By: The Canadian Press
Defence Minister Harjit Sajjan met with his Iraqi and Kurdistan counterparts in Baghdad on Monday to discuss Canada's ongoing contribution to the fight against the Islamic State of Iraq and the Levant.
Jordan Owens, a spokeswoman for the minister, said Sajjan arrived in Iraq after attending the recent NATO summit in Warsaw, Poland.
She said U.S. Defence Secretary Ashton Carter was also in Iraq, but that he and Sajjan were not together.
Owens said she could not provide details of Sajjan's discussions, adding the minister will discuss his visit later in a telephone conference call with the media.
The Liberal government announced in May that it was expanding its contribution to the fight against ISIL to include three CH-146 Griffon helicopters, an intelligence centre and additional trainers to what is called Operation IMPACT.
It said that would triple the size of Canada's mission to train, advise and help Iraqi security forces plan and conduct military operations against ISIL.
Sajjan will return to Canada on Thursday.
Additional Content by: David Pugliese,
Sajjan’s visit also coincided with a trip to Baghdad by U.S. Defense Secretary Ashton Carter.
At the end of the recent NATO summit, Canada announced it would contribute to an alliance program to train Iraqi troops in disposing of improvised explosive devices.
But at the time Prime Minister Justin Trudeau did not offer any details about the mission, such as numbers of personnel, duration of their mission, and where they would be operating in Iraq. “The fact is from the beginning we have always talked about the broad range of activities we can do in support of the local troops,” Trudeau told reporters.
The Kuwait News Agency, citing Iraqi officials, reported that Canada will be providing military engineers as part of the training package.
NATO has been training Iraqi personnel in counter-IED operations at the King Abdullah II Special Operations Training Centre in Amman, Jordan. NATO is also providing “train the trainer” instruction, enabling the officers to build the professionalism of the Iraqi forces by sharing their new skills with colleagues with the support of the NATO Counter Improvised Explosive Devices Centre of Excellence, the alliance added in an earlier news release.
At the request of the Iraqi government, NATO is now assessing the possibility of conducting training inside Iraq as well, NATO pointed out.
Showing posts with label Liberal ISIS Mission. Show all posts
Showing posts with label Liberal ISIS Mission. Show all posts
Tuesday, July 12, 2016
Tuesday, April 19, 2016
Still No Additional CAF Deployment to Iraq; As US Deploys 217 Special Forces and Apache Helicopters
Written by: Daniel Maillet, CAF Dispatch
April 19, 2016, 8:00AM
Back on April 4, 2016, a report published by David Pugliese of The Ottawa Citizen noted that the additional 200 CAF members the Liberals announced in February to be deployed to OP IMPACT to fight ISIS in Northern Iraq had yet to be deployed. That is still the case as of today. Canada needs to quicken it's response times.
Within two weeks of the announcement of the withdraw of CF-18 Fighter jets, the RCAF had ended airstrikes against ISIS; and had sent 4 of the 6 CF-18's to Romania on bilateral training. Yet nearly three months after the announcement of 200 trainers to Norther Iraq to advise and assist Peshmerga forces, there has been no major movement. Canada's 69 Special Forces members are still alone; despite the announced deployment of Griffon Helicopters to help them move around the region.
Yet, today the United States announced it will immediately deploy 217 additional US Army Troops to Northern Iraq as well as send Apache helicopters to the region for the first time to continue its fight against ISIS, according to a US Defense official who spoke with The National Post.
The US's announcement and deployment is intended to further help Iraqi and Kurdish forces retake Mosul and Raqqa from the hands of ISIS. It is expected that the majority, if not all the 217 will be special forces members. The additional troops will bring the US troop level in Iraq to around 4,087.
Canada does not lack the lift capacity to put our 200 additional forces on the ground, it would seem the country is just dragging it's feet on the additional deployment.
April 19, 2016, 8:00AM
Back on April 4, 2016, a report published by David Pugliese of The Ottawa Citizen noted that the additional 200 CAF members the Liberals announced in February to be deployed to OP IMPACT to fight ISIS in Northern Iraq had yet to be deployed. That is still the case as of today. Canada needs to quicken it's response times.
Within two weeks of the announcement of the withdraw of CF-18 Fighter jets, the RCAF had ended airstrikes against ISIS; and had sent 4 of the 6 CF-18's to Romania on bilateral training. Yet nearly three months after the announcement of 200 trainers to Norther Iraq to advise and assist Peshmerga forces, there has been no major movement. Canada's 69 Special Forces members are still alone; despite the announced deployment of Griffon Helicopters to help them move around the region.
Yet, today the United States announced it will immediately deploy 217 additional US Army Troops to Northern Iraq as well as send Apache helicopters to the region for the first time to continue its fight against ISIS, according to a US Defense official who spoke with The National Post.
 |
| Apache Helicopter Land at Camp Bastion Airfield, Afghanistan Photo: MOD 45153345 |
Canada does not lack the lift capacity to put our 200 additional forces on the ground, it would seem the country is just dragging it's feet on the additional deployment.
Monday, April 18, 2016
CAF Still Unclear when Lethal Support to Kurds will be Delivered
By: David Pugliese, Defence Watch
As the U.S. and other coalition allies begin their deliveries of lethal military equipment to the Kurds, the Canadian Forces has still to figure out when it will do so.
America and its coalition partners have begun arming the Kurdish peshmerga with weapons such as armoured personnel carriers, mortars and anti-tank weapons, the U.S. publication, the Stars and Stripes newspaper reported.
Brig. Gen. John E. Novalis II, deputy commander of the 101st Airborne Division, told the newspaper that the U.S.-led coalition is providing the peshmerga with a significant amount of new gear. “We have decided to give them about two U.S. Army brigades-worth of equipment – heavier stuff,” he said.
The deliveries were approved and coordinated with the Iraqi government. There is concern in Baghdad the Kurds will eventually use such weaponry to support an eventual bid for independence.
The ships include at least 150 vehicles, including 40 Mine Resistant Ambush Protected (MRAP) armored personnel carriers. Of those fifteen are equipped with mine-rollers.
More details:
-56 million rounds of ammunition
-5,000 anti-tank weapons
-45,000 rifles and machineguns
-700 mortar tubes
-80,000 mortar rounds
-3,600 gas masks
In an email to Defence Watch, the Canadian Forces noted that since Prime Minister Justin Trudeau’s announcement on February 8 committing Canada to provide weapons to the Kurds, there have been no donations of lethal military equipment.
Planning is underway.
“Further details are not available at this time,” noted that response.
“The Government of Canada remains in close contact with the Iraqi authorities on the implementation of the new strategy, which will be carried out with the full consent of the Iraqi government,” the response added.
As the U.S. and other coalition allies begin their deliveries of lethal military equipment to the Kurds, the Canadian Forces has still to figure out when it will do so.
America and its coalition partners have begun arming the Kurdish peshmerga with weapons such as armoured personnel carriers, mortars and anti-tank weapons, the U.S. publication, the Stars and Stripes newspaper reported.
Brig. Gen. John E. Novalis II, deputy commander of the 101st Airborne Division, told the newspaper that the U.S.-led coalition is providing the peshmerga with a significant amount of new gear. “We have decided to give them about two U.S. Army brigades-worth of equipment – heavier stuff,” he said.
The deliveries were approved and coordinated with the Iraqi government. There is concern in Baghdad the Kurds will eventually use such weaponry to support an eventual bid for independence.
The ships include at least 150 vehicles, including 40 Mine Resistant Ambush Protected (MRAP) armored personnel carriers. Of those fifteen are equipped with mine-rollers.
More details:
-56 million rounds of ammunition
-5,000 anti-tank weapons
-45,000 rifles and machineguns
-700 mortar tubes
-80,000 mortar rounds
-3,600 gas masks
In an email to Defence Watch, the Canadian Forces noted that since Prime Minister Justin Trudeau’s announcement on February 8 committing Canada to provide weapons to the Kurds, there have been no donations of lethal military equipment.
Planning is underway.
“Further details are not available at this time,” noted that response.
“The Government of Canada remains in close contact with the Iraqi authorities on the implementation of the new strategy, which will be carried out with the full consent of the Iraqi government,” the response added.
Monday, April 4, 2016
Additional 200 CAF Still Waiting to Deploy to OP IMPACT
In a new report released this morning, David Pugliese, of The Ottawa Citizen, reported that despite it being almost two months since the Liberal's announced their new mission to Iraq - the extra 200 CAF personnel have yet to be deployed.
Here here is his report:
In the first week of February, Prime Minister Justin Trudeau announced the changes in the Iraq mission. The CF-18s were to be withdrawn while the Auroras and refuelling aircraft would stay. Canada’s contribution would actually increase by more than 200 personnel, with those extra staff being assigned to the training mission, according to the government.
The CF-18s now are gone. There are still 600 Canadians overseas on the Iraq mission, according to the Department of National Defence. That figure includes the estimated 69 special forces personnel.
"But the promised extra personnel have yet to deploy. An exact timeline has yet to be determined,” Canadian military spokesman Capt. Kirk Sullivan told Defence Watch. “The Canadian Armed Forces is in the process of finalizing plans for the transitioning of the mission. Deploying military capabilities over thousands of kilometers into a theatre of operations requires careful planning, which takes time."
Friday, March 25, 2016
Den Tandt: War Of Words over "War"
Written by Michael Den Tandt, The National Post
Canada is not at war with the Islamic State of Iraq and the Levant. Of course not. It’s a police action. A lawenforcement and publicsafety issue, to address a pernicious threat, one being met with utmost seriousness by the federal government, which has applied a range of remedies across the span of policy, without resorting to fearmongering that would … where was I?
“A war is something that can be won by one side or the other and there is no path for ISIL to actually win against the West,” Prime Minister Justin Trudeau told the CBC Wednesday. “They want to destabilize, they want to strike fear. They need to be stamped out.” Stamped out! Excellent wording, that. Foreign Affairs Minister Stéphane Dion calls it a fight. This is progress.
But they’re both wrong, demonstrably and clearly wrong, in saying it’s not war. It is precisely that.
Let’s dispense first with the too-easy cliché that Trudeau and his Liberals are “soft on terror.” They’re not. No government in its right mind would be or could be, given events. This is why, as reported by the Ottawa Citizen’s Ian MacLeod, it is moving on several fronts behind the scenes to block terrorists before they strike again in Canada, including via information-sharing enabled by the former government’s Bill C-51. Good. That much is reassuring.
Trudeau’s contention that the new anti-ISIL mission launched by his government, even sans CF-18 fighters, can provide invaluable help to the U.S.-led coalition, is well taken. It’s true that other countries, especially the United States, have a corner on air power. It’s also true that Canadian soldiers are good at training allied ground forces in hostile environments, having acquired this skill in Afghanistan. And it’s equally true that military power alone cannot “defeat” an enemy such as ISIL in a 21st-century, asymmetrical insurgent conflict that collapses and conflates previous categories of warfare. OK. But no one ever said otherwise, that I know of.
And it’s all beside the point on the question of what is, and is not, war.
The conflict with ISIL is war in the sense that French Prime Minister Manuel Valls used the term after Tuesday’s bombings in Brussels. Valls said this: “We are at war.”
France is not at war in a Napoleonic sense. There are no clear battle lines. The French Foreign Legion is not (yet) poised to move in great numbers into northern Iraq. Yet France is at war, because the seat of its society and one of the shining beacons of global society, Paris, was attacked and is under threat of further attack. Brussels has been attacked, no doubt because of its symbolic heft as the European capital. Europe — the very idea of a free society, multilingual, multicultural and borderless — is shaken to its foundations by the inflow of refugees, partially (though only partially) caused by ISIL. All that makes this a war.
Ah, but ISIL is a non-state actor, says the technician. It’s not “war” because one side can never win. Calling it war gives ISIL too much credit! They’re unhinged, degenerates and sociopaths to be viewed with contempt, not elevated to the status of combatants. And that’s true, as far as it goes. Of course they’re unhinged. Based on a literal reading of ancient prophecy, these men seek to catalyze a global conflagration that will bring about their own mass death and ultimately Armageddon. To say they’re unhinged really doesn’t cover it.
But let us be clear about a couple of things. First, ISIL holds territory. It has a capital city, Raqqa. That makes it different from al- Qaida, which never did that, rather choosing to infest failed states and cling to them parasitically. As I and many others have written, the fact of ISIL’s holding land and administering institutions of government, albeit in demented and criminal fashion, is its principal drawing card. Land gives the selfanointed caliph, Abu Bakr al-Baghdadi, legitimacy, by radical Islamist lights.
Therefore the land he controls must be taken back. The peshmerga and Iraqi ground forces doing that, at great cost to themselves, believe they’re at war, one suspects. It would be astonishing, indeed, if Canadian special forces risking their lives to help them don’t feel the same way.
In 2002, the Liberal government launched the Afghan mission against a ragtag band of illiterate opium farmers who fought with looped-up Soviet-era artillery shells buried in roadways. Yet most Canadians, particularly the estimated 30,000 soldiers who served there, likely now consider that to have been war.
It’s an absurd descent into technocracy for the PM and his top foreign policy hand to suggest the conflict with ISIL, which poses a far greater threat to Canadian citizens than the Taliban ever did, is anything but.
Tuesday, March 15, 2016
Canadian General to Command coalition team in Iraqi
By: Mathew Fisher, National Post
Canadian Brigadier-General David Anderson is to command a coalition team — including as many as 12 other Canadians — that is to work with Iraq’s security ministries in Baghdad as they prepare battle plans for the long-anticipated offensive to drive the Islamic State of Iraq and the Levant out of Mosul and northwestern Iraq.
Lt.-Gen. Steve Bowes — who commands all Canadian troops on operations at home and abroad — revealed the key appointment, during an interview with the National Post, in which he discussed details of what Canada’s new mission in Iraq and the region will look like when it becomes operational in July.
Anderson’s name was later confirmed to the Post by Commander Nathalie Garcia.
Anderson served with the infantry in Afghanistan before commanding an army brigade in western Canada. He is to be responsible for ensuring that “the lines of communication and the intents and actions fire both ways,” said Bowes, who runs Canadian Joint Operations Command.
Four RCAF Griffon helicopters being sent to Iraq are to be deployed exclusively with elite Canadian Special Forces Operations Command troops who are advising and mentoring Kurdish peshmerga forces, Bowes said.
Canada was conducting “a ground-air threat assessment” so the helicopters would be able to react to whatever ISIL might try to do to them, said the three-star general, who served two tours in Afghanistan. “They will certainly go with a defence suite.”
Griffons that Canada deployed to Afghanistan were armoured and equipped with lethal Gatling guns manned by door gunners.
Matthew Fisher/Postmedia NewsLt.-Gen Steve Bowes
Bowes confirmed that, as has been the case since the Harper government first sent military advisers to Iraq in late 2014, only elite and secretive Canadian special forces commandos — rather than conventional forces — would assist the Peshmerga, whose front-line troops are dug in on a strategically important ridge that looks down on Mosul and the Tigris River Valley.
Although the Trudeau government withdrew the RCAF’s Kuwait-based CF-18s from combat operations over Iraq and Syria last month, the number of Canadians helping Iraq fight ISIL is to grow to 830 from about 600. The exact locations and jobs of those Canadians who are to be based in Iraq and neighbouring countries was discussed recently at a conference with U.S. Central Command and partner nations.
“A lot of positions were vacant within the coalition structure. We are picking up some of them,” Bowes said.
“At the moment, in what they call the building partner capacity sites, they are oversubscribed in trainers and undersubscribed in troops to train, but the mission will evolve. So, in a year’s time, who really knows.”
The Canadian Forces were aware of reports ISIL has been using chemical weapons but his troops had excellent equipment and training to deal with such threats, the general said.
“The enemy, ISIL, Daesh (its acronym in Arabic), has shown an ability to metastasize and change tactics and we try to keep abreast of them,” he said.
“For example, how they have been converting dump trucks, putting armour plates on them and creating vehicle-borne improvised explosive devices. That shows the degree to which they are capable of taking anything and changing it into a weapon.”
Brig.-Gen. Shane Brennan, who led a Canadian team that mentored Afghan security forces in Kandahar, is to be the next public lead of Joint Task Force-Iraq. Like the previous three JTF-I commanders, who were from the RCAF, Brennan, who is an army officer, is to be based at an airfield in Kuwait that serves as the joint coalition headquarters.
Some of the Canadians being sent to the Middle East are to join another Canadian Afghan vet, Brig.-Gen. Greg Smith, on the staff of a U.S. army major-general in Baghdad. Others are to be part of an expanded Canadian intelligence capability or tasked with supporting troops in Iraq by expanding the logistics footprint in Kuwait.
Sgt Donald Clark, Army NewsFour RCAF Griffon helicopters being sent to Iraq are to be deployed exclusively with elite Canadian Special Forces Operations Command troops who are advising and mentoring Kurdish peshmerga forces, Bowes said
“The mission is complex, as you can imagine, with people all over the place,” Bowes said. “What we have to go through is a very human process of identifying the people and matching them to the positions and then giving themselves sufficient time to prepare themselves professionally with pre-deployment training.”
As well as weapons and other specific military training, those troops selected for what the defence department calls Operation Impact would undergo cultural training specific to their assignments with the Iraqi Kurds or Iraqi Arabs.
“Be mindful that ours is a small mission,” that should not be compared with the much larger combat operation that Canada undertook in Kandahar, Bowes said, adding that not only the military was involved in Iraq but there were “significant whole-of-government initiatives underway in Ottawa to support the mission.”
Bowes was upbeat about the somewhat expanded ground duties that Canada was taking on in Iraq.
“No fears and nothing that keeps me awake,” Bowes said. “What I think about a lot is whether I am doing everything I can to enable the chief (Gen. Jon Vance) and other leaders to ensure that our (political) leadership in this country understands the environment in which we have deployed personnel.”
The general’s mornings began early, reading reports from international news organizations such as Al-Jazeera before attending classified briefings with his staff who monitor everything from volcanoes to terrorist attacks and conflicts and potential conflicts worldwide, especially in eastern Europe and the Middle East.
“You can’t just look at northern Iraq, or Baghdad or Kuwait in isolation,” he said. “You have to be able to look at the region. You have to be able to monitor what is going on around it and understand how things can shift. On the political level this is an extraordinarily complex part of the world.”
Canadian Brigadier-General David Anderson is to command a coalition team — including as many as 12 other Canadians — that is to work with Iraq’s security ministries in Baghdad as they prepare battle plans for the long-anticipated offensive to drive the Islamic State of Iraq and the Levant out of Mosul and northwestern Iraq.
Lt.-Gen. Steve Bowes — who commands all Canadian troops on operations at home and abroad — revealed the key appointment, during an interview with the National Post, in which he discussed details of what Canada’s new mission in Iraq and the region will look like when it becomes operational in July.
Anderson’s name was later confirmed to the Post by Commander Nathalie Garcia.
Anderson served with the infantry in Afghanistan before commanding an army brigade in western Canada. He is to be responsible for ensuring that “the lines of communication and the intents and actions fire both ways,” said Bowes, who runs Canadian Joint Operations Command.
Four RCAF Griffon helicopters being sent to Iraq are to be deployed exclusively with elite Canadian Special Forces Operations Command troops who are advising and mentoring Kurdish peshmerga forces, Bowes said.
Canada was conducting “a ground-air threat assessment” so the helicopters would be able to react to whatever ISIL might try to do to them, said the three-star general, who served two tours in Afghanistan. “They will certainly go with a defence suite.”
Griffons that Canada deployed to Afghanistan were armoured and equipped with lethal Gatling guns manned by door gunners.
Matthew Fisher/Postmedia NewsLt.-Gen Steve Bowes
Bowes confirmed that, as has been the case since the Harper government first sent military advisers to Iraq in late 2014, only elite and secretive Canadian special forces commandos — rather than conventional forces — would assist the Peshmerga, whose front-line troops are dug in on a strategically important ridge that looks down on Mosul and the Tigris River Valley.
Although the Trudeau government withdrew the RCAF’s Kuwait-based CF-18s from combat operations over Iraq and Syria last month, the number of Canadians helping Iraq fight ISIL is to grow to 830 from about 600. The exact locations and jobs of those Canadians who are to be based in Iraq and neighbouring countries was discussed recently at a conference with U.S. Central Command and partner nations.
“A lot of positions were vacant within the coalition structure. We are picking up some of them,” Bowes said.
“At the moment, in what they call the building partner capacity sites, they are oversubscribed in trainers and undersubscribed in troops to train, but the mission will evolve. So, in a year’s time, who really knows.”
The Canadian Forces were aware of reports ISIL has been using chemical weapons but his troops had excellent equipment and training to deal with such threats, the general said.
“The enemy, ISIL, Daesh (its acronym in Arabic), has shown an ability to metastasize and change tactics and we try to keep abreast of them,” he said.
“For example, how they have been converting dump trucks, putting armour plates on them and creating vehicle-borne improvised explosive devices. That shows the degree to which they are capable of taking anything and changing it into a weapon.”
Brig.-Gen. Shane Brennan, who led a Canadian team that mentored Afghan security forces in Kandahar, is to be the next public lead of Joint Task Force-Iraq. Like the previous three JTF-I commanders, who were from the RCAF, Brennan, who is an army officer, is to be based at an airfield in Kuwait that serves as the joint coalition headquarters.
Some of the Canadians being sent to the Middle East are to join another Canadian Afghan vet, Brig.-Gen. Greg Smith, on the staff of a U.S. army major-general in Baghdad. Others are to be part of an expanded Canadian intelligence capability or tasked with supporting troops in Iraq by expanding the logistics footprint in Kuwait.
Sgt Donald Clark, Army NewsFour RCAF Griffon helicopters being sent to Iraq are to be deployed exclusively with elite Canadian Special Forces Operations Command troops who are advising and mentoring Kurdish peshmerga forces, Bowes said
“The mission is complex, as you can imagine, with people all over the place,” Bowes said. “What we have to go through is a very human process of identifying the people and matching them to the positions and then giving themselves sufficient time to prepare themselves professionally with pre-deployment training.”
As well as weapons and other specific military training, those troops selected for what the defence department calls Operation Impact would undergo cultural training specific to their assignments with the Iraqi Kurds or Iraqi Arabs.
“Be mindful that ours is a small mission,” that should not be compared with the much larger combat operation that Canada undertook in Kandahar, Bowes said, adding that not only the military was involved in Iraq but there were “significant whole-of-government initiatives underway in Ottawa to support the mission.”
Bowes was upbeat about the somewhat expanded ground duties that Canada was taking on in Iraq.
“No fears and nothing that keeps me awake,” Bowes said. “What I think about a lot is whether I am doing everything I can to enable the chief (Gen. Jon Vance) and other leaders to ensure that our (political) leadership in this country understands the environment in which we have deployed personnel.”
The general’s mornings began early, reading reports from international news organizations such as Al-Jazeera before attending classified briefings with his staff who monitor everything from volcanoes to terrorist attacks and conflicts and potential conflicts worldwide, especially in eastern Europe and the Middle East.
“You can’t just look at northern Iraq, or Baghdad or Kuwait in isolation,” he said. “You have to be able to look at the region. You have to be able to monitor what is going on around it and understand how things can shift. On the political level this is an extraordinarily complex part of the world.”
Thursday, March 10, 2016
New Iraq Mission to Cost $628 million
By TIM NAUMETZ. The Hill Times
PUBLISHED : Wednesday, March 9, 2016 4:31 PM
UPDATED : Thursday, March 10, 2016 12:56 PM
The one-year extension of Canada’s military mission in Iraq with double the number of special operations soldiers and other new troop and air force elements following the withdrawal of CF-18 fighter jets will bring the cost of the operation over two years to $628-million by the expiry of the new mission in March, 2017, according to Department of National Defence planning documents.
The renewed and expanded mission under the Liberal government will cost a total of $263.9-million over the next year, 72 per cent more than the cost of the former Conservative government’s extension of the mission a year ago, despite the Liberal re-deployment of six Canadian CF-18 fighter jets that had been taking part in coalition air strikes against Islamic State fighting positions and installations since 2014, according to the documents the government tabled in Parliament Monday.
Under the previous government of prime minister Stephen Harper (Calgary Heritage, Alta.), spending estimates and plans and priorities tabled in Parliament did not break out costs for Operation Impact, the Canadian Armed Forces designation for the mission that began when Canada joined a coalition led by the United States in response to attacks by the so-called Islamic State in Iraq and the Levant in northern Iraq earlier in 2014.
But the planning documents Treasury Board President Scott Brison (Kings Hants, N.S.) tabled, which were prepared by the National Defence under new Defence Minister Harjit Sajjan (Vancouver South, B.C.), included specific forecast and planned spending details for 16 identified “Major Canadian Armed Forces International Operations.”
An appendix in the document forecasts a planned cost for the Iraq mission of $416.9-million for the 2016-2017 fiscal year, which an explanatory note in the appendix says includes $153-million for the mission’s first extension “as approved in budget 2015, plus $263.9-million to support [the] extension to 31 March 2017.”
The report shows a separate cost of $211.7-million in mission costs for the 2015-2016 fiscal year, apparently including a period prior to the April 21, 2015, budget taking effect—which brings the total planned cost to $628.6-million from March 31, 2015, to the end of the Liberal extension. The first six-month term of mission began after a Commons vote in October, 2014.
The Commons majority of Liberal MPs approved the government’s February decision to extend the mission under new terms in a 178 to 147 vote on Tuesday.
Both the Conservative Party and the NDP voted Tuesday against the government extension—with the Conservatives accusing the Liberals of deserting coalition partners and abandoning “the fight” by withdrawing the CF-18s and the New Democrats taking the position that the government was ramping up combat elements of the mission by increasing the number of soldiers advising and training Iraqi security forces.
Mr. Harper was present for the vote, after having missed three of the 17 earlier House votes in the 42nd Parliament, and opposed the government motion.
The Iraq mission accounts for the lion’s share of the cost for all current Canadian military operations abroad, the National Defence plans show.
All of the international operations, with Operation Impact being the only one that includes combat elements among the 16, are forecast to cost a total of $325.3-million for the fiscal year 2015-2016 with a planned cost of $502-million for the fiscal year 2016-2017.
National Defence planned spending for its other areas of operations, including troop strength, sovereignty areas and international roles such as NATO and the U.S.-Canada North American Aerospace Defence Command, extends to 2018.
But the forecast for Operation Impact goes only to the end of the current fiscal year.
Mr. Trudeau said when he announced the mission extension Feb. 8 that the government intended to extend it for a further year, but would conduct a review before another renewal.
Although the new Canadian mission does not include CF-18 fighter aircraft, the government doubled the number of Canadian special forces soldiers attached near front lines with Iraqi Kurdish Peshmerga troops to roughly 140, although a specific number has never been made public.
The Canadian soldiers, up to now deployed from the Canadian Special Operations Regiment near Petawawa, Ont., have also pinpointed targets for coalition aircraft, engaged with ISIL fighters who have either attacked them or posed a deadly threat and ought alongside Kurdish soldiers to repel a major ISIL offensive last December. Chief of Defence Staff Gen. Jonathan Vance told the House National Defence committee on Tuesday Canada’s rules of engagement allow Canadian soldiers to fire first—”engage in a hostile act”—if they believe ISIL combatants are preparing to shoot at them.
The government also approved the deployment of an unspecified number of troops to Jordan and Lebanon to contribute to security and maintained up to two Royal Canadian Air Force surveillance aircraft and an in-air refueling jet, with other new elements including Canadian Armed Forces helicopters to transport special operations troops near front lines or enemy-held areas, to reduce the chance of injury or death from the kind of concealed bombs—called Improvised Explosive Devices—that were responsible for a majority of the 152 Canadian troop fatalities in the Afghanistan war.
The government as well committed $840-million in humanitarian assistance to Syrian refugees in Jordan and Lebanon and a further $270-million rebuilding basic social services such as health, education, water and sanitation in the region, over a three-year period.
Those initiatives are planned to include Iraq and Syria, once fighting in those two countries diminishes to the point the assistance can take place, or if the conflict in the two countries ends. The CF-18 air strikes came to a halt by Feb. 22, and four of the CF-18s were redeployed to Romania for NATO duties.
The government said in February the increase in military resources in support of Iraq and the U.S.-led coalition would cost $264-million, plus a further $41.9-million in 2017 for redeployment of personnel and equipment.
It said a further $145-million over three years would be spent on counter-terrorism, stabilization and chemical, biological, radiological and nuclear security programming, and other measures to counter ISIL, including cutting off access to financing.
Tuesday, March 8, 2016
Canada in Iraq: CAF to Train and Arm Peshmerga
Written by: Lee Berthiaume, The Ottawa Citizen "NP Section"
Peshmerga fighters from Iraq take part in a training session with German troops last week. Canada’s top soldier says Canadians will train a battalion of Kurdish troops.
Chief of Defence Staff Gen. Jonathan Vance made the comments during an appearance before the Senate defence committee on Monday, where he also acknowledged that ISIL has chemical weapons, which represents a “huge concern.”
The Trudeau government announced last month that Canada would be tripling the number of military personnel working alongside the Kurdish peshmerga in northern Iraq to 200, as well as providing “lethal aid” to the Kurds.
The move coincided with the Liberals ending Canadian airstrikes against ISIL in Iraq and Syria.
Vance told senators that Canada does not have a specific number of peshmerga fighters it wants to train over the next year.
Most of those being trained are average citizens who volunteer to man the front line against ISIL for a few days before going back to their jobs and families, he said.
“We’re not building an army,” he said. “We’re building an effect that will last as along as it needs to last.”
But Vance said Canada is also looking at training some “discrete forces” as part of its new mission.
“One of the programs will be a program to try and take conventional forces and give them a bit more focused training,” he said. “That is where we’re going to equip people. So try to take roughly … 300 to 400 (Kurds), give them training for months (and) equip them so they have a stronger core of more professional fighters.”
The hope is to have such a force ready to help retake Mosul. Iraqi and Kurdish forces have been building up for an attack on the country’s second-largest city for months.
The assault is expected to be difficult and bloody, as ISIL has thousands of fighters and is holding up to one million residents as human shields.
Meanwhile, Vance confirmed ISIL has access to chemical weapons. He described the mustard and chlorine gas weapons as “rudimentary” and “smallscale,” and said Canadian troops on the ground are well protected against such attacks.
However, he acknowledged fears that ISIL’s capabilities will grow either in size or with the addition of nerve agents.
“We don’t have indication of that right now,” he said. “But it is a huge concern. It’s also, if you can imagine, a concern because of the impact it could have on a civilian populace.”
The U. S. State Department said Thursday ISIL is believed to have used the deadly chemical in an attack near the town of Makhmur last August. Approximately 35 Kurdish peshmerga fighters were affected by the gas, which causes severe burns to the skin, eyes and respiratory tract.
Makhmur is about 100 kilometres south of Mosul and the Kurdish capital, Erbil. Canadian special forces have been training and accompanying Kurdish forces around those two cities, and to the north of them, since September 2014.
National Defence said it did not believe Canadian troops have been directly exposed to mustard gas, which was previously used by the Iraqi military against Kurds in Iran and Iraq in the 1980s.
Vance also said Canada is not technically at war, noting the legal definition is an armed conflict between two states. “The word ‘war’ doesn’t enter the lexicon, and it doesn’t necessarily matter from my perspective. It doesn’t change the status of my forces. … It doesn’t alter the benefits and allowances that the soldiers get.”
Chief of Defence Staff Gen. Jonathan Vance made the comments during an appearance before the Senate defence committee on Monday, where he also acknowledged that ISIL has chemical weapons, which represents a “huge concern.”
The Trudeau government announced last month that Canada would be tripling the number of military personnel working alongside the Kurdish peshmerga in northern Iraq to 200, as well as providing “lethal aid” to the Kurds.
The move coincided with the Liberals ending Canadian airstrikes against ISIL in Iraq and Syria.
Vance told senators that Canada does not have a specific number of peshmerga fighters it wants to train over the next year.
Most of those being trained are average citizens who volunteer to man the front line against ISIL for a few days before going back to their jobs and families, he said.
“We’re not building an army,” he said. “We’re building an effect that will last as along as it needs to last.”
But Vance said Canada is also looking at training some “discrete forces” as part of its new mission.
“One of the programs will be a program to try and take conventional forces and give them a bit more focused training,” he said. “That is where we’re going to equip people. So try to take roughly … 300 to 400 (Kurds), give them training for months (and) equip them so they have a stronger core of more professional fighters.”
The hope is to have such a force ready to help retake Mosul. Iraqi and Kurdish forces have been building up for an attack on the country’s second-largest city for months.
The assault is expected to be difficult and bloody, as ISIL has thousands of fighters and is holding up to one million residents as human shields.
Meanwhile, Vance confirmed ISIL has access to chemical weapons. He described the mustard and chlorine gas weapons as “rudimentary” and “smallscale,” and said Canadian troops on the ground are well protected against such attacks.
However, he acknowledged fears that ISIL’s capabilities will grow either in size or with the addition of nerve agents.
“We don’t have indication of that right now,” he said. “But it is a huge concern. It’s also, if you can imagine, a concern because of the impact it could have on a civilian populace.”
The U. S. State Department said Thursday ISIL is believed to have used the deadly chemical in an attack near the town of Makhmur last August. Approximately 35 Kurdish peshmerga fighters were affected by the gas, which causes severe burns to the skin, eyes and respiratory tract.
Makhmur is about 100 kilometres south of Mosul and the Kurdish capital, Erbil. Canadian special forces have been training and accompanying Kurdish forces around those two cities, and to the north of them, since September 2014.
National Defence said it did not believe Canadian troops have been directly exposed to mustard gas, which was previously used by the Iraqi military against Kurds in Iran and Iraq in the 1980s.
Vance also said Canada is not technically at war, noting the legal definition is an armed conflict between two states. “The word ‘war’ doesn’t enter the lexicon, and it doesn’t necessarily matter from my perspective. It doesn’t change the status of my forces. … It doesn’t alter the benefits and allowances that the soldiers get.”
Friday, February 26, 2016
Canada in Iraq: Government to Vote on New ISIS Mission, March 8
By TIM NAUMETZ | The Hill Times
Published: Friday, 02/26/2016 1
A House of Commons vote on the Liberal government’s decision to pull Canadian fighter planes out of air strikes against Islamic State fighters in Iraq and Syria while tripling the number of Canadian soldiers near front lines with Iraqi security forces is set to be held on Tuesday, March 8, according to a schedule all sides agreed to this week.
A motion from Prime Minister Justin Trudeau (Papineau, Que.) calling on the Commons to support the government’s renewed Iraq mission is bound to pass with the Liberal majority.
The decision to withdraw Canada’s six CF-18 fighter planes from U.S.-lead coalition air strikes against ISIL fighting positions and other targets while beefing other military components, including helicopter transport support for Canadian special forces soldiers advising Kurdish Peshmerga troops, dominated most of the opposition arguments in the extended debate.
NDP Leader Tom Mulcair (Outremont, Que.) declared at the outset on Wednesday, Feb. 17, that his MPs would vote against the motion on grounds Canadian soldiers are taking part in ground combat by serving close to frontlines with the Peshmerga soldiers and having exchanged fire with ISIL soldiers, targeted air strikes against ISIL targets along front lines of battle and taken part in defending a Peshmerga compound against a major ISIL assault last December.
A Canadian CF-18 fighter jet, along with two French warplanes, helped to repel the attack.
Conservative Leader Rona Ambrose (Sturgeon River-Parkland, Alta.) has made it clear the Conservative party is likely to oppose Mr. Trudeau’s motion, after she moved an amendment on the first day of the debate calling on the Commons instead to urge the government to “re-establish Canada’s influence within the international decision-making process in the fight against terrorism and rebuild the trust Canada has lost with its allies by reversing its decision to withdraw, which essentially removes Canada from any combat role.”
Defence Minister Harjit Sajjan (Vancouver South, B.C.), however, told the Senate this week the government plan will maintain the close relationship between Canadian special operation troops and Peshmerga security forces they are currently with, including to the point Iraqi security forces begin a ground offensive to re-capture the northern Iraqi city of Mosul, overrun by ISIL fighters after they began attacks against Iraqi government and military positions in 2014.
“As the Iraqi security forces take cities, the U.S. was already there for a significant amount of time. We need to be able to train the Iraqi security forces, because if you realize how the problem happened in the first place, they weren't able to hold ground, and Daesh [ISIL] was able to take over,” Mr. Sajjan told Senators on Wednesday when he appeared for a special Question Period.
“As we re-take those cities, keep in mind we need to leave troops on the ground in the cities as you go to the next one. You need to train a significant number of troops to be able to have an eventual defeat,” Mr. Sajjan said in response to questions. “You cannot defeat an enemy like this from the air, so we have adjusted our mission to be more suited towards defeat of Daesh alongside our coalition partners, making sure a critical piece in the north, where we're at, remains stable, and that we have trained the right security force, not just external, but internal as well.”
He added: “As the Iraqi security forces make their way up, coming up to Mosul, we will be very close to that line. It's part of a wider plan to make sure of the eventual defeat of ISIL. I am not talking about our CF-18s or air strikes or dropping bombs. I am talking about the defeat of the enemy, which is Daesh. The only way we can do this is by making sure that we train the Iraqi security forces to be able to hold their ground, and, more importantly, to keep the ground and the gains after the defeat is complete. When they can maintain the stability in that nation, then we can work on the political piece as well to keep the entire region stable.”
Mr. Sajjan said Thursday the reference to Canadian soldiers being close to the front line when Iraqi security forces eventually attack ISIL troops holding Mosul is consistent with the existing “advise and assist” role for the Canadians. “The training mission as it stands, as it always ways, does not change,” Mr. Sajjan said in response to a question about his statement in the Senate. “Our troops are providing the Peshmerga the advise and assist function, making sure that they are able plan their defences and making sure that they can adjust to the needs of the threat, but we also do a lot of work for the internal security as well, so there’s a lot of moving parts, but the advise and assist mission, from as it was, does not change.”
Conservative MP James Bezan (Selkirk-Interlake-Eastman, Man.) told The Hill Times he believes the debate in the House on the motion was worthwhile, even though the result of the vote has been known from the start. “We knew what the outcome was going to be, but at least everybody has had a chance to voice their opinion. I’m satisfied that we’ve had enough time to have that debate and that our position was put out there clearly, that the CF-18s need to be in the fight,” Mr. Bezan said.
Mr. Trudeau made a point of noting, when he announced the renewed Canadian mission, which includes more than $1-billion of humanitarian and civil society development in the war-torn region, and confirmed the plan would go to a motion and debate in the Commons, that Cabinet has the authority to make decisions over international treaties and combat operations without the consent of Parliament.
tnaumetz@hilltimes.com
The Hill Times
Published: Friday, 02/26/2016 1
A House of Commons vote on the Liberal government’s decision to pull Canadian fighter planes out of air strikes against Islamic State fighters in Iraq and Syria while tripling the number of Canadian soldiers near front lines with Iraqi security forces is set to be held on Tuesday, March 8, according to a schedule all sides agreed to this week.
A motion from Prime Minister Justin Trudeau (Papineau, Que.) calling on the Commons to support the government’s renewed Iraq mission is bound to pass with the Liberal majority.
The decision to withdraw Canada’s six CF-18 fighter planes from U.S.-lead coalition air strikes against ISIL fighting positions and other targets while beefing other military components, including helicopter transport support for Canadian special forces soldiers advising Kurdish Peshmerga troops, dominated most of the opposition arguments in the extended debate.
NDP Leader Tom Mulcair (Outremont, Que.) declared at the outset on Wednesday, Feb. 17, that his MPs would vote against the motion on grounds Canadian soldiers are taking part in ground combat by serving close to frontlines with the Peshmerga soldiers and having exchanged fire with ISIL soldiers, targeted air strikes against ISIL targets along front lines of battle and taken part in defending a Peshmerga compound against a major ISIL assault last December.
A Canadian CF-18 fighter jet, along with two French warplanes, helped to repel the attack.
Conservative Leader Rona Ambrose (Sturgeon River-Parkland, Alta.) has made it clear the Conservative party is likely to oppose Mr. Trudeau’s motion, after she moved an amendment on the first day of the debate calling on the Commons instead to urge the government to “re-establish Canada’s influence within the international decision-making process in the fight against terrorism and rebuild the trust Canada has lost with its allies by reversing its decision to withdraw, which essentially removes Canada from any combat role.”
Defence Minister Harjit Sajjan (Vancouver South, B.C.), however, told the Senate this week the government plan will maintain the close relationship between Canadian special operation troops and Peshmerga security forces they are currently with, including to the point Iraqi security forces begin a ground offensive to re-capture the northern Iraqi city of Mosul, overrun by ISIL fighters after they began attacks against Iraqi government and military positions in 2014.
“As the Iraqi security forces take cities, the U.S. was already there for a significant amount of time. We need to be able to train the Iraqi security forces, because if you realize how the problem happened in the first place, they weren't able to hold ground, and Daesh [ISIL] was able to take over,” Mr. Sajjan told Senators on Wednesday when he appeared for a special Question Period.
“As we re-take those cities, keep in mind we need to leave troops on the ground in the cities as you go to the next one. You need to train a significant number of troops to be able to have an eventual defeat,” Mr. Sajjan said in response to questions. “You cannot defeat an enemy like this from the air, so we have adjusted our mission to be more suited towards defeat of Daesh alongside our coalition partners, making sure a critical piece in the north, where we're at, remains stable, and that we have trained the right security force, not just external, but internal as well.”
He added: “As the Iraqi security forces make their way up, coming up to Mosul, we will be very close to that line. It's part of a wider plan to make sure of the eventual defeat of ISIL. I am not talking about our CF-18s or air strikes or dropping bombs. I am talking about the defeat of the enemy, which is Daesh. The only way we can do this is by making sure that we train the Iraqi security forces to be able to hold their ground, and, more importantly, to keep the ground and the gains after the defeat is complete. When they can maintain the stability in that nation, then we can work on the political piece as well to keep the entire region stable.”
Mr. Sajjan said Thursday the reference to Canadian soldiers being close to the front line when Iraqi security forces eventually attack ISIL troops holding Mosul is consistent with the existing “advise and assist” role for the Canadians. “The training mission as it stands, as it always ways, does not change,” Mr. Sajjan said in response to a question about his statement in the Senate. “Our troops are providing the Peshmerga the advise and assist function, making sure that they are able plan their defences and making sure that they can adjust to the needs of the threat, but we also do a lot of work for the internal security as well, so there’s a lot of moving parts, but the advise and assist mission, from as it was, does not change.”
Conservative MP James Bezan (Selkirk-Interlake-Eastman, Man.) told The Hill Times he believes the debate in the House on the motion was worthwhile, even though the result of the vote has been known from the start. “We knew what the outcome was going to be, but at least everybody has had a chance to voice their opinion. I’m satisfied that we’ve had enough time to have that debate and that our position was put out there clearly, that the CF-18s need to be in the fight,” Mr. Bezan said.
Mr. Trudeau made a point of noting, when he announced the renewed Canadian mission, which includes more than $1-billion of humanitarian and civil society development in the war-torn region, and confirmed the plan would go to a motion and debate in the Commons, that Cabinet has the authority to make decisions over international treaties and combat operations without the consent of Parliament.
tnaumetz@hilltimes.com
The Hill Times
Monday, February 22, 2016
Current Liberal Advisory on Iraq Criticized Tories on "Non-Combat"
Written by: LEE BERTHIAUME Ottawa Citizen
The Current Liberal Foreign Affairs Advisory also backed airstrikes against the Islamic State.
Less than a year before becoming Prime Minister Justin Trudeau’s foreign policy guru, Roland Paris blasted the Conservative government for not being upfront about the fact that Canadian troops in northern Iraq were indeed engaged in combat.
The comments were made in a January 2015 blog post written for the University of Ottawa’s Centre for International Policy Studies, where Paris was director. They came after the Tories revealed that Canadian soldiers had been operating on the front lines with the Kurdish forces they were advising and assisting.
The Conservatives as well as senior military officers maintained the mission was non-combat, even though Canadian troops were calling in airstrikes and had engaged in firefights with Islamic State fighters. But Paris accused the government of “redefining” combat, and said Canadians deserved the truth.
“Our national government — regardless of the political party in power — must be forthright with Canadians about something as serious as putting Canadian soldiers into combat situations,” Paris wrote.
“Wars, especially long wars (as this one is likely to be), must be rooted in public trust. A lack of forthrightness erodes that trust.”
The Trudeau government is now presiding over the exact same type of mission. And like the Conservatives before them, they insist Canadians are not engaged in combat.
The fact the Liberals have followed the Conservatives in also using the term non-combat, even though Canadian soldiers are doing the same thing as before, has emerged as a political headache for the government after it promised during the election to end combat operations.
In his blog post, Paris raised and then answered nine questions about the Iraq mission. The first: “Is Canada engaged in ground combat?” His answer: “Yes.” Paris went on to accuse prime minister Stephen Harper and defence chief Gen. Tom Lawson of “walking a tightrope” in trying to explain why it isn’t combat.
Paris, who was appointed Trudeau’s foreign policy adviser in November, wrote that the Iraq mission had become a victim of “mission creep,” in which a small military operation slowly drags a country deeper into war.
“It became clear last week that the terms of Canada’s operation had changed,” Paris said. “Canada’s new front-line role — as well as our leaders’ redefinition of what counts as combat — unquestionably represent mission creep.”
As part of its new mission in Iraq and Syria, the Liberal government has ended Canadian airstrikes against Islamic State. But it has also tripled the number of soldiers assigned to work with Kurdish forces to 200, and will deploy helicopters to help move the troops and ferry equipment and supplies.
Gen. Jonathan Vance, the chief of defence staff, has said there will be no change to what Canadian troops are doing there. This includes accompanying Kurdish forces to the front lines, calling in airstrikes and fighting Islamic State forces when necessary.
But the government and Vance insist the mission is non-combat. Vance rejected suggestions Friday that he was tailoring the definition of combat to suit the Liberal government’s needs, saying he was the “expert on what is combat,” and telling those who don’t like his definition: “Too bad.”
In his blog post, Paris said Canada was the first country to “tinker with the definition of ‘ combat’ and move ‘advisers’ into a front-line role.” And he said having Canadian soldiers on the front lines with the Kurdish forces they are “advising and assisting” was unnecessary.
“In the final years of the Canadian mission in Afghanistan, for instance, our troops trained Afghan forces in military facilities behind the wire and did not accompany Afghan forces on tactical operations,” he wrote.
“Indeed, the U.S. military indicated last week that American troops currently in Iraq are not being deployed with Iraqi units to front-line positions. Rather, they are training Iraqis behind the wire at four major military bases.
“The assertion that deploying Canadian troops to the front lines is an inevitable element of advising and assisting is, therefore, misleading.”
Paris did support expanding Canada’s mission in northern Iraq, noting that Australia had about 200 soldiers on the ground. But he said such an increase in the number of Canadian trainers should be done “while simultaneously clarifying and tightening guidelines on the deployment of these forces to front-line positions.”
He also called for a redoubling of non-military assistance to address the root causes of instability in the Middle East and North Africa, and offered qualified support for Canada continuing to bomb Islamic State in Iraq.
“As long as Canada’s CF18s can play a useful role,” he wrote, “it is reasonable to continue this deployment, provided we remain convinced that the overall mission is achievable, and that there are not more compelling demands for the CF-18s when we have to make this decision.”
Canadian warplanes conducted their last airstrikes in Iraq and Syria last week.
Less than a year before becoming Prime Minister Justin Trudeau’s foreign policy guru, Roland Paris blasted the Conservative government for not being upfront about the fact that Canadian troops in northern Iraq were indeed engaged in combat.
The comments were made in a January 2015 blog post written for the University of Ottawa’s Centre for International Policy Studies, where Paris was director. They came after the Tories revealed that Canadian soldiers had been operating on the front lines with the Kurdish forces they were advising and assisting.
The Conservatives as well as senior military officers maintained the mission was non-combat, even though Canadian troops were calling in airstrikes and had engaged in firefights with Islamic State fighters. But Paris accused the government of “redefining” combat, and said Canadians deserved the truth.
“Our national government — regardless of the political party in power — must be forthright with Canadians about something as serious as putting Canadian soldiers into combat situations,” Paris wrote.
“Wars, especially long wars (as this one is likely to be), must be rooted in public trust. A lack of forthrightness erodes that trust.”
The Trudeau government is now presiding over the exact same type of mission. And like the Conservatives before them, they insist Canadians are not engaged in combat.
The fact the Liberals have followed the Conservatives in also using the term non-combat, even though Canadian soldiers are doing the same thing as before, has emerged as a political headache for the government after it promised during the election to end combat operations.
In his blog post, Paris raised and then answered nine questions about the Iraq mission. The first: “Is Canada engaged in ground combat?” His answer: “Yes.” Paris went on to accuse prime minister Stephen Harper and defence chief Gen. Tom Lawson of “walking a tightrope” in trying to explain why it isn’t combat.
Paris, who was appointed Trudeau’s foreign policy adviser in November, wrote that the Iraq mission had become a victim of “mission creep,” in which a small military operation slowly drags a country deeper into war.
“It became clear last week that the terms of Canada’s operation had changed,” Paris said. “Canada’s new front-line role — as well as our leaders’ redefinition of what counts as combat — unquestionably represent mission creep.”
As part of its new mission in Iraq and Syria, the Liberal government has ended Canadian airstrikes against Islamic State. But it has also tripled the number of soldiers assigned to work with Kurdish forces to 200, and will deploy helicopters to help move the troops and ferry equipment and supplies.
Gen. Jonathan Vance, the chief of defence staff, has said there will be no change to what Canadian troops are doing there. This includes accompanying Kurdish forces to the front lines, calling in airstrikes and fighting Islamic State forces when necessary.
But the government and Vance insist the mission is non-combat. Vance rejected suggestions Friday that he was tailoring the definition of combat to suit the Liberal government’s needs, saying he was the “expert on what is combat,” and telling those who don’t like his definition: “Too bad.”
In his blog post, Paris said Canada was the first country to “tinker with the definition of ‘ combat’ and move ‘advisers’ into a front-line role.” And he said having Canadian soldiers on the front lines with the Kurdish forces they are “advising and assisting” was unnecessary.
“In the final years of the Canadian mission in Afghanistan, for instance, our troops trained Afghan forces in military facilities behind the wire and did not accompany Afghan forces on tactical operations,” he wrote.
“Indeed, the U.S. military indicated last week that American troops currently in Iraq are not being deployed with Iraqi units to front-line positions. Rather, they are training Iraqis behind the wire at four major military bases.
“The assertion that deploying Canadian troops to the front lines is an inevitable element of advising and assisting is, therefore, misleading.”
Paris did support expanding Canada’s mission in northern Iraq, noting that Australia had about 200 soldiers on the ground. But he said such an increase in the number of Canadian trainers should be done “while simultaneously clarifying and tightening guidelines on the deployment of these forces to front-line positions.”
He also called for a redoubling of non-military assistance to address the root causes of instability in the Middle East and North Africa, and offered qualified support for Canada continuing to bomb Islamic State in Iraq.
“As long as Canada’s CF18s can play a useful role,” he wrote, “it is reasonable to continue this deployment, provided we remain convinced that the overall mission is achievable, and that there are not more compelling demands for the CF-18s when we have to make this decision.”
Canadian warplanes conducted their last airstrikes in Iraq and Syria last week.
Wednesday, February 10, 2016
Canada in Iraq: U.S. Applauds Canada’s Revamped Mission
Written by: Lee Berthiaume,
Published in the Monday, February 9, 2016 Ottawa Citizen - NP Section
Mission meets coalition’s needs, U.S. envoy says
"IF YOU THINK CANADA IS A FREE RIDER BECAUSE WE ARE NOT PARTICIPATING ANYMORE TO THE AIRSTRIKES, THEN GERMANY IS A FREE RIDER. AND ITALY. AND ABOUT 50 MEMBERS OF THE COALITION. THIS IS NOT THE CASE." — FOREIGN AFFAIRS MINISTER STÉPHANE DION
The U.S. has headed off a potential controversy by giving the Liberal government a thumbs-up over its plan to stop bombing ISIL in Iraq and Syria, and instead concentrate on military training, diplomacy and aid.
Prime Minister Justin Trudeau unveiled the new mission Monday, as Defence Minister Harjit Sajjan prepared to travel to a NATO defence ministers meeting in Brussels. The plan includes tripling the number of troops training Kurdish forces in northern Iraq to 200, while ending the bombing campaign by Feb. 22.
There had been fears the U.S. and other allies would react negatively to the plan to withdraw Canadian fighter jets from the region, particularly at a time when other countries such as the Netherlands and Australia are expanding their participation in the bombing campaign.
But speaking in Washington, the Pentagon’s chief spokesman, Peter Cook, praised the new mission, describing it as the kind of response U.S. Defence Secretary Ashton Carter has been looking for from anti-ISIL coalition members.
“The secretary sees these as significant contributions,” Cook told reporters, “and he appreciates the decision by the Trudeau government to step up Canada’s role in the campaign at this critical time.”
In a separate statement, U.S. Ambassador to Canada Bruce Heyman said Canada’s “significant contributions” are “in line with the coalition’s current needs.” That includes trainers, as well as more than $1 billion in humanitarian and longer-term aid. Canada is also beefing up its diplomatic presence in the region.
But Heyman left the door open to more contributions in the future.
“Canada remains an essential partner in the counter-Daesh mission,” he said, using another name for ISIL, “and we will continue to discuss with all coalition partners additional ways to intensify efforts.”
Foreign Affairs Minister Stéphane Dion said in an interview he had spoken to French Foreign Minister Laurent Fabius and was scheduled to talk with U.S. Secretary of State John Kerry.
“It’s not for me to put words in their mouth, but I’m very confident that both of them will be very positive,” he said.
Carter said two weeks ago there should be “no free riders” in the U.S.-led coalition fighting ISIL. While his comments were largely aimed at Turkey and some Arab states, critics of the Liberal government suggested the comment could apply equally well to Canada.
“If you think Canada is a free rider because we are not participating anymore to the airstrikes, then Germany is a free rider. And Italy. And about 50 members of the coalition,” Dion said. “This is not the case.
“In fact, in order to be more effective, we needed to deploy a larger panoply of our expertise, and to do it in a very integrated way with what our allies are doing. We are not alone in this fight. We are part of a coalition, and we looked at the best way for us to be optimally effective within the coalition.”
Experts on both sides of the border said the Americans’ biggest fear was the Liberal government would withdraw the fighter jets as soon as it was elected to power in October. The fact Canada is keeping its surveillance and refuelling planes in Iraq and Syria also helps.
Chris Sands, director of Canadian studies at Johns Hopkins University in Washington, said the expanded training mission is important because many allies don’t want to put troops on the front lines with the Kurds.
Still, there was skepticism over Washington’s overwhelming praise.
“I’m not sure this will be greeted with a great deal of hand clapping down in Washington,” said former Canadian diplomat Colin Robertson, now vicepresident of the Canadian Global Affairs Institute. “There’ ll be disappointment because they thought maybe they could change the Liberal government’s mind.”
Added Sands: “I think people here will say ‘OK, fine. At least they’re not walking away.’ ”
"IF YOU THINK CANADA IS A FREE RIDER BECAUSE WE ARE NOT PARTICIPATING ANYMORE TO THE AIRSTRIKES, THEN GERMANY IS A FREE RIDER. AND ITALY. AND ABOUT 50 MEMBERS OF THE COALITION. THIS IS NOT THE CASE." — FOREIGN AFFAIRS MINISTER STÉPHANE DION
The U.S. has headed off a potential controversy by giving the Liberal government a thumbs-up over its plan to stop bombing ISIL in Iraq and Syria, and instead concentrate on military training, diplomacy and aid.
Prime Minister Justin Trudeau unveiled the new mission Monday, as Defence Minister Harjit Sajjan prepared to travel to a NATO defence ministers meeting in Brussels. The plan includes tripling the number of troops training Kurdish forces in northern Iraq to 200, while ending the bombing campaign by Feb. 22.
There had been fears the U.S. and other allies would react negatively to the plan to withdraw Canadian fighter jets from the region, particularly at a time when other countries such as the Netherlands and Australia are expanding their participation in the bombing campaign.
But speaking in Washington, the Pentagon’s chief spokesman, Peter Cook, praised the new mission, describing it as the kind of response U.S. Defence Secretary Ashton Carter has been looking for from anti-ISIL coalition members.
“The secretary sees these as significant contributions,” Cook told reporters, “and he appreciates the decision by the Trudeau government to step up Canada’s role in the campaign at this critical time.”
In a separate statement, U.S. Ambassador to Canada Bruce Heyman said Canada’s “significant contributions” are “in line with the coalition’s current needs.” That includes trainers, as well as more than $1 billion in humanitarian and longer-term aid. Canada is also beefing up its diplomatic presence in the region.
But Heyman left the door open to more contributions in the future.
“Canada remains an essential partner in the counter-Daesh mission,” he said, using another name for ISIL, “and we will continue to discuss with all coalition partners additional ways to intensify efforts.”
Foreign Affairs Minister Stéphane Dion said in an interview he had spoken to French Foreign Minister Laurent Fabius and was scheduled to talk with U.S. Secretary of State John Kerry.
“It’s not for me to put words in their mouth, but I’m very confident that both of them will be very positive,” he said.
Carter said two weeks ago there should be “no free riders” in the U.S.-led coalition fighting ISIL. While his comments were largely aimed at Turkey and some Arab states, critics of the Liberal government suggested the comment could apply equally well to Canada.
“If you think Canada is a free rider because we are not participating anymore to the airstrikes, then Germany is a free rider. And Italy. And about 50 members of the coalition,” Dion said. “This is not the case.
“In fact, in order to be more effective, we needed to deploy a larger panoply of our expertise, and to do it in a very integrated way with what our allies are doing. We are not alone in this fight. We are part of a coalition, and we looked at the best way for us to be optimally effective within the coalition.”
Experts on both sides of the border said the Americans’ biggest fear was the Liberal government would withdraw the fighter jets as soon as it was elected to power in October. The fact Canada is keeping its surveillance and refuelling planes in Iraq and Syria also helps.
Chris Sands, director of Canadian studies at Johns Hopkins University in Washington, said the expanded training mission is important because many allies don’t want to put troops on the front lines with the Kurds.
Still, there was skepticism over Washington’s overwhelming praise.
“I’m not sure this will be greeted with a great deal of hand clapping down in Washington,” said former Canadian diplomat Colin Robertson, now vicepresident of the Canadian Global Affairs Institute. “There’ ll be disappointment because they thought maybe they could change the Liberal government’s mind.”
Added Sands: “I think people here will say ‘OK, fine. At least they’re not walking away.’ ”
Tuesday, February 9, 2016
Den Tandt: Canada is Stepping Back to War with ISIS Mission Update
Published by Michael Den Tandt, National Post
February 9, 2016
Prime Minister Justin Trudeau’s revamped military mission in Iraq — because he wears it now, for good or ill — is neither cowardly appeasement, as the Conservatives allege, or a perilous escalation, as New Democrats would have you believe. But of the two themes, the second is closer to the mark.
As is the custom with Canadian military ventures, clarity and directness vanished or were non-existent from the start. The Conservatives’ soon-to-be-former combat mission, fronted by six Royal Canadian Air Force CF-18 fighter-bombers, was never as robust or aggressive as they or their critics let on. The effort unveiled Monday, with its tripling of the special forces contingent from 69 to 207, will be far more combative — that is to say, risky for those who will carry it out — than the PM’s swords-into-ploughshares rhetoric suggests.
This isn’t to say the new mission is wrong-headed. On the contrary: It appears to be robust internationalism, backed up with lethal force, of a kind Canada hasn’t engaged in since the final pullout from Afghanistan in 2014.
The irony is that politics prevents any of the warring tribes in the House of Commons from saying so.
This is, more than anything else, a replay of 2005, when then-prime minister Paul Martin and then-defence chief Rick Hillier conceived of a multi-pronged military and humanitarian project for Canada in Afghanistan that would clear away any cobwebs left by this country’s non-participation in president George W. Bush’s catastrophic invasion of Iraq in 2003.
That wasn’t the Kandahar mission’s tactical purpose, obviously, but it provided the context. We didn’t do that for you (thank God), the Martin government was saying to Washington, but we can do this for you, and this is both better, and more difficult.
The crack to be papered over in the current case, of course, is the withdrawal of Canada’s CF-18s from the air war in Iraq and Syria, which happens in two weeks, despite the Liberal government still not having managed to articulate why. In their disquisitions about this the PM and his ministers have tied themselves in one rhetorical knot after another, apparently out of a desire to avoid saying the wrong thing, or embarrassing their Obama administration allies. In the process they’ve sustained far more damage than they would have had they been more blunt from the get-go.
If there is a rationale for withdrawing the fighters (beyond that this was a campaign promise), as near as I can figure it, it is as follows: First, the carnage in northern Iraq and Syria, the emergence of the Islamic State of Iraq and the Levant itself, are primarily an American responsibility. ISIL, formerly al-Qaida in Iraq, formerly members of Saddam Hussein’s Sunni praetorian guard, would not now exist had the Iraqi dictator been left to rot. “If you break it, you own it,” General Colin Powell told his commander-in-chief before the invasion. That was true. Therefore, the American military should be at the sharp end in wiping out ISIL.
The second reason, now coming to the fore with details on the new mission: If Ottawa is tripling the special forces component, boosting overall troops deployed from 650 to 830, and spending a total of $1.6 billion in the region over three years, the cost has to come from somewhere. The PM alluded to this Monday in French, in answer to a question from reporters: “In any mission, there are choices to make. We can’t do everything.” Like Reason #1, this is laced with political pitfalls, which may be why Trudeau mentioned it only in passing. Is the government placing nickels and dimes above preserving human life? The direct answer is that resources are finite and no political party in Ottawa is calling for increased defence spending (though they should).
Finally to a third reason, related to the first two: The Trudeau government is keen to put its own stamp on foreign policy. It wishes to brand itself, domestically and internationally, as a government more interested in helping the needy than obliterating the wicked, to put it simply. Therefore it symbolically sets down Thor’s hammer, the CF-18s, and extends more helping hands, earning it kudos from agencies such as UNICEF and CARE Canada, while also throwing enough new ground muscle into the fight to appease the Pentagon.
This makes a certain kind of sense, from a Liberal political perspective, as it puts them squarely in the centre of the spectrum, taking shots from both left and right.
The wrinkle and the great risk in this, for Trudeau and his government, is precisely that it is so symbolic. For all the Harper government’s vaunted bellicosity, six CF-18s formed a relatively small hammer, in the context of the broader war, and their pilots were not routinely at risk of being shot at or blown up. This changes now. The risk of casualties has at least tripled. Aid requires transport and protection, all of it vulnerable to attack. That is the news here, not the CF-18s. In a modest but deliberate way, Canada is stepping back to war.
Canada in Iraq: CAF Looking to Deploy Griffons to Iraq
Written by: JDM, Canadian Forces Dispatch author
Last Updated: February 9, 2016 - 1:44 pm
With the dramatic shift in the Government of Canada's policy towards ISIS, and the change to Canada's contributions to the US-led Coalition against ISIS, Chief of Defence Staff Jonathan Vance provided some details in a technical briefing.
The total number of military personnel deployed will increase from the currently authorized 600, to 850. This adjustment will be seen in the required ground crew required for the CF-18s, which will be returning home, and the increase in the number of Special Forces trainers in Iraq.
While specific numbers of Special Forces have not been released, it is assumed that close to 200 Canadian Special Forces members will be in Norther Iraq working with the Kurdish Peshmerga within the coming months, as both Prime Minister Trudeau, and Minister of Defence Sajjan said clearly that the training commitment would triple.
For the Special Forces in Iraq, reporters asked the Prime Minister if the CAF will still be on the front lines of the fight against ISIS, and if they would still be marking targets for the remaining coalition partners in the air campaign. General Vance responded, "I want Canadians to know that we will be involved in engagements as we defend ourselves or those partners who we are working with.” Vance also indicated that Special Forces will continue to "mark ISIS targets" for the coalition. This is something that the US Special Forces members in Iraq are not currently able to do.
The Liberal Government's new ISIS plan goes beyond military contributions. The government will enhance measures focused on stabilization, counter-terrorism and chemical, biological, radiological and nuclear security programming in the region, dedicating $145 million to unnamed initiatives in these areas over the next three years.
Last Updated: February 9, 2016 - 1:44 pm
With the dramatic shift in the Government of Canada's policy towards ISIS, and the change to Canada's contributions to the US-led Coalition against ISIS, Chief of Defence Staff Jonathan Vance provided some details in a technical briefing.
The total number of military personnel deployed will increase from the currently authorized 600, to 850. This adjustment will be seen in the required ground crew required for the CF-18s, which will be returning home, and the increase in the number of Special Forces trainers in Iraq.
While specific numbers of Special Forces have not been released, it is assumed that close to 200 Canadian Special Forces members will be in Norther Iraq working with the Kurdish Peshmerga within the coming months, as both Prime Minister Trudeau, and Minister of Defence Sajjan said clearly that the training commitment would triple.
For the Special Forces in Iraq, reporters asked the Prime Minister if the CAF will still be on the front lines of the fight against ISIS, and if they would still be marking targets for the remaining coalition partners in the air campaign. General Vance responded, "I want Canadians to know that we will be involved in engagements as we defend ourselves or those partners who we are working with.” Vance also indicated that Special Forces will continue to "mark ISIS targets" for the coalition. This is something that the US Special Forces members in Iraq are not currently able to do.
Minister Sajjan echoed Vance's statement, when he told CTV's Canada AM program, " This is a conflict zone - it comes with risks."
In yesterday's Press briefing the Prime Minister said that as part of Canada's new advise and assist role, Canada would be sending small arms and ammunition to Iraq. Vance indicated that Canada would be supplying machine guns and riffles to Iraqi forces, but did not specify who in particular. He also could not indicate how the arms will be sent legally to Iraq; as Iraq is not approved for arms export under the Automatic Weapons Country Control List.
 |
| A CAF Door Gunner mans his machine gun aboard a CH-146 Griffon over the desserts of Afghanistan (Undated DND Photo) |
To help mitigate some of the risks, the DND Spokesman was quoted as indicating that, the CAF is looking at deploying 4 CH-146 Griffon Helicopters to Iraq. Daniel Le Bouthier, was quoted to Defence Watch as saying, "options are being explored to enhance in-theatre tactical transport, further analysis, coordination and discussions with our coalition partners is required before details regarding the deployment of Griffon helicopters can be finalized, though the current plan calls for 4 airframes."
No specifics as to what the Griffons would be used for. CANSOFCOM has their own Griffon Helicopters, but there is no public information as to what vehicles CANSOFCOM has deployed in theater already. The Griffons are expected to be used for Troop Transport, as well as Medi-Vac Capabilities within Norther Iraq.
 |
| Chief Instructor, Major Alain Matteau walks away from one of the Griffon helicopters of the 427 SOAS (Special Operations Aviation Squadron). At Canadian Forces Base (CFB) Petawawa, members of the ultra secretive Canadian Special forces (CANSOFCOM) go through a variety of training exercises. (RICHARD LAUTENS / TORONTO STAR) |
In Afghanistan, the CAF deployed RCAF Chinook and Griffon Helicopters. The Griffons were often used as gunships while the Chinooks took over the role as Troop Transport. There is no current plan to deploy Chinooks to Iraq. For a short period of time, the RCAF also piloted and leased Russian Mi-17-V5 Helicopters (known in the RCAF as CH-178's) while waiting for the Chinooks to be delivered. The RCAF added Armour plating and Gatling-guns to the Griffons that served in Afghanistan.
According to the RCAF; the Griffon aircraft can carry up to 13 people (two pilots, a flight engineer and 10 passengers) and has a maximum gross weight of nearly 5,400 kilograms. The Griffon can reach speeds up to 260 kilometres per hour.
According to the RCAF; the Griffon aircraft can carry up to 13 people (two pilots, a flight engineer and 10 passengers) and has a maximum gross weight of nearly 5,400 kilograms. The Griffon can reach speeds up to 260 kilometres per hour.
There has been some backlash over the Governments commitment to withdraw Canada's CF-18s, even many calling the new mission a form of backing down to ISIS, and letting our allies down. That is not necessarily the case. According to Foreign Policy Magazine, Canada is "Doubling Down." The article continues saying, "The Canadian government announced Monday its six CF-18 fighter planes would end their bombing runs on the Islamic State by Feb. 22 and come home. But don’t count Canada out. A close look at what Ottawa is doing in Iraq actually reveals a growing mission that may increase the dangers for Canadian troops."
Even the US Ambassador, Bruce Heyman agrees with the new mission outline. He indicated that Canada's new plan amounts to a "significant contribution to the coalition," and is "in line with the coalitions current needs." He went on to say, "The commitments that Prime Minister Trudeau and his cabinet ministers announced today are in line with the coalition’s current needs, including tripling Canada’s training mission in northern Iraq and increasing its intelligence efforts throughout the region. Canada remains an essential partner in the counter-Da’esh mission and we will continue to discuss with all coalition partners additional ways to intensify our efforts. The United States, Canada, and the rest of our coalition partners remain unwavering in our commitment to degrade—and ultimately destroy— Da’esh and we look forward to continuing that mission together.”
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)