Peter MacKay

Canada posting warship in Med, but will not intervene in Syria without UN mandate

Jorge Benitez — Mon, 21 Nov 2011 08:25:11 -0600

From Steven Chase, Les Perreaux, and Oliver Moore, the Globe and Mail: Canada is ready to assist an international military intervention in Syria should sanctions and diplomacy fail, but the United Nations authorization that Ottawa says it would first require is neither imminent nor inevitable.

Still, the Harper government announced Sunday it was posting a warship to the Mediterranean until the end of 2012, a frigate that could be useful for evacuations or naval blockades if the violence in Syria descends into civil war.

Barely three weeks after the Harper government formally ended its role in the NATO bombing mission that helped oust Libyan dictator Moammar Gadhafi, Ottawa says it’s prepared to offer assistance if necessary in Syria, where Bashar al-Assad’s bloody campaign of oppression against his own people has killed about 3,500. . . .

Defence Minister Peter MacKay, who spent the weekend with major international military and security players at a forum in Halifax, said nobody is eager to enter the fray.

“With all of the brainpower that we had in this building in the last 72 hours, I didn’t hear anybody say ‘Let’s charge into Syria,’ ” he told reporters.

“What I heard was ‘Let’s contemplate the next move very cautiously,’ knowing … if you break it you own it.”

Mr. MacKay said he hopes that China and Russia can be persuaded to agree to levy economic sanctions on Syria through the United Nations as a next step.

He told CTV’s Question Period that Canada’s armed forces are “prepared for all inevitabilities” but said in the case of Syria, there are a “cascading number of [international] sanctions that would have to happen before there would be any type of intervention.”

The Defence Minister said a UN Security Council resolution is a “necessity in this instance” before Canada would agree to join an international effort to intervene in Syria, where Mr. al-Assad is viciously cracking down on protestors. . . .

The Conservative government said HMCS Vancouver, which helped patrol the waters off Libya, will remain in the Mediterranean as part of a NATO counterterrorism effort, Operation Endeavour, until relieved by HMCS Charlottetown in early 2012.

“There’s no question that [Syria is] weighing heavy on our mind,” Mr. MacKay said. “The primary purpose is to contribute to antiterrorist operations in the region. But there’s no question having a ship in the region, in the event that Canadians need direct assistance or evacuation … gives us that capability to respond, should certain things transpire.

Asked if he would take military intervention against Syria off the table, Canada’s defence minister told Global TV’s The West Block that he would not.

“We, again I would say to you, are very cautious when you get into the projecting of military intervention. But to answer your question, no, I don’t think we should suggest that it’s not an option. It’s not the preferred option, it never is.” (photo: Reuters)

Canada begins annual arctic sovereignty exercise, Operation Nanook

Jorge Benitez — Fri, 05 Aug 2011 18:26:33 -0500

From Canada's Ministry of Defense: Operation Nanook commenced today when a combined Naval Task Group set sail from St. John’s, Newfoundland, towards Canada’s Eastern and High Arctic, where other personnel and equipment from the Army, Air Force, and Canadian Rangers will converge over the month of August.

Partners from an array of federal, territorial and municipal governments, as well as the Royal Danish Navy and the US Coast Guard, are participating in the Canada Command-led operation which will take place in the vicinity of Resolute Bay, Nunavut Territory, from August 5-26.

“Operation Nanook demonstrates our Government’s commitment to the sovereignty and cooperation in the Arctic region,” said the Honourable Peter MacKay, Minister of National Defence and Minister of the Atlantic Gateway. “With world attention and increasing travel into and over the vast territory of Canada’s north, it is essential that the Canadian Forces and their partners enhance their operational capability and presence in the High Arctic.”

Op Nanook, named for the Inuit word for polar bear, is the centerpiece of three annual northern sovereignty operations conducted by the Canadian Forces and its partners who share interest in Canada's North. First conducted in 2007, Op Nanook demonstrates a visible presence and provides opportunities for military and civilian teams to operate and train in Canada’s unique Arctic environment. . . . (photo: Sean Kilpatrick/the Canadian Press)

Canada dropping out of NATO AWACS program

Jorge Benitez — Thu, 09 Jun 2011 08:15:34 -0500

From CBC News: The government of Canada intends to cut its participation in a NATO air surveillance program, CBC News has learned.

The cuts have not yet been publicly announced, but sources tell CBC that Defence Minister Peter MacKay raised the issue with some allies at a NATO conference in Brussels, this week.

The NATO Airborne Warning And Control System (AWACS) is a series of military airborne surveillance and mission control planes that provides the alliance the ability to monitor air space, and to control fighter aircraft patrolling the skies. . . .

The planes have been in heavy use in the Libyan campaign, monitoring the skies above the war-torn country, and guiding fighter planes towards their targets.

It's not clear when Canada will end its participation in the program, but sources report the decision has apparently angered some allies. . . .

"Over the course of the past months, the Department of National Defence and the Canadian Forces have identified numerous efficiencies that do not affect the core capabilities or readiness of our military, as part of this government's efforts to ensure best value for tax dollars," Jay Paxton, a spokesman for MacKay said.

"In tough economic times, this government believes making action-oriented decisions in support of freedom, democracy, human rights and the rule of law are more essential to NATO member states' security than any other initiative. . . ."

More than 100 Canadian air crew are involved in the program, flying the planes, and operating their sophisticated airborne sensors. (photo: Canada's Department of National Defense/AP)

Canadian General in command of the "yet to be fully defined NATO operations" over Libya

Jorge Benitez — Fri, 25 Mar 2011 12:25:31 -0500

From the AP: A Canadian general will take over command of the NATO mission in Libya.

Canadian Defense Minister Peter MacKay said Friday that Lt. Gen. Charles Bouchard has been designated to lead the alliance's military campaign in Libya. ...

"He will be commander of the NATO operations, yet to be fully defined NATO operations," MacKay said.

From Lee-Anne Goodman, the Canadian Press: Bouchard, a native of Chicoutimi, Que., has been designated by NATO as head of the alliance's campaign in Libya. He will work with “his naval and air component commands” to enforce the no-fly zone and the so-called civilian-protection mission in Libya, a senior White House official said Friday.

Bouchard, a lieutenant-general whose rank is equivalent to a three-star U.S. general, is currently stationed in Naples, Italy, at the Allied Joint Force Command.

His appointment did not come without considerable debate among the allies. “There were a lot of egos involved,” a Canadian government source said.

The source said a British general was touted for the job at one point, but the United States wanted to see a face that nervous allies _ particularly the Turks _ trusted. The tipping point came when the French got behind the appointment, senior Canadian officials said.

There was some political hesitation in Ottawa about the appointment as it represents an escalation of Canada's engagement in Libya just as politicians are about to hit the hustings, the source said.

The decision means Canada will have to dispatch a handful of staff officers to work with Bouchard in Naples.

Before his current job, Bouchard was deputy commander of NORAD, reporting to an American general.

Canadian jets to enforce Libya no-fly zone

Jorge Benitez — Sun, 20 Mar 2011 08:57:10 -0500

From Tobi Cohen, the Montreal Gazette: Days before the country may be plunged into a federal election, Prime Minister Stephen Harper announced he has committed Canada to a combat mission in Libya in an effort to enforce a no-fly zone approved Thursday by the United Nations. ...

As part of the mission, Canada dispatched the fighter jets along with some 140 support personnel.

They join roughly 240 Canadian sailors already in the region aboard HMCS Charlottetown which was deployed earlier this month to assist with evacuation and humanitarian efforts in Libya. Defence Minister Peter MacKay said the frigate is now patrolling the waters off Libya's coast as part of the same operation. ...

Under the command of Col. Alain Pelletier, pilots from Canadian Forces Base Bagotville left Friday afternoon on a 12-hours-plus journey to the area, accompanied by support personnel from Trenton, Ont. ...

Elinor Sloan, an associate professor ofinternational relations at Carleton University and a former Defence Department analyst, said she's long supported the idea of a no-fly zone over Libya and said Canada's involvement is a "good move.'' That said, she adds Canada has the ability to do more.

According to Sloan, Canada has as many as 80 CF-18s, mostly in Canada. They are being used primarily by troops who are training for deployment to Afghanistan.

She said Canada contributed about two dozen fighter jets to the 1992 Gulf War and perhaps a dozen in 1999 to Kosovo, the last time CF-18s were used in a combat situation.

At that time, she added, Canada was able to use its new laser-guided munitions in combat for the first time. She believes this latest mission presents another first as Canada's CF-18s have since been upgraded with satellite-guided munitions.

"They're properly positioned and upgraded to participate in this sort of conflict,'' she said. ...

She also foresees a larger role for HMCS Charlottetown.

"Specifically interdicting ships that are carrying strategic supplies to Libya, I think that would be a big role for Canada,'' she said, adding it's "something that we're very good at.''

From Reuters: Canadian fighter jets have reached the region but need another day or two of preparation before they can join the mission, a Canadian government spokesman said. One Canadian tanker aircraft is stationed at Decimomannu airbase in Sardinia, Italy, the Italian command at the base said. (photo: Reuters)

Canada to remain in Afghanistan past 2011

Jorge Benitez — Tue, 09 Nov 2010 05:27:37 -0600

From Rob Gillies, the AP: Canada will keep between 900 and 950 troops in Afghanistan in a noncombat training role after Canada's combat mission ends in 2011, a senior government official said Monday.

The official said that 750 military trainers and about 200 support troops will remain and most likely be based in Kabul. They would remain in Afghanistan until no later than 2014.

The official said NATO allies pressured Canada to remain in a combat role but said that is something Canada won't consider. The official spoke on condition of anonymity because no authorization was given to speak publicly.

Parliament has mandated that the combat mission end in 2011. ...

Canada had repeatedly insisted that its mission in Afghanistan would be a purely civilian operation after its troops pull out of volatile Kandahar province in 2011. However, Defense Minister Peter MacKay said Sunday that Canada was considering a U.S. request to keep troops in Afghanistan past 2011, but switch them from a combat to training role.

MacKay hosted a variety of foreign politicians, diplomats and military officers at the Halifax International Security Forum over the weekend. (photo: Reuters)

Pakistan: Is It Over, Over There?

Harlan Ullman — Wed, 06 Oct 2010 11:57:22 -0500

Just when it seemed that things could not get worse, they do. One would have thought that given the ongoing catastrophic floods, conditions in Pakistan were at a nadir. But last week, several incidents lowered even that bar regarding U.S.-Pakistani ties.

NATO forces in Afghanistan made two unauthorized incursions into Pakistan, the second killing three Frontier Corps soldiers. CIA drone strikes soared possibly provoked last week by threats of al-Qaida attacks in Europe using operatives trained in Pakistan carrying U.S. and friendly passports.

In response to these incidents, Pakistan closed one of the major supply routes from Karachi to Afghanistan citing "security" concerns arising from a backlash to the NATO forays into Pakistan territory.

However, the signal was unmistakable regardless of the rationale -- violate our territory again and suffer the consequences.

But the potentially most damaging incident was a cellphone camera video showing Pakistani army soldiers summarily executing a handful of prisoners in their custody. The most careful investigation as to determine the real identity of the executioners is essential because the impact could be powerful in shaping even greater negative public opinion in Pakistan and in the United States.

Without a transparent, credible inquiry, hearings by the U.S. Congress into allegations of extrajudicial executions and illegal detentions by Pakistan security forces will be inevitable. The U.S. Senate had deferred these investigations including charges that the army held hundreds, if not thousands, of prisoners suspected of terrorism refusing to turn them over to the courts on the grounds that these suspects would be released and would return to the battlefield.

Ironically, America's categorization of prisoners captured in the war on terror as "enemy combatants" and incarcerating them at Guantanamo Bay to circumvent trials in civilian U.S. courts suggests this dilemma of dealing with terrorist suspects isn't limited to Pakistan.

And, unfortunately, Pakistan's interior minister asking whether Americans were "friends or enemies" in light of the incursions and other incidents isn't an idle question in either Pakistan or the United States, reflecting the growing strain.

Both Pakistan and the United States tried to reduce the impact of these events. A joint investigation of the NATO incursions and an apology by International Security Assistance Force commander U.S. Army Gen. David Petraeus to Pakistani Army Chief of Staff Gen. Ashfaq Pervez Kayani will help. However, inherent difficulties and tensions in the overall relationship have never been fully resolved and have been exacerbated possibly to the breaking point this past week.

The crucial divergences and competing interests between America and Pakistan are no secret. If Bob Woodward's newest book "Obama's War" is accurate, the White House regards Pakistan as "the cancer" that must be cured and on which success or failure in Afghanistan rests.

Americans rightly won't tolerate sanctuaries in Pakistan from which Taliban fighters can rest, recuperate and return to Afghanistan to kill and maim American, NATO and Afghan forces. These sanctuaries and Pakistani reluctance to take on terrorist groups such as the Haqqani network remain major bones of contention.

Pakistan sees any encroachment on national sovereignty as intolerable. Further, given strong public antipathy to the United States (as opposed to individual Americans), any presence of U.S. forces in Pakistan is politically risky and must be limited.

Given conspiracy theories that abound, distortions and exaggerations of American military and CIA presence in Pakistan are taken as ground truth and used to whip up negative public sentiment.

Because of the historical record, many Pakistanis doubt America's staying power in Afghanistan and resent its fickleness in using and then abandoning Pakistan at key junctures. The consequence is that Pakistan would be justified in its long-term planning "going it alone" given the hollowness of some of Washington's prior reassurances. The effect is to widen the growing "trust deficit" between the two allies.

Opportunities must be seized from these worsening conditions. Here are two.

First, the forthcoming strategic dialogue in Washington this month can be the forum for addressing these key issues that divide and unite us. However, the two sides must agree to be candid, forthcoming and willing to compromise based on better mutual understanding of the other. That will require presidential leadership on both sides to repair the relationship.

Second, Pakistan must determine who was responsible for the summary executions and take appropriate action. If the army wasn't responsible, that must be shown beyond a reasonable doubt. If guilt is established, either a court-martial or civil trial is essential. That happened in 1992 when the then army chief took strong action in similar circumstances.

But make no mistake: the U.S.-Pakistani relationship is suffering. The worst outcome is for that relationship to be over, over there. Both sides must understand how severely tested this relationship has become and that without bold action by Washington and Islamabad, it may not be repaired.

Harlan Ullman is Senior Advisor at the Atlantic Council, Chairman of the Killowen Group that advises leaders of government and business, and a frequent advisor to NATO. This article was syndicated by UPI. Photo credit: Reuters Pictures.

Canadian jets intercept Russian bombers

Jorge Benitez — Fri, 30 Jul 2010 13:51:34 -0500

From Brian Lilley, the QMI Agency: Canadian fighter jets scrambled to repel Russian bombers that made several attempts to probe Canadian airspace on Wednesday.

QMI Agency has learned that two CF-18s took off from CFB Bagotville to intercept two TU-95 long range bombers about 463 km east of Goose Bay, N.L.

Attempts by Russia to test Canadian airspace have been going on since 2007; military and intelligence analysts tell QMI Agency the frequency has been increasing since then, but one senior official described Wednesday's event as "not the usual s--t."

"The response as always was a rapid, effective deterrent," Defence Minister Peter MacKay told QMI Agency.

"They were in the buffer zone," said MacKay, stressing that although the planes did not enter Canada's sovereign airspace, the bombers did come inside the 300 nautical mile zone that Canada claims.

"They did not give us any advance notice," said MacKay, adding that NORAD fighter jets have intercepted between 12 and 18 Russian bombers per year since 2007. After the CF-18s made contact with the Russians the pilots shadowed them until the bombers turned northeast and headed out of Canadian airspace. ...

The incursion into Canadian airspace also comes as debate rages over whether Canada needs the next generation of fighter jets to replace the nearly 30-year-old CF 18s. The Harper government has committed to buying 65 F-35 stealth fighters at a cost of $9 billion. Critics have said such Cold War-type jets are no longer needed. (photo: ctv.ca)