OP Athena drawing resources from other deployments

[Armymedic]

This is a two part post:
1. the moving of ballistic vest from OP Palladium to OP Athena,
2.The use of civilian contract workers in an area where the Army has already said where numerous people may be killed;

Seeing how I am going to Bosnia, I may be a bit hypersensitive to the blatent disregard to my personal protection. While I agree that the crew going to Afghan will need it more then me, What will I have? Hope they still got the old ones around....

Fragmentation Protective Vest and Ballistic Plates
Because some orders have yet to be received, the CF currently has an overall shortage of the ballistic plates that are worn with the fragmentation protective vest. Ballistic plates are being introduced through the Clothe the Soldier program, which is not yet complete.

Ballistic plates are sections of body armour that fit into pockets on the front and back of the soldier‘s fragmentation protective vest, or "frag vest." Without the plates, the vest will protect the soldier from shell fragments from artillery and mortar fire, but will not stop direct, aimed shots from rifles and machine-guns. The ballistic plates, which cover vital organs in the upper body, significantly increase the protection offered by the vest, and may stop some direct shots.

About 1,700 frag vests with plates are in Canada and available for Op ATHENA, and 650 more sets are being withdrawn from Bosnia, where the threat level is much lower. Therefore, every soldier deploying on Op ATHENA will have a frag vest with ballistic plates. All 250 CF personnel currently in Afghanistan have frag vests with ballistic plates.

The CF has a total of about 4,000 sets of ballistic plates. A newer type of plate that was ordered as part of the Clothe the Soldier program should be delivered in the fall of 2004, along with an improved frag vest.

It should be noted that neither the frag vest nor the vest plus the ballistic plates can give perfect protection. They are meant to reduce injury and save life. They do not make soldiers bullet-proof.

Ballistic plates are not worn all the time during a deployment; the Task Force Commander for each mission decides whether they will be worn, depending on the mission and threat level. At the current threat level, Op ATHENA personnel will be required to wear a frag vest with plates whenever they leave the camp, and sometimes even in camp if the threat level indicates a requirement.

More information, including photos, can be found on the Clothe the Soldier website: http://www.army.dnd.ca/lf/equip/hab/index_e.asp

CANCAP
The Contractor Augmentation Program (CANCAP) is a CF initiative under which civilian contractors deliver support services to CF units deployed on operations where local conditions permit. CANCAP does not replace CF functions, but augments combat service support capabilities and will, therefore, provide relief for overstretched CF support trades. This type of support has been used in Bosnia for about three years.

In December 2002, DND entered into a contract with SNC-Lavalin/PAE to provide support services to deployed CF operations to a value of $400 million for up to 10 years. SNC-Lavalin/PAE is an experienced company that has been in Afghanistan for two years providing support to non-governmental organizations and the deployed forces of the United States and other countries. Many contractors are in Kabul providing services such as food and fuel supply.

CANCAP will support the 1,700 personnel to be deployed in Afghanistan from August 2003 to August 2004. Due to the mission‘s extremely short timelines, the support task was divided into two parts: the Support to Theatre Activation Task and the Mission Sustainment Task.

The Support to Theatre Activation Task, now under way, will end on August 10, 2003, when the entire Canadian contingent will be on the ground in Kabul.. Activities in Kabul include camp construction, reception and movement of camp materiel, and provision of some camp support services (e.g., food services and fuel supply) to the Theatre Activation Team. Most of these activities are being conducted under subcontracts arranged by CANCAP in theatre.

The Sustainment Task Order for services to the Canadian camp is currently being negotiated and should be approved by June 20. This Task Order will allow CANCAP to provide camp services such as food services, local procurement, laundry, water and waste management, engineering support, fire services, accommodation control, and system support to communications and information systems.

CANCAP is expected to save 80 to 100 military logistics positions in combat service support. CANCAP personnel will be integrated into the CF logistics support structure.

 

[Armymedic]

Oops forgot to mention as well...

When I went to Bosnia 2 yrs ago we were issued extra sets of combats, underwear, socks, t shirts, and boots before we left.

Well, we just went through this past week to get our ‘deployment‘ issue, and there were no extra CADPAT uniforms(we‘d just get the green ones), and they had run out of boots and green socks my size. So I got 3 pr (vs the 5 pr last tour) of black liner socks, grey socks, underwear, and green tshirts.

So I wonder, do we really have all the kit we need? (I do realize this could be construde as whining but...)

 

[Bartok5]

Armymedic,

And all of this suddenly comes as a surprise to you? Please see my post under "current affairs".

If you think you are "hard done by" right now, wait for it. The impending traffic cop skit in Kabul will be the Canadian Army‘s highest-profile mission since Korea. That leaves you (and those like you) in Bosnia as the "retarded" poor cousins. Get used to it. If you aren‘t the main effort, you are quickly forgotten.

At least with the current "security mission" to Kabul, the government has vowed it‘s support come **** , high water, or actual expenditure of modest funds. The numbers involved in the Afghan mission are such that the "powers that be" are essentially compelled to do what they can to support. Those guys are the main effort, and will remain so for the next year. For anyone not involved in that focus, either in Canada or abroad elsewhere, you are screwed plain and simple. Trying to obtain kit or funding for training above platoon level will be an exercise in futility....

Here‘s the pathetic part. Even as the "Army Main Effort", the guys and gals in Afghanistan are going to be left wondering right up until the last minute (and probably beyond deployment) whether or not they will actually receive the ballistic plates withdrawn from Bosnia, the highly-touted monocular NVGs and IR aiming lasers that the Army just ordered, IFF IR insignia, C8‘s, etc, etc, etc. Best of luck to them all, knowing what I know. Hollow promises never fulfilled seem to be our professional stock in trade these days. "Peter, this is Paul - send ballistic plates and extra uniforms, over".....

Anyone headed to Bosnia is about to become a irrelevant, second-fiddle sideshow. Been there, lived the experience when the Army focus shifted to G8 two months into my former unit‘s deployment to Afghanistan. I just hope you feel appreciated when your 6 months in Bosnia are done.....

Can you say "you‘ve been where???" I knew you could....

Bartok5

 

[Jarnhamar]

I thought that was quite brutal myself. When Charlie company showed up at clothing looking to get stuff issued they flipped. It seemed like they needed a signed note from God to issue reserves equipment.

When we finally did get access to clothing we found the same problems. No socks, no boot sizes. Cadpat was all out of normal sizes.
I thought the guys going on athena were getting ussed desert uniforms, flak vests and TVs??

It makes sence the athena boys would get priority, i still think the army should have enough to cover both.

 

[Pikache]

http://www.cbc.ca/stories/2003/06/21/cdn_forces_afghan030621


Afghan mission will drain military‘s strength: CDS
Last Updated Sat, 21 Jun 2003 9:58:41
OTTAWA - The head of Canada‘s military says the upcoming mission to Afghanistan will damage his forces‘ ability to take on new tasks in the future.


INDEPTH: Afghanistan: Mission comes under fire at home

Gen. Ray Henault says the mission to stabilize and secure the capital, Kabul, is both dangerous and expensive.

About 3,800 Canadian troops will go to Afghanistan starting in August.

Henault, the chief of the defence staff, says it will take 18 months after the Afghan mission is over before any new tasks can be taken on.

He says the Canadian Forces‘ response to a flood, an ice storm or a terrorist attack would be uncertain.

"Our ability to do that is getting very limited at the moment, certainly from a land force perspective," he said.

"We are… doing a review of what our commitments are, where they‘re taking us and to try to determine where we may have flexibility in future," said Henault.

Henault says the cost of going to Afghanistan will be well beyond the $200 million Ottawa set aside for the mission in the last budget.

He said he told the Prime Minister‘s Office the mission could only be carried out "with difficulty."

But while one high-ranking general has already quit, reportedly in protest over the mission, Henault said he never considered leaving.

"I can‘t help the Canadian Forces or help to smooth out some of the wrinkles that we often face by resigning," he said.

"The best way I can help the Canadian Forces, in my view, is by staying here and to try to provide for government my best possible advice," said Henault.

Henault said it‘s the government‘s job to order the Forces to carry out missions and he can‘t refuse, just point out potential risks and implications.


Written by CBC News Online staff

 

[Pikache]

http://www.cbc.ca/news/features/afghan_cda_peacekeeping.html

Afghanistan: Canadian peacekeeping mission comes under fire at home
John Bowman and Justin Thompson, CBC News Online | June 19, 2003

When Canadian peacekeepers land in Afghanistan in late summer 2003, it will mark the second major deployment to the war-battered country in as many years. The first was Operation Apollo, Canada‘s contribution to the U.S.-led military campaign against terrorism.

Two contingents of 1,800 Canadian soldiers will deploy in consecutive six-month rotations. They will command the International Security Assistance Force (ISAF), including the Kabul Multinational Brigade, in charge of maintaining order in the capital city.

It‘s a mission already mired in criticism. When the federal government announced in February 2003 it would send peacekeepers to Afghanistan rather than provide military support to the U.S.-led invasion of Iraq, many pundits said it was because the military was too small and already stretched too thin.

It‘s a claim Defence Minister John McCallum denies. "The government‘s commitment to Afghanistan does not reflect any lack of confidence in the combat capabilities of Canada‘s army," he said, speaking at a defence conference in February 2003. "Quite the contrary, our soldiers are outstanding Canadians who are fully capable of carrying out difficult combat missions."

But some high-profile military figures have questioned the timing and wisdom of the mission.

Prominent among those is retired major-general Lewis MacKenzie, a veteran of nine peacekeeping tours, and commander of UN troops during the 1992 siege of Sarajevo in the Bosnian war. He says Afghanistan will by no means be a cakewalk.

"The idea of peacekeeping as being helping old ladies across the street in Bangladesh is false," he said in an interview with CBC News Online, explaining that peacekeepers are very much in a dangerous position, especially in Afghanistan.

"Looking from the Canadian soldiers‘ perspective, they‘ll be well-trained to do the job, but they‘ll have to be alert," said MacKenzie.

He‘s not alone in raising concerns about the potential dangers of the mission. A few short days after Ottawa announced it would send the peacekeeping force, the man responsible for charting possible directions for Canada‘s military, Maj.-Gen. Cam Ross, voted with his feet and resigned his post.

In a commentary written for The Globe and Mail, military analyst Scott Taylor says Ross‘s move came in apparent protest against the government‘s decision not to follow his recommendation to stay out of Afghanistan.

MacKenzie shares Ross‘s skepticism and says it probably would have been safer, and more politically astute for the government to commit troops to the invasion of Iraq.

"It would have been much more effective if (the government) would have supported the U.S. in Iraq," he said. "That‘s where the geopolitical Brownie points are."

And, he said, an offensive on Iraq would have been relatively safe compared with the daily grind of a peacekeeping mission. Afghanistan, he explained, is still controlled mostly by warlords. Only in Kabul, where the Canadians will be stationed, will there be any real show of force or control by peacekeepers.

But Taylor‘s Globe and Mail commentary points out there are also calls to expand the ISAF‘s mission in Afghanistan to include patrols moving outside of the secure zones around Kabul.

The patrols would attempt to bring law and order to the warlord-controlled regions outside the main urban areas in preparation for the country‘s first general election in the summer of 2004.

Taylor says the Canadian troops‘ resources will also be stretched because they‘ll be on their own when they land in 2003. The previous deployment of troops in 2002 arrived courtesy of the U.S. air force, and relied on U.S. military services for such things as transportation and laundry service.

Now, with U.S. and British forces busy in Iraq, supplies for the Canadian troops will have to be shipped commercially through a new staging area in Turkey, at elevated prices because of the increased demand in the area.

MacKenzie says the federal government‘s decision to send a peacekeeping contingent to Afghanistan was a convenient way of solving a tough ethical dilemma: how to show support for the war on terror on the one hand, while avoiding war in Iraq on the other.

"Was it a coincidence that (Canada‘s decision to commit peacekeepers to Afghanistan) happened at the same time as the U.S. was calling for support in Iraq? I don‘t think that‘s a coincidence," he said.

"The government saying that (it is) going to war on terror in Kabul is a lie," said MacKenzie. "The real war on terror is taking place in the mountains between Afghanistan and Pakistan. I chuckled when I heard the announcement… It certainly raises one‘s suspicions."

***
Interesting how a general resigned over this.