Op PRESENCE/Mali (Cdn mission/s, sitreps, etc. - merged)

[Edward Campbell]

It appears, to me, from what little I can see in the media, that France has earned a great deal of goodwill in North Africa and respect around the world for its operations in Mali. All that will, I suspect, wither and die if France becomes involved in a protracted counter-insurgency campaign.

 

[tomahawk6]

France has alot of experience in North Africa with excellent intel sources. Once the bad guys have been pushed back out of the towns,this will become an SF/Air Force show.The Taureg have already begun to negotiate with France/Mali so they arent crushed like their AQ foes will be.

 

[The Bread Guy]

It appears, to me, from what little I can see in the media, that France has earned a great deal of goodwill in North Africa and respect around the world for its operations in Mali. All that will, I suspect, wither and die if France becomes involved in a protracted counter-insurgency campaign.

:nod:

France has alot of experience in North Africa with excellent intel sources. Once the bad guys have been pushed back out of the towns,this will become an SF/Air Force show.The Taureg have already begun to negotiate with France/Mali so they arent crushed like their AQ foes will be.

The Tuaregs aren't friends of AQ ....
http://news.yahoo.com/tuaregs-seized-mali-towns-islamists-093208317.html
.... so there's a chance of two (Mali/France/African force and Tuaregs) piling on the one (AQ) - with the wild card being how much "autonomy" the Tuaregs are going to be allowed in their back yard:
http://www.businessweek.com/news/2013-01-31/france-s-says-mali-should-accept-some-touareg-autonomy

Interesting times, interesting cards France has been dealt .....

 

[Colin Parkinson]

No doubt, subtle efforts to separate the 2 have been underway for sometime as well.

 

[The Bread Guy]

Highlights mine....

The total cost of providing a transport plane to aid international efforts in Mali is an estimated $18.6 million, says one of Canada's top soldiers.

Of that cost, $11.7 million is directly related to the mission itself and the remainder is the regular cost of keeping the C-17 Globemaster ready to go, Maj.-Gen. Jonathan Vance told a House of Commons committee Thursday.

Canada had initially agreed to provide the massive transport plane for one week to assist the French government in transporting soldiers and supplies to the West African country.

The French military launched an intervention there Jan. 11 to oust Islamists from power in the north of the country and to stop their march south.

Canada later agreed to extend the contribution of the transport plane until the middle of February.

Since then, the French have been successful in pushing back the rebels and the United Nations is now considering a peacekeeping force to keep the peace in the north.

The total cost of the Canadian contribution mission won't be known until 60 days after it's over, Vance said.

Since the first flight on Jan. 17, the plane has flown 13 missions and moved more than 350,000 kilograms of cargo ....

The Canadian Press (via CTVnews.ca), 31 Jan 13

 

[a_majoor]

Civilization 1; Barbarians 0.

Intrepid citizens band together to save their heritage against the Islamists. Given the behaviour of the Isamists, it seems pretty easy to turn the population out against them (but most of the time, the population is disorganized while the Islamists are not only organized, but have the means and will to do violence against the population as well). Glenn Reynolds of Instapundit has documented some similar actions in Egypt, Islamic Brotherhood offices being torched and and so on. So long as civilized people continue to band together, barbarians will have a harder time of it. Build high trust neighbourhoods at home, you never know when you are going to need a helping hand:

http://blogs.the-american-interest.com/wrm/2013/01/30/intrepid-citizens-save-timbuktus-priceless-manuscripts/

Intrepid Citizens Save Timbuktu’s Priceless Manuscripts

Once again civilization survives barbarism: Timbuktu’s ancient literary treasures were not destroyed after all. In a classic example of how the uncertainty of war can make bad reporters of us all, local accounts apparently vastly exaggerated the damage done to the city’s legendary library. Not only was the place not burned to the ground—as the city’s mayor claimed—but the manuscripts themselves were removed from the library by Malians last year. The Daily Maverick reports:

Preservationists in Mali told Walt that a large-scale rescue operation was executed early last year and thousands of manuscripts were hauled out of the Ahmed Baba Institute [the name of the library that housed the manuscripts] to a safe house elsewhere. “Realising that the documents might be prime targets for pillaging or vindictive attacks from Islamic extremists, staff left behind just a small portion of them, perhaps out of haste, but also to conceal the fact that the centre had been deliberately emptied,” Walt said. . . .

Other reports now suggest just 2,000 manuscripts were kept at the Ahmed Baba Institute while a further 28,000 were transferred safely to Bamako last year. According to these reports, efforts to save the manuscripts began as soon as northern Mali fell to Tuareg rebels last year. So while some manuscripts may have been destroyed, or looted, by fleeing rebels, the bulk of the collection appears to have been saved.

Though of course the loss of even some of the the manuscripts is tragic, we are greatly relieved that the majority of the collection has been saved. We are also inspired by the example of decency and courage displayed by the citizens who saved these treasures. Civilization is a hard won victory, and it must be constantly reclaimed in the face of barbarism. It’s successes like these that give us hope and remind us that no matter how culturally different Malians are from us, we are all involved in the same fight.

 

[Edward Campbell]

In an article in MacLean's magazine Michael Petrou suggests that the Mali adventure is very convenient for French President Hollande because it changes his well earned reputation as a timid, risk averse bureaucrat who is unwilling or unable to deal with France's many and varied problems.

Of course, if Mali turns into a quagmire, then Hollande will be seen as a timed, risk averse bureaucrat with deeply flawed strategic vision.  :dunno:

 

[Colin Parkinson]

I think France sees this as their backyard and do nothing is not an option. I suspect that most of the other parties are in some sort of agreement about intervening. They are also clear about not overextending themselves and have been careful not to target the Tureaq main population centre. AQM sems to find itself suddenly alone.

 

[tomahawk6]

In an article in MacLean's magazine Michael Petrou suggests that the Mali adventure is very convenient for French President Hollande because it changes his well earned reputation as a timid, risk averse bureaucrat who is unwilling or unable to deal with France's many and varied problems.

Of course, if Mali turns into a quagmire, then Hollande will be seen as a timed, risk averse bureaucrat with deeply flawed strategic vision.  :dunno:

As much as I admire you Edward,this quagmire meme just doesnt fit the situation as we discussed at the outset. There is no comparison between North Africa and Afghanistan. We are the outsiders in Afghanistan but the French are on home ground so to speak.The local population of the former French colonies speak French which is a big advantage. The strategy I would follow is one of creating quagmire's for AQ and its affiliates.Iraq was one such killing ground.Afghanistan is another.My version of a quagmire would be invading Lebanon for example. A quagmire is a situation that you cannot extract yourself from.

 

[Edward Campbell]

I know I'm harping on the dangers of quagmire and, to France's credit, they have intervened in North Africa something like 40 times in the last 50 years and they either:

1. Understand when to leave; or

2. Are already in a quagmire, of sorts.

I will be very happy for Pres Hollande when (if), in a few weeks, he dusts of his hands, says, "OK, we killed a few unpleasant black folks and I've decided that we won so lets forget about whatever that place is and have a nice victory parade in Paris."

If he manages that I will hold him up as an example to the West. There's nothing wrong with periodic bouts of killing unpleasant foreigners; there's a lot wrong with declaring them to be peace loving allies and trying to make them democrats.

 

[The Bread Guy]

House of Commons "take note" debate on Mali yesterday - Hansard transcript link here, Mali debate also attached (33 page PDF)

More from CBC.ca:

Members of Parliament took part in a four-hour 'take-note' debate on the conflict in Mali and Canada's contribution to the mission Tuesday night.

While 'take-note' debates are non-binding, they allow for MPs to make their views known in the development of government policy.

Bob Dechert, the parliamentary secretary to the minister of foreign affairs, kicked off the debate by saying this was "only one part" of the federal government's commitment to engage MPs on Canada's reaction to the conflict in Mali.

"It is our hope that we will find consensus on this matter," said Dechert.

To date, the federal government has contributed one C-17 military transport plane to help support the French military intervention in Mali at a cost of roughly $18.6 million to Canadian taxpayers.

The massive cargo-lifter was dispatched roughly three weeks ago and has completed 13 airlift missions to Bamako, the capital of Mali. Its mission is due to end Feb. 15.

Dechert reiterated that Canada's C-17 and the 40 troops deployed in support of the military transport plane's operations "have not been and will not be part of combat operations."

The Conservative MP said Canada's objective is to see Mali return to "a fully democratic and constitutional rule."

New Democrat MP Paul Dewar, who is his party's foreign affairs critic, said while the debate helps provide "much-needed oversight" of Canada's role in Mali, the government's position has been "inconsistent" with ministers sending "mixed messages."

"The government must be clear both about the purpose and level of commitment," said Dewar.

Interim Liberal leader Bob Rae said he got the sense the government was being very cautious about its engagement in Mali and wondered why the federal government would not keep the C-17 running as long as Canada felt it necessary "to protect the security of Mali, West Africa, Canada and the world," instead of setting a deadline ....

 

[Colin Parkinson]

Because deadlines are arbitrary and not set in reality? Do we pull out at a critical moment or do we assess the situation and determine if the need is no longer there. Or perhaps we pull out if the mission changes to one beyond the scope given. The Liberals have shown appalling lack of understanding of how the military fits into world affairs, I see the tradition continues.

 

[PanaEng]

Because deadlines are arbitrary and not set in reality? Do we pull out at a critical moment or do we assess the situation and determine if the need is no longer there. Or perhaps we pull out if the mission changes to one beyond the scope given. The Liberals have shown appalling lack of understanding of how the military fits into world affairs, I see the tradition continues.

Perhaps I misread your comment but I think Rae was actually saying that he did not like that the Gov set a deadline (this time) and suggested that the C-17 should be kept running as long as required.

 

[GAP]

Why would you leave a mission/commitment open ended.....you can always extend the mission, but there needs to an "end date"....isn't that what the opposition was crying about all those years?

 

[Colin Parkinson]

I read it as the Liberals asking for a deadline, I may have been mistaken.

 

[Journeyman]

It's poorly written (hence this discussion), but I read it as Rae critiquing the government for having set a deadline.

What Rae is actually saying is.......anything contradictory to the government's position; it's easier than thinking and having to develop a coherent policy of one's own.

 

[PanaEng]

It's poorly written (hence this discussion), but I read it as Rae critiquing the government for having set a deadline.

What Rae is actually saying is.......anything contradictory to the government's position; it's easier than thinking and having to develop a coherent policy of one's own.

Exactly. Had a deadline not been set, they both, Lib and NDP would be berating the Gov about it - and let me add, the same scenario would be played regardless of who is in power - that's politics

 

[Edward Campbell]

What are the incremental costs of the C-17 support?

Are we going to ask France to reimburse us?

 

[The Bread Guy]

It's poorly written (hence this discussion), but I read it as Rae critiquing the government for having set a deadline ....

.... which is why I like sharing primary source material like the debate transcript to provide more than just second-hand media reporting - here's hoping this clears up what Rae said (highlights mine):

Hon. Bob Rae (Toronto Centre, Lib.):  Mr. Chair, I appreciate the fact that the government has given us the opportunity to have this discussion tonight. I want the Canadian public to know that the Prime Minister spoke to the Leader of the Opposition on this subject and I also had a chance to speak with him as well.

    From the Prime Minister's comments in our one discussion, and I had a couple of discussions with the Minister of Foreign Affairs, I had a sense of deep caution on the part of the government. I had a sense that it was looking for support and a broad consensus in the House of Commons as to what would be appropriate for Canada to do.

    I will tell the House what I told the Prime Minister. I said that we live in a shrinking world. We live in a world where violence in one corner, whether it is Timbuktu, Gao, Kabul or anywhere in the world, places that perhaps Canadians 15 or 20 years ago would have said what did it matter if people were killing each other in some place that seemed to be far away. The answer to that simple question is, it matters a lot, not only morally, not because we are morally connected to what goes on in the entire globe, but because our interests, our security interests are directly affected. We cannot afford to be narrow, isolationist or small minded about how we look at problems in places far away, so we have to avoid thinking in that way.

    We also have to avoid thinking ideologically. It was the great Conservative, Edmund Burke, who said once that there was no greater menace than to govern in the name of a theory. We cannot govern in the name of a theory. We cannot say that we think Latin America is more important to us than Africa, which the Conservatives did say. They said that they would concentrate more on one part of the world than another.

    We cannot afford to say that we will not fall in with the United Nations, that we will do it on our own. The reality is we do these things together.

    Yes, the government has been very careful to say it will give the French a cargo plane for a week. What if the conflict lasts more than a week? What if it lasts beyond February 15? The parliamentary secretary says that we will find out. Yes, we will find out. Therefore, I do not know why the Government of Canada would not say that it takes this conflict seriously and that it will keep its plane running as long as it feels it is necessary to protect the security of Mali, to protect the security of West Africa, to protect the security of Canada and to protect the security of the world. Why would we not take that position?

 

[Colin Parkinson]

What are the incremental costs of the C-17 support?

Are we going to ask France to reimburse us?

Likely a favour given for a future favour elsewhere.