Dear Colleagues,

The Conference of Defence Associations (CDA) would like to draw to your attention to media coverage and analysis of the following areas of interest:

-      Policy and political debate in Canada over the mission in Afghanistan.
-      Reports from the ground in Afghanistan.
-      Developments in NATO members’ policy

The CDA also reminds you of the CDA Institute’s annual defence seminar and CDA annual general meeting on 21-22 February in Ottawa. Registration is still open (see link below for agenda/registration).
http://cda-cdai.ca/defenceseminars.htm

Canadian Policy

Jack Granatstein in the National Post (see link below) writes on interpreting Pearson’s legacy to peacekeeping and collective security. Granatstein writes, “Pearson . . . was no pacifist. He wanted Canada to play a strong role, and understood that this favoured land had to work with its friends to guarantee its security. He supported increasing defence budgets and raising troop numbers, and he understood that Canada had to be prepared to fight in defence of its national interests. To Pearson, strength and alliances were key to advancing our interests.” He writes that the “hard-edged values” that Pearson stood for have faded from Canadian memory, and ironically it is the Conservative government that is fostering the Liberal Pearson’s legacy correctly.
http://network.nationalpost.com/np/blogs/fullcomment/archive/2008/02/03/15633...

Much has been made of discussions between the Prime Minister and the Leader of the Opposition on the future of Canada’s role in Afghanistan. Adam Chapnick in the Ottawa Citizen (see link below) writes that the minority government is maturing in its foreign policy by being less partisan in its approach and appealing to the opposition and a wider portion of public opinion. He writes that support for the mission in Afghanistan will not come from “dividing the country along partisan lines” but by gaining the long-term backing of both of Canada’s main political parties.
http://www.canada.com/ottawacitizen/views/story.html?id=87688066-29ad-4ca5-8f...

In a speech at the University of Ottawa, NDP leader Jack Layton gave a speech on Canada’s role in Afghanistan in which he called for an end to the NATO mission and more of a ‘UN’ role. The full text is available at the link below.
http://www.ndp.ca/page/6134

Among the fallacies are present in this speech, the CDA would like to address two notable ones: (1) Layton advocates that the mission should be ‘UN’-led instead of ‘NATO-led’. The CDA would like to point out that the ISAF mission in Afghanistan is mandated and legitimized by the UN, according to various UN Security Council resolutions and the words of the UN Secretary-General himself; (2) Layton claims that ‘like the Soviets and others before’ the international mission in Afghanistan is destined to fail. This assumes a moral equivalency between the goals of the Soviets and the international community today: the former an invading force, the latter a force from some 30+ nations that are there at the request of the democratically-elected and sovereign government of Afghanistan.

The Senlis Council has released its new report (see link below) on the security and developmental situation in Afghanistan. Its recommendations include previous ones such as increasing troop numbers and boosting counter-insurgency efforts, as well as a proposal to foster bottom-up governance and security provision.
http://www.senliscouncil.net/documents/Decision_Point

Vincent Marissal in La Presse (see link below) explores the political ‘hot-potato’ that is the Afghan mission, and explores some of the issues that preoccupy Canadians about it.
http://www.cyberpresse.ca/apps/pbcs.dll/article?AID=/20080202/CPOPINIONS05/80...

Terry Glavin in the Vancouver Sun (see link below) writes that making ‘peace’ with the Taliban would “mean a human rights disaster and a giant leap backwards for the fledgling democracy Canadian soldiers have been fighting and dying to defend there. . . It would also mean a power-sharing deal with thugs and criminals whom the vast majority of Afghans want nothing to do with.”
http://www.canada.com/components/print.aspx?id=0ef96e4d-dd9f-4c0b-b775-920e17...

Retired Colonel Gary Rice writes for Vanguard (see link below) on the elements of a successful counterinsurgency strategy.
http://www.vanguardcanada.com/SuccessfulCOINStrategiesRice

Afghanistan

A letter in the National Post (see link below) from Captain Serge Blier, who was a medical officer with Joint Task Force Afghanistan, displays a keen appreciation for the difficulties faced in delivering humanitarian assistance in an insecure environment.
http://www.nationalpost.com/story-printer.html?id=278543

Arnaud de Borchgrave in the Washington Times and Kamran Bokhari for Strategic Forecasting (see links below) write on the situation in Pakistan and the Taliban insurgency there.
http://washingtontimes.com/apps/pbcs.dll/article?AID=/20080201/COMMENTARY/941...

http://www.stratfor.com/weekly/jihadist_insurgency_pakistan

Philip Smucker for the Asia Times (see link below) writes on the combination of counter-insurgency and developmental work being undertaken by US troops in Afghanistan, and the challenges incurred from combining the roles.
http://atimes.com/atimes/South_Asia/JB01Df01.html

The BBC reports (see link below) on the increase of opium production in southern Afghanistan where the level of insecurity is at its greatest. It is worth noting that very little or no poppy cultivation takes place in some 25 of 34 provinces, where relative stability exists.
http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/south_asia/7229126.stm

NATO

A series of reports have been released with high media and analytical attention focused on them. One is the report of the influential US Afghanistan Study Group (see link below), led by retired US General James Jones and former US Ambassador Thomas Pickering. Another briefing has come from the Atlantic Council of the United States (see link below). Another report by Oxfam on development and humanitarian priorities for Afghanistan (see link below). Together they provide a bleak picture of the security and development situation in Afghanistan, and the CDA believes that they should be viewed as a spur to the international community to contribute more to Afghanistan in all aspects.

Afghanistan Study Group:
http://www.thepresidency.org/pubs/Afghan_Study_Group_final.pdf

Atlantic Council of the US:
http://www.acus.org/docs/012808-AfghanistanbriefwoSAG.pdf

Oxfam:
http://www.oxfam.org.uk/resources/policy/conflict_disasters/downloads/afghani...

In response, the UK’s Secretaries of State for Defence, Foreign and International Development wrote a letter responding to the reports, outlining the UK’s position on the mission and NATO’s efforts there (see link below).
http://www.timesonline.co.uk/tol/news/uk/article3307373.ece

In light of these reports, Trevor Royle for the UK Sunday Herald (see link below) writes a piece examining the difficult issues raised in them.
http://www.sundayherald.com/news/heraldnews/display.var.2014880.0.0.php

In the run-up to the NATO summit in April 2008 on the mission in Afghanistan, greater prominence has been given to the rifts between NATO allies on contributions to the mission in Afghanistan. Sue Pleming for Reuters and Laura Winter for the Christian Science Monitor (see links below) write that the US faces difficulties in convincing its NATO allies to boost and coordinate their efforts in Afghanistan.
http://www.reuters.com/article/featuredCrisis/idUSN04599567

http://www.csmonitor.com/2008/0206/p01s03-wogi.htm

The German government expressed surprise at the forceful US request to contribute more to Afghanistan, according to a news report from Bloomberg (see link below). An article by Andreas Cremer (see link below) examines the German technical capacity to expand its mandate.
http://www.bloomberg.com/apps/news?pid=20601100&sid=axTrEfMRbI44

http://www.bloomberg.com/apps/news?pid=20601100&sid=aXTHp7.6T894

Paul Wells in Maclean’s and Campbell Clark in the Globe and Mail (see links below) report that Poland has announced that it will be providing two helicopters for Canada’s use in Afghanistan, along with 400 extra troops in the southeast. In a blog post (see link below) Wells also reports that there are rumblings that France might send 700 paratroopers to Kandahar following the April 2008 summit, as part of its moves to rejoin NATO’s military structure. Wells writes that this could put pressure on the Germans to provide more troops.
http://www.macleans.ca/article.jsp?content=20080204_001906_632

http://www.theglobeandmail.com/servlet/story/RTGAM.20080204.wafghan0204/BNSto...

http://forums.macleans.ca/advansis/?mod=for&act=dip&pid=104263&tid=104263&eid...

Victoria Nuland in the Washington Post (see link below) writes that the mission in Afghanistan is “an investment in our collective security” and “the catalyst for the 21st-century transformation of our democratic alliance [NATO].”
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2008/01/31/AR20080131025...

Conclusion

In anticipation of the tabling by the government of a motion in parliament on the Canadian mission in Afghanistan, and a parliamentary debate next week, the CDA will continue to contribute to an informed public debate on this crucial security and defence issue.

Alain Pellerin, Colonel (Ret’d)
Executive Director, CDA-CDAI / Directeur exécutif, CAD-ICAD
222 rue Somerset Street West / Ouest, Suite 400B
Ottawa, Ontario K2P 2G3
T: (613) 236-1252
F: (613) 236-8191
director@cda-cdai.ca
www.cda-cdai.ca