi's

By: Conrad Black

National Post, May 14, 2016

The controversy over the sale of light armoured vehicles (LAVs) to Saudi Arabia illustrates the fact that Canada can now decide whether it wants to be one of the world’s important powers or not. This does not mean a super power, which is not and will not be on offer for a country of 35 million people. It means a G7 country with the ability to extend its status to be one of world’s influential countries beyond economics and including the full range of factors that create a country’s stature in the world. This is not the last chance for Canada to make that choice, but is one of the first of such opportunities.

Those who most strenuously oppose the sale to Saudi Arabia include practically all audible elements of the NDP. They rightly see Saudi Arabia as a primitive absolute monarchy that has no respect for human liberty, especially women’s rights, is religiously intolerant, and foments militant Wahhabi Islam throughout the Muslim world. This past week, opponents of the sale to Saudi Arabia have been jubilantly circulating news film footage of the Saudis deploying similar equipment, though not supplied by Canada, to break up Shiite demonstrations in Saudi Arabia, and claiming that it could be reasonably inferred that Canadian-supplied LAVs would be similarly deployed.

The opponents of the deal focus especially on the fish-tailing of the federal government as it cites Saudi Arabia as an ally in the fight against Iranian expansion and anti-Western terrorism. The government has assured that this equipment would not be used on Saudi civilians. Tepid supporters of the deal make the point that thousands of Canadian jobs are at stake, and that Canada must not gain a reputation as a fickle and unreliable trading partner.

Of course, the Saudi regime is a nauseating affront to Western values. It has been for decades a joint venture between the House of Saud and the Wahhabi hierarchy, which has long been the principal propagator of militant Islam among Sunni Muslims. Financed by the Saudi royal family, the Wahhabis leave the Saudi regime untroubled, even as they try to destabilize many other governments. Of course, Saudi hypocrisy is distasteful, although it has moderated its support for extremism, under pressure from the United States, and as it has been pushed into the Islamic centre by al-Qaida and ISIL.

Bill Graveland / Canadian PressA Canadian LAV (light armoured vehicle) in Afghanistan on Nov.26, 2006.

Now is the time for Canada to end the role of foreign affairs as a substitute for theology and psychiatry, and to see it as it should be: the means of projecting this country’s interests and influence as a benign policy force in the world. Those who strongly favour the LAV contract, including me, emphasize that the manufacturer is a branch-plant of an American company which would decamp elsewhere if this deal is revoked, creating thousands of skilled, durably unemployed Canadians. The Saudis would buy similar vehicles from other suppliers. Canada would then be mocked in the world as a flaky, inconstant, self-righteous, and light-weight country with no vocation to measure the balance between its interests and moral influence in the world. Further, we would be seen, correctly, as subordinating our economic and strategic interest to a moralistic encouragement of a more liberal Saudi state, something we cannot achieve. This view exaggerates and misjudges our moral interest at the expense of the practical interests of Canada and the West.

Related
Tasha Kheiriddin: Stop supporting Saudi apartheid
Conrad Black: What Canada can do to help stabilize the Middle East and resurrect a strong Western alliance
Stephane Dion releases ‘secret’ Saudi Arabia documents, approving $11 billion in armoured vehicle exports

Saudi Arabia is a powerful regional and sectarian ally against Hezbollah (Lebanon), Hamas (Palestinian territories and Israel), and the Houthi (Yemen), and formidable associate in the struggle against ISIL, which dismisses the Iranian theocrats (and their above-mentioned proxies), and Saudi royals together as pallid infidels. What we have now in the Middle East is a stranger association of powers than was the West with Stalin’s Soviet Union during the Second World War (which Stalin helped start with his Nazi-Soviet Pact with Hitler). But that alliance worked very well, and the West gained or retrieved Germany, France, Italy, and Japan, four of the world’s greatest nations, back into the West as prosperous and democratic allies, while Stalin gained only expensive and temporary and brutal occupation of Eastern Europe, having taken over 90 per cent of the casualties in subduing Nazi Germany. This parallel can be overworked, but as I have written here and elsewhere before, Saudi Arabia, in trying to put a rod on the back of Iran by tanking the world oil price, was also so instrumental in afflicting the Russian national treasury that Russian leader Putin almost certainly moderated the pressure he had planned to assert on Ukraine and the Baltic states. Whatever their shortcomings, the Saudis have been the greatest pillar the crumbling Western alliance has had in the last two years.

Photo: Caporal-chef Dan Pop, AffaireThe Department of National Defence receives the first modernized LAV III from General Dynamics Land Systems Canada in London, Ontario on January 24, 2013.

In applying standards of acceptable moral conduct on other countries, all mature Western nations are compelled to be governed by two factors: whether the co-contracting regime is morally abhorrent and inferior to its local, or sectarian or ideological rivals; and if refusing to treat with such an odious regime would actually lead to its downfall, and would a replacement regime be preferable. Of course, the answer in this case, of Saudi Arabia, is no on both counts. The Saudis are less dangerous and hostile to the West than their Iranian rivals, and the Saudis are effectively combatting Iranian surrogates mentioned above (even allowing for President Obama’s spongiform-brained appeasement of Tehran). Any replacement of the Saudi government, mired in infelicities as it is, would be a hideous cocktail of al-Qaida and ISIL. These would make the relatively house-trained Wahhabi grandees seem like the pious elders of the United Church of Canada (who can be very tiresome and self-serving, but persist in the murky cause of Protestant rights in the People’s Republic and aren’t trying to kill anyone).

Capt Dave MuraltA LAV-III light armoured vehicle of Company Headquarters, C Company, 1st Battalion the Royal 22nd Regiment, the Kandahar Provincial Reconstruction Team's Force Protection Company, secures the village of Zangabad during the ceremonies marking the return of the residents to their homes.

Two examples in living memory of those who have imposed trade embargoes on strategic exports are Franklin D. Roosevelt’s ending the shipments of oil and iron exports to Japan in 1941, and prime minister Lester Pearson’s refusal to sell uranium to France in 1965. Regarding Japan, Roosevelt was correct, morally and practically, and Japan had to attack the United States treacherously, as it did in 1941, or retreat with its tail between its legs from China and Indochina, which it had brutally invaded. Pearson’s moral sanctimony opposite France caused General de Gaulle to seek uranium from France’s former African colonies, and he responded to Pearson’s shabby breach of trust with a call to French Canadians to secede from the Canadian state, wherever they might be. This contributed to decades of turmoil in Quebec-federal relations.

We must start by outgrowing the national mythos expressed by Michael Byers in the Globe and Mail on May 12, and accept that most members of the United Nations pay no attention to the UN Charter or the Universal Declaration on Human Rights; that nobody applies the Geneva Conventions or UN Convention Against Torture to terrorism or counter-terrorism, and that Lester Pearson “won the Nobel prize for peace because he devised a new mechanism — UN peacekeeping — for preventing death and suffering.” the U.S. ambassador to the UN, Henry Cabot Lodge, and the State Department, devised it as a face-saving measure for the British and French after the dreadful fiasco at Suez in 1956 and asked Pearson to move it because if the U.S. did, the Soviet Union, which was then busily engaged in suppressing the Hungarian revolution, would veto it. It is time we had a real foreign policy tailored to our potential capabilities, and emerged from our long-spun cocoon as the pure Snow Maiden of the north raising a light to the nations. Our duty and interest in this case is to pursue our economic interest while assisting the least bad of the Middle East blocs against the worse Iranian bloc and the unspeakable theo-terrorists.

LAV Export Deal Challenged in Court

Published by Defense News, David Pugliese 

VICTORIA, British Columbia — A lawsuit that could potentially derail the largest weapons export deal in Canadian history will be heard in court as early as next month.

Daniel Turp, a law professor and former member of parliament, has filed the legal challenge in the Federal Court of Canada to prevent the export of CAN $14.8 billion (US $11 billion) of light armored vehicles by Canada to Saudi Arabia.

A Canadian LAV-III (Photo: Canadian Army)

Turp argues that the sale of the vehicles, to be built by General Dynamics Land Systems-Canada of London, Ontario, violates Canadian law which prevents the export of military goods to a nation that abuses human rights or is engaged in an active conflict.

Related:
After Saudi Executions, New Canadian Leaders Still Back $15B Vehicle Deal

Canadian PM: Human Rights Issues Won't Derail LAV Sale to Saudis

In his submission to the Federal Court, Turp noted that light armored vehicles previously built by General Dynamics Canada are being used by Saudi forces in fighting in Yemen. He has also wrote that Saudi Arabia “consistently, severely and systematically violates its citizens’ human rights.”

He has asked the Federal Court to cancel the export permits issued for the vehicles.

Doug Wilson-Hodge

, manager of corporate affairs for 
General Dynamics Land Systems-Canada, declined to comment on Turp’s legal action. Production of the vehicles has not yet begun.

Canada’s Liberal Party Prime Minister Justin Trudeau has refused to cancel the contract, which is financially guaranteed by the government. “Fundamentally, this issue is a matter of principle,” Trudeau told journalists. “The principle at play here is that Canada’s word needs to mean something in the international community. It is important that people know when they sign a deal with Canada, when they sign a commercial agreement, a change in government isn’t going to lead to that contract being ripped up.”

The Saudi deal was announced in February 2015 by Canada’s previous Conservative Party government.

The Canadian government has filed its rebuttal with the Federal Court; it acknowledged Saudi Arabia’s poor human rights record but pointed out that the country is supportive of international efforts to counter the Islamic State in Iraq and Syria as well as “countering instability in Yemen.”

"The acquisition of state-of-the-art armoured vehicles will assist Saudi Arabia in these goals, which are consistent with Canada's defence interests in the Middle East," the Canadian government argued in its response.

The case will be heard by the court in Montreal in late May or early June.

The contract has largely been shrouded in secrecy with the Saudis not even acknowledging they are purchasing the Canadian-built light armoured vehicles. Numbers of vehicles to be purchased has not been released. But analysts say Turp’s legal action may force Canada to reveal some of those details in court.

Conservative Party Prime Minister Stephen Harper also acknowledged human rights violations in Saudi Arabia but said that any of Canada’s allies would have signed a similar defense export deal with that country.

General Dynamics Land Systems-Canada has sold more than 1,400 LAVs to the Saudis over the last 20 years. The vehicles have been equipped with a variety of weapon systems, ranging from 25mm cannons to 90mm guns.

Human rights observers point out that some of those vehicles were sent in 2011 to help Bahrain’s rulers suppress a pro-democracy uprising.

Email: dpugliese@defensenews.com

Manley: We can’t always sell weapons to people we like

By: John Manley, originally published on iPolitics 

It saddens me to watch my successor as minister of Foreign Affairs, Stéphane Dion, attacked and criticized over the sale to Saudi Arabia of light armoured vehicles manufactured in London, Ontario.

A Canadian LAV-III on patrol in Kabul, Afghanistan. 

The minister and his colleagues are, of course, right to say that the sale was negotiated and approved before they assumed office. The fact that the minister’s signature was required on the final export permits in no way contradicts the reality that to have refused to sign those permits would have breached a contract previously entered into by the Government of Canada.

If I sign an agreement to sell my house, the transaction is not completed until the day I sign the papers transferring ownership of the property to the buyer. But if I refuse to do the latter, I am clearly in breach of my prior agreement.

Beyond the contractual obligation, there are plenty of reasons to support the sale of these light armoured vehicles.

First, the defence industry is a key driver of economic activity and an important source of high-value employment. The sector encompasses more than 650 firms, supports more than 65,000 full-time jobs across the country and contributes an estimated $6 billion a year to our country’s GDP. Exports account for half of Canada’s total defence industry revenues.

Some people would prefer that we not be in the arms business at all. But not only does this industry supply some of our own defence and security requirements, it supplies our allies as well.

Should we adopt a policy of refusing to trade with people whose values are out of line with our own? Regrettably, that might leave us with a rather limited number of potential customers.

Whether one believes that Canada should offer its forces only in support of peacekeeping (a view I don’t happen to share), or should play a more robust role in global affairs, our armed forces plainly need vehicles, uniforms and ordinance to carry out their duties.

Given that requirement, it stands to reason that Canadians should want to design and manufacture this equipment — and if we’re doing so, the economics of scale dictate exporting those same products.

Second, Canada has long had interests in the region. Our armed forces have served there. Some 23 fallen Canadian soldiers and peacekeepers are buried in the Commonwealth Gaza War Cemetery near Gaza City.

It’s often said that countries don’t have friends — they have interests. Canada has an obvious interest in stability in a region in which regime change has, to say the least, not gone well in recent years. A strong Saudi Arabia, balancing Iran and its regional allies, is not a bad thing. Conversely, if you dislike the current government of Saudi Arabia (and there are good reasons to do so), you had better ask yourself who and what might replace it.

Third, as a mature country, we have to be able to deal with governments and regimes with which we do not always agree. The world is full of countries that do not share our values and beliefs. Should we adopt a policy of refusing to trade with people whose values are out of line with our own? Regrettably, that might leave us with a rather limited number of potential customers.

Canada, it should be pointed out, is not supplying the Saudis with equipment that can be used in torture or persecution of women. We are selling military vehicles — basically fancy trucks — of the sort that are required by any country’s armed forces, and which we happen to be good at making.

Finally, I find myself wondering whether the people who are now loudly proclaiming that we should block the sale of military vehicles to the Saudis are being equally vigorous in their support of a pipeline from Alberta to the East Coast — a pipeline that would reduce and perhaps end our dependence on oil imports from that same country. Somehow, I doubt it.

In my judgement, selling light armoured vehicles to Saudi Arabia is good for Canada and Canadian workers, and fully justifiable on moral grounds.

----

John Manley is president and CEO of the Business Council of Canada. He served as Minister of Foreign Affairs from 2000 to 2002.

Montreal Law Professor Sues Liberal Government Over Conservative Vehicle Sale to Saudi Arabia

Written by: Steven Chase, The Globe and Mail 

Foreign Minister Stéphane Dion is acting illegally by issuing permits to allow the export of combat vehicles to Saudi Arabia, a lawsuit filed in Federal Court on Monday alleges.

Opponents of Canada’s $15-billion arms deal with the Saudis are taking the Trudeau government to court in an attempt to block shipments of the fighting vehicles to Riyadh.

A group led by Daniel Turp, a professor of international and constitutional law at the University of Montreal, filed a notice of application for judicial review on Monday.

The Liberals have repeatedly refused to cancel the contract, but Dr. Turp argues this isn’t about whether a deal should be abrogated. According to Dr. Turp, the question at hand is whether the Liberals are fulfilling their legal obligations to properly implement Canadian restrictions on weapons exports – both under Canadian export rules and the Geneva Conventions Act.

He says Mr. Dion’s responsibility to carefully police exports of arms to countries with poor human-rights records isn’t extinguished simply because Ottawa doesn’t want to cancel a business deal.

The legal action may force the Liberals to explain how they justify these exports to a human-rights pariah despite Canadian rules that place restrictions on weapons shipments to countries where civilians are abused or where conflict is taking place.

“Saudi Arabia is a country ruled by a dictatorship supported by a powerful army,” the Turp application says. “Saudi Arabia is … a state which consistently, severely and systematically violates its citizens’ human rights.”

Dr. Turp has taken Ottawa to court before, including in 2012, when he challenged the Harper government’s withdrawal from the Kyoto Protocol.

The Canadian government is the prime contractor in a deal to supply the Saudi monarchy with $15-billion of armoured vehicles that will be equipped with machine guns or anti-tank weapons. The manufacturer, supporting 3,000 jobs in Canada, is General Dynamics Land Systems Canada in London, Ont.

“The armoured vehicles to be delivered by General Dynamics Land Systems Canada to Saudi Arabia may be used against the civilian population and therefore, the issuance of export permits … would not respect the guidelines Canada imposed on itself and would be contrary to the Geneva Conventions Act,” Dr. Turp’s application says. “For those reasons, issuing those permits would be illegal.”

The Trudeau government did not immediately respond when asked for comment. A spokesman for Mr. Dion left it to bureaucrats at Global Affairs Canada to answer the media query.

Prime Minister Justin Trudeau has stood by the massive contract, which was signed by the former Harper government, saying Canada’s reputation as a fair dealer would be injured if Ottawa walked away from a signed deal. Mr. Dion has also warned that abrogating the deal could incur big financial penalties for Ottawa – however, he refuses to elaborate on the size of the liability Canada would face.

Dr. Turp, supported by students at the University of Montreal and Montreal law firm Trudel Johnston & Lespérance, argues Mr. Dion’s responsibility to properly police arms exports is unaffected by who signed the deal or what legal consequences might follow from blocked shipments.

The former Bloc Québécois MP, who later served as a Parti Québécois MNA, said he finds it hard to believe Mr. Dion, once a professor at the University of Montreal himself, really believes the Saudi deal is appropriate.

Mr. Dion, as Foreign Minister, is responsible for signing export permits to allow the light-armoured vehicles (LAVs) to leave Canada for Saudi Arabia. Dr. Turp said the guidelines followed by cabinet stipulate that “Canada will not allow the export of military equipment to countries whose governments have a persistent record of serious violations of human rights of their citizens – unless it can be demonstrated that there is no reasonable risk that the goods might be used against the civilian population.”

Dr. Turp’s legal action argues it is impossible for the Saudis to guarantee they won’t use armoured vehicles against civilians.

The war Saudi Arabia is currently waging in neighbouring Yemen has already drawn serious accusations of human-rights violations from a United Nations panel. A UN report earlier this year blamed the Saudi-led coalition of Arab states fighting Houthi rebels in Yemen for “widespread and systematic” air-strike attacks on civilian targets.

The Globe and Mail reported last month that Canadian-made armoured vehicles manufactured by General Dynamics appear to be embroiled in Saudi Arabia’s war in Yemen– caught up in cross-border hostilities.

The Saudi Arabian National Guard, a buyer of many Canadian-made LAVs in the past decade, has published photos on its official Twitter account showing how, in late 2015, it moved columns of combat vehicles to Najran, a southwestern Saudi town near the border with Yemen that is in the thick of the conflict.

A significant number of vehicles in these photos have the triangular front corners, the eight wheels and the headlamps fixed above these triangles that are familiar features in earlier LAV models made in Canada.

Canadian LAV's Appear to have made an Entrance into Saudi-Yemini Conflict

By: STEVEN CHASE AND ROBERT FIFE, The Globe and Mail 

Canadian-made armoured vehicles appear to be embroiled in Saudi Arabia’s war against Yemeni-based Houthi rebels – caught up in cross-border hostilities that critics say should force Ottawa to reconsider a $15-billion deal to sell Riyadh more of these weapons.

The Saudi-led coalition fighting the Houthis – who are aligned with Iran – has already been accused by a United Nations panel of major human-rights violations for what its report called “widespread and systematic” air-strike attacks on civilian targets. Along the Saudi-Yemen border, constant skirmishes pit Houthi fighters against Saudi ground forces such as the Saudi Arabian National Guard.

The Saudi Arabian National Guard, a buyer of many Canadian-made light armoured vehicles (LAVs) in the past decade, has published photos on its official Twitter account showing how in late 2015 it moved columns of combat vehicles to Najran, a southwestern Saudi town near the border with Yemen that is in the thick of the conflict.

A photo posted to Twitter by thee Saudi National Guard shows what appear to be Canadian made LAVs being delivered to the front lines of the Saudi-Yemini Conflict. 

A significant number of vehicles in the photos have the triangular front corners, the eight wheels and the headlamps fixed above these triangles that are familiar features in earlier LAV models made in Canada.

Neither the Liberal government nor LAV-maker General Dynamics Land Systems in London, Ont., would confirm these are Canadian machines.

But a retired Canadian general consulted by The Globe and Mail, who spoke on condition of anonymity, identified the LAVs being transported to Najran as fighting vehicles made by General Dynamics Land Systems. Stephen Priestley, a researcher with the Canadian American Strategic Review, a think tank that tracks defence spending, also identified the LAVs as Canadian-made.

Critics say having Canadian-made arms enmeshed in a conflict that has claimed more than 2,800 civilian lives should prompt Ottawa to rethink the recent $15-billion deal to sell hundreds or thousands more to the Saudis.

Canada’s export control rules for weapons shipments are supposed to require Ottawa to restrict arms exports to countries such as Saudi Arabia, that have “poor human-rights records.” Saudi Arabia, regularly ranked among the “worst of the worst” on human rights by Freedom House, qualifies for special scrutiny.

The same federal weapons export controls also say Canada should “closely control,” or be very discriminating, about shipments to countries “that are involved in or under imminent threat of hostilities.”

Foreign Affairs Minister Stéphane Dion’s department refused comment Monday when pressed on whether it is concerned about the armoured vehicle shipments, saying it’s bound to secrecy on anything to do with arms sales to the Saudis.

“In regards to your request, please see our response: For reasons of commercial confidentiality, specific contractual details cannot be shared,” Tania Assaly, a spokeswoman for Global Affairs said in a prepared statement.

The Trudeau Liberals keep trying to dissociate themselves from the increasingly controversial deal. Last week, Mr. Dion argued his government merely inherited the contract and that cancelling it would cost taxpayers huge penalties. Pressed on this, Mr. Dion’s department refused to provide details to back up the Foreign Minister’s assertion, citing the need to keep the commercial pact with Riyadh secret.

General Dynamics Land Systems Canada of London, Ont., which employs about 2,100 people, did not respond to a request for comment about whether it is concerned about the LAVs caught up in the Saudi-Yemen conflict.

Ken Epps with the anti-war group Project Ploughshares, which tracks arms sales, said the Liberal government should rethink the latest $15-billion contract with Saudi Arabia. Ottawa, not General Dynamics Land Systems, is the prime contractor in this deal, which was also brokered by the federal government.

The Trudeau government still has power over the deal. It can suspend exports of these combat vehicles.

“Given a UN report accused the Saudis of war crimes because of their bombing of civilians, then clearly our concern must be that since they are involved in war crimes there, it should give the Canadian government additional pause in shipping these kind of weapons to them,” Mr. Epps said.

The $15-billion Saudi LAV deal will provide Riyadh with weaponized armoured vehicles in what is the largest manufacturing export contract in Canadian history – but one that doesn’t garner significant public support. A recent Nanos Research poll found nearly six out of 10 Canadians surveyed feel it is more important to ensure arms exports go only to countries “that respect human rights” than it is to sustain some 3,000 jobs by selling combat vehicles to Saudi Arabia.

A new report says Saudi Arabia was the second-largest arms importer in the world between 2011 and 2015 after India as Mideast countries upped weapons purchases significantly. Shipments to Saudi Arabia rose 275 per cent in those years, by value, compared with the earlier 2006-10 period, the Stockholm International Peace Research Institute said.

At least one wartime footage video posted on YouTube on the Houthi-Saudi conflict also shows what appears to be a disabled Canadian-made LAV, presumably abandoned by Saudi troops as their enemies approached.

Mr. Priestley said this December, 2015, video, purported to be shot near the southern Saudi town of Al Raboah, shows a National Guard LAV-AG model, made in London, Ont., being looted by combatants.

UN Report Wants Ottawa to Cancel Saudi Vehicle Deal

Written by: Steven Chase, Globe and Mail 

A leaked United Nations report detailing human-rights violations by a Saudi Arabia-led bombing campaign in Yemen has spurred calls in Britain to suspend arms sales to Riyadh and is increasing pressure on the Canadian government to do the same.

A Canadian LAV III in Afghanistan in 2006. Globe and Mail file photo

The Trudeau government opened the door last week to halting a $15-billion arms sale to Saudi Arabia when it issued a statement saying it reserves the right to do so if events warrant – a shift in message after weeks of framing the Canadian sale of combat vehicles as a done deal.

The UN report is raising fresh hopes among critics of Canada’s unprecedented arms deal with Saudi Arabia that Ottawa might finally be persuaded to suspend the sale of weaponized armoured vehicles to a country that already has an abysmal record on human rights. The office of Foreign Affairs Minister Stéphane Dion did not immediately respond Wednesday to requests for comment.

(The Saudi arms deal: A primer on what we've learned so far)

In a new report obtained by The Guardian, a UN panel investigating the bombing campaign in Yemen has found “widespread and systematic” attacks on civilian targets in violation of international humanitarian law – revelations that are prompting the Official Opposition in Westminster to urge an immediate inquiry and suspension of British arms sales to Saudi Arabia. The Saudis and Arab allies launched a military intervention in Yemen last year in support of President Abd-Rabbu Mansour Hadi who was under threat from Houthi forces aligned with Iran.

Cesar Jaramillo, executive director of Waterloo, Ont.-based Project Ploughshares, an anti-war group that tracks arms sales, said he believes the UN panel’s findings should galvanize Canada to act on the Saudi deal.

He noted the report documented “systematic targeting” of civilians in Yemen, rather than simply indiscriminate bombing.

“This report is further evidence of the Saudi regime’s utter disregard for human rights,” Mr. Jaramillo said.

“Is this not exactly the type of report that Mr. Dion’s office said it would consider to determine whether export permits should be suspended or cancelled?”

Last week, Mr. Dion’s office announced that while the Liberals had no intention of cancelling the deal, they would not ignore developments in Saudi Arabia and would “factor this information into consideration of future permits.” Permits for exports are time-limited and would need to be renewed over the life of Canada’s 14-year arms deal with Riyadh.

According to The Guardian, the new UN report attributes 60 per cent, or 2,682, of civilian deaths and injuries in Yemen to air-launched explosive weapons dropped by the Saudi-led coalition. “The coalition’s targeting of civilians through air strikes, either by bombing residential neighbourhoods or by treating the entire cities of Sa’dah and Maran as military targets, is a grave violation of the principles of distinction, proportionality and precaution. In certain cases, the panel found such violations to have been conducted in a widespread and systematic manner.”

The federal government has faced repeated requests to justify the shipment of weapons to Saudi Arabia, a country notorious for its atrocious treatment of women, dissidents and prisoners. The Liberals promised during the election campaign that they would revise Ottawa’s approach to international relations to improve this country’s reputation on the global stage, and marketed this change as “Canada’s back.”

Opposition parties on Wednesday intensified their demands for the Trudeau government to make public any study or report showing how the Saudi arms deal passes muster under Canada’s weapons export regime.

Conservative foreign affairs critic Tony Clement, whose government signed the Saudi arms deal, called on the Liberals to release those deliberations and said it’s up to the Liberals to determine if the justification for selling the armoured vehicles is still solid. “Clearly if circumstances have changed, the Government of Canada … should come clean to the Canadian people and we can have a discussion.”

NDP foreign affairs critic Hélène Laverdière urged likewise, saying the Liberals themselves were urging the release of this information when they were still in opposition.

The Saudi deal – the largest advanced manufacturing contract in Canadian history – is no ordinary transaction between a Canadian company and a foreign government.

In this deal, the Canadian government is the prime contractor, responsible for delivery of what are believed to be hundreds if not thousands of combat vehicles to the Saudi Arabian national guard. As The Globe and Mail first reported, LAVs sold to the Saudis will be equipped with anti-tank missile cannons and medium-calibre machine guns.

The former Harper government used its diplomatic resources to lobby the Saudis hard for this contract, and Ottawa is fronting the deal on behalf of General Dynamics Land Systems Canada, a Canadian subsidiary of a major U.S. defence contractor.

The deal will support 3,000 Canadian jobs over 14 years, both in London, Ont., where the vehicles are assembled, as well as across the country.

The contract is currently in the material-procurement stage.

Before an export permit is issued, federal arms-control rules require Ottawa to ensure there is no risk that arms shipped to a country with a poor human-rights record could be used against civilians.

The Liberal government still refuses to release Ottawa’s deliberations on the matter, citing commercial confidentiality.

Follow Steven Chase on Twitter: @stevenchase