- Reaction score
- 892
- Points
- 1,010
http://www.nationalpost.com/home/story.html?id=80349046-3469-4B66-962E-9D3D5607EBDD
Proposal to U.S. to send 600-800 soldiers dropped suddenly in favour of Afghan plan
Chris Wattie
National Post
Thursday, November 27, 2003
Canadian troops on assignment in Afghanistan patrol a mountainous region outside of Kabul, the capital.
CREDIT: Stephen Thorne, The Canadian Press
ADVERTISEMENT
Canada offered to send a battle group of up to 800 soldiers to take part in the U.S.-led war in Iraq, but the proposal was hastily withdrawn when the government unexpectedly announced it was sending troops on a UN-mandated mission in Afghanistan, defence documents show.
Planning for a Canadian contribution to the conflict in Iraq was well advanced by mid-February, state the documents, which were obtained under federal access to information legislation.
Defence sources say the U.S. Central Command, based in Tampa, Fla., was offered a Canadian battle group of 600 to 800 troops for Iraq made up of infantry from the Royal Canadian Regiment and armour from the Royal Canadian Dragoons.
The Canadian unit would have joined the British Army‘s 1st UK Division, either on its own or as part of a "Commonwealth Brigade" with Australian and New Zealand forces.
The U.S.-led "coalition of the willing" invaded Iraq in March and soon toppled Saddam Hussein.
The source said Cabinet and other government departments were informed of the plans and of the offer to the U.S. military, which came at a time when Canada‘s position on the war in Iraq was in apparent flux.
While the Canadian contribution was still in the planning stages, it had proceeded to the point where the Canadian military had made a tentative offer of the troops to the United States "with the caveat that it had not been approved by Cabinet," said one senior officer familiar with the plan.
The officer, who spoke on condition of anonymity, said the Cabinet was kept informed of the planning and the offer to the Americans, which was first made in late October or early November of 2002.
That planning -- and the offer of Canadian troops -- came to a sudden halt on Feb. 12, the day John McCallum, the Defence Minister, stood in the House of Commons to announce that Canada would join the International Security Assistance Force (ISAF) in Afghanistan.
Defence sources said that if an offer had been made to the Americans, the planned contribution to Iraq had progressed far beyond the hypothetical stage.
"This was way beyond contingency planning if it got to this level," said another officer, who asked not to be named.
David Bercuson, the director of the Centre for Military and Strategic Studies at the University of Calgary, said the Defence Minister and the Prime Minister had to have at least tacitly approved the plan to send Canadian troops to Iraq.
"There‘s no question the Minister knew it was going on; that the Prime Minister knew it was going on ... and they let it go ahead," he said. "Then at the last minute [Mr. Chrétien] puts on the brakes."
Dr. Bercuson said the documents suggest an abrupt about-face by the government, a move he said "must have made the Americans absolutely furious" and left the Canadian military frustrated.
The minutes of an emergency meeting of the Canadian Forces‘ Joint Staff Steering Committee show senior defence planners scrambling to deal with the fallout from the announcement of the Afghan mission.
The committee, the senior operational planning body for National Defence Headquarters, held an emergency meeting on Feb. 13, one day after Mr. McCallum announced Canada would join ISAF in Kabul.
According to notes to the official minutes of the meeting, made by a staff officer in attendance, the military "have been pushing this idea [joining ISAF] off with a ten-foot pole up to this point."
While the document notes -- under the heading "Iraq" -- that there has been "no decision yet and all options are still on table," it goes on to say that the offer of Canadian troops for Iraq had to be withdrawn because of the Afghan mission.
"DFAIT [Department of Foreign Affairs and International Trade] to take lead in telling US State [Department] that BG [battlegroup] offer for Iraq now off table; DND [Department of National Defence] then to follow to DoD [the U.S. Department of Defense] with same message."
The documents, among 610 pages of records obtained by the National Post on defence planning for the Afghan mission, do not give details on when the Canadian troops were offered.
However, Colonel Howard Marsh, a retired army officer now working as an analyst for the Conference of Defence Associations, said he believes the Iraqi-bound soldiers were diverted to Afghanistan by order of the Prime Minister.
"I could see why people would‘ve been surprised -- they‘d been planning to sent a battle group to Iraq all that time and suddenly they‘re going to Afghanistan instead," he said. "At the last minute, the Cabinet -- or rather, the Prime Minister -- said: ‘No, we‘re not going to do that.‘"
The document said the Afghan announcement "was a surprise to all," including the government‘s own Privy Council Office and Treasury Board, which was reportedly "mad that [there was] no warning for budget."
The generals and senior officers at the meeting also raised a host of questions about the deployment to Afghanistan.
The minutes of the meeting, chaired by Major-General Michel Maisonneuve, the assistant deputy chief of defence staff, noted that: "A number of members questioned how the personnel, equipment and funding requirements of CF participation in ISAF will be met."
"Asst DCDS [Maj.-Gen. Maisonneuve] reiterated the need to identify these matters, and called on JSSC members to be realistic but not defeatist in their planning for this mission."
Col. Marsh said a Canadian contribution to ISAF, the Afghan security force that now includes 2,000 Canadian troops, had been considered by defence planners leading up to February‘s announcement, but was not viewed favourably.
"ISAF wasn‘t very high on the radar screen until the Prime Minister put it on," he said. "It wasn‘t on the front burner of things the military wanted to do -- far from it."
The military was instead concentrating on the planned Canadian contribution to Operation Iraqi Freedom -- as the U.S. code-named its March invasion of Iraq -- at a time when Mr. McCallum was speculating that Canada might contribute forces to a U.S.-led war even without UN approval.
Mr. McCallum told a news conference after meeting his U.S. counterpart, Donald Rumsfeld, on Jan. 9 that: "Many, many countries are in a position where they are offering contingency co-operation."
Bill Graham, the Foreign Affairs Minister, also said Canada could not rule out going to war if getting Security Council authorization was not feasible.
Jean Chrétien, the Prime Minister, told a year-end interview last December that: "We in Canada never went to war without the authorization of the United Nations."
However, the Prime Minister told a news conference on Jan. 23 that a war could be justified under an existing UN resolution on Iraq, adding: "Saddam Hussein -- he is no friend of mine."
Mr. McCallum was not available for comment yesterday, but a spokesman said he was aware of the planning for Iraq including the offer of Canadian ground troops.
However, Shane Diaczuk said it was only a contingency plan that was never acted on by the government.
TIMELINE: CANADA AND IRAQ:
OCTOBER, 2002 Canadian Forces planners brief John McCallum, the Defence Minister, on options for Canadian involvement in Iraq and Afghanistan. After meeting with American and other allied officers, an offer of a Canadian battle group for Iraq is made to U.S. Central Command in late October.
DECEMBER, 2002 Jean Chrétien, the Prime Minister, tells a year-end television interview: "If the United Nations says there shouldn‘t be a war, we in Canada never went to war without the authorization of the United Nations."
JAN. 8, 2003 National Post reports that Canadian officers posted to Central Command in Florida have been excluded from important planning meetings because of Canada‘s refusal to confirm its participation in a U.S-led war to depose Saddam Hussein. Canada is also excluded from a command-and-control exercise in Qatar that British and Australian officers were invited to attend.
JAN. 9 Mr. McCallum tells a news conference in Washington that Canada might contribute forces to an attack on Iraq even without UN approval. After meeting with his U.S. counterpart, Donald Rumsfeld, Mr. McCallum said the U.S. Defense Secretary was "very, very happy" with the apparent change in Canada‘s position, adding, "Many, many countries are in a position where they are offering contingency co-operation."
JAN. 10 In the face of strong opposition from Liberal backbenchers, including one MP who threatened to quit over the issue, the Prime Minister plays down Mr. McCallum‘s comments, saying Ottawa still believes any action against Iraq should first be approved by the Security Council. Jim Munson, Mr. Chrétien‘s communications director, says Mr. McCallum did not speak for the government.
JAN. 13 In a speech to a group in his Toronto-area riding, Mr. McCallum says would support a war if there was consensus among NATO allies that Saddam Hussein possesses weapons of mass destruction. He says Canada could also send troops if weapons inspectors find "strong evidence" of biological and chemical weapons.
JAN. 15 Mr. Chrétien refuses to rule out taking part in a war on Iraq without UN approval. Asked repeatedly how Canada would respond if the United States wants to go to war and the UN Security Council does not, he says: "I don‘t know. I don‘t know. I am waiting to hear what [the Security Council members] are going to say."
JAN. 22 George W. Bush telephones Mr. Chrétien to discuss U.S. strategy in advance of a Jan. 27 report on Iraq‘s weapons program by UN inspectors. Mr. Chrétien says the U.S. President did not make any specific requests for Canadian involvement in a war.
JAN. 23 Mr. Chrétien says Canada would support a war in Iraq if the U.S. and Britain produce "great evidence" that Saddam Hussein has violated UN demands to disarm, adding that such a war could be launched without passage of another resolution by the UN Security Council. "If the proof is made of that, of course Canada will support an activity in there," Mr. Chrétien says. "But we are not there yet." Asked if he believed a new UN resolution is needed to authorize attacks, he tells reporters: "I don‘t know."
FEB. 11 The government defeats a Bloc Québécois motion saying that Canadian participation in a war with Iraq should be considered only after the UN Security Council passes a resolution giving "explicit" authorization for war. Four Liberal MPs break ranks to vote for the motion, which was defeated 196 to 54.
FEB. 12 Mr. McCallum tells the House of Commons that Canada will contribute a battalion of troops and a brigade headquarters to the International Security Assistance Force (ISAF) in Afghanistan. He says participation in Iraq has not been ruled out, but later acknowledges that the Afghan mission limits the chance of a sizeable Canadian contribution to Iraq.
FEB. 13 The military‘s Joint Staff Steering Committee holds an emergency meeting to discuss the implications of the announcement, which "was a surprise to all" according to minutes of the meeting obtained by the National Post.
FEB. 14 Canadian Major-General Cameron Ross announces his resignation as director-general of international security policy "for personal reasons." Military sources tell media outlets that the general quit over the decision to commit Canadian troops to Afghanistan instead of Iraq.
FEB. 26 Carolyn Parrish, Liberal MP for Mississauga Centre, emerges from a weekly caucus meeting saying: "**** Americans. Hate those *******s." She later apologizes for the remark.
MAR. 20 The United States begins its attack on Iraq with an early morning air strike on Baghdad, less than two hours after its 48-hour deadline for Saddam Hussein to leave the country passed.
Ran with fact box "Timeline: Canada and Iraq" which had been appended to the story.; cwattie@nationalpost.com
© Copyright 2003 National Post
Proposal to U.S. to send 600-800 soldiers dropped suddenly in favour of Afghan plan
Chris Wattie
National Post
Thursday, November 27, 2003
Canadian troops on assignment in Afghanistan patrol a mountainous region outside of Kabul, the capital.
CREDIT: Stephen Thorne, The Canadian Press
ADVERTISEMENT
Canada offered to send a battle group of up to 800 soldiers to take part in the U.S.-led war in Iraq, but the proposal was hastily withdrawn when the government unexpectedly announced it was sending troops on a UN-mandated mission in Afghanistan, defence documents show.
Planning for a Canadian contribution to the conflict in Iraq was well advanced by mid-February, state the documents, which were obtained under federal access to information legislation.
Defence sources say the U.S. Central Command, based in Tampa, Fla., was offered a Canadian battle group of 600 to 800 troops for Iraq made up of infantry from the Royal Canadian Regiment and armour from the Royal Canadian Dragoons.
The Canadian unit would have joined the British Army‘s 1st UK Division, either on its own or as part of a "Commonwealth Brigade" with Australian and New Zealand forces.
The U.S.-led "coalition of the willing" invaded Iraq in March and soon toppled Saddam Hussein.
The source said Cabinet and other government departments were informed of the plans and of the offer to the U.S. military, which came at a time when Canada‘s position on the war in Iraq was in apparent flux.
While the Canadian contribution was still in the planning stages, it had proceeded to the point where the Canadian military had made a tentative offer of the troops to the United States "with the caveat that it had not been approved by Cabinet," said one senior officer familiar with the plan.
The officer, who spoke on condition of anonymity, said the Cabinet was kept informed of the planning and the offer to the Americans, which was first made in late October or early November of 2002.
That planning -- and the offer of Canadian troops -- came to a sudden halt on Feb. 12, the day John McCallum, the Defence Minister, stood in the House of Commons to announce that Canada would join the International Security Assistance Force (ISAF) in Afghanistan.
Defence sources said that if an offer had been made to the Americans, the planned contribution to Iraq had progressed far beyond the hypothetical stage.
"This was way beyond contingency planning if it got to this level," said another officer, who asked not to be named.
David Bercuson, the director of the Centre for Military and Strategic Studies at the University of Calgary, said the Defence Minister and the Prime Minister had to have at least tacitly approved the plan to send Canadian troops to Iraq.
"There‘s no question the Minister knew it was going on; that the Prime Minister knew it was going on ... and they let it go ahead," he said. "Then at the last minute [Mr. Chrétien] puts on the brakes."
Dr. Bercuson said the documents suggest an abrupt about-face by the government, a move he said "must have made the Americans absolutely furious" and left the Canadian military frustrated.
The minutes of an emergency meeting of the Canadian Forces‘ Joint Staff Steering Committee show senior defence planners scrambling to deal with the fallout from the announcement of the Afghan mission.
The committee, the senior operational planning body for National Defence Headquarters, held an emergency meeting on Feb. 13, one day after Mr. McCallum announced Canada would join ISAF in Kabul.
According to notes to the official minutes of the meeting, made by a staff officer in attendance, the military "have been pushing this idea [joining ISAF] off with a ten-foot pole up to this point."
While the document notes -- under the heading "Iraq" -- that there has been "no decision yet and all options are still on table," it goes on to say that the offer of Canadian troops for Iraq had to be withdrawn because of the Afghan mission.
"DFAIT [Department of Foreign Affairs and International Trade] to take lead in telling US State [Department] that BG [battlegroup] offer for Iraq now off table; DND [Department of National Defence] then to follow to DoD [the U.S. Department of Defense] with same message."
The documents, among 610 pages of records obtained by the National Post on defence planning for the Afghan mission, do not give details on when the Canadian troops were offered.
However, Colonel Howard Marsh, a retired army officer now working as an analyst for the Conference of Defence Associations, said he believes the Iraqi-bound soldiers were diverted to Afghanistan by order of the Prime Minister.
"I could see why people would‘ve been surprised -- they‘d been planning to sent a battle group to Iraq all that time and suddenly they‘re going to Afghanistan instead," he said. "At the last minute, the Cabinet -- or rather, the Prime Minister -- said: ‘No, we‘re not going to do that.‘"
The document said the Afghan announcement "was a surprise to all," including the government‘s own Privy Council Office and Treasury Board, which was reportedly "mad that [there was] no warning for budget."
The generals and senior officers at the meeting also raised a host of questions about the deployment to Afghanistan.
The minutes of the meeting, chaired by Major-General Michel Maisonneuve, the assistant deputy chief of defence staff, noted that: "A number of members questioned how the personnel, equipment and funding requirements of CF participation in ISAF will be met."
"Asst DCDS [Maj.-Gen. Maisonneuve] reiterated the need to identify these matters, and called on JSSC members to be realistic but not defeatist in their planning for this mission."
Col. Marsh said a Canadian contribution to ISAF, the Afghan security force that now includes 2,000 Canadian troops, had been considered by defence planners leading up to February‘s announcement, but was not viewed favourably.
"ISAF wasn‘t very high on the radar screen until the Prime Minister put it on," he said. "It wasn‘t on the front burner of things the military wanted to do -- far from it."
The military was instead concentrating on the planned Canadian contribution to Operation Iraqi Freedom -- as the U.S. code-named its March invasion of Iraq -- at a time when Mr. McCallum was speculating that Canada might contribute forces to a U.S.-led war even without UN approval.
Mr. McCallum told a news conference after meeting his U.S. counterpart, Donald Rumsfeld, on Jan. 9 that: "Many, many countries are in a position where they are offering contingency co-operation."
Bill Graham, the Foreign Affairs Minister, also said Canada could not rule out going to war if getting Security Council authorization was not feasible.
Jean Chrétien, the Prime Minister, told a year-end interview last December that: "We in Canada never went to war without the authorization of the United Nations."
However, the Prime Minister told a news conference on Jan. 23 that a war could be justified under an existing UN resolution on Iraq, adding: "Saddam Hussein -- he is no friend of mine."
Mr. McCallum was not available for comment yesterday, but a spokesman said he was aware of the planning for Iraq including the offer of Canadian ground troops.
However, Shane Diaczuk said it was only a contingency plan that was never acted on by the government.
TIMELINE: CANADA AND IRAQ:
OCTOBER, 2002 Canadian Forces planners brief John McCallum, the Defence Minister, on options for Canadian involvement in Iraq and Afghanistan. After meeting with American and other allied officers, an offer of a Canadian battle group for Iraq is made to U.S. Central Command in late October.
DECEMBER, 2002 Jean Chrétien, the Prime Minister, tells a year-end television interview: "If the United Nations says there shouldn‘t be a war, we in Canada never went to war without the authorization of the United Nations."
JAN. 8, 2003 National Post reports that Canadian officers posted to Central Command in Florida have been excluded from important planning meetings because of Canada‘s refusal to confirm its participation in a U.S-led war to depose Saddam Hussein. Canada is also excluded from a command-and-control exercise in Qatar that British and Australian officers were invited to attend.
JAN. 9 Mr. McCallum tells a news conference in Washington that Canada might contribute forces to an attack on Iraq even without UN approval. After meeting with his U.S. counterpart, Donald Rumsfeld, Mr. McCallum said the U.S. Defense Secretary was "very, very happy" with the apparent change in Canada‘s position, adding, "Many, many countries are in a position where they are offering contingency co-operation."
JAN. 10 In the face of strong opposition from Liberal backbenchers, including one MP who threatened to quit over the issue, the Prime Minister plays down Mr. McCallum‘s comments, saying Ottawa still believes any action against Iraq should first be approved by the Security Council. Jim Munson, Mr. Chrétien‘s communications director, says Mr. McCallum did not speak for the government.
JAN. 13 In a speech to a group in his Toronto-area riding, Mr. McCallum says would support a war if there was consensus among NATO allies that Saddam Hussein possesses weapons of mass destruction. He says Canada could also send troops if weapons inspectors find "strong evidence" of biological and chemical weapons.
JAN. 15 Mr. Chrétien refuses to rule out taking part in a war on Iraq without UN approval. Asked repeatedly how Canada would respond if the United States wants to go to war and the UN Security Council does not, he says: "I don‘t know. I don‘t know. I am waiting to hear what [the Security Council members] are going to say."
JAN. 22 George W. Bush telephones Mr. Chrétien to discuss U.S. strategy in advance of a Jan. 27 report on Iraq‘s weapons program by UN inspectors. Mr. Chrétien says the U.S. President did not make any specific requests for Canadian involvement in a war.
JAN. 23 Mr. Chrétien says Canada would support a war in Iraq if the U.S. and Britain produce "great evidence" that Saddam Hussein has violated UN demands to disarm, adding that such a war could be launched without passage of another resolution by the UN Security Council. "If the proof is made of that, of course Canada will support an activity in there," Mr. Chrétien says. "But we are not there yet." Asked if he believed a new UN resolution is needed to authorize attacks, he tells reporters: "I don‘t know."
FEB. 11 The government defeats a Bloc Québécois motion saying that Canadian participation in a war with Iraq should be considered only after the UN Security Council passes a resolution giving "explicit" authorization for war. Four Liberal MPs break ranks to vote for the motion, which was defeated 196 to 54.
FEB. 12 Mr. McCallum tells the House of Commons that Canada will contribute a battalion of troops and a brigade headquarters to the International Security Assistance Force (ISAF) in Afghanistan. He says participation in Iraq has not been ruled out, but later acknowledges that the Afghan mission limits the chance of a sizeable Canadian contribution to Iraq.
FEB. 13 The military‘s Joint Staff Steering Committee holds an emergency meeting to discuss the implications of the announcement, which "was a surprise to all" according to minutes of the meeting obtained by the National Post.
FEB. 14 Canadian Major-General Cameron Ross announces his resignation as director-general of international security policy "for personal reasons." Military sources tell media outlets that the general quit over the decision to commit Canadian troops to Afghanistan instead of Iraq.
FEB. 26 Carolyn Parrish, Liberal MP for Mississauga Centre, emerges from a weekly caucus meeting saying: "**** Americans. Hate those *******s." She later apologizes for the remark.
MAR. 20 The United States begins its attack on Iraq with an early morning air strike on Baghdad, less than two hours after its 48-hour deadline for Saddam Hussein to leave the country passed.
Ran with fact box "Timeline: Canada and Iraq" which had been appended to the story.; cwattie@nationalpost.com
© Copyright 2003 National Post
