Canada in Iraq: Sajjan - Government will Vote on New Iraq Mission

By: Tim Naumetz, The Hill Times 

The Liberal government will bring a decision on renewing and changing Canada’s participation in the U.S.-led campaign against Islamic State combatants in Iraq to the House of Commons for a vote, says Defence Minister Harjit Sajjan.

“We promised to be an open and transparent government. We will be discussing it in Cabinet, and we will be bringing it to the House as well,” Mr. Sajjan (Vancouver South, B.C.) told The Hill Times Monday in response to questions as the March 30, 2016, expiry date approaches for a year-long extension to the Iraq mission by the previous Conservative government.

While Prime Minister Justin Trudeau (Papineau, Que.) and his Cabinet have indicated the government intends to continue Canada’s role in a U.S.-led military campaign against ISIL, Mr. Trudeau as late as last week signaled the government will stick to a Liberal election promise that it would withdraw six Canadian CF-18 fighter bombers that have been part of air-strike operations along with the U.S. and 11 other countries.

Despite Mr. Sajjan’s statement, NDP Leader Thomas Mulcair (Outremont, Que.) continued to criticize Mr. Trudeau and his government over the time that has passed with no change to Canada’s Iraq mission since the Liberals took office last Nov. 4.

Air strikes by Canada's CF-18s have continued, while operations by Canadian Special Forces soldiers attached to Iraqi security forces also continue.

"Mr. Trudeau made a crystal clear commitment to withdraw Canada's CF-18s from the bombing mission. Instead of making good on that promise, the bombings increased and then his Defence minister mused about extending the mission without consulting with Parliament,” Mr. Mulcair said Monday.

“The Liberal government must bring any change to the mission before Parliament and finally come clean with their plans for our military. It is unacceptable to have this much confusion when it comes to our troops in combat,” he said through his top media aide, George Smith.

The motion passed on March 30, 2015 stated that the Commons supported the previous Conservative government’s decision to extend the mission, which the Conservatives first approved for a six-month period in October, 2014, to “a date not beyond March 30, 2016.”

The motion also stated that the House of Commons “continues to support the government's decision to contribute Canadian military assets to the fight against ISIL, and terrorists aligned with ISIL, including air strike capability with authorisation to conduct airstrikes in Iraq and Syria."

Canadian CF-18s took part in only four air strikes against ISIL targets in Syria up to last July and have not conducted air strikes in Syria since then, but the wording of the March 30, 2015, motion suggests withdrawal of the CF-18s by this coming March 30 would have to be included in a new motion, as well as continuance of Canadian refuelling, surveillance and cargo aircraft in the mission.

As well, considering the Liberal commitment to Parliamentary reform and consultation with Parliament, any increase in the number of Canadian Special Operations Regiment soldiers as advisers and trainers for Kurdish Peshmerga Iraqi security forces would likely also be included in the motion.

Mr. Trudeau reiterated the Liberal CF-18 withdrawal plans at the World Economy Forum summit in Davos, Switzerland, last week.

“We are committed to withdrawing our six CF-18 fighter jets and looking for another way to continue in the efforts against these global terrorists,” he said.

Relatives of six Canadians who were killed in an Al Qaeda terrorist attack in Burkina Faso last week—all from Quebec and four from the same family—called on the government to maintain Canada’s role in the bombing campaigns.

Mr. Sajjan suggested Monday the Canadian mission could continue as it is until the March 30 deadline, as Mr. Trudeau and his Cabinet map out the new Canadian contribution.

“We do need to look at how we're going to evolve in terms of the next, you know, what the next year may look like or even beyond that, and this is where it's extremely important,” Mr. Sajjan told reporters outside the Commons after Question Period.

He said Canada’s new mission has to be “synchronized” approach involving several departments. “The decision will be coming soon,” he said.

tnaumetz@hilltimes.com
The Hill Times

Den Tandt: Why Trudeau should keep CF-18’s in the fight against ISIS

Michael Den Tandt outlines here a great argument for why the Liberal Majority should reconsider its withdrawal of RCAF CF-18s from the US-led coalition against ISIS in Iraq and Syria.

An RCAF CF-18 flies over Iraq during a sortie on OP IMPACT. November 7, 2015. Photo: CAF Combat Camera, OP IMPACT, DND 

By: Michael Den Tandt, National Post 

There is a straightforward way for the Liberal government to get beyond the tangle in which it now finds itself over its pledge to pull Canada’s CF-18 fighters from the air war against the Islamic State of Iraq and the Levant. That would be to break its promise, make a U-turn and keep them in the fight. This is not only the responsible thing to do; it is the politically smart thing to do, given the other options.

Since the Oct. 19 federal election, the debate has raged. Throughout the back and forth, the claims and counterclaims, Royal Canadian Air Force jets have continued to contribute to the U.S.-led campaign by, yes, dropping bombs on enemy targets. Late last week, Canadian forces took part in a battle that involved CF-18s and special forces ground troops.

In a year-end interview with the Huffington Post, Defence Minister Harjit Sajjan committed to withdrawing the fighters within six months, though a parliamentary resolution calls for the air-combat mission to end in March. The reason for not pulling out immediately, Sajjan has said, is that the government does not wish to contribute to a loss of capacity for its allies. Translation: The CF-18s are making a valuable contribution to the overall effort, albeit a small one. If this were not the case, withdrawing them would make no difference to anyone and would have occurred already.

The arguments for keeping the CF-18s in the fight, or not, fall loosely into three groupings: tactical/strategic, philosophical/moral and political. In every case, based on a careful and fair-minded reading of the facts, the case for keeping the previous Conservative government’s policy in place is unassailable.

In military terms, simply put, the Liberals in crafting their policy and sticking to it doggedly have misunderstood the role of aerial combat in modern warfare. Repeatedly, Prime Minister Justin Trudeau has spoken dismissively of “dropping bombs,” as though it’s indiscriminate carpet-bombing of residential areas, like something out of the Second World War or Vietnam.

That assumption is false. In this campaign, which even now is modest in scope compared with the rate of missions flown in both Gulf wars and in Yugoslavia in the late 1990s, air power is being used precisely by the allies to degrade and destroy ISIL’s capabilities and allow allied local ground troops to take back territory more easily.

To dismiss the air war as indiscriminate “combat” is shallow in the extreme. On the contrary, the aerial campaign is arguably the last, best hope for the North Atlantic Treaty Organization powers to avoid sending in their own ground troops in large numbers. It is an alternative to a ground war – not a necessary prelude to one. U.S. President Barack Obama, a lifelong pacifist, and French President François Hollande, a socialist, are not war hawks. They are advancing this strategy because they can see no other way of defeating ISIL, short of all-out war.

The philosophical and moral arguments essentially resolve into a discussion of failed foreign involvements in various Middle Eastern and South Asian wars extending centuries back. Many Canadians wonder what was achieved by 12 years of war in Afghanistan. The quagmire in Iraq and Syria, it is often noted, has its roots in president George W. Bush’s failed U.S. invasion of Iraq in 2003. Gen. Colin Powell’s famous admonition, “if you break it, you own it,” went unheeded. The result has been one catastrophe after another, one of which was the rise of al-Qaida in Iraq, which metastasized into ISIL. Yes. Point understood and accepted.


The fact remains that 2015 is not 2003. In 2003, Iraqi dictator Saddam Hussein, beyond being an annoying blowhard and a demented tyrant to his people, threatened no one beyond Iraq’s borders. He had no weapons of mass destruction. Had he had them, he had no will to use them.

ISIL’s self-anointed caliph, Abu Bakr al-Baghdadi, is no Saddam. He’s something much worse. He and his jihadists believe — and this is not opinion, but fact, available to anyone with stomach enough to do the research — that they are warriors for God on a sacred mission to bring about the end of the world. They believe that in the interim, it is their sacred obligation to wipe out all other iterations of Islam, re-introduce slavery and extend their caliphate worldwide. And they pose, as has been demonstrated repeatedly now, a clear and present danger to every pluralistic society, including Canada’s. Pearsonian Liberalism would opt for engagement.

That leaves the political argument, which is this: As long as withdrawing the CF-18s remains government policy, because it is incoherent, it will be a thorn in its side and a fundraising tool for the Conservatives. A flip-flop would cause short-term bruising. Longer term, it would validate the Liberals’ pledge to base policy on evidence, not ideology. And it would help establish them as responsible managers, rather than wishful thinkers.

National Post

Twitter.com/mdentandt

Opposition Motion Defeated: RCAF CF-18 Mission To End

Yesterday, member of the Official Opposition, Tony Clement brought forward a Motion for the House of Commons to keep the Royal Canadian Air Force CF-18's involved in the fight against ISIS in Iraq and Syria.

The motion was easily defeated by the Majority Liberal Government;  104 YAYS to 220 NAYS.
There Liberal and NPD members voted against the motion; while the Conservatives and Bloq Quebecois voted for the motion.

The motion read as follows:

"That, given that ISIS has taken responsibility for recent deadly attacks in Paris, Beirut, and Africa, and has declared war on Canada, this House: (a) acknowledge that now is not the time for Canada to step back and force our allies to take on a heavier burden in the fight against ISIS; (b) remind the government of its obligation to our NATO partners and its responsibility to protect the freedom, democracy, safety, and security of Canadians; (c) call upon the government to maintain the air-combat mission of the RCAF CF-18 fighter jets; (d) express its appreciation to the members of the Canadian Armed Forces for their participation in the fight against terror; and (e) reconfirm our commitment to our allies to stop ISIS." 

If you wish to see how your MP voted, please see the Record of the Vote.