Gates hints Canada should extend mission. 11 Dec 08

[jollyjacktar]

I expect a more formal request will be forthcoming with the new administration after Jan 20th.  Who knows what will come.


Gates hints Canada should extend Afghan mission
Updated Thu. Dec. 11 2008 8:02 AM ET
CTV.ca News
U.S. Secretary of Defense Robert Gates met with U.S. and NATO leaders in Afghanistan Thursday where he hinted that he would like to see Canada's mission in the war-torn country pushed past its legislated end in 2011.
Gates told reporters after a meeting with military leaders about operations in southern Afghanistan -- including Kandahar where the majority of Canadian soldiers are posted -- that the U.S. understands Canada's sacrifice in the war so far.
"The countries that have partnered here in RC South have made an extraordinary commitment and proportionately none has worked harder or sacrificed more than the Canadians," Gates said, responding to queries about a possible Canadian mission extension.
"They have been outstanding partners for us and all I can tell you, as has been the case for a very long time, the longer we can have Canadian soldiers as our partners the better it is."
Gates went on to note that the Afghanistan mission is a "long-term commitment."
"This is a long fight and I think we are in it until we're successful, along with the Afghan people," Gates said.
"I would take my cue from the Dutch commander here at RC South. His view is the situation is not getting worse -- it's just different."
Gates also said that the Pentagon is trying to get three of four requested combat brigades to Afghanistan by this summer.
President-elect Obama has said he wants to see an additional 20,000 troops sent to Afghanistan within the next 18 months. The U.S. has already said 3,500 troops will be sent to Afghanistan by the end of this year, with an additional 5,000 soldiers expected to be deployed in January. The U.S. currently has about 32,000 troops in the country.
Gates added that NATO and U.S. forces in the country may need to make a "course correction" and help build a stronger Afghan army and co-operate more fully with Kabul.
"I think there's a concern on the part of some of the Afghans that we sort of tell them what we're going to do, instead of taking proposals to them and getting their input and then working out with them what we're going to do, so it's a real partnership," Gates said.
"That's an important aspect of this, that I think we need a course correction."
With files from The Canadian Press

 

[a_majoor]

If we are serious about:

a. Stabilizing Afghanistan to promote regional stability,
b. Promoting human rights, and;
c. winning the counter insurgency,

then the timeline is quite clear. We need to stay until 2015, when the first cadre of @ 6 million Afghan children start graduating from school. With a critical mass of educated people hitting Afghan society and reforming Afghan institutions, the situation will swing clearly over to "us". Until then, a field force is still needed to help shield the Afghan students and protect the infrastructure, and while we can gradually draw down to just the OMLT role, it will still be a drawn out process.

 

[The Bread Guy]

Agreed there will be LOTS still to be done even after 2011 - it'll be interesting to see who the incoming US President gets to ask on this side of the border....

 

[helpup]

I think the time to start debating about this is now.  And emphasis on the fact that although it seems like a long time in reality of nation building it is not.  Non of our recent Op's were short term commitments. ( i.e Bosnia ) Cyprus was even longer.  It takes time to instill in people the want for change.  As was pointed out it can take a generational change where kids growing up have the chance to get educated and see that there is differant options.  It also sticks in my craw that we go into a place to help and then pull out before we are done. 

By debate I should add, that is more for engaging those who are sitting on the fence or those who feel that we have shed enough blood.  Give them the facts, don't sugar coat it, lay it out so all Canadians are more aware. 

 

[jeffb]

The inauguration of Obama in January will probably help to swing domestic opinion towards extension. There is a lot of support for Obama in Canada and I suspect that he will be able to make a more better pitch to Canadians then Harper would.

 

[Colin Parkinson]

Harper will remain quiet on the subject till Obama drops by to give a speech to the House and when the Messiah asks for more troops and extension from us, Harper will stand up and say yes we can extend, but unlikely more troops. The Left will be choking on their latte's at this time.

 

[forza_milan]

Canada's defence ministry has ruled out extending its combat mission in Afghanistan past the 2011 scheduled deadline despite hints from U.S. Defence Secretary Robert Gates that Ottawa should reconsider its end date.

"Nothing has changed since the parliamentary motion was passed," said Dan Dugas, a spokesman for Defence Minister Peter MacKay. "We're done with the Kandahar combat mission in 2011."

Ottawa's response follows comments made Thursday by Gates , who was asked by a reporter whether Canada should continue its mission.

"The countries that have partnered with the United States and Afghanistan here in [regional command] south have made an extraordinary commitment, and proportionately, none have worked harder or sacrificed more than the Canadians," said Gates, who arrived at Canada's main base in Kandahar on Thursday.

"They have been outstanding partners for us, and all I can tell you, as has been the case for a very long time, the longer we can have Canadian soldiers as our partners, the better it is."

Dugas said that Gates has "always been gracious about Canada's role in the UN-mandated mission."

But he added that "the minister and government have been very clear that Parliament has decided that our mission there ends in 2011."

During the election campaign, Prime Minister Stephen Harper reaffirmed that he will abide by a motion passed in the House of Commons that Canada would withdraw the bulk of its military forces in Afghanistan as scheduled in 2011.

CBC's David Common said Gates comments should not be considered a formal request, but that they are significant because the defence secretary is staying on in that role under Barack Obama's administration. As well, the president-elect has said getting more troops to Afghanistan is a priority.

Gates also told reporters that the Pentagon will move three brigades into Afghanistan by next summer,. the most specific he's been on when he'd begin meeting the requests of ground commanders asking for 20,000 troops.

The extra troops are expected to be deployed to Kabul to secure the capital before moving to Kandahar, considered the epicentre of violence and where most of the 2,500 Canadian soldiers in the region are based.

Gates said he will not have to cut troop levels further in Iraq to free up at least two of those three brigades for Afghan duty.

He also said the mission needs to focus better on building the Afghan army and better co-operation with Kabul on security operations.

"I think there's a concern on the part of some of the Afghans that we sort of tell them what we're going to do, instead of taking proposals to them and getting their input and then working out with them what we're going to do, so it's a real partnership," Gates said. "That's an important aspect of this, that I think we need a course correction."
With files from the Associated Press

Source: http://www.cbc.ca/world/story/2008/12/11/gates-soldiers.html

 

[Haggis]

Harper will remain quiet on the subject till Obama drops by to give a speech to the House and when the Messiah asks for more troops and extension from us, Harper will stand up and say yes we can extend, but unlikely more troops. The Left will be choking on their latte's at this time.

You are assuming, of course, that Harper is still PM at that time.  Iggy may be less receptive if the Bloc and NDP make it clear that they want nothing to do with this.

 

[Marshall]

You are assuming, of course, that Harper is still PM at that time.  Iggy may be less receptive if the Bloc and NDP make it clear that they want nothing to do with this.

*fingers crossed* that Harper stays to be honest.

Also, I would fully support staying in past 2011. It would give me a slim chance to fit into a rotation after RMC, nothing would make me happier then getting a chance to help out over there (If I get in this year). With how it is going over there at this moment, it would be foolish to leave the combat role in 2011 - Canada needs more time, (and less whining by the public about 'spending' etc.)

 

[Gasplug]

It would give me a slim chance to fit into a rotation after RMC, nothing would make me happier then getting a chance to help out over there

Marshall,

Don't be in a hurry!  Your time will come. I joined CMR in 1980 and I thought Ronald Reagan was going to turn the Cold War into a hot one.  Instead I got to be a Balkans warrior.  There will be more jobs for the miltary after Afghanistan, you can bet on that one...

Cheers,

Gasplug

 

[Armymedic]

At the risk of getting piled on:

I believe that come 2011, we need to take a break. No more combat focused (battle group, OMLT) troops after Aug 2011. That being said, I believe we can (and should) still make a difference in the continued presence of the PRT (and POMLT) and with SOF forces, with a token group of medical pers still working out of the R3MMU.

IMHO, our contribution after Aug 2011 should be about 500 in Afghanistan.

 

[PuckChaser]

I would agree that a combat presence could be turned down, IE limiting our kinetic operations therefore reducing the need for a full battlegroup, however the OMLT is the main reason we are there. If we pull the OMLT, we'll lose the trust that we've built with the Afghan troops and degrade their morale. OMLT and KPRT are the 2 things we need to keep if we are going to thin out.

I would agree with you, however, that at 2011, we should take a similar tactical pause like we did before we moved down to Kandahar. Perhaps we can take over the KAF security job from another country, and let their troops have our FOBs. Give our combat troops a little time at home, get some new pers trained through DP1 training, etc and then come back in there to finish the job with all "bright-eyed and bushy tailed" troops and a whack of new kit+vehicles (hopefully some of the stuff will be procured by then).

The Canadian people have to remember how long it took for us to end the fighting in the Balkans, and turn it into a prosperous region again.

 

[cavalryman]

Marshall,

Don't be in a hurry!  Your time will come. I joined CMR in 1980 and I thought Ronald Reagan was going to turn the Cold War into a hot one.  Instead I got to be a Balkans warrior.  There will be more jobs for the miltary after Afghanistan, you can bet on that one...

Cheers,

Gasplug

Hmm.... funny you should metion that, Gasplug.... I joined CMR in 1980 and I though Ronald Reagan was going to turn the Cold War into a hot one as well... I even spent 3 years as a speedbump in the Fulda Gap, preparing to die a noble death, but quit the RegF before the Balkan war. Watching the army's employment evolve since the days of heavy metal on the Czech border, I'd say you're right on.  BTW - we know each other, buddy

 

[PanaEng]

The Left will be choking on their latte's at this time.

Hey! I like my lattes but I'm definitely not a lefty!
;D

 

[GAP]

Gates can make all the noise he wants, but in this political atmosphere there is no way Harper is going to extend the mission without a majority....

 

[PanaEng]

Gates can make all the noise he wants, but in this political atmosphere there is no way Harper is going to extend the mission without a majority....

That's my feeling - even if both Iggy and Harper personally want to do so it would take a lot of convincing to get the rest of the mp's to go along with it. Unless the polls start showing some support for the extension.

cheers,
Frank

 

[MarkOttawa]

From the end of a Torch post (please forgive any civilian infelicities or inaccuracies):
http://toyoufromfailinghands.blogspot.com/2008/11/eight-griffons-to-afstan.html

...
Thoughts for after 2011. How about keeping the PRT and a fair number of troops to mentor the ANA. But focus the mission on the Air Force, using the CH-47Ds and also new build CH-47Fs as and when we ever get them, Griffons, Heron UAVs, and C-17s and C-130Js to support our force and allies. Troops at KAF to provide force protection and support the mentors in the field when necessary, with required armour, and some JTF2 too. Probably a maximum of around 1,000 from the Army (about what the Aussies now have). No real idea of Air Force numbers but should be I imagine in the mid-hundreds actually in country (then there's Camp Mirage).

That would be a significant and useful contribution that the CF should be able to implement, and that I think would be welcomed by NATO and President Obama. I don't see why, in principle, the Canadian public could not be convinced to go along.

Moving from Kandahar would be very expensive and forgo all the local knowledge and familiarity acquired.

Especially now that there is a Joint Task Force Afghanistan Air Wing .

Mark
Ottawa

 

[Marshall]

Marshall,

Don't be in a hurry!  Your time will come. I joined CMR in 1980 and I thought Ronald Reagan was going to turn the Cold War into a hot one.  Instead I got to be a Balkans warrior.  There will be more jobs for the miltary after Afghanistan, you can bet on that one...

Cheers,

Gasplug

Your dating yourself.. haha

Good advice. I realize there will be ample opportunities for deployment in the future (be it war, peace keeping etc). Ill take what I get :.)

 

[TCBF]

At the risk of getting piled on:

I believe that come 2011, we need to take a break. No more combat focused (battle group, OMLT) troops after Aug 2011. That being said, I believe we can (and should) still make a difference in the continued presence of the PRT (and POMLT) and with SOF forces, with a token group of medical pers still working out of the R3MMU.

IMHO, our contribution after Aug 2011 should be about 500 in Afghanistan.

- The trouble with that is we lose continuity.  We need to stay focused and remain a threat to the baddies.  As well, a lot of our 'teeth' give us a say in the various rooms where other countries control the agenda of the meeting.  If they get the impression that we are trying to slide out from under the load, our agenda becomes harder to accomplish in cooperation with them.  It's cultural: "Y'all play football today?  Why not?"

- 500 is peanuts.  Even if you got rid of the HLTAs (which I would do if it was up to me), 500 would barely cover a national level HQ and a bare bones NSE.  Who is left to drive/fly out of the wire?  Remember, this is a "Big HQ" war: this isn't just linear combat, but a mission concerning longterm governance. 

- We don't need a break.  We need to realize that in a WAR, we have to ditch a lot of our peacetime career/MHR policies and start pushing the people who perform in the slot.  Trouble is, there is a strong isolationist element in the CF who cannot or will not admit we are in combat.  They have never been properly inculcated with a military ethos and are themselves mere bureaucrats in uniform.  They do little of the lifting and most of the whining.  Defeatists. If this was old country back in 1943...

 

[regulator12]

We don't need a break.  We need to realize that in a WAR, we have to ditch a lot of our peacetime career/MHR policies and start pushing the people who perform in the slot.  Trouble is, there is a strong isolationist element in the CF who cannot or will not admit we are in combat.  They have never been properly inculcated with a military ethos and are themselves mere bureaucrats in uniform.  They do little of the lifting and most of the whining.  Defeatists. If this was old country back in 1943...

I disagree, We do need a break. Our troops are getting worn out, we are going through our equipment at an alarming rate. We don't have all the proper parts for vehicle repairs, We are going through Lavs do to damage that don't make back to the front lines. Our AO is big for the size of force we have, we have lived up to our part of the deal if not more. We are stretched out and need a break. There are other countries that can step in a take over from us. The US and UK CAN afford to stay there for the long haul due to the size of there forces. We have done an amazing job and the world recognizes that, but to what cost to our soldiers and families. That country needs more soldiers especially in the south and they need to come from some other countries. We have done our part.