Royal Canadian Air Force headed to mission in Africa ‘very soon’: top general

[Retired AF Guy]

An interesting article from Deutsche Welle about the situation in the DRC.

DR Congo to remain 'unstable and violent'

A regional summit on peace and security in the DRC has just ended without major progress towards peace in eastern Congo. Congo expert Phil Clarke fears that more violence may follow.

A regional summit on peace and security in the Great Lakes region just ended in Angola's capital Luanda. The meeting, officially known as the High-Level Regional Oversight Mechanism for Peace, Security and Cooperation, focused on the long-running conflict in the Democratic Republic of Congo (DRC), Burundi, the Central Africa Republic and South Sudan.

The summit tried to address why it has been so difficult for the DRC army to detect insurgents and restore security in the vast country. DW spoke to Phil Clarke, a lecturer in international politics at SOAS at the University of London, to try and shed light on the challenges and possible outcomes of the current crisis.

DW: Why has it been difficult for the DRC army to contain the security situation and to end the insurgency created by the various marauding rebel groups in the vast country?

Phil Clarke: This is a problem that the Congolese armed forces have faced as long as anyone can remember. They are basically unable to bring any kind of peace and security to the eastern provinces because they are under resourced and poorly trained. The army is often extremely corrupt and in the last ten or 12 years, the Congolese army itself has built some important economic and political relationships with a range of rebel groups in the east.

Opposition groups and observers have accused Kabila of delaying elections in order to overstay his mandate as president

Because the army is a partner of those rebel groups, it does not want to target and eradicate them so the army has become a part of the problem and not a part of the solution in eastern Congo.

Given the mistrust between the DRC, Rwanda and Burundi, how easy or difficult will it be for these countries to work together and achieve sustainable peace in the region?

One of the main reasons the regional actors have struggled to deal with the conflict situations in both Congo and Burundi is that the neighbors themselves are often also directly implicated in these conflicts. So Burundi accuses Rwanda of arming rebels who are now acting inside Burundi and over the past 15 years, Rwanda has backed various groups within eastern Congo.

Expecting Rwanda to play a stabilizing role in the neighboring states is of course a very far-fetched notion. Part of the reason for holding this UN Great Lakes Summit in Angola is to try and build more of a regional response to the conflicts in the Great Lakes.

It is very clear that both the United Nations (UN) and the African Union (AU) have failed in their efforts in eastern Congo. This summit is about trying to build a coherent position between the Great Lakes members themselves so that those regional actors might be able to bring pressure to bear on the conflict in the region. This is going to be a real challenge.

One of the issues the meeting addressed was the revamping of the UN mission in DRC (MONCUSO), which they argued has allowed rebels to thrive. Do you think MONCUSO has failed in its mandate?

MONCUSO has largely failed in its mandate to protect civilians ever since it came into eastern Congo 15 years ago. In recent times, it has found itself in a very difficult position in the sense that it can only act if it has the support of the Congolese military. But the Congolese military itself is one of the main perpetrators of crime. This has limited the UN's ability to protect civilians. This has been one of the key weakening factors of the mission.

Residents of eastern Congo have been living with insecurity for decades, even with the presence of UN peacekeepers

DRC is currently embroiled in a crisis prompted by President Joseph Kabila evident attempts to avoid stepping down when his mandate expires. How can DRC political leaders ensure that there is some semblance of peace in the country during the election period?

There is a real need for a sustained national dialogue in Congo but I also think that there is a key role for regional actors as well. This is where the government in Angola can play a central role. Of all the neighboring states, Angola is the one that has the greatest influence over Kabila's government. The economic ties between Angola and Congo are extremely strong as are the diplomatic ties. This is then the one country that could have an influence over Kabila in terms of scheduling elections quickly. 

Do you see peace returning to the DRC anytime soon?

I think it is difficult to be optimistic concerning the Congolese conflict at the moment. The picture has been very bleak for the last 12 months. As soon as it became clear that Kabila was not going to hold the elections on time, the number of protests in the country increased. In response there was a major government crackdown against protesters and against opposition leaders. Unfortunately that is a pattern that is likely to continue right up until these elections are actually held.

Every time there has been a large-scale protest in a major urban area in Congo, it has led to a major crackdown particularly by the Congolese police. This cycle is likely to continue. So I would predict a very unstable and very violent set of circumstances in Congo in the next six to 12 months. 

Phil Clarke is a lecturer in international politics at SOAS at the University of London.

Interview: Isaac Mugabi

Article Link

 

[The Bread Guy]

Another opening in the "sorta-kinda trying to keep some definition of peace in Africa" portfolio ...

Kenya withdraws troops from UN mission in South Sudan

Kenya has said it is withdrawing its troops from the United Nations mission in South Sudan, a day after Ban Ki-moon sacked* the Kenyan commander of peacekeeping forces in the country for failing to protect civilians.

In an angrily worded statement, the Kenyan ministry of foreign affairs said on Wednesday that it was "dismayed" by the UN secretary-general's decision to dismiss Lieutenant General Johnson Mogoa Kimani Ondieki.

Continued deployment of Kenyan troops in South Sudan "is no longer tenable", the ministry said, saying Kenya would "withdraw, immediately" its forces there.

Kenya has more than 1,000 troops deployed in South Sudan.

The ministry said the UN mission in the country, known as UNMISS, suffered from "systemic dysfunctionality" and that Ondieki was not to blame for violence that killed dozens of people.

"What is clear is that UNMISS suffers from fundamental structural and systemic dysfunctionality, which has severely hindered its ability to discharge its mandate since its inception," it said ...

* - While the U.N. is far from perfect, it appears even they can fire folks who aren't doing the assigned job ...

 

[MarkOttawa]

One is amazed at basic things even our better media can get wrong (further links at original):

Canada and UN “Peace Operations”: Letter of Mine in Globe and Mail

November 8 in print edition–scroll down to the third letter at “War and peace” (links added):

'Your editorial recommends that Senegal be the focus for renewed peace operations by the Canadian military (Start In Senegal, For The New Peacekeeping, Nov. 4). But the government has made it clear that the point of such missions is to support UN-led peacekeeping operations; unfortunately, there is no such UN operation in Senegal to support. It seems much more probable that the government will commit some military personnel to the UN mission in Mali, with Senegal serving as a logistics hub to support both them and the UN mission more broadly.

The editorial also states that “a counterinsurgency in a chaotic, arid country such as Mali … would be outside the experience of most members of the Canadian Armed Forces.” That “arid country” sounds like Kandahar province in Afghanistan where thousands of Canadians fought a counterinsurgency against the Taliban from 2006 to 2011.

How soon we apparently forget.'
https://cgai3ds.wordpress.com/2016/11/08/mark-collins-canada-and-un-peace-operations-letter-of-mine-in-globe-and-mail/

Mark
Ottawa

 

[The Bread Guy]

One is amazed at basic things even our better media can get wrong (further links at original):

Mark
Ottawa

And why should Senegal not having a mission be such a hinderance to Canada's participation?  You're thinking WAY too small, here ...

 

[MarkOttawa]

milnews.ca: And a mere bagatelle that both Kandahar and northern Mali are arid indeed .

Mark
Ottawa

 

[MarkOttawa]

But Globe did get Sufi Senegal right:
https://berkleycenter.georgetown.edu/posts/jennifer-lang-on-islam-in-senegal
http://www.muslimpopulation.com/africa/Senegal/inslam%20In%20Senegal.php

Mark
Ottawa

 

[The Bread Guy]

Some more tea leaves to read -- three years (assessed year-by-year) and more than one place ...

Canadian troops headed to Africa will operate in dangerous territory where peacekeepers have been killed, says Defence Minister Harjit Sajjan.

In an exclusive interview with the Star from Vancouver Sajjan said Canada has committed to a three-year deployment that will be reassessed each year to ensure it has an “enduring” impact.

It will be spread among a number of unspecified African countries, have a major focus on training and increasing “capacity” of the host nation as well as other countries’ troops, and build on existing social, economic and deradicalization programs on the ground.

“These missions, all of them, have the level of risk where peacekeepers have been hurt, they have been killed. And we’ve been looking at the risk factor in a very serious way,” said Sajjan.

Asked about his approach to deploying Canadian forces to conduct counter-insurgency operations — something the previous Conservative government was keen to avoid in Africa when it turned down requests to deploy soldiers to Congo and Mali — Sajjan said “some of it is going to be the reduction of radicalization in certain areas, in other parts it will be developing the capacity of the host nation.”

Just back from Mali, which hosts the deadliest United Nations mission in the world right now, Sajjan says it’s clear there are risks there. He said the same risks exist in the other African missions under consideration by the Liberal government.

But, he added, there are also risks to Canada of doing nothing to counter insurgent groups that are terrorizing populations and radicalizing new recruits, and suggested he and the Liberal government have made this clear to Canadians from “day one.”

“This is not the peacekeeping of the past — we need to look at what the challenges are of today and develop the peace operations for today’s challenges.”

After having travelled to the Democratic Republic of Congo, Uganda, Kenya, Tanzania and Ethiopia in late summer, and Senegal and Mali in the past week — Sajjan said he believes the UN mandate for and rules of engagement with hostile forces are “robust” enough to address the risks, particularly in Mali. The UN mission in Mali, known as MINUSMA, has seen 106 casualties since it was established in 2013, including 69 from “malicious acts.”

“One thing I did learn, the mandate for the mission is robust so there no concern that our troops would be limited in any way,” said Sajjan. “I had a very direct conversation with the political leadership of the UN and the force commander about that, and the safety of our troops is always paramount.”

( ... )

Sajjan stressed that a big part of the federal analysis underway — as he, two other federal ministers, and military and civilian fact-finders have travelled to Africa — is examining how Canada’s contribution of some 600 soldiers and up to 150 police can have a maximum impact, whether it’s through military training, building on economic development programs and opportunities like on the “agriculture side” in Mali, or combating sexual violence, including by UN peacekeeping troops.

“What we do provide will be enduring. We committed for three years, but the thinking is to have the impact, we always need to assess,” said Sajjan.

Asked how Canada avoids sending troops to be injured or killed in a mission where there is no end in sight, Sajjan stressed Canada’s intention is to effect measurable change.

“I wouldn’t want to put troops in any place where there is no end,” he said, suggesting the plan is to provide “innovative” solutions, to help UN or African Union troops be better able to do their jobs, “so we don’t have to look at a very long, protracted deployment that will not have an impact.” ...

op:

 

[MarkOttawa]

So a Schwerpunkt in Mali, logistics hub in Senegal, and several penny-packets elsewhere.

Mark
Ottawa

 

[sandyson]

Well if you want to park your prestigious rear in a Security Council seat you need as many votes as you can find at the lowest cost possible.  Now let me see...

 

[Kirkhill]

So a Schwerpunkt in Mali, logistics hub in Senegal, and several penny-packets elsewhere.

Mark
Ottawa

It seems that Natynczyk's Operational Support Hub plan form 2010 might still be an active file.

In recent months Canada has signed an agreement to house soldiers and equipment in Kuwait, Jamaica and Germany and is negotiating to set up bases in Singapore, South Korea, Tanzania, Senegal and Kenya. According to a military briefing note obtained by Postmedia, the bases are designed to improve the Canadian Forces’ “ability to project combat power/security assistance and Canadian influence rapidly and flexibly anywhere in the world.” Publically, defense minister Peter MacKay called the base initiative part of expanding “our capability for expeditionary participation in international missions….We are big players in NATO.”

http://army.ca/forums/threads/106855/post-1160736.html#msg1160736

And I apologise for supplying oxygen to the source but it was the first actual reference I could find.

 

[Retired AF Guy]

It will be spread among a number of unspecified African countries, have a major focus on training and increasing “capacity” of the host nation as well as other countries’ troops, and build on existing social, economic and deradicalization programs on the ground.

Whatever happened to the old adage about "Concentration of Force" and not spreading your forces around?

 

[MarkOttawa]

Retired AF Guy:

Montgomery on "penny-packets" (scroll down):
https://books.google.ca/books?id=Px4-gf1zPwkC&pg=PA28&lpg=PA28&dq=montgomery+%22penny+packets%22&source=bl&ots=pkzHxSLovy&sig=aluF7P4HtLjAPpoIqd8CpPwU4yY&hl=en&sa=X&ved=0ahUKEwiWi6nK-KHQAhVJ94MKHVHiDYUQ6AEIMzAG#v=onepage&q=montgomery%20%22penny%20packets%22&f=false

But then we won't really be fighting (much), rather doing as much good in as many places as we can.

Mark
Ottawa

 

[OldSolduer]

So if I understand this correctly the CAF will have troops scattered hither and yon.....so what's the plan if things go to crap?

 

[daftandbarmy]

So if I understand this correctly the CAF will have troops scattered hither and yon.....so what's the plan if things go to crap?

I think it's the modern way to diversify the blame risk.

 

[The Bread Guy]

Not to worry - decisions haven't been made yet (allegedly, anyway) ...

Canada's defence minister says troops are headed to Africa for three years of dangerous peacekeeping missions, but his spokeswoman says cabinet hasn't made a decision yet.

Harjit Sajjan told The Toronto Star that Canada has “committed” to a three-year deployment in Africa that will be re-assessed each year to ensure it has an enduring impact.

Without specifying which countries Canadian forces and police are headed to, Sajjan said their UN missions would be focused on training, increasing local capacity, and the reduction of de-radicalization, the newspaper reported.

“These missions, all of them, have the level of risk where peacekeepers have been hurt, they have been killed. And we’ve been looking at the risk factor in a very serious way,” Sajjan told The Star in an interview published Friday.

However, Sajjan’s press secretary, Jordan Owens, told The Huffington Post Canada that the minister “got a little bit ahead of where we are as a government.

“Three years is part of the suite of options that will be considered, but this hasn't gone to Cabinet yet for a decision,” she wrote in an email ...

More op:

 

[Journeyman]

Not to worry - decisions haven't been made yet (allegedly, anyway)

How dare he actually keep people informed about current thinking  before it's been released as a fait accompli.  He'll never make it in Ottawa.  ;D

 

[Humphrey Bogart]

So if I understand this correctly the CAF will have troops scattered hither and yon.....so what's the plan if things go to crap?

An ASIC here, couple of CIMIC teams there, few HQs here, which all amounts to whole lot of nothing other than some good photo shoots and bragging rights at the gentlemens club in NY.

I'll be shocked if there is any sort of coherent structure to this come execution day. 

I'd love to see a Mach Inf Battalion in Mali with an Aviation TF but that would mean we actually cared about getting rid of the bad guys. 

 

[Oldgateboatdriver]

How dare he actually keep people informed about current thinking  before it's been released as a fait accompli.  He'll never make it in Ottawa.  ;D

Yes. He misunderstood as a result of his own background: When he was told to find missions in Africa, he took that as actual marching orders.  ;D

Hate to come down on the main stream medias (not!), but what I still don't see anywhere is the press asking the government: Why? What are you trying to accomplish? What Canadian interest is at stake? How will this benefit Canada?

 

[McG]

Hate to come down on the main stream medias (not!), but what I still don't see anywhere is the press asking the government: Why? What are you trying to accomplish? What Canadian interest is at stake? How will this benefit Canada?

Why?  The answer was given in the election, and it would seem a plurality of voters bought it.  The government will deploy the military out of altruism.

It does not matter if we buy into that reasoning on this site.  That's just the way it is now in sunny ways Canada.

 

[Eye In The Sky]

Yes. He misunderstood as a result of his own background: When he was told to find missions in Africa, he took that as actual marching orders.  ;D

Hate to come down on the main stream medias (not!), but what I still don't see anywhere is the press asking the government: Why? What are you trying to accomplish? What Canadian interest is at stake? How will this benefit Canada create more opportunities for selfies and yoga poses?

FTFY  :nod: