جوانان بيدار
Canadian Troops in Afghanistan:
Taking a Hard Look
at a Hard Mission
An Interim Report of the Standing Senate Committee
on National Security and Defence
February 2007
MEMBERSHIP
39th Parliament – 1st Session
STANDING COMMITTEE ON NATIONAL SECURITY AND DEFENCE
The Honourable Colin Kenny, Chair
The Honourable Michael A. Meighen, Deputy Chair
and
The Honourable Norman K. Atkins
The Honourable Tommy Banks
The Honourable Joseph A. Day
The Honourable Wilfred P. Moore
The Honourable Gerry St. Germain
(*) The Honourable David Tkachuk (member since November 29, 2006)
The Honourable Rod A.A. Zimmer
*The Honourable Marjory Lebreton, P.C., (or the Honourable Gerald Comeau)
*The Honourable Daniel Hays (or the Honourable Joan Fraser)
*Ex Officio Members
Other Senators who participated during the 39th Parliament – 1st Session:
The Honourable George Baker
The Honourable Janis G. Johnson
The Honourable Pierre Claude Nolin
The Honourable Hugh Segal
MEMBERSHIP
38th Parliament – 1st Session
STANDING COMMITTEE ON NATIONAL SECURITY AND DEFENCE
The Honourable Colin Kenny, Chair
The Honourable J. Michael Forrestall, Deputy Chair
and
The Honourable Norman K. Atkins
The Honourable Tommy Banks
The Honourable Jane Cordy
The Honourable Joseph A. Day
The Honourable Michael A. Meighen
The Honourable Jim Munson
The Honourable Pierre Claude Nolin
*The Honourable Jack Austin, P.C. (or the Honourable William Rompkey, P.C.)
*The Honourable Noël A. Kinsella (or the Honourable Terry Stratton)
*Ex Officio Members
Other Senators who participated during the 38th Parliament – 1st Session:
The Honourable Ione Christensen
The Honourable Anne C. Cools
The Honourable Percy Downe
The Honourable Rose-Marie Losier-Cool
The Honourable John Lynch-Staunton
The Honourable Terry M. Mercer
The Honourable Wilfred P. Moore
The Honourable Donald H. Oliver
The Honourable Gerard A. Phalen
The Honourable William Rompkey
The Honourable Peter A. Stollery
The Honourable David Tkachuk
The Honourable Marilyn Trenholme Counsell
MEMBERSHIP
37th Parliament – 3rd Session
STANDING COMMITTEE ON NATIONAL SECURITY AND DEFENCE
The Honourable Colin Kenny, Chair
The Honourable J. Michael Forrestall, Deputy Chair
and
The Honourable Norman K. Atkins
The Honourable Tommy Banks
The Honourable Jane Cordy
The Honourable Joseph A. Day
The Honourable Michael A. Meighen
The Honourable Jim Munson
The Honourable David P. Smith, P.C.
*The Honourable Jack Austin, P.C. (or the Honourable William Rompkey, P.C.)
*The Honourable John Lynch-Staunton (or the Honourable Noël A. Kinsella)
*Ex Officio Members
MEMBERSHIP
37th Parliament – 2nd Session
STANDING COMMITTEE ON NATIONAL SECURITY AND DEFENCE
The Honourable Colin Kenny, Chair
The Honourable J. Michael Forrestall, Deputy Chair
and
The Honourable Norman K. Atkins
The Honourable Tommy Banks
The Honourable Jane Cordy
The Honourable Joseph A. Day
The Honourable Michael A. Meighen
The Honourable David P. Smith, P.C.
The Honourable John (Jack) Wiebe
*The Honourable Sharon Carstairs, P.C. (or the Honourable Fernand Robichaud,
P.C.)
*The Honourable John Lynch-Staunton (or the Honourable Noël A. Kinsella)
*Ex Officio Members
MEMBERSHIP
37th Parliament – 1st Session
STANDING COMMITTEE ON NATIONAL SECURITY AND DEFENCE
The Honourable Colin Kenny, Chair
The Honourable J. Michael Forrestall, Deputy Chair
and
The Honourable Norman K. Atkins
The Honourable Tommy Banks
The Honourable Jane Cordy
The Honourable Joseph A. Day
The Honourable Laurier L. LaPierre
The Honourable Michael A. Meighen
The Honourable John (Jack) Wiebe
*The Honourable Sharon Carstairs, P.C. (or the Honourable Fernand Robichaud,
P.C.)
*The Honourable John Lynch-Staunton (or the Honourable Noël A. Kinsella)
*Ex Officio Members
TABLE OF CONTENTS
Canada’s Involvement in Afghanistan.......................................................................1
The Rationale Behind Canada’s Involvement in Afghanistan ..................................2
Looking for Answers .................................................................................................3
The Challenges...........................................................................................................4
Problem 1: Warrior Culture...................................................................................4
Problem 2: Home Team Advantage .......................................................................4
Problem 3: Away Team Disadvantage...................................................................5
Problem 4: Geography and Time ...........................................................................5
Problem 5: Can we win, given how the map is drawn? .........................................6
Problem 6: Change Comes Slowly in Medieval Societies....................................6
Problem 7: The Enemy is Rich...............................................................................7
Problem 8: The Society We are Trying to Rebuild is Corrupt..............................7
Problem 9: Too Many Innocent People Killed.......................................................7
Problem 10: We Don’t Have a (Visible) Development Program .........................8
Problem 11: The Perception That Life for People in Kandahar is More Fraught
with Peril Because We are There ...........................................................................9
Problem 12: If This is a Litmus Test for the New NATO, the Results Aren’t
Impressive So Far .................................................................................................10
Problem 13: Afghanistan Does Not Want to be Rebuilt in Canada’s Image.......10
So, Why Are We Still Over There? .........................................................................11
Proof of Success.......................................................................................................11
The Committee’s Perception....................................................................................13
Recommendations....................................................................................................15
APPENDIX I............................................................................................................17
Order of Reference ...............................................................................................17
APPENDIX II ..........................................................................................................19
Biographies of Committee Members ...................................................................19
APPENDIX III.........................................................................................................31
Biographies of the Committee Secretariat............................................................31
Canadian Troops in Afghanistan:
Taking a Hard Look at a Hard Mission
1
Canadian Troops in Afghanistan:
Taking a Hard Look at a Hard Mission
Afghans have been both battered by foreign occupiers and tyrannized by extreme
elements of their own countrymen for as long as its citizens can remember. The
Russians bludgeoned Afghanistan in the ‘80s. The Americans helped drive the
Russians out in 1989 and then largely abandoned the Afghans in the ‘90s. The
Taliban moved into the void and ruled with merciless fervor until overpowered by
the Americans and their Northern Alliance allies in 2001.
An election in 2004 brought a new president to power in Kabul and, just under a
year later, a new government was elected. But the Taliban continue to resist,
particularly in three southern provinces, including Kandahar. While efforts are
being made to eliminate corruption and solidify democratic institutions throughout
the country, real power resides largely in the hands of warlords from various tribes.
Any attempts to centralize control are complicated by the fact that Afghanistan’s
economy is almost totally dependent on the sale of opium, and the opium
marketplace is controlled by the warlords and, increasingly, the Taliban.
Tens of thousands of innocent people have died during the struggle for power in
Afghanistan. More are being lost every day.
Canada’s Involvement in Afghanistan
Canada’s involvement in Afghanistan has expanded dramatically since it first
participated in the International Security Assistance Force (mandated by the United
Nations in late 2001). While Canada did participate in the war on terror in
Afghanistan during the first part of 2002, our first deployment under ISAF
occurred in the summer of 2003. That mission, Operation Athena as named by the
Canadian Forces - was largely undertaken within the relatively safe confines of the
capital city of Kabul, and attracted little attention in Canada.
Canada began expanding our forces in Afghanistan in the summer of 2005,
preparing for combat in the far more dangerous province of Kandahar, home of the
Taliban. For the past year, approximately 2,500 members of the Canadian Forces
have taken a lead combat role in Kandahar Province under Operation Archer, aided
and augmented primarily by troops from Britain and the Netherlands, who are
Canadian Troops in Afghanistan:
Taking a Hard Look at a Hard Mission
2
conducting operations in adjoining southern provinces. In August 2006, a new
NATO command assumed responsibility for operations in this part of Afghanistan
while still working in close conjunction with the U.S.-led Operation Enduring
Freedom. These NATO allies are often called upon to provide air support for
Canadian troops on the ground. Since Operation Archer began, 44 Canadian troops
and one diplomat have been killed in Afghanistan; about 200 soldiers have been
wounded.
In February 2006, Canada and 40 other countries including Afghanistan, signed
“The Afghanistan Compact.” The Compact sets out detailed outcomes, including
benchmarks and timelines, and commits Canada to contributing to the
rehabilitation of Afghanistan until February 1st 2011.1
The Rationale Behind Canada’s Involvement in Afghanistan
Canada is deeply involved in attempting to stabilize Afghanistan, for very good
reasons.
Firstly, looking at Canada’s involvement in Afghanistan from a humanitarian point
of view, only a very callous person would deny that the Afghan people need help.
Secondly, looking at Canada’s involvement from a strategic point of view, only a
very naive person would deny that western countries are threatened by religious
extremists – some of the most venomous of whom currently make their home in
Afghanistan – and that neither Canada nor its allies should acquiesce to that threat.
Members of our Committee are neither callous nor naive. We have been studying
Canada’s overall military capacity, and the Afghanistan situation in particular, for
more than five years now. We believe that we understand both the humanitarian
and strategic motives behind Canada’s military deployment in Afghanistan, and
associated efforts to improve the life of Afghans through development projects and
diplomatic initiatives.
On the Committee’s second visit to Afghanistan shortly before Christmas 2006,
five of our members met Canadians on the Kandahar base and, thanks to the
cooperation of the Canadian commander Brigadier-General T. Grant and the U.S.
1 The Afghanistan Compact is the result of the London Conference on Afghanistan, which took place on January 31st
–February 1st, 2006.
Canadian Troops in Afghanistan:
Taking a Hard Look at a Hard Mission
3
Army’s helicopters, we visited members of Canada’s Provincial Reconstruction
team in the countryside. We were impressed by the commitment and bravery of the
soldiers, commanders, and support personnel we met there. Like other Canadians,
we want our troops to succeed, and we want them to return home safely.
We would not, however, be acting in the interests of Canadians in Afghanistan or
at home if we did not proceed beyond the realm of emotional patriotism into the
realm of intellectual patriotism, which means taking a hard look at what Canada is
up against in Afghanistan.
To help determine whether the Afghanistan mission – as currently constituted –
makes sense, we believe that Canadians should have access to all the information
at the Government’s disposal necessary to help them formulate their own answers
to essential questions. Since Canada’s involvement in Afghanistan comes at a huge
cost – in both lives, and in billions of dollars – Canadians need answers to the
following five questions:
What precisely is Canada’s role in Afghanistan?
What will define success for Canada in Afghanistan?
What are the realistic chances of achieving that kind of success in
Afghanistan?
What costs2 are Canadians willing to pay to achieve success?
Is Canada’s mission to Afghanistan currently being deployed in a way that
gives Canada the best chance of achieving success?
Looking for Answers
Does our Committee have definitive answers to these questions? We do not. But
we have studied the key issues related to Canadian security and defence for several
years now. We have asked questions of thousands of people – including military
leaders, enlisted personnel, academics, bureaucrats, politicians, journalists, and
Canadians from all walks of life about those issues. We have studied Afghanistan,
2 The Committee was advised by Brigadier-General Tim Grant that the monetary cost of the operation in Kandahar
is $30 million per month exclusive of salaries.
Canadian Troops in Afghanistan:
Taking a Hard Look at a Hard Mission
4
and some of us have been there – albeit all too briefly. So Committee members
believe that we have a contribution to make in what should be a national discussion
on Canada’s involvement in Afghanistan. Such a discussion, replete with clear
answers, has been sorely lacking.
Our troops deserve more than patriotic bumper stickers. They deserve thoughtful
assessments from honest and impartial observers as to why Canada is in
Afghanistan, what we can expect to achieve there, what we cannot expect to
achieve there, and how best to proceed to try to ensure that the benefits of this
deployment – both to Canada and Afghanistan – end up outweighing the costs.
The Challenges
The word “challenges” is widely used by politicians, bureaucrats and other sleightof-
hand artists as a euphemism for “problems.” There are all kinds of problems to
be solved if the Canadian deployment to Afghanistan is to achieve what any
reasonable person would define as “success.”
Allow us to list some of these problems first, and wrestle later in this Report with
what might constitute a successful outcome.
Problem 1: Warrior Culture
Afghans have, over centuries, proven themselves to be fierce fighters particularly
when confronting invaders from outside cultures. They repeatedly defeated the
British during the 19th century “Afghan Wars” when Britain was the world’s
dominant military power, and they routed the Soviets during the 1980s when the
Soviet Union was the world’s second most dominant military power. Superior
military technology does not always win the day, particularly in an era when
suicide bombing and Improvised Explosive Devices have proven themselves to be
very effective tools in this kind of war. Afghans are used to killing and being
killed. Their society has been in a state of war for most of the last two centuries.
Problem 2: Home Team Advantage
NATO troops see themselves as defenders of the majority of Afghans versus
powerful minority groups – the Taliban and regional warlords – who are the true
enemies of the Afghan people. But how do Afghans see us? Do residents of
Canadian Troops in Afghanistan:
Taking a Hard Look at a Hard Mission
5
Kandahar province – home of the Taliban – see the situation our way? The harsh
and sadistic Taliban government was repugnant to westerners, and to many
Afghans. But are the Taliban more repugnant than foreign troops, who have been
despised each and every time they have come to Afghanistan over the past two
centuries?
We think we’re the good guys. What do Afghans think?
Problem 3: Away Team Disadvantage
The Taliban have no trouble identifying village elders and other influential
Afghans. Identifying those people is far more difficult for a foreign army,
including ours. We were informed that there have been cases when Canadian
authorities thought they were talking to impartial “elders,” when they were actually
talking to members of the Taliban. Furthermore, the Taliban are far more capable
of finding out who they can trust in any given location – they have eyes and ears
everywhere. Some Canadians we talked to strongly suggested that Afghans will
always tell foreigners what they want to hear, which may have nothing to do with
reality. Put simply, the side that speaks the language and knows the culture will
always have the advantage when it comes to knowing what’s really going on.
Problem 4: Geography and Time
The Taliban have time and geography on their side. Invading armies can only
spend so much time on foreign soil before patience and money run out at home.
The Taliban have forever. Are Canadians willing to commit themselves to decades
of involvement in Afghanistan, which could cost hundreds of Canadian lives and
billions of dollars with no guarantee of ending up with anything like the kind of
society that makes sense to us? If we aren’t willing to hang in for the long haul,
what will have been the point of five years of Canadian lives and Canadian money
disappearing?3
3 If one were to look at this problem in strictly military terms (which one obviously cannot), tying up so many of the
personnel and resources of the Canadian Forces in Afghanistan is a double-edged sword. On the one hand, Canada’s
combat role is hardening troops on the battlefield – a painful and perilous experience, but an important one for any
military. On the other hand, the Forces’ involvement in Afghanistan not only precludes other missions at home and
abroad that may prove to be important, it ties up resources that the Forces could be using to transform and grow after
years of neglect.
Canadian Troops in Afghanistan:
Taking a Hard Look at a Hard Mission
6
Problem 5: Can we win, given how the map is drawn?
In the 1890s, the British Empire arbitrarily demarcated the border between
Afghanistan and then British India (Pakistan since 1947), known as the Durand
Line, taking into account physical geography not human geography. Tribes,
including the Pashtun, therefore have roots on both sides of the Afghanistan and
Pakistan border. Local Taliban members have found ways to gain virtually free
passage across the border and have used this to their advantage - hiding out in
Pakistan. This is a wild and independently-minded region over which Pakistan has
little control. Most analysts believe that even if it actually wanted to (a prospect
that many believe is wishful thinking) the Government of Pakistan would find it
nearly impossible to exert meaningful control in this unruly border region.
This gives the Taliban a safe haven in which to hide and plan their attacks on our
troops; and to plan their return to oppression of the Afghan people.
Problem 6: Change Comes Slowly in Medieval Societies
Some Canadians may think of all Middle East countries in similar terms, but
countries like Iraq and Iran are far more sophisticated than Afghanistan.
Afghanistan is only remotely connected to the modern world. Only one out of three
Afghans is literate, and the country’s economy is almost entirely dependent on the
growth of poppies and the sale of opium. The country’s only brief experience with
democracy ended in a coup in 1973. The three primary forces in Afghan politics
are armed power, tribal loyalties and corruption. Anyone expecting to see the
emergence in Afghanistan within the next several decades of a recognizable
modern democracy capable of delivering justice and amenities to its people is
dreaming in Technicolor.
Chris Alexander, when he was Canada’s Ambassador to Afghanistan, told
members of the Committee in his living room in Kabul that it would take 5
generations of effort to make a difference in Afghanistan. Lieutenant-General
Andrew Leslie, currently Commander of Land Forces said on a number of
occasions, that the mission would take two decades to complete. People outside
Kabul are generally far more dependent on their traditional Sharia courts and
systems of government than they are on the central government. Not only is the
government’s justice system as corrupt as other components of the government,
most police are untrained, illiterate, and don’t even know what the law is. This
Canadian Troops in Afghanistan:
Taking a Hard Look at a Hard Mission
7
makes the law difficult to enforce. While NATO is proud of the fact that national
elections have taken place, these elections have proven to be all but irrelevant to
Afghans in places like Kandahar.
Problem 7: The Enemy is Rich
Much of the lucrative opium trade is controlled by the Taliban. Villagers who join
the Taliban’s fighting forces earn a significantly larger amount of money than
Afghan police officers, who earn $70 a month. Cutting down poppies isn’t the
answer – unless we offer alternatives to the abject poverty that would only get
worse without the poppy crop. Unless that situation changes, most Afghans won’t
have much trouble deciding which side to snuggle up to: the rich guys who aren’t
foreigners, who can hide in the mountains for years or decades or centuries if need
be, and who pay big bucks; versus the foreign guys who can’t hide, who will
eventually run out of time and patience, and who don’t pay big bucks.
Problem 8: The Society We are Trying to Rebuild is Corrupt
Afghan government officials are notoriously corrupt at all levels, including those
within the police and many regional governments. Since police and bureaucrats
earn relatively low salaries and some state governors (all of whom are appointed
by the President) are notorious for skimming those salaries, the police and other
officials are known for shaking down ordinary citizens on a regular basis. The
Taliban were known for their excessive moral indignation when in power. There
were often brutal consequences. The good news is that the current government is
not known for moral excess. The bad news is that the word moral is probably the
last word that comes to an ordinary Afghan’s mind when describing the new
government. Nearly everyone we talked to in Afghanistan – Canadians and
Afghans - mentioned the high degree of corruption as a problem. It would be much
easier to win hearts and minds if ordinary Afghans had respect for public officials.
Higher salaries for police and other officials would undoubtedly help lessen
corruption. But it is a pipe dream to believe that this deep-seated tradition will go
away overnight.
Problem 9: Too Many Innocent People Killed
Collateral damage does not win the hearts and minds of Afghans. This damage
results from air support, suicide attacks, Improvised Explosive Devices etc. The
Canadian Troops in Afghanistan:
Taking a Hard Look at a Hard Mission
8
death of many innocent people and the destruction of property are undermining
efforts to portray our troops as “the good guys.” The Committee is impressed by
the concerns that our troops have in attempting to minimize collateral effects
during their operations. However, when the Committee was outside of the
Kandahar base, we met one Afghan police colonel who, after he said all the proper
things in a speech he had clearly memorized, became more animated and more
frank when he claimed that Canada has no chance of winning the support of the
people of Kandahar as long as so many innocent Afghans were dying as a result of
NATO air strikes. He said that the local population will simply wait until we
disappear; that siding with the Canadians is a bad bet the way things are going; and
that the incentives aren’t there to risk annoying those people up in the hills.
Problem 10: We Don’t Have a (Visible) Development Program
The province of Kandahar is where the Canadians are. The Canadian International
Development Agency (CIDA) insists that it has a number of development projects
underway in the province, but no one was able to show us. Canada did contribute
to the building of a road that makes military forays less dangerous; but building
one kilometer of road, no matter how strategically-important, isn’t going to win
any hearts and minds. Journalists say they have seen some evidence of useful
programs, but these appear to be limited. It appears obvious to us that the kind of
widespread development and aid that is said to be winning hearts and minds in
other regions of the country can happen in Kandahar only if and when Kandahar,
which is now essentially a war zone, is militarily stabilized.
There is a chicken-and-egg element here, however. Unless Canada can gain credit
for some useful and prominently-seen development efforts in Kandahar, it will
remain difficult to gain the support of Afghans in that province, and therefore to
stabilize the region. If our troops are to be seen as liberators rather than invaders,
their image needs all the help it can get. That is why the Committee believes that
CIDA should be funneling significant amounts of development money through our
military, and doing so in Kandahar. At present, CIDA’s focus is on improving the
institutional strength of the central Government of Afghanistan in Kabul; to make
it more workable and therefore more relevant and appealing to its citizens.
Whenever the issue of development came up, nearly every Canadian official we
talked to emphasized the importance of stabilizing Afghanistan’s central
institutions – Parliament, the justice system, the health care system, etc.
Canadian Troops in Afghanistan:
Taking a Hard Look at a Hard Mission
9
This is a necessary and worthy long-term goal. Even in the short term, institutions
like the police, the army and the courts need to be strengthened and reformed. But
in places like Kandahar, if Canadian and other NATO troops are to have any hope
of creating the kind of peaceful conditions that would enable foreign and Afghan
NGOs to bring in improvements at the village level, then Canada needs to focus on
showing what can be done on the ground now.
There seems to be a mantra that only if the central government’s institutions can be
reformed will the people get assistance from the centre; and that only then will
they respect and support their federal government. There is some truth and logic in
this. But one wonders if Canada isn’t too fixated on making Afghan institutions
work like ours, which is going to take a very long time, if it ever happens. In the
meantime in Kandahar, Canada should be connecting directly to the people whose
needs are immediate, and who are unlikely to buy in to our efforts unless they are
offered something more rewarding than another chance to live in a war zone. We
may have something more and better to offer than the Taliban, but we don’t have
much time to prove it.
The process of reforming Afghan institutions will take a long, long time.
Meanwhile, since peace is not in sight in Kandahar or in neighbouring provinces,
the Government of Canada should be funneling money through the Canadian
military so that our soldiers can be seen to be the sponsors of very visible, helpful
projects at the grass roots. Only when our military is seen to be there to assist
rather than conquer, is there any hope that we can start being seen as a positive
alternative to the Taliban.
In normal times, the best way to deliver aid is not through the military. But these
are not normal times.
Problem 11: The Perception That Life for People in Kandahar is
More Fraught with Peril Because We are There
The bottom line is that we say we are in Afghanistan to make things better for
Afghans. Things may be improving in some parts of the country, but where Canada
is trying to have its biggest impact – in Kandahar – life is clearly more perilous
because we are there. That doesn’t mean that Canada shouldn’t be there, or that we
should not be engaging the Taliban. We need to do that to help create the stability
needed to work toward long-term solutions. But it does mean that the ordinary
Canadian Troops in Afghanistan:
Taking a Hard Look at a Hard Mission
10
citizen of Kandahar is living in a war zone that he or she wouldn’t be living in if
NATO troops weren’t there. The combination of too many innocent lives being
lost and too little development assistance coming through the pipeline contributes
to making life bleak and dangerous in the Kandahar region. We need to do
everything possible to make the short term more livable while we are trying to
improve prospects for the long term.
Problem 12: If This is a Litmus Test for the New NATO, the Results
Aren’t Impressive So Far
Some NATO allies (other than the U.S., the U.K., and the Netherlands) have
shown themselves to be unwilling to serve on the battlefield in Afghanistan. If the
Afghans are going to take over their own defence against the Taliban, they need to
be trained and they need to develop military leadership. The current NATO
contingent doesn’t have enough troops to go toe-to-toe with the Taliban, to get
involved in defending development projects, and at the same time to train Afghan
troops and leaders. Any other NATO countries that get involved in such training
will have to join the Afghan troops in action over the early years of producing an
effective Afghan fighting force. Since NATO countries like Germany and France
don’t want to engage in battle, how will this training get done? NATO came
together to defend Europe against the Soviet threat. That role is history. If NATO
is to have a meaningful new role, it is likely to be that of like-minded countries
working in common cause against what all of them perceive to be a common
threat. At the moment, violent religious extremism with roots in places like
Afghanistan and Pakistan is at the top of the threat list. Some of our allies are
doing a lot of saluting, but not much marching. So what does that say about the
future of NATO?
Problem 13: Afghanistan Does Not Want to be Rebuilt in Canada’s
Image
There are all kinds of pressure from home to provide the kind of aid that Canadians
believe in because they would reflect the kind of society we treasure: no
corruption, free and fair elections, girls being treated equally with boys in terms of
education and other matters. Afghanistan is considerably more backward than
other difficult areas like Iraq, Iran and Palestine. Whatever changes are made here
are going to take many generations to effect, and any early reforms are unlikely to
Canadian Troops in Afghanistan:
Taking a Hard Look at a Hard Mission
11
present Canadians with the kinds of successes that might easily be seen to justify
our involvement in Afghanistan.
So, Why Are We Still Over There?
Firstly, we have international allies that we need to support. Following the attacks
on 9/11, Canada made a commitment to its fellow NATO member-states to assist
in securing and re-building Afghanistan not only for the sake of international peace
and security, but also for the safety and security of Canadians. Secondly, as one of
the richest countries in the world, we cannot stand idly by and fail to help one of
the poorest countries in the world. As the Committee has said repeatedly, we
cannot succeed in Afghanistan at the point of a bayonet. Afghanistan needs
infrastructure – a viable economy not centered on the poppy fields; and a
government, courts, police force and military that are trusted in all provinces and
by local Afghans.
Thirdly, Afghanistan was a training ground for terrorists whose actions disrupted
our lives and economy. We cannot let instability abroad ruin the prosperity of our
country.
Canada has accepted the responsibility of stabilizing and re-building the most
dangerous part of Afghanistan. Now that the problems or “challenges” facing our
troops in Kandahar and Afghanistan as a whole have been outlined, what should be
our description of success?
Proof of Success
The Committee believes that any proof of Canadian success in Afghanistan will be
built on progress in the following areas:
1. STABILITY: Our mission needs to create sufficient stability in Kandahar
and neighbouring southern provinces to allow the economic and political
development of this impoverished region to begin.
2. GOVERNANCE: Our mission needs to help improve the governance of
Afghanistan without expecting that we will recreate this country’s
institutions and behaviour patterns in anything like a Canadian image.
Canadian Troops in Afghanistan:
Taking a Hard Look at a Hard Mission
12
3. CORRUPTION: Eliminating corruption in a place like Afghanistan is
probably a pipe dream. Even reducing corruption to the point that most
development assistance actually gets to ordinary people will qualify as a
huge success. Building an army and police force that offered protection to
citizens instead of shaking them down for money will constitute a huge step
forward.
4. GEOGRAPHY: Until now the Afghanistan-Pakistan Border has proven to
be an insurmountable challenge. As long as the Taliban have access to
hideouts beyond the reach of our forces, our mission has little hope of
success. The Government of Canada has put pressure on the Pakistan
Government to patrol and take control of its border with Afghanistan, but
there is still disagreement over how this should be done. Canada’s
opposition to the very existence of landmines, for example, runs counter to
the Pakistani proposal to use landmines in securing the border. Is it time for
Canada, in partnership with other nations and international organizations, to
explore with Afghanistan radical new solutions?
Canadian Foreign Minister Peter MacKay, in his recent visit to Pakistan,
offered to put together a group of experts with vast experience in managing
the North American border to make concrete suggestions to Pakistan.
According to Mr. MacKay, the government had also tasked the Army to
come forward with suggestions on how to deal with the Afghanistan-
Pakistan border. In the context of enhanced border monitoring and security,
Mr. MacKay and his Pakistani counterpart exchanged views on selective
fencing, aerial surveillance, and the use of modern technology like
biometrics in border movement. In addition, Mr. MacKay agreed to extend
technological assistance to help Pakistan strengthen border controls.4
Although the Committee is looking forward to hearing these suggestions and
potential solutions, the Committee is concerned about the complexities of
implementing 21st century biometrics in a 16th century environment, and the
timeframe it would take to accomplish such a feat.
It is clear that in the interim, robust action needs to be taken in order to
prevent the Taliban from undermining Canadian efforts in the region. For
4 Qudssia Akhlaque, “Pakistan-Afghanistan border mining being reviewed: Canadian FM holds talks” January 9th,
2007, DAWN Group of Newspapers and Relief Web International.
Canadian Troops in Afghanistan:
Taking a Hard Look at a Hard Mission
13
example, one alternative would be to establish a defensible no-go zone on
the Afghan side of the border that would effectively stop Taliban infiltration
into Afghanistan from the traditional Pashtun territory.
The Committee’s Perception
The Committee was impressed by the optimism of Canadian troops and their
leaders to bring about positive change in Afghanistan. But when Committee
members listened closely to both military people and diplomats, both Afghan and
Canadian, we found it hard to square that with reality. Huge and complex set
problems confront any foreign interests attempting to give ordinary Afghans access
to an even perfunctory combination of peace, democracy, justice and prosperity.
It is in our view doubtful that this mission can be accomplished given the limited
resources that NATO is currently investing in Afghanistan. The kind of collateral
damage and lack of developmental progress that has marked NATO’s effort in the
Kandahar region to date, and the Taliban’s ability to retreat to and redeploy from
the mountains of Pakistan makes success even more doubtful.
To have any chance of success, Canada and our allies must make real progress in
solving the problems listed above. We can never solve all of them at once, but will
have to make a sizable dent, and we will have to make it soon.
Ours is an enormously difficult task. Meanwhile, the task of our enemy - the
Taliban and some regional warlords – is relatively easy. They don’t have to win
major battles. They only need to keep attracting disaffected people to their cause;
use those people to disrupt reform; and persist for as many years as it takes for
Canada and our allies to lose heart.
If our only mission is to distract the Taliban while our allies and other progressive
forces make progress on other fronts, historians may some day describe Canada’s
deployment to Afghanistan as a success. But if the goals of the Government of
Canada are this modest, that hasn’t been properly explained to Canadians. It is said
that Canada is giving Afghans a better chance to live decent lives. In the words of
the Department of National Defence website:
Canadian Troops in Afghanistan:
Taking a Hard Look at a Hard Mission
14
“The Afghan people are relying on the international community to
help them rebuild their lives and their country after having suffered
through decades of instability, oppression and insurgency.
By supporting the rebuilding of institutions such as independent
courts, police and an army, Canada is on the ground laying the
foundation for Afghans to govern themselves and secure a better
future.
Canada has shown leadership by committing troops, resources,
development and political effort to help the Afghan government
secure a better future for its people. We have made a commitment to
the Afghan people and we will stand by that commitment.”5
If that is Canada’s goal – obviously joined to the goal of inflicting significant
damage to radical forces that pose a threat to western society – then Canada and
NATO must deploy more resources in Afghanistan and use those resources in a
better way than we have done to this point. If this proves impossible, Canada
should be prepared to consider withdrawing its troops from Afghanistan as soon as
our current commitment ends.
5 DND/CF: Backgrounder, “Canadian Forces Operations in Afghanistan: Why are we there?” January 5th, 2007.
Canadian Troops in Afghanistan:
Taking a Hard Look at a Hard Mission
15
Recommendations
The Committee Recommends That:
1. The Government of Canada continue to apply pressure on its
NATO allies to provide additional troops to assist in the training
of the Afghan National Army through the use of Operational
Mentor Liaison Teams.
2. The Government of Canada send up to 250 additional Canadian
Forces instructors when an increase in the number of Afghan
National Army trainees in Kandahar requires an expansion of
the Canadian Operational Mentor Liaison Teams.
3. The Government of Canada provide up to 60 Canadian police
trainers in addition to its current contingent of approximately 6
officers (soon to be 10) to help train the Afghan National Police
and its Auxiliary.
4. The Government of Canada significantly augment the $10
million contribution announced by the Minister of Foreign
Affairs in January 2007 to provide uniforms and, for future
years, to improve benefits and salaries for the Afghan National
Police.
5. The Government of Canada, in order to minimize civilian
casualties, continue with the “gentle approach” of providing
advance warning to civilians of forays against Taliban fighters,
as successfully used in Operation Baaz Tsuka.
6. The Government of Canada should announce that while it
understands that Canada’s involvement in Afghanistan is long
Canadian Troops in Afghanistan:
Taking a Hard Look at a Hard Mission
16
term, it will be forced to reconsider its commitment unless
NATO, within the next 12 months, puts into place in Kandahar
a significantly larger and fully-engaged stability force.
7. In the next year and in subsequent fiscal years, until NGOs are
able to safely function in Kandahar, CIDA provide from its
budget $20 million directly to the Canadian Forces for their use
in local development projects by Afghans.
8. The Government of Canada advise the Karzai government that
it must, within the next 12 months, present to NATO a
comprehensive, transparent and effective plan to reduce
corruption as a condition of Canada’s continued long term
commitment in Afghanistan.
9. To effectively stop Taliban infiltration, the Government of
Canada, with its NATO partners and Afghanistan, establish a
defensible buffer zone in Afghanistan on the Afghan side of its
border with Pakistan.
10. The Government of Canada increase agricultural and
commercial assistance to help Afghan farmers in their transition
from growing poppies to cultivating legitimate alternative crops.
11. The Government of Canada, in conjunction with Afghan
authorities, should engage our special forces and RCMP
intelligence gathering expertise in an accelerated program of
interdiction, targeting drug lords and their distribution systems
in order to quell the trade of narcotics.
APPENDIX I
Order of Reference
17
APPENDIX I
Order of Reference
Extract from the Journals of the Senate, Thursday, April 27, 2006:
It was moved by the Honourable Senator Kenny, seconded by the Honourable
Senator Moore:
That the Standing Senate Committee on National Security and Defence be
authorized to examine and report on the national security policy of Canada. In
particular, the Committee shall be authorized to examine:
(a) the capability of the Department of National Defence to defend and protect
the interests, people and territory of Canada and its ability to respond to and
prevent a national emergency or attack, and the capability of the Department of
Public Safety and Emergency Preparedness to carry out its mandate;
(b) the working relationships between the various agencies involved in
intelligence gathering, and how they collect, coordinate, analyze and disseminate
information and how these functions might be enhanced;
(c) the mechanisms to review the performance and activities of the various
agencies involved in intelligence gathering; and
(d) the security of our borders and critical infrastructure.
That the papers and evidence received and taken during the Thirty-seventh and
Thirty-eighth Parliaments be referred to the Committee; and
That the Committee report to the Senate no later than March 31, 2007 and that
the Committee retain all powers necessary to publicize the findings of the
Committee until May 31, 2007.
After debate,
The question being put on the motion, it was adopted.
Paul C. Bélisle
Clerk of the Senate
Canadian Troops in Afghanistan:
Taking a Hard Look at a Hard Mission
18
APPENDIX II
Biographies of Committee Members
19
APPENDIX II
Biographies of Committee Members
The Honourable NORMAN K. ATKINS, Senator
Senator Atkins was born in Glen Ridge, New Jersey. His
family is from Nova Scotia and New Brunswick, where he
has spent a great deal of time over the years. He is a graduate
of the Appleby College in Oakville, Ontario, and of Acadia
University in Wolfville, Nova Scotia, where he studied
economics and completed a Bachelor of Arts programme in
1957. Senator Atkins subsequently received an Honourary
Doctorate in Civil Law in the Fall of 1999 (DLC), from
Acadia University, his old “alma mater”.
A former President of Camp Associates Advertising Limited, a well-known
Toronto-based agency, Senator Atkins has also played an active role within the
industry, serving, for instance, as a Director of the Institute of Canadian
Advertising in the early 1980’s.
Over the years, Senator Atkins has had a long and successful career in the field of
communications – as an organizer or participant in a number of important causes
and events. For instance, and to name only a few of his many contributions,
Senator Atkins has given of his time and energy to Diabetes Canada, the Juvenile
Diabetes Foundation, the Dellcrest Children’s Centre, the Federated Health
Campaign in Ontario, the Healthpartners Campaign in the Federal Public Service
as well as the Chairperson of Camp Trillium-Rainbow Lake Fundraising
Campaign.
Senator Atkins was also involved with the Institute for Political Involvement and
the Albany Club of Toronto. It was during his tenure as President in the early
1980’s that the Albany Club, a prestigious Toronto private club, and one of the
oldest such clubs across the country, opened its membership to women.
Senator Atkins has a long personal history of political involvement. In particular,
and throughout most of the last 50 years or so, he has been very active within the
Progressive Conservative Party – at both the national and the provincial levels.
Namely, Senator Atkins was National Campaign Chair in the federal elections of
1984 and 1988 and has held senior organizational responsibility in a number of
Provincial election campaigns and he has served as an advisor to both the Rt. Hon.
Canadian Troops in Afghanistan:
Taking a Hard Look at a Hard Mission
20
Brian Mulroney and the Rt. Hon. Robert L. Stanfield, as well as the Hon. William
G. Davis Premier of Ontario.
Norman K. Atkins was appointed to the Senate of Canada on June 29, 1986. In the
years since, he has proven to be an active, interested, and informed Senator. In
particular, he has concerned himself with a number of education and poverty
issues. As well, he has championed the cause of Canadian merchant navy
veterans, seeking for them a more equitable recognition of their wartime service.
Senator Atkins served in the United States military from September 1957 to
August 1959.
Currently, Senator Atkins sits as an independent Progressive Conservative
member, and is on the National Security and Defence Committee and the Veterans
Affairs Subcommittee. He is also the Honourary Chair of the Dalton K. Camp
Endowment in Journalism at Saint-Thomas University in Fredericton, New
Brunswick and Member of the Advisory Council, School of Business at Acadia
University.
APPENDIX II
Biographies of Committee Members
21
The Honourable TOMMY BANKS, Senator
Tommy Banks is known to many Canadians as an
accomplished and versatile musician and entertainer. He is a
recipient of the Juno Award, the Gemini Award and the
Grand Prix du Disque.
From 1968 to 1983 he was the host of The Tommy Banks
Show on television. He has provided musical direction for
the ceremonies of the Commonwealth Games, the World
University Games, Expo ’86, the XV Olympic Winter
Games, various command performances and has performed
as guest conductor of symphony orchestras throughout Canada, the United States,
and in Europe.
He was founding chairman of the Alberta Foundation for the Performing Arts. He
is the recipient of an Honourary Diploma of Music from Grant MacEwen College,
and Honourary Doctorate of Laws from the University of Alberta, and of the Sir
Frederick Haultain Prize. He is an officer of the Order of Canada, and a Member
of the Alberta Order of Excellence.
Tommy Banks was called to the Senate of Canada on 7 April 2000. On 9 May
2001, Senator Tommy Banks was appointed Vice-Chair of the Prime Minister's
Caucus Task Force on Urban issues.
He is currently a member of the Committee on National Security and Defence,
Chair of the Committee on Energy, the Environment and Natural Resources, and
chair of the Alberta Liberal Caucus in the Parliament of Canada.
A Calgary-born lifelong Albertan, he moved to Edmonton in 1949 where he
resides with Ida, as do their grown children and their families.
Canadian Troops in Afghanistan:
Taking a Hard Look at a Hard Mission
22
The Honourable JOSEPH A. DAY, Senator
Appointed to the Senate by the Rt. Honourable Jean
Chrétien, Senator Joseph Day represents the province of
New Brunswick and the Senatorial Division of Saint John-
Kennebecasis. He has served in the Senate of Canada since
October 4, 2001.
He is currently a Member of the following Senate
Committees: National Security and Defence; the
Subcommittee on Veterans Affairs, National Finance and
Internal Economy Budgets and Administration. Areas of
interest and specialization include: science and technology, defence, international
trade and human rights issues, and heritage and literacy. He is a member of many
Interparliamentary associations including the Canada-China Legislative
Association and the Interparliamentary Union. He is also the Chair of the Canada-
Mongolia Friendship Group.
A well-known New Brunswick lawyer and engineer, Senator Day has had a
successful career as a private practice attorney. His legal interests include Patent
and Trademark Law, and intellectual property issues. Called to the bar of New
Brunswick, Quebec, and Ontario, he is also certified as a Specialist in Intellectual
Property Matters by the Law Society of Upper Canada, and a Fellow of the
Intellectual Property Institute of Canada. Most recently (1999-2000) he served as
President and CEO of the New Brunswick Forest Products Association. In 1992,
he joined J.D. Irving Ltd., a conglomerate with substantial interests in areas
including forestry, pulp and paper, and shipbuilding, as legal counsel. Prior to
1992 he practiced with Gowling & Henderson in Kitchener-Waterloo, Ogilvy
Renault in Ottawa, and Donald F. Sim, Q.C. in Toronto, where he began his career
in 1973.
An active member of the community, Senator Day recently chaired the Foundation,
and the Board of the Dr. V.A. Snow Centre Nursing Home, as well as the Board of
the Associates of the Provincial Archives of New Brunswick. Among his many
other volunteer efforts, he has held positions with the Canadian Bar Association
and other professional organizations, and served as National President of both the
Alumni Association (1996) and the Foundation (1998-2000) of the Royal Military
Colleges Club of Canada.
Senator Day holds a Bachelor of Electrical Engineering from the Royal Military
College of Canada, an LL.B from Queen’s University, and a Masters of Laws from
Osgoode Hall. He is a member of the bars of Ontario, Quebec and New Brunswick.
APPENDIX II
Biographies of Committee Members
23
The Honourable COLIN KENNY, Senator
Career History
Sworn in on June 29th, 1984 representing the Province
of Ontario. His early political career began in 1968 as the
Executive Director of the Liberal Party in Ontario. From
1970 until 1979 he worked in the Prime Minister's Office
as Special Assistant, Director of Operations, Policy
Advisor and Assistant Principal Secretary to the Prime
Minister, the Right Honourable Pierre Trudeau.
Committee Involvement
During his parliamentary career, Senator Kenny has served on numerous
committees. They include the Special Committee on Terrorism and Security (1986-
88) and (1989-91), the Special Joint Committee on Canada’s Defence Policy
(1994), the Standing Committee on Banking Trade and Commerce, the Standing
Committee on National Finance, and the Standing Committee on Internal
Economy, Budgets and Administration.
He is currently Chair of the Standing Senate Committee on National Security and
Defence. The Senator is also currently a member of the Steering Committee of the
Standing Senate Committee on Energy, the Environment and Natural Resources.
Defence Matters
Senator Kenny has been elected as Rapporteur for the Defence and Security
Committee of the NATO Parliamentary Assembly. Prior to that he was Chair of
the NATO Parliamentary Assembly Subcommittee on the Future Security and
Defence Capabilities and Vice-Chair of the NATO Parliamentary Assembly
Subcommittee on the Future of the Armed Forces.
EMAIL: kennyco@sen.parl.gc.ca
Website: http://sen.parl.gc.ca/ckenny
Canadian Troops in Afghanistan:
Taking a Hard Look at a Hard Mission
24
The Honourable MICHAEL A. MEIGHEN, Q.C., Senator
Appointed to the Senate in 1990, the Honourable Michael
Meighen serves on various Senate Standing Committees
including Banking Trade and Commerce, Fisheries, National
Security and Defence, and chairs the Subcommittee on
Veterans Affairs. He has also served on the Special Joint
Committee on Canada’s Defence Policy and the Special Joint
Committee on a Renewed Canada.
In his private career, Senator Meighen practiced litigation and
commercial law in Montreal and Toronto. He is Counsel to the law firm Ogilvy
Renault, and was Co-Legal Counsel to the Deschênes Commission on War
Criminals. He sits on the Boards of Directors of Paribas Participations Limited,
J.C. Clark Ltd. (Toronto), and Sentry Select Capital Corp. (Toronto).
Senator Meighen’s present involvement in community service includes the
Salvation Army (Past Chair), Stratford Festival (past Chair), Atlantic Salmon
Federation - Canada (Chair), University of King’s College (Chancellor), McGill
University (Chair, McGill Fund Council and Governor).
Senator Meighen is a graduate of McGill University and Université Laval and was
awarded Honorary Doctorates in Civil Law from Mount Allison University in 2001
and from University of New Brunswick in 2002. He lives in Toronto with his wife
Kelly and their three sons.
APPENDIX II
Biographies of Committee Members
25
The Honourable WILFRED P. MOORE, Q.C., Senator
Senator Moore was appointed to the Senate on September
26th, 1996 by the Right Honourable Jean Chrétien and
represents the province of Nova Scotia (Stanhope
St./Bluenose). The Senator graduated from Saint Mary’s
University with a Bachelor of Commerce degree in 1964 and
in 1968, with a Law degree, from Dalhousie University.
The Senator was a Halifax Alderman from 1974 to 1980 and
served as Deputy Mayor from 1977 to 1978. He was
Chairman of the Halifax Metro Centre as well as the Social Assistance Appeal
Board for Halifax and Dartmouth. He served as a member of the Board of
Governors of Saint Mary’s University for 10 years, including the Advisory
Committee to the President.
Senator Moore served as a member of the Economic Committee of the Atlantic
Liberal Caucus. This Committee was responsible for the policy paper for the
Atlantic Provinces entitled “Catching Tomorrow’s Wave.” This initiative became
government policy in 2000 under the program name of “Atlantic Investment
Partnership” which committed $700 million into research (including postsecondary
education), community economic development, small communities
investment, trade and investment, entrepreneurship and business skills
development, and tourism.
In March, 2001, the Senator commenced an Inquiry in the Senate on the role of the
federal government in the financing of deferred maintenance costs in Canada’s
post-secondary education institutions. This inquiry, after being considered by the
Senate Standing Committee on National Finance, resulted in the federal
government providing assistance of $200 million in its 2002 budget for Canada’s
post-secondary education institutions for the indirect costs of research, which
included maintenance of the buildings of those institutions. This financial
assistance has continued in every subsequent federal budget.
Currently, the Senator sits as a member of the Senate Standing Committee on
National Security and Defence, Banking Trade and Commerce, as well as the Joint Committee on Scrutiny of Regulations. He is vice-chair of the Canada-United States Inter-Parliamentary Group and is chair of the Senate’s internal Artwork
Canadian Troops in Afghanistan:
Taking a Hard Look at a Hard Mission
26
Advisory Working Group. He is also a member of the Liberal Party’s Post-
Secondary Education and Research Caucus
He has sat on both the Standing Senate Committee on National Finance (1996-
2003) and Legal and Constitutional Affairs (1996-2003). He is a Vice-Chairman
of the Canada-United States Interparliamentary Group, and is a member and
director of the Canada-Ireland Interparliamentary Friendship Group.
The Senator’s community and volunteer involvement is wide-ranging. In
particular, from 1994 until 2006, Senator Moore was volunteer chairman of the
Bluenose II Preservation Trust Society, a not-for-profit registered charity
organization, whose fundraising efforts over the winter of 1994-95 enabled the
restoration and full operational and sailing status of the historic schooner, Bluenose
II, one of Canada’s beloved national icons. More recently, the Senator, along with the then President of the Nova Scotia College of Art and Design (NSCAD) and the Town of Lunenburg, initiated a studio residency program, in Lunenburg, for NSCAD. This facility will give graduates of the University an opportunity to gain professional experience, develop their work for an exhibit or graduate school, or make preparations for an entrepreneurial endeavour.” Concurrently, this initiative strengthens the existing artistic community in Lunenburg.
Senator Moore was born in Halifax, Nova Scotia on January 14th, 1942. He lives
with his wife Jane and their two children, Nicholas and Alexandra in Chester,
Nova Scotia.
APPENDIX II
Biographies of Committee Members
27
The Honourable GERRY ST. GERMAIN, Senator
Appointed to the Senate on June 23, 1993, the Honourable Gerry St. Germain represents the province of British Columbia and the Senatorial Division of Langley – Pemberton - Whistler. He is Chair of the Standing Senate Committee on Aboriginal Peoples, and also sits on Scrutiny of Regulations and National Security and Defence.
Senator St. Germain has had a long career in Parliament, having first been elected to the House of Commons in a 1983 by-election. He was subsequently re-elected in 1984. He was sworn to the Queen’s Privy Council when appointed Minister of State (Transport) on March 31, 1988. He was appointed Minister of Forestry in October 1988.
In his life outside of Parliament, Senator St. Germain has worked as commercial
pilot, building contractor and cattle rancher.
Canadian Troops in Afghanistan:
Taking a Hard Look at a Hard Mission
28
The Honourable DAVID TKACHUK, Senator
Appointed to the Senate on June 8, 1993, the Honourable David Tkachuk represents the province of Saskatchewan.
He is Deputy Chair of the Standing Senate Committee on Transport and Communications, and also sits on the Senate Committees of Agriculture and Forestry; Banking, Trade and Commerce; National Security and Defence; and
the Selection Committee.
Senator Tkachuk holds a Bachelor of Arts from the University of Saskatchewan and a Teaching Diploma from the College of Education in Saskatoon. In his life outside of Parliament, he has worked as a teacher and a businessman.
APPENDIX II
Biographies of Committee Members
29
The Honourable ROD A.A. ZIMMER, CM, Senator
With a long and distinguished career in business and philanthropy, Rod Zimmer is one of Winnipeg’s most recognized community leaders. His roots stem from Kuroki Saskatchewan, where he was born. He acquired a Bachelor of Commerce from the University of Saskatchewan in Saskatoon.
Since 1993, he has been the President of The Gatehouse Corporation. From 1995 to 1998, he served as Vice President of Festivals for the Pan American Games Society Inc. From 1985 to 1993, he was the Director of Marketing and Communications for the Manitoba Lotteries Foundation and was also the Director of Project Management for the Canadian Sports Pool Corporation in Ottawa in 1984. From 1979 to 1983, he was Vice- President of Corporate Communications for CanWest Capital Corporation. In 1973 he became Special Assistant to the Hon. James Richardson, Minister of National Defense, in Ottawa and served in that position until 1979.
Rod Zimmer is an extremely active player within his community, volunteering his services for countless charitable causes and organizations including serving as President of the Royal Winnipeg Ballet from 1989 to 1991 and as a Member of the Board of Directors for the Winnipeg Blue Bombers Football Club from 1981 to 1993.
Throughout his career, he has co-chaired and coordinated appeals for various
charitable groups, arts and sport organizations and universities, including, B’nai
Brith, Hebrew University, Manitoba Métis Federation, First-Nations, Universities of Winnipeg and Manitoba, Winnipeg Chinese Cultural Centre, Hellenic Society, East Indian Culture Centers, Saskatchewan Association of Rehabilitation Centres, Para and Special Olympics, and recently Gold Medal Plates (Manitoba)/ 2010 Winter Olympics (Vancouver).
Recently, Rod Zimmer was asked to be the Senate Caucus Liaison for the Young Liberals of Canada. A role that will allow him to mentor youth from across the country through his position as a Senator, an illustration that merely reflects his countless years of dedication to youth within the Liberal Party.
Canadian Troops in Afghanistan:
Taking a Hard Look at a Hard Mission
30
APPENDIX III
Biographies of the Committee Secretariat
31
APPENDIX III
Biographies of the Committee Secretariat
Major-General (Ret’d) G. Keith McDonald, Senior
Military Advisor
MGen McDonald grew up in Edmonton, attended College
Militaire Royal in St. Jean and Royal Military College in
Kingston (RMC), graduating in 1966 and being awarded his
pilot wings in 1967.
MGen McDonald operationally flew the Tutor, T-33, CF5,
CF104 and CF18 aircraft accumulating over 4000 hours of
pilot in command throughout his 37-year career in the Air
Force, Canadian Forces.
He held staff positions at the Royal Military College, in Baden Soellingen
Germany, at National Defence Headquarters in Ottawa and at the North American Aerospace Command in Colorado Springs. Command positions include CF18 Squadron Commander, Base and Wing Commander in Baden Soellingen, Germany.
Major General McDonald ended his military career as the Director of Combat
Operations at Headquarters North American Aerospace Defence Command at
Colorado Springs, USA.
After leaving the military in 1998, General McDonald served a period of “conflict of interest” prior to joining BMCI Consulting as a Principal Consultant in the Aerospace and Defence Division. He left BMCI in 2002 to set up his own
consulting company, KM Aerospace Consulting.
Major General McDonald has a degree in Political and Economic Science
(Honours Courses) from the Royal Military College. He has completed Canadian Forces staff school, the Royal Air Force (England) Staff College, the National Security studies course, Post Graduate Courses in Business at Queens University, Electronic Warfare Courses at the University of California Los Angeles, the Law of Armed Conflict at San Remo, Italy, and numerous project management courses.
General McDonald is married to the former Catherine Grunder of Kincardine,
Ontario, and they have two grown daughters, Jocelyn and Amy.
Canadian Troops in Afghanistan:
Taking a Hard Look at a Hard Mission
32
Barry A. Denofsky, National Security Advisor
Barry Denofsky recently retired after having completed 35
years with the Canadian Security Intelligence Service
(CSIS) and the Royal Canadian Mounted Police (RCMP).
Mr. Denofsky joined the RCMP in January 1969 and
worked as a peace officer in Saskatchewan, Alberta, and
Quebec. In 1972, he was transferred to the RCMP Security
Service where he was involved in a variety of national
security investigations. With the creation of CSIS in 1984, Mr.
Denofsky maintained his interest and involvement in matters of national security
with the new Service.
Mr. Denofsky held a variety of operational and senior management positions with
CSIS which have included the following: Chief, Counter Intelligence, Quebec Region,
Deputy Director General Operations, Ottawa Region, Deputy Director General Counter Terrorism, Headquarters, Ottawa, and Director General Counter Intelligence, Headquarters, Ottawa. On retirement from CSIS, Mr. Denofsky was the Director General, Research, Analysis and Production, Headquarters, Ottawa. In that capacity, he was responsible for the production and provision to government of all source analytical products concerning threats to the security of Canada Mr. Denofsky also represented CSIS for many years at meetings of the NATO Special Committee in Brussels, Belgium. The Special Committee is an organization of security and intelligence services representing all member nations of NATO. In 2002, Mr.
Denofsky was the Chair of the NATO Special Committee Working Group.
Mr. Denofsky is a graduate of the University of Toronto, and holds a graduate
Diploma in Public Administration from Carleton University in Ottawa. He is a
member of the Council of Advisors, the Canadian Centre of Intelligence and Security Studies, (CSIS), Carleton University. He is married and has two children.
APPENDIX III
Biographies of the Committee Secretariat
33
Steven James, Analyst
Steven James joined the Parliamentary Information and
Research Service of the Library of Parliament in July
2005. He serves as a Research Officer for the Standing
Senate Committee on National Security and Defence.
Mr. James received his Bachelor of Arts (Psychology and
Sociology) from the University of Alberta and a Masters
in Military and Strategic Studies from the Center for
Military and Strategic Studies at the University of
Calgary.
Mr. James' recent studies have focused on Canada's counter-terrorism framework,
specifically, federal, provincial and municipal responses to and prevention of
terrorist-related incidents.
Previous to joining the Committee, Mr. James served as a Police Officer for the
both the Ontario Provincial Police (1994 - 1998) and the Toronto Police Service
(1998 - 2001).
Canadian Troops in Afghanistan:
Taking a Hard Look at a Hard Mission
34
Jodi Turner, Committee Clerk
Jodi Turner joined the Committees Branch of the Senate in January 2005. She
serves as the Co-clerk for the Standing Senate Committee on National Security and Defence.
Ms. Turner received a cum laude Double Honours Bachelor of Arts (French and
Political Studies) and a cum laude Masters in Public Administration (specialization
in Canadian Politics), from the University of Manitoba.
Previous to joining the Committee, she served as Chief of Staff to the Speaker of
the Senate from 2002 – 2005; and was Vice-President of Research for Western
Opinion Research in Winnipeg, Manitoba from 2000 – 2002.
APPENDIX III
Biographies of the Committee Secretariat
35
Barbara Reynolds, Committee Clerk
Barbara Reynolds has worked with Canadian
parliamentarians for 30 years in various capacities. Trained
as a sociologist, she worked for 10 years as a research
officer for the Library of Parliament, assisting committees
involved in the area of social affairs. During this time she
served for three years as Director of Research for the House
of Commons Committee on Disabled Persons that produced
the landmark report entitled Obstacles.
An associate of the Parliamentary Centre for 15 years, she
organized fact-finding visits for legislators to and from the United States as well as study tours to Canada for legislators from African and Southeast Asian countries.
She coordinated professional development programs for legislators and their staff, and wrote guidebooks on the operation of parliamentarians’ offices in Ottawa and in their constituencies. In addition, she served as the director of the Parliament, Business and Labour Trust, a program under which legislators spend up to a week with major corporations and trade unions.
From 1985 to 2000 she also served as adviser to the Canadian Group of the Inter- Parliamentary Union, the worldwide organization of legislators that serves as the parliamentary wing of the United Nations.
In April 1998, she joined the Senate Committees Directorate as a Committee
Clerk. Her committee assignments have included: Security and Intelligence; Boreal Forest, Fisheries; Transportation Safety; Veterans Affairs; and National Security and Defence. In June 2002, she received the Speaker’s Award of Excellence for her work in the Senate.
www.jawananebedaar.nl
|
|