Commons defence committee arrives in Afghanistan

[The Bread Guy]

This just in - they may end up being able to leave the wire....

Defence minister relents - Cdn MPs may get to leave Afghan base
MARTIN O'HANLON, Canadian Press, 24 Jan 07
Article Link

Visiting Canadian MPs confined to base in Afghanistan might be about to get a weekend pass.  Defence Minister Gordon O'Connor has relented a bit and announced that eight MPs visiting Kandahar may be allowed to leave the NATO base - provided the military can ensure their safety.  "The minister is supportive of every effort to maximize opportunities for members of Parliament to garner a better understanding of what Canadian soldiers, development workers, police representatives, and diplomats are doing for Canada in Afghanistan," spokeswoman Isabelle Bouchard said in an e-mail.  "Therefore, the minister has asked military authorities to see whether the Canadian Forces can safely support MP requests to see CF operations outside of Kandahar Airfield."  The MPs arrived in Kandahar on Tuesday to review the progress in the war against the Taliban.  But O'Connor barred them from leaving the base, citing security reasons - a decision that didn't sit well with opposition MPs who noted that other dignitaries have been escorted outside ....

 

[Bart Nikodem]

So let's see if I understand the security situation in Afghanistan: In 2002 with the Taliban in place Afghanistan was 100% unsafe for Canadian Parliamentarians. In 2007, being generous with the number, Afghanistan is 99% unsafe for Canadian Parliamentarians (KAF and parts of Kabul being presumably safe). Wow. A 1% improvement in 5 years. At this rate Afghanistan will be safe for Canadian Parliamentarians in 500 years. Talk about progress.

We shouldn't get down on ourselves though.

I can tell you about another country that had very poor infrastructure, no electricity or running water and was filled with hostile, non christian insurgents. But after 500 years of determined effort by the British and French we now have one of the best countries in the world. I'm talking about Canada of course. So all we need to turn Afghanistan around is a commitment from our government to stay the course in Afghanistan until 2502. I don't see how that is an unreasonable request.

 

[North Star]

"Liberal MP Carolyn Bennett says she's looking forward to seeing the Conservative government's so-called three-D approach - defence, development and diplomacy - in action."

Excuse me, but wasn't it Paul Martin's Liberal government that released Canada's Foreign Policy Statement, where the 3-D approach first made its appearance? Oh yes, i do believe it was as I was working in the DCDS shop at the time and quoted it incessantly at interdepartmental meetings.

OK, massive blunder number 1. Carolyn Bennet either doesn't read policy documents, or she's kinda forgetful.

Does anyone believe that anyone on this touring dog and pony show will actually go back to their party and sway their policies? I mean, come on...it's the political B team...

 

[vonGarvin]

The "3-D" approach was exactly what we practiced in Haiti.  It's a good method, and yes, the Liberals brought it forward under David Pratt (I believe). Now, not saying he was the ONE on this one, but he was MND, and that approach seemed, and seems, to have potential.

 

[geo]

North star...
Now that the Liberals are in opposition, they are welcome to say what they like, when they like.... there are no rules when you are the Loyal Oppsition.

Conservatives were a wee bit erratic as the opposition...............one year ago

 

[beach_bum]

On this one, I have to disagree with you....

Sean Penn headed to Iraq to "report"?  Can't see much use.  People we elected (for better or worse) wanting to see the reality on the ground of a situation that's costing a lot of Canadian lives and money?  I think that's not unreasonable.

That said, the Bloc-boy who said he'd like to dress like a local to hand out aid doesn't make it EASY to defend politicians wanting to have a look....

I was not referring to them wanting to go outside the wire, or to be on the ground.  I was referring to him wanting to dress up like an Afghani and hand out aid.  Did he honestly believe he could just blend right in?

 

[The Bread Guy]

I was not referring to them wanting to go outside the wire, or to be on the ground.  I was referring to him wanting to dress up like an Afghani and hand out aid.  Did he honestly believe he could just blend right in?

Ah, I misunderstood - then we agree that it's NOT, as someone wiser than I put it, like Hallowe'en dress-up for this guy!

BTW, here's the latest on venturing outta the wire....

Restrictions relaxed as MPs visit Afghan army base
CBC Online, 25 Jan 07
Article Link

Security restrictions on a group of MPs visiting Canadian troops in Afghanistan were relaxed Thursday so they could visit a nearby Afghan army base.

Eight members of the Commons defence committee currently in Kandahar to assess the Canadian mission to the country. The group had been confined to the Canadian base at Kandahar Airfield since they arrived on Tuesday, under orders from Defence Minister Gordon O'Connor.

But Liberal MP Carolyn Bennett said she and her colleagues took a short drive to a nearby Afghan national army base on Thursday in a Nyala RG-31 armoured truck, which is known for its ability to withstand blasts.

"We were suited up and convoyed out to the Afghan army base," she told CBC Newsworld. "It isn't that far away but it sure was a procedure to get us there, with our helmets and our gunners."

Bennett said the MPs are viewed as "high-value targets" for militants.

"Just on the road outside of here between the airfield and Kandahar, there have been a number of incidents. I guess they want to make sure we're not a part of that," she said ....

 

[geo]

No one is interested in having a "ramp party" for the departed MPs

 

[enfield]

Haven't Rick Mercer and other VIP's visited the FOB's? Hillier certainly has. I don't see the difference. I may not like, or agree with the views of the MPs in question, but I don't see how securing eight people is so difficult.

The MND and PM are shooting themselves in the foot here. They should be moving heaven and earth to get the MPs wherever they want to go. The MPs are adults - they can accept the risks, and take their chances. Those people are the elected representatives on the people, and if Harper et. al. want to sell this mission, educating MPs is a good start. Coupled with the apparent difficulty in getting the MPs over there (when the MND, PM, various entertainers etc have made it), the security excuse is weak, and I doubt many Canadians are believing it - I know I'm not.

Let them go, and within reason show them what they want to see.

 

[George Wallace]

So Enfield?

Are you suggesting that because the CDS (a well qualified Soldier, the last I saw.) escorts a person on a Christmas visit to the Troops, it is justification that we now have our Troops in Afghanistan become "Tour Guides" for any Member of Parliament or the Senate, who has some desire to go on a 'Junket' to a "War Zone".  We should drop everything we are doing over in Afghanistan and put on a "Dog and Pony Show" for some of these 'brilliant' folk, who in the end will still never understand what is going on, as they will see a bunch of people who have been called in from what they are doing, to perform like 'Dancing Bears' for these political twits. 

Sorry.  We are fighting a war, not running an "Escort Service" for Canadian Politicians.

 

[Colin Parkinson]

George, I respect your wisdom a lot, but I will have to agree with Enfield, the taxpayers have spent a whack of money to get this group there, they should be out of the wire. Telling the world they won't be going out and then zipping them around would help forstall planned attacks by the Taliban and reducing the risks. But it would also be a big impression on the locals that they are important enough that VIP's (using the term loosely I know) would travel half-way around the world to speak to them. It may also create a dose of reality to some of these politicans that may turn them from hostile and stupid to at least neutrel and thinking a little.

But you are right that "tours" need to kept in check.

 

[George Wallace]

Just got an update.

The reason that these pontificating Politicos were not going outside the wire is due to a number of factors, most centered on the fact that a Supply Convoy was attacked prior to their arrival, and there was a shortage of fuel.  This led to the most essential tasks having a priority for the fuel.  Visiting Politicians is not an essential task.  Patrolling and Cbt Tasks are. 

They are now getting the opportunities to get outside the wire.

 

[Old Sweat]

George beat me to the punch.

Cheryl Gallant, the MP for Renfrew-Nippising, was on local radio in Ottawa less than an hour ago and said that they had been outside the wire. They had travelled in Nyalas to visit local development projects. To be fair to the media reports, this had happened today, so the stories may not have been filed yet.

 

[cplcaldwell]

Mr Wallace, WADR, what is the source of the news on the convoy?


(Not trying to play 'net cop', I'd like to read more.)

 

[George Wallace]

Old Sweat answered that.

It was a live interview with Cheryl Gallant, the MP for Renfrew-Nippising, who was speaking directly from Kandahar.

CFRA 580 AM, Talk Radio in Ottawa (also accessable on the Net. http://www.cfra.com/headlines/index.asp  ).

 

[cplcaldwell]

Ack.

 

[enfield]

Are you suggesting that because the CDS (a well qualified Soldier, the last I saw.) escorts a person on a Christmas visit to the Troops, it is justification that we now have our Troops in Afghanistan become "Tour Guides" for any Member of Parliament or the Senate, who has some desire to go on a 'Junket' to a "War Zone". 

The CDS is not a combatant, and he is probably even more high profile than any of these MPs - hence, he requires just as much if not more security. If Rick Mercer and company (including several dubious 'celebrities', including the head of the Dominion Institute) can visit FOBs, why not the duly elected representatives of the tax payers of Canada? The MPs would require little more 'tour guiding' than the celebrities or even most Generals, and I hardly see these MPs as going on a 'war zone junket'. They are not any old MPs, they are the Defence Committee. It is directly in line with their duties - and should be a requirement for them - to visit. I would be far more concerned if they did not want to visit.

We should drop everything we are doing over in Afghanistan and put on a "Dog and Pony Show" for some of these 'brilliant' folk, who in the end will still never understand what is going on, as they will see a bunch of people who have been called in from what they are doing, to perform like 'Dancing Bears' for these political twits. 

Who said 'drop everything'? The MPs likely want - or at least should - see the troops and Afghans doing exactly what they always do. The MPs have not requested a dog and pony show, and if the military chooses to provide one, thats the fault of the military, not the MPs.
Again, these are not random 'political twits' who have suddenly decided a trip to the 'Stan would be good for their image. They are the Commons Defence Committee. It's a dozen people for a little over a week, how difficult can it be to accomodate them?

Sorry.  We are fighting a war, not running an "Escort Service" for Canadian Politicians.

We are fighting a war that requires the understanding and support of the Canadian people. Parliament is paying for this war, and it is Parliament's job to keep the Government accountable. The war is being fought in Canada's name, with Canada's money, and Canadian lives. To date, the Government has done apoor job of selling it to the people. These MPs have a duty and a right to visit the theatre, examine what is being done, and be educated by the frontline troops on exactly what is happening - franklly, I would have thought the Government would be begging MP's, VIPs, and officials to visit. I don't particularly know or like any of these MPs, but I firmly believe they should be given a broad view of what Canada is doing in Afghanistan, and hopefully they'll learn a thing or two about the mission and the soldiers.

 

[cplcaldwell]

From today's Globe and Mail, Online Edition

Shared under the Fair Dealings Provisions of the CopyRight Act, RSC



MPs urge more diplomacy in Afghanistan
Canadian Press

KANDAHAR, Afghanistan — Members of the House of Commons all-party defence committee say more diplomacy has to be injected into Canada's mission in Afghanistan, but they disagree on where the focus of that effort should be.

New Democrat defence critic Dawn Black said Thursday that Canada's role in the war-torn country is supposed to be what's called a three-D approach – defence, development and diplomacy.

She said the visiting MPs have not heard anything about diplomacy in their visit to Kandahar, particularly when it comes to dealing with Pakistan, which provides safe haven to Taliban militants.

The committee chairman, Tory MP Rick Casson, defended the government by saying Foreign Affairs Minister Peter MacKay has been actively engaging countries in the region, but if there is to be diplomacy it should be aimed at convincing NATO allies to meet repeated calls for additions troops.

His sentiment was shared by Liberal Ujjal Dossanjh, who said the Conservatives need to be tougher with the alliance so they “cough up more resources, particularly more troops"

 

[Colin Parkinson]

Maybe we can send Ujjal Dossanjh the NWF to help with the talks at the same time he can help resolve kashmir, I sure it's within his abilities..... :

 

[The Bread Guy]

Are you suggesting that because the CDS (a well qualified Soldier, the last I saw.) escorts a person on a Christmas visit to the Troops, it is justification that we now have our Troops in Afghanistan become "Tour Guides" for any Member of Parliament or the Senate, who has some desire to go on a 'Junket' to a "War Zone".  We should drop everything we are doing over in Afghanistan and put on a "Dog and Pony Show" for some of these 'brilliant' folk, who in the end will still never understand what is going on, as they will see a bunch of people who have been called in from what they are doing, to perform like 'Dancing Bears' for these political twits.  Sorry.  We are fighting a war, not running an "Escort Service" for Canadian Politicians.

Respect your experience & wisdom too, George, but I've gotta side (generally) with Enfield on this one.  I don't think anybody wants the troops to be sidelined from doing the job of helping the Afghans, but we also have to make reasonable accommodations for those we elected (love 'em or not).  I notice accommodations were made for three (gov't side) MP's over Christmas, as seen on CF Combat Camera .  So, do we just let the MP's who "get it" go over?  How do we decide who "gets it" or not?  Do we just leave out the MP's who we disagree with?

The fuel rationale is a good reason for spending effort/resources on "must do's", not "nice to do's".  Why wasn't this mentioned earlier?  Then again, I wonder if it was mentioned, but edited out of MSM accounts? Hmmm....

As for the latest from Canadian Press and the Globe & Mail, sadly, more ammo for those who feel some of these politicians aren't getting it....