Ceasefire.ca

Reservists training in Watrous, Saskatchewan

The Canadian Army has reallocated $5 million to pay for Reserve training that it cancelled earlier this year as a cost-cutting measure. In a press release last week (”Class A Reserves receive $5 million for training,” 3 February 2010), Army commander Lieutenant-General Andrew Leslie acknowledged that “Obviously the situation is not ideal, as this funding comes late in the fiscal year and is insufficient to restart all Reserve activities. But I am very pleased that units will be able to reactivate important work and training sooner rather than later.”

The original cuts to Reserve training came in the context of a series of “budget adjustments” undertaken by the Canadian Forces over the past two months in order to reallocate spending to what were deemed higher priorities by the military (see Ceasefire posts here, here, and here). But the decision to cut the training unleashed a storm of protest both inside and outside the armed forces, and exacerbated the sometimes tense relations between the Regular Force and the Reserves.

Ceasefire suggested in early January that the Army’s Close Combat Vehicle project was a better candidate for cutbacks, and apparently we weren’t the only ones to think so, as the CCV project was shelved later that month.

Photo by Cpl Bill Gomm, Public Affairs Photographer, 38 CBG HQ

The Fogh of War: "We now see a new momentum in 2010"

2010

“‘After a difficult year in 2009, we now see a new momentum in 2010 and it has already started,’ [NATO Secretary-General Anders] Fogh Rasmussen said Friday.” (Slobodan Lekic, “NATO Chief: Situation improving in Afghanistan after tough year,” Canadian Press, 5 February 2010)

2009

“The insurgents are desperate and they are employing desperate tactics.” Brigadier General Eric Tremblay (Stephen White, “2 killed by Taliban,” Mirror, 6 July 2009)

2008

“I’m not saying that this conflict is ending. Nor am I predicting that the going will be easy in Kandahar and Helmand. But within the borders of Afghanistan, the Taliban are losing momentum because they’re being challenged in more places, both politically and militarily.” Deputy Special Representative of the U.N. Secretary-General Christopher Alexander (Rosie DiManno, “Taliban losing momentum,” Toronto Star, 19 May 2008)

“[U.S. Brigadier General Douglas] Pritt, the Army’s No. 2 man in Afghanistan until he retired, says the apparent upsurge in violence is a sign of the Taliban’s desperation as its influence diminishes…. ‘They see their area of operation shrinking, they see their influence shrinking, and so with that, it’s just like anything, they’re more trapped, more desperate, and so they take more desperate acts.’” (Hamish McKenzie, “An American General’s Upbeat Assessment,” Asia Sentinel, 25 January 2008)

2007

“The U.S. deputy commander in Afghanistan, Brigadier General Joseph Votel, said on December 16 that the security situation, governance, and economic conditions have improved in Afghanistan compared to last year…. ‘We are in a much better position right now than we were a year ago at this time,’ Votel said. (”U.S. general says the situation in Afghanistan is improving,” Radio Free Europe/Radio Liberty, 18 December 2007)

“The situation in Afghanistan is improving in spite of reports to the contrary, said NATO Secretary General Jaap de Hoop Scheffer as he finished a whirlwind tour of Canada’s Kandahar City base yesterday.” (”There is reason for optimism,” Montreal Gazette, 23 November 2007)

2006

“[Chief of Defence Staff General Rick] Hillier said Canada and other NATO nations operating in Afghanistan are defeating the Taliban. ‘The Taliban are losing the last few areas where they used to rest and recuperate and plan and train,’ he said.” (”GG urges soldiers to take pride in Afghan mission,” CTV News, 25 June 2006)

2005

“‘It looks to me as though we are going to be as a country able to draw down our forces in Afghanistan by, oh I suppose, 2,000 or 3,000 sometime very soon and it’s a direct result of the progress that’s being made in the country,’ [U.S. Defense Secretary Donald] Rumsfeld said.” (Barbara Starr, “Pentagon to Reduce Troop Levels in Early 2006,” CNN, 20 December 2005)

“America’s senior military commander in Afghanistan warned Saturday that Taliban-linked terrorists might launch a large-scale attack in coming months in a desperate attempt to reverse their waning fortunes. But Lt. Gen. David Barno said the future was against them and predicted the near-total collapse of the Taliban within a year. ‘As these terrorist capabilities grow more and more limited, the hard-core fanatics will grow more and more desperate to try and do something to change the course of events in Afghanistan,’ Barno told a news conference.” (”U.S. commander sees near-collapse of Taliban within year, terrorists could still strike,” USA Today, 17 April 2005)

2004

“Each time he goes to Afghanistan, the chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff [Gen. Richard B. Myers] said here Aug. 11, conditions in the country seem better than during his previous visit…. The general said security also is improving in the country.” (Jim Garamone, “Joint Chiefs Chairman Notes Improvement in Afghanistan,” American Forces Press Service, 12 August 2004)

2003

“Visiting Afghanistan in May, [Defense Secretary] Rumsfeld said the US had moved from major combat operations to stabilisation and reconstruction. Each time he has visited the country he has insisted that security is improving.” (”Rumsfeld presses for wider Nato action in Afghanistan,” The Guardian, 8 September 2003)

World Economic Forum photo, Creative Commons license 2.0

The Pentagon has requested a record $708 billion for fiscal year 2011.

The Obama administration on Monday requested Congressional approval for a record $708 billion in military spending for fiscal year 2011. Defense Secretary Robert Gates stressed the need for the Pentagon to prepare for a broader range of approaching security challenges while continuing to fund two ongoing wars and also expanding operations in Yemen and Somalia, where al-Qaeda influence is growing. The Pentagon says the proposed military budget reflects a shift away from Cold War-era spending priorities. Changes include further expansion of Special Operations units and a greater focus on cyber security.

The budget request includes $549 billion for the Pentagon’s base budget and $159 billion for the cost of military operations in Afghanistan and Iraq. According to Travis Sharp (Vision Meets Reality: 2010 QDR and 2011 Defense Budget, Center for a New American Security, 1 February 2010), the $708 billion total represents a 1.6 percent nominal and 0.2 percent real (inflation-adjusted) increase over the fiscal year 2010 budget of $697 billion (assuming a $33-billion supplement to the 2010 budget that the Obama administration is also requesting is passed).

The 2011 budget request is 13 percent higher in inflation-adjusted terms than the Pentagon’s Korean War peak budget ($624 billion), 33 percent higher than its Vietnam War peak  budget ($534 billion), and 23 percent higher than its 1980s peak budget ($574 billion).

The planned expansion of Special Operations funding will include increasing the number of advanced unmanned aerial vehicles such as the Predator and Reaper drones, adding up to 2,800 more “irregular warfare” troops, and enhancing intelligence operations in Afghanistan, Pakistan, and Iraq.

The budget also highlights cyberspace as a new potential zone of conflict, on par with the land, sea, air, and space environments. The Pentagon is building a team of computer experts to operate in cyberspace and protect the U.S. military’s  computer networks.

U.S. Department of Defense photo 100201-N-0696M-121

Coming up in the next issue? "I can no longer sit back and allow communist infiltration, communist indoctrination, communist subversion, and the international communist conspiracy to sap and impurify all of our precious bodily fluids."

The mandate of the Conference of Defence Associations Institute is to “provide research support to the Conference of Defence Associations (CDA) and promote informed public debate on national security and defence issues.” And as a contribution to that informed public debate, the latest edition of its magazine On Track contains an article by retired Colonel Sean Henry warning of the “disinformation” threat to Canada:

[A poll conducted in 2009] by Ipsos Reid on behalf of the Department of National Defence indicated that a strong majority of Canadians still view their soldiers as peacekeepers. They would rather have them perform disaster assistance and international social work than engage in combat operations. This, notwithstanding the fact the Conservative government and the military leadership have done their best to reverse that outlook. These attempts have met with relatively little interest and still less acceptance. One may therefore ask: What is going on here? The short and simple answer is that the Canadian population has been swept by a tide of disinformation, starting in the 1970s and continuing to this day.

Pioneered by the Soviets, disinformation–”information which is intended to mislead”–has since been put to devastating use by non-governmental organizations courting public support for their causes:

Examples in Canada would include anti-Americanism, climate change, health care, bilingualism, gun control and animal welfare.

(Not to mention the fluoridation of water!) The public discourse has been sapped and impurified with dangerous nonsense.

Half-truths, rumours and bogus facts and arguments can now be placed directly into the main stream of public consciousness. Moreover, sites such as Wikipedia can be altered to favour the disinformation artist’s line, by removing and/or replacing material of rivals. Climate change advocates employ this technique extensively.

Even the Canadian government is part of the problem:

Since the early 1980s, government public information has been guided and vetted by a set of Privy Council Office and Treasury Board directives and similar regulations. They are focused on promoting causes such as gender equality, visible minorities, multiculturalism, social justice and peacekeeping. Either knowingly or unknowingly this policy reinforces some of the disinformation flowing from interest groups.

The solution, according to Henry, is for government to “lead the way to wean Canadians away from utopian notions and puncture the bubble of unreality that surrounds them.”

God willing, they will prevail, in peace and freedom from fear, and in true health–through the purity and essence of our natural fluids.

Why should people who aren’t crazy care about this kind of stuff? Well, for one thing, the Conference of Defence Associations operates on the taxpayer’s dime, receiving an annual grant of $100,000 plus other support (such as a $35,000-a-year intern), all paid for by the Department of National Defence. Obviously no shortage of cash over at DND.

Update:

Oh, dear. The gentle souls at The Torch, whose very hallmark is the unfailing respect with which they treat all those with whom they happen to find themselves in disagreement, are saddened and disappointed to have read the “cheap shot” above. Not that they can bring themselves to mount more than a half-hearted “curate’s egg” defence of the CDAI article in question: apparently, parts of it are not as “loony” as the whole is.

US missiles and troops will be deployed in Poland less than 60 km from the Russian border.

The Obama administration is planning to station American Patriot surface-to-air missiles in Poland within 60 kilometres of the Russian border, sparking expressions of concern from Russia.

The Russians perceive the plan to station the missiles and accompanying troops in Poland as part of a larger build-up of American military infrastructure in Eastern Europe that threatens Russian security. They have expressed particular concern about U.S. plans to deploy a missile defence umbrella in Europe. Russian Prime Minister Vladimir Putin has indicated that Russia may develop offensive weapons in response.

The defence shield has also further complicated the ongoing Strategic Arms Reduction Treaty (START) talks between the US and Russia, which are intended to further reduce the nuclear arsenals of both nations. The U.S. State Department insists that the START negotiations are not the appropriate forum for discussing missile defence systems, but the Russians are insisting that the issue be addressed in some way. The START talks have already missed their December 5th deadline, but are scheduled to continue on Monday.

The American plans in Eastern Europe come amidst the White House’s Quadrennial Defense Review and its fiscal year 2011 budget request, both of which will be submitted to Congress on February 1st. The administration will request a record-high $708 billion for the Pentagon, which will continue funding the wars in Afghanistan and Iraq and expand American military operations in Pakistan, Colombia, Bulgaria, Romania, and parts of Africa.

Photo: The Prague Post

Yet another reason to withdraw from Afghanistan

What has killed the most U.S. military personnel during the Iraq and Afghanistan wars? Surprisingly, the answer is suicide.

That disturbing statistic could also be true for Canadian soldiers participating in the Afghanistan war, but we just don’t know. Testifying to a forum on the problems faced by Canadian veterans that was organized by Liberal MPs last week, the president and CEO of the Ottawa Institute of Mental Health Research, Zul Merali, called for military suicides to be tracked and the numbers made public so that Canadians can learn the scope of the problem in Canada’s armed forces.

Merali and other experts also discussed the prevalence of Post-Traumatic Stress Disorder (PTSD) in returning veterans. Many veterans need years of intensive support to overcome the effects of PTSD and the increased possibility of suicide accompanying it.

The social stigma surrounding mental illness means that there is still far too little public discussion of these issues. And government inaction is not helping to change that situation. Senator Romeo Dallaire, himself suffering from PTSD after his stint as commander of the UN mission in Rwanda during the 1994 genocide, stated that the departments of National Defence and Veterans Affairs “don’t even want to count” the number of Canadian soldiers who have committed suicide since the war in Afghanistan began in 2002.

The forum also heard calls to change the 2006 “New Veterans Charter”, which, witnesses said, has reduced compensation to those in the military who have suffered from physical or mental trauma. Liberal leader Michael Ignatieff stated at the forum that his party would try to change the Veterans Charter to allow more care to be given to those suffering post-combat.

More coverage:

Juliet O’Neill, Military needs to monitor post-combat suicides, panel told, Ottawa Citizen, 28 January 2010

Photo: wagingnonviolence.org

Afghan President "Taliban Hamid" Karzai inspects ANA troops

On January 28th, the London Conference convened to discuss the future of Afghanistan. The two main initiatives discussed by the more than 60 foreign ministers in attendance were a proposal for the gradual transfer of security responsibility to Afghanistan and, more controversially, an Afghan government plan to open negotiations with “moderate” elements of the Taliban. Both initiatives were approved by the conferees.

As noted in the conference communiqué, the conference “welcomed” the Afghan government’s plan to convene a “Grand Peace Jirga” to which elements of the Taliban will be invited. According to some reports, a preliminary meeting has already taken place between Taliban leaders and the outgoing UN Special Representative, Kai Eide.

The conference also supported the creation of an Afghan-led Peace and Reintegration Programme to encourage lower level Taliban fighters to disarm and reintegrate into Afghan society and agreed to establish a Peace and Reintegration Trust Fund to finance the programme. The fund has already received $141 million in pledges for the first year of its operation. The Canadian government decided to study the reconciliation plan proposed by President Karzai before committing any funds, however.

In addition, the conference endorsed a plan for the systematic handing over of responsibility for security to the Afghan government, with Afghan security forces “taking the lead and conducting the majority of operations in the insecure areas of Afghanistan within three years and taking responsibility for physical security within five years.” As part of this plan, Afghan National Army (ANA) and National Police force (ANP) are scheduled to grow to a combined total of over 300,000 personnel.

Whether any of the conference’s goals will be achieved remains to be seen. But it is likely that, if nothing else, the outlines of the international community’s “exit strategy” from the Afghan war have now been laid down.

More coverage:

Doug Saunders, Afghan endgame: From victory to compromise, The Globe and Mail, 28 January 2010
Julian Borger, Afghanistan conference sets out plan for two-tier peace process, The Guardian, 28 January 2010
Tom Coghlan & Catherine Philp, Five-year plan to ‘buy Afghanistan exit’, The Times, 28 January 2010

U.S. Department of Defense photo 020723-F-0201H-011