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

By: Melanie Marquis, The Canadian Press

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

A Canadian Army LAV III deployed in Afghanistan in 2010. 

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

The helicopters are manufactured in Mirabel, Que.

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

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

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

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

-- with files from The Associated Press.

Saudi Arabia Defends use of Canadian-made armoured vehicles against civilians

By: Steven Chase, The Globe and Mail 
OTTAWA
AUGUST 17, 2017

The Saudi Arabian government is defending the recent deployment of Canadian-made armoured vehicles against residents of the kingdom's Eastern Province, saying security forces found it necessary to use "military equipment" to fight terrorists who threatened the safety of its population.

Canadian Foreign Affairs Minister Chrystia Freeland recently launched an investigation into this Saudi conflict, which escalated in late July, saying she was "deeply concerned" over videos and photos showing Canadian-made Terradyne Gurkha armoured vehicles taking part in a clash in al-Qatif, a predominately Shia region of Sunni-ruled Saudi Arabia.

The Saudi embassy in Canada, however, is trying to explain to Canadians what happened in terms it hopes this country will understand.

In a statement provided to The Globe and Mail, the embassy likened Riyadh's use of force in this case to the October, 2014, incident in Ottawa where Canadian authorities killed a lone gunman who stormed Parliament Hill after fatally shooting a soldier at the National War Memorial.

"It is the right of the Government of the Kingdom of Saudi Arabia to use its military equipment to fight the terrorist groups of Awamiyah to protect the civilians," the Saudi embassy said.

The embassy reminded Canadians that on October 22, 2014: "Canadian authorities did fight the attacker and killed him on the spot to protect Canadian civilians. Fighting terrorism and protecting innocent civilians are not human-rights violations."

The House of Saud's use of combat machines against its Shia population goes to the very heart of the controversy over whether the Trudeau government is violating Canada's weapons export control rules by allowing arms exports to Saudi Arabia – in particular a $15-billion General Dynamics sale of weaponized armoured vehicles it just authorized last year.

These rules call for restrictions on arms exports to countries with a "persistent record of serious violations of the human rights of their citizens." Shipments are supposed to be blocked unless there is "no reasonable risk" the buyer could turn arms against its own population.

In late July, even before Ms. Freeland announced she would probe the matter, the Canadian government issued a statement criticizing Saudi Arabia's handling of what it called "escalating violence in eastern Saudi Arabia" and cautioning that while Ottawa recognizes Riyadh has "security challenges," these "must be addressed in a manner that abides by international human-rights law."

The Globe and Mail asked the Saudi embassy recently whether the kingdom had in fact made any promises to Canada about not using Canadian-made military equipment against Saudi civilians.

In reply, the embassy argued that Saudi Arabia was fully justified in deploying its military equipment in Eastern Province.

"The terrorist groups in Awamiyah are equipped with military equipment and they are attacking civilians in the area," the embassy said in a statement.

Cesar Jaramillo, the executive director of Project Ploughshares, a disarmament group that tracks military exports, said the Saudi explanation for what took place merits skepticism.

"The Saudi government's depiction of military operations in civilian areas as being part of its war on terrorism has become routine, and increasingly suspect," he said.

"The fact is that there are too many red flags. A country consistently found to be among the very worst human-rights violators on the planet is now categorically denying any human-rights violations in the siege of Awamiyah. The Canadian public needs to know how much credence Ottawa gives to this claim and whether it is consistent with its own findings."

Al-Qatif has long been described by experts as an area under lockdown. It's a hotbed of opposition to the reigning House of Saud and the Saudis frequently cite terror threats when they go after the area's militants. The best-known resident from the area may be Sheik Nimr al-Nimr, the populist dissident Shia cleric whom the Saudi government killed in January, 2016, during a wave of mass executions.

Some Shia dissidents have become militant in recent years, wielding guns or Molotov cocktails, after facing a harsh crackdown by the Saudis during protests that coincided with Arab Spring uprisings across the Middle East in 2011.

The most recent conflict in Eastern Province began to flare up in early 2017, when Saudi Arabia began to raze a minority Shia Muslim neighbourhood in al-Qatif. Riyadh said it wanted to redevelop the ancient neighbourhood of Al-Masora for health and safety reasons. Shia activists, however, said the Saudis wanted to eliminate a hideout for militants.

The Saudi embassy told The Globe that the latest clash began when workers preparing the area for redevelopment came under heavy fire and attacks by "explosive devices" – incidents they blamed on "terrorist groups from within the neighbourhood."

The embassy said these attacks killed two Saudis and injured 10 civilians, including one woman and two children.

Shia activists, for their part, have told Human Rights Watch that the recent violence took the lives of more than a dozen people, in addition to five armed militants who clashed with the Saudi authorities.

The Saudi embassy said Riyadh is determined to fight terrorism regardless of whether the threat comes from the Islamic State, the radical Sunni Islamist militant group or Shia terrorists that Riyadh alleges are funded by Iran.

Ali Adubisi, director of the Berlin-based European-Saudi Organization for Human Rights, said the Saudi government criminalizes any form of dissent. Many civilians were targeted and killed in Awamiyah, he said, while the government is saying it's fighting armed men. "Portraying themselves as the protectors of civilians in Awamiyah is a mockery."

Human Rights Watch said in a statement this week that residents in Awamiyah told them Saudi security forces fired into populated areas from Al-Masora, killing residents, occupying a public school, closing clinics and pharmacies and preventing essential services such as ambulances from reaching the area. The group called for an investigation into whether Saudi authorities "used excessive force in Awamiyah."

Dion: Canada still has leverage in Saudi LAV deal

By: TONDA MACCHARLES, Ottawa Bureau reporter The Toronto Star 

OTTAWA—Foreign Affairs Minister Stéphane Dion insists Canada still has leverage over the controversial contract to sell light armoured vehicles to Saudi Arabia despite the Star’s revelation that the federal government could be on the hook for a multibillion cancellation penalty.

“Each time you break a contract, there is always the danger of penalties,” Dion said Monday. “I always said that, but this is not the issue, because we’re not — we’ll respect the contract.”

At the same time, Dion insisted Canada’s hands are not tied when it comes to ensuring “that the military equipment that any Canadian company is selling abroad is not used against human rights and the interests of Canada and our allies.”

Dion said the arms “export permits allow Canada to be sure that military equipment . . . sold by Canadian companies is not misused by the country that received them.”

The Star on Saturday reported the cancellation penalty is in the multibillion-dollar range, under the contract signed by the previous Conservative government.

Cesar Jaramillo, executive director of Project Ploughshares, said his greater concern is Dion has made up his mind that the contract will continue despite valid questions about the human rights implications of proceeding with the deal.

In signing export permits for the vehicles, said Jaramillo, Canada has already given up “leverage.”

“They speak of evidence, but the threshold (for export approval) is neither certainty nor evidence, it is reasonable risk” the weaponized vehicles might be used against unarmed populations, he said. “The practical difference is if you use ‘evidence’ — this is something that takes place after the exports have taken place and after the human rights violations have occurred.”

Project Ploughshares joined Amnesty International and other groups in writing an open letter to the Liberal government asking it to halt the sale on the grounds that there is “reasonable risk — the threshold for Canadian export controls — that Canadian-made goods will be used against civilians by Saudi Arabia.”

The sale of an unspecified number of weaponized vehicles, to be built by General Dynamic Land Systems in London, Ont., was signed between Saudi Arabia and the Canada Commercial Corporation, a Crown corporation.

A briefing note for Finance Minister Bill Morneau, released under Access to Information and shared with the Star on condition the source not be identified, states clearly there is a question of liability for the government.

While the international trade minister has direct responsibility to Parliament for the Crown corporation that is the contracting party for Canadian suppliers, the document flags to the finance minister that it is he who approves the corporation’s borrowing plan and also has a direct role in approving CCC’s involvement in large capital projects.

The document, which contains redactions, identifies CCC’s signing of “a record $14.3-billion contact with Saudi Arabia for the sale of light armoured vehicles produced by General Dynamics Land Systems, and says “fees from transactions like this help maintain CCC’s financial viability.”

Liberal MP John McKay, the parliamentary secretary to the defence minister, said in an interview that if there were any move to stop the Saudi contract it would have to involve “very, very serious consideration.”

“There’s reputational damage, there’s financial damage, there’s employment damage and at the end of the day what did you actually accomplish? It’s not if the Saudis wouldn’t be able to buy LAVs. They can buy LAVs. So in an ideal world you wouldn’t have to be discussing this but this is not an ideal world.”

Members of the former Conservative government adamantly defended the contract in interviews with the Star last week. On Monday, Conservative foreign affairs critic Tony Clement clarified previous statements he’d made questioning whether the Saudi regime’s cross-border military efforts in Yemen should result in the contract’s cancellation.

Clement said “if the situation on the ground is the same as when we signed the contract, ie., that the LAVs are going to be used against terrorists, I’m in favour of implementing the contract. If there’s something different on the ground that indicates that the LAVs would be used to crush legitimate internal dissent that’s a different story.”

He now says the issue in Yemen is more complicated than when he suggested the contract should be shelved.

Black: Sell the Arms to the Saudi's

By: Conrad Black

National Post, May 14, 2016

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

Written by: Steven Chase, The Globe and Mail 

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

UN Report Wants Ottawa to Cancel Saudi Vehicle Deal

Written by: Steven Chase, Globe and Mail 

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

The contract is currently in the material-procurement stage.

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

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

Follow Steven Chase on Twitter: @stevenchase

Government Will move Forward on Military Vehicle Sale to Saudi Arabia

Written by Emily Chan, CTV-News

Foreign Affairs Minister Stephane Dion says the federal government "will not cancel" a private contract that sees military vehicles sold to Saudi Arabia, despite international criticism over 47 executions that took place in the Middle Eastern kingdom this weekend.

Dion told CTV News that there have "always" been concerns, but Canada will engage in a "very vigorous process" to ensure that the LAV III light armoured vehicles are not misused.

"It is a commitment we have made that we will not cancel private contracts, but we will engage with the authorities in Saudi Arabia to make sure they’ll be properly used," he said.

The $14.8-billion arms deal, negotiated by the previous Conservative government, was expected to create 3,000 jobs in Southern Ontario.

Earlier Tuesday, Dion's communications director Adam Barratt said the government "carefully reviewed" the proposed arms export before granting a permit to General Dynamics Land Systems Canada.

"Canada ensures that … human rights considerations are seriously taken into account," Barrat said in a statement.

Conservative MP Tony Clement told CTV’s Power Play Tuesday that a review was conducted during the previous government to ensure that the equipment was being used to "fight the bad guys, fight terrorism or aggressive nations that Saudi Arabia was facing in the Middle East."

"It was specifically designed to make sure they weren’t using the equipment against their own people," he added.

This is not the first time the arms deal has come under scrutiny.

In September, Stephen Harper faced flak when a 17-year-old arrested in Saudi Arabia for participating in political protests was sentenced to beheading and crucifixion.

The issue also arose on the federal election campaign trail, and in discussions about imprisoned blogger Raif Badawi, whose wife lives in Quebec.

This weekend, Saudi Arabia's mass executions renewed focus on the controversial deal.

The federal government officially condemned the executions in a statement on Sunday.

"Canada opposes the death penalty and decries the execution of 47 individuals in Saudi Arabia on January 2, 2016," the statement read. "In the wake of these executions, we reiterate our call to the Government of Saudi Arabia to protect human rights."

The statement made no mention of the multi-billion dollar agreement to export armoured vehicles to the country. It went on to express concern that the execution of prominent Shiite cleric Nimr al-Nimr could "further inflame" tensions between Shiite and Sunni Muslims in the Middle East.

Nimr's execution has already sparked widespread protests, and strained relations between Iran, which is Shiite-dominated, and Saudi Arabia and its allies.

On Tuesday, Dion also spoke out against an attack on the Saudi embassy in Tehran, which occurred amid the protests.

"We disagree completely about what happened (with) the embassy in Iran -- it is not helping," said Dion.

"We want positive steps between these two countries. We invite these two countries to stay calm and to focus on what is really important, and it is to fight the terrorist group the so-called Islamic State."

Dion was also asked if Canada was considering reopening its embassy in Iran, which has been closed since 2012 because of "heightened regional tensions."

"Yes, but the government of Iran will need to take more seriously the Vienna (Convention) to protect diplomatic personnel and assets," he said.

Meanwhile, Clement said that Iran remains a "state-sponsor of terrorism," and that Canada should not reopen its embassy until Iran renounces its support for extremists groups,

"Unless the Tehran government can guarantee that diplomatic and consular assets are safe, then I think it would be the height of irresponsibility to open a mission," he said.