Troops may leave by 2010
Defence Minister says Afghan Mission is not open-ended; Exit timing depends on when nation is secure
John Ivison, National Post
Published: Wednesday, April 11, 2007
OTTAWA - Canadian troops could be withdrawn from Afghanistan by the end of 2010, the Minister of National Defence suggested yesterday.
However, Gordon O'Connor said the withdrawal would be conditional on Afghan security forces meeting their targeted levels of expansion.
"We don't want to be there forever. Our exit strategy is to try to get Afghan governance, development and security to such a level that they can look after themselves," he said in an interview with the National Post. "We will probably have to provide aid there for many, many years but that doesn't necessarily mean we have to keep large security forces there. If the Afghan army and police can get to some reasonable level -- in their value system, not ours -- that will allow NATO to withdraw.
Under the Afghanistan Compact, signed between the Afghan government and the international community in London last year, targets were set at 70,000 for the Afghan army (roughly double current numbers) and 62,000 for the police force.
Asked whether the Afghan army is on course to reach its target size, and whether this would constitute a "reasonable level," Mr. O'Connor, said: "Yeah, I think so," pointing out that the United States has recently committed around US$8-billion to purchase equipment for the army.
Mr. O'Connor, who will host a working meeting with the defence ministers from the eight other NATO countries in southern Afghanistan this week in Quebec City, said the scenario is hypothetical at the moment, because Canada's military commitment is only firm until February, 2009.
"We haven't made any decision whatsoever [beyond that]. We wouldn't look at that until some time next year," he said.
Despite the deaths of six soldiers of the Royal Canadian Regiment on Sunday in a roadside bombing, Mr. O'Connor said he is satisfied with the progress.
"It's been a sad week and particularly hard on the families. But people ask about morale. I don't think they understand the psychology of soldiers. It doesn't affect morale -- they're committed and they believe in it."
Mr. O'Connor said the bombing does not necessarily indicate an increase in Taliban activity in Kandahar region. "It looks like Helmund [the neighbouring province] will get most of the activity," he said.
The Defence Minister was in Afghanistan for the third time last month and said the situation had improved from his last visit a year ago. "Kandahar City used to be black at night but when I left, it was all lit up. There are even traffic jams. I'm not talking with rose-coloured glasses on, though -- there is a long way to go."
Mr. O'Connor, who has had a strained relationship with the media since the Conservatives took office, expressed frustration with misconceptions about Canada's role in Afghanistan. "I hear other people talking of Afghanistan as if we have complete freedom to operate. [But] we're there to support the Afghan government," he said.
He admitted that Canada has "next to no influence" when it comes to the endemic corruption in the country. "If we see it, we report it to the governor or the President. But it's their sovereign country."
He said the same criteria applied to the issue of detainees, over which the Defence Minister had to apologize to the House of Commons after making erroneous comments about how they were monitored by the International Red Cross Committee. "It's their country. If someone commits an offence, we detain them and hand them over to the legal authorities."
He cited the case of the suspect in the death of Canadian diplomat Glyn Berry. "The suspect was arrested twice and released twice. [But] it's their boundaries, their customs. We can advise and help but at the end of the day, it's their decision."
Mr. O'Connor said the Afghan government's jurisdiction also extends to negotiating an end to hostilities. "We are one of 36 countries in Afghanistan. We will not negotiate with anyone. It's up to the Afghan government to negotiate with the Taliban, if they so choose."
He indicated a negotiated settlement is the likely outcome of the Afghan situation-- "Nearly all [conflicts] have to end up ultimately in some negotiation" -- but he pointed out that President Hamid Karzai has offered to talk to the Taliban and been rebuffed.
"You have to look at it from the Taliban side. If the Taliban do not achieve their goals, they will realize that they can't return to power in Afghanistan and their best option is to negotiate," he said.
He refuted the idea that the Taliban are jihadists who will never compromise or negotiate. "That's just a cover -- they want power," he said.
The Defence Minister waved off suggestions that Canada is in Afghanistan in support of U.S. ambitions to build an oil pipeline across the country to transport the rich reserves in neighbouring Turkmenistan.
"I try to tell people that, if there is a country on the planet that has no ambitions on anyone else, it's Canada. We don't need oil. There's nothing that Afghanistan has that we're interested in.
"We're there for noble purposes -- to improve the lives of the Afghan people. People write about these great conspiracies, but I don't believe in conspiracies," he said.
Defence Minister says Afghan Mission is not open-ended; Exit timing depends on when nation is secure
John Ivison, National Post
Published: Wednesday, April 11, 2007
OTTAWA - Canadian troops could be withdrawn from Afghanistan by the end of 2010, the Minister of National Defence suggested yesterday.
However, Gordon O'Connor said the withdrawal would be conditional on Afghan security forces meeting their targeted levels of expansion.
"We don't want to be there forever. Our exit strategy is to try to get Afghan governance, development and security to such a level that they can look after themselves," he said in an interview with the National Post. "We will probably have to provide aid there for many, many years but that doesn't necessarily mean we have to keep large security forces there. If the Afghan army and police can get to some reasonable level -- in their value system, not ours -- that will allow NATO to withdraw.
Under the Afghanistan Compact, signed between the Afghan government and the international community in London last year, targets were set at 70,000 for the Afghan army (roughly double current numbers) and 62,000 for the police force.
Asked whether the Afghan army is on course to reach its target size, and whether this would constitute a "reasonable level," Mr. O'Connor, said: "Yeah, I think so," pointing out that the United States has recently committed around US$8-billion to purchase equipment for the army.
Mr. O'Connor, who will host a working meeting with the defence ministers from the eight other NATO countries in southern Afghanistan this week in Quebec City, said the scenario is hypothetical at the moment, because Canada's military commitment is only firm until February, 2009.
"We haven't made any decision whatsoever [beyond that]. We wouldn't look at that until some time next year," he said.
Despite the deaths of six soldiers of the Royal Canadian Regiment on Sunday in a roadside bombing, Mr. O'Connor said he is satisfied with the progress.
"It's been a sad week and particularly hard on the families. But people ask about morale. I don't think they understand the psychology of soldiers. It doesn't affect morale -- they're committed and they believe in it."
Mr. O'Connor said the bombing does not necessarily indicate an increase in Taliban activity in Kandahar region. "It looks like Helmund [the neighbouring province] will get most of the activity," he said.
The Defence Minister was in Afghanistan for the third time last month and said the situation had improved from his last visit a year ago. "Kandahar City used to be black at night but when I left, it was all lit up. There are even traffic jams. I'm not talking with rose-coloured glasses on, though -- there is a long way to go."
Mr. O'Connor, who has had a strained relationship with the media since the Conservatives took office, expressed frustration with misconceptions about Canada's role in Afghanistan. "I hear other people talking of Afghanistan as if we have complete freedom to operate. [But] we're there to support the Afghan government," he said.
He admitted that Canada has "next to no influence" when it comes to the endemic corruption in the country. "If we see it, we report it to the governor or the President. But it's their sovereign country."
He said the same criteria applied to the issue of detainees, over which the Defence Minister had to apologize to the House of Commons after making erroneous comments about how they were monitored by the International Red Cross Committee. "It's their country. If someone commits an offence, we detain them and hand them over to the legal authorities."
He cited the case of the suspect in the death of Canadian diplomat Glyn Berry. "The suspect was arrested twice and released twice. [But] it's their boundaries, their customs. We can advise and help but at the end of the day, it's their decision."
Mr. O'Connor said the Afghan government's jurisdiction also extends to negotiating an end to hostilities. "We are one of 36 countries in Afghanistan. We will not negotiate with anyone. It's up to the Afghan government to negotiate with the Taliban, if they so choose."
He indicated a negotiated settlement is the likely outcome of the Afghan situation-- "Nearly all [conflicts] have to end up ultimately in some negotiation" -- but he pointed out that President Hamid Karzai has offered to talk to the Taliban and been rebuffed.
"You have to look at it from the Taliban side. If the Taliban do not achieve their goals, they will realize that they can't return to power in Afghanistan and their best option is to negotiate," he said.
He refuted the idea that the Taliban are jihadists who will never compromise or negotiate. "That's just a cover -- they want power," he said.
The Defence Minister waved off suggestions that Canada is in Afghanistan in support of U.S. ambitions to build an oil pipeline across the country to transport the rich reserves in neighbouring Turkmenistan.
"I try to tell people that, if there is a country on the planet that has no ambitions on anyone else, it's Canada. We don't need oil. There's nothing that Afghanistan has that we're interested in.
"We're there for noble purposes -- to improve the lives of the Afghan people. People write about these great conspiracies, but I don't believe in conspiracies," he said.
