Afstan:

Grant Kippen: Small, Positive Steps for Democracy in Afghanistan

Haiti:

Haiti erupts in riots as supporters of Michel Martelly protest
Outbreak of gunfire in Port-au-Prince follows disputed election results that push presidential candidate Martelly into third place

How many Canadians, politicians, pundits (see Haroon the Magnificent and hurl) or progressives, have you heard demanding that Canada bug out of helping Haiti because elections there are significantly less than optimal? The thing is that Afstan involves war (on a relatively small scale in terms of Canadian history); Haiti so far does not. Gutless, gutless, gutless wannabe do-gooders are we.

More stinking Canadian self-centred hypocrisy:

Corruption? What stinking corruption? Part 2

Update thought: And if Afstan is so hopelessly violent how come our embassy in Kabul is open while (two days ago)…

Port-au-Prince riots force Canadian Embassy in Haiti to remain closed

Mark
Ottawa

The story below, by Campbell Clark, appears in the first, news, section of today’s print paper and is in the “News/National” section of the website.  Yet the lengthy piece is not a news story at all; it is largely opinion and speculation, much of it the author’s rather than from quoted “experts”.  It is effectively a magazine article and should have been run as “Commentary” or something (but what’s a reporter doing writing opinion? yet Globe ones have been doing that for some time).

The new (again!), improved (again!) Globe has abandoned all remaining pretence to being a paper that separates news from opinion.  It is an agenda-driven (more here and here) media something or other.  So be very wary when you read its “reporting”.

The story:

Canada’s next battle

An important graph from it, just in case you thought the Conservative government has seriously increased defence spending–and remember the CF have actually been fighting a war:

…

…

As for the substance of the article, I doubt that any government will for quite a while be willing to use the Army in any serious combat role, certainly not a sustained one.  But it will remain governments’ main tool when they wish to use the CF for important foreign policy purposes.

Like Mr Campbell I have many doubts about the planned F-35 procurement and its costs–as readers of this blog well know–which is why I favour a real competition for the Air Force’s next fighter.

I think Mr Clark is wrong in seeing, and advocating, an important blue water role for the Navy. Its current fighting ships with a long distance capability are our destroyers and frigates. The three destroyers are aged and will be taken out of service in the next few years. The twelve frigates are being modernized (more here).

These destroyers and frigates are eventually to be replaced by up to 15 Canadian Surface Combatants (CSC), supposedly starting around 2017 (see Q14.). Given that the government plans to select only one shipyard to build future combat ships, that the shipyard will have to build ill-conceived Arctic/Offshore Patrol Ships demanded by this government before the CSCs, that the shipyard has not yet been chosen and that no contract has yet been signed for the A/OPS, and that no requirements have been issued for the CSC or schedule outlined, there is zero chance any vessel will appear by 2017 and very likely not for some time thereafter.

And if you thought the F-35 progam, claimed to cost around $16 billion over some 20 years, is expensive, read this carefully:

…
The most anticipated vessel in the new wave of shipbuilding is the Canadian Surface Combatant, the 15 ships that will replace the current mix of destroyers and frigates. With acquisition costs of about $26 billion and in-service support estimated at almost $15 billion over twenty years, these ships will be Canada’s military presence on the world’s oceans…

That, dear reader, is $41 billion dollars, well over twice as much as for the F-35s–themselves the most expensive military procurement in Canadian history. I do not believe such costs are affordable; and I do not believe they are realistic especially given the parlous state and capabilities of our shipbuilding industry–and especially with a monopoly builder.

It seems to me Canada should give up trying to maintain a blue water “military presence on the world’s oceans” and focus the Navy primarily on patrolling and protecting our maritime interests out to several hundred nautical miles from shore. That would require ships with a high seas capability, but surely ships less expensive than for a full expeditionary role (and still able to do a Haiti).

Moreover our European allies have a rather large number of destroyers and frigates themselves, to the exent that they are able to contibute to both NATO (along with the US) and EU anti-piracy missions. The time for, and affordability of, a blue water Canadian fleet may be coming to an end.

For more on how difficult, and perishingly slow, it is proving to re-equip the Navy see:

Joint Support Ship effectively sunk

New fighters, Joint Support Ships, and Arctic Offshore Patrol Ships: What’s good enough?..

And for some broader thoughts from Jack Granatstein, our pre-eminent military historian, and me:

The Canadian Forces, war present, and future?

Update: If you think Canadian shipyards, which have not built a large naval vessel since the mid-90s, will just do a bang-up job on future vessels, take a look at the current Australian situation:

…
If local naval shipbuilders have trouble constructing three AWDs [air warfare destroyers], based on a tested Spanish design…

At least it looks like we’ll be using a foreign design for reduced-capability Joint Support Ships; imagine the problems if we try to use a Canadian design for the A/OPS or the CSC.

Mark
Ottawa

Put in the Sunday Telegraph:

Pakistan suffers – but our wallets remain closed
Alasdair Palmer asks why the floods in Pakistan prompted only a sixteenth of the donations sent to Haiti

Some background here.

Mark
Ottawa

Canada has recently announced an increase in spending on foreign aid for the country of Haiti, but that money will come in the form of increased funding for the Canadian International Development Agency [CIDA].

An additional $54.6-million will go into a Haitian hospital and to local police. $65.15-million will go to the Red Cross, the United Nations, and NGOs. This is coming from the existing 2006-11 budget of $555-million for Haitian foreign aid.

The government has also pledged to match the $220-million in aid raised by Canadian donations, following the January 12 earthquake, of which about half has been “earmarked” for various projects.

But how much money has CIDA actually spent on earthquake relief in the wake of its devastation? Unfortunately for Canadians, we have no idea. That’s because CIDA has spent most of the past four months earmarking the donations for disbursement to various NGOs, but one month ago today not a penny had even been spent yet.

It certainly doesn’t engender a great deal of confidence in CIDA.

UPDATE

CIDA responded to me via email, by saying that the first $85 million Canada gave to CIDA went to NGO’s following the Earthquake, which is over and above the $220 million matching fund that Canada promised.

The $65 million announced last week, from the matching fund [Haitian Earthquake Relief Fund], has gone to the following organizations listed here.

Bernard Etzinger, Director General of Communications told me that Minister Bev Oda said that the major Canadian organizations who received the initial $220 million from Canadians directly say that they don’t need more government money immediately, which is why CIDA is waiting:

“In keeping with its mandate to manage Canadian aid effectively, CIDA will disburse funds from the Haiti Earthquake Relief Fund in a manner that achieves meaningful and sustainable results. The Government of Haiti has urged all donors to take a measured and coordinated and approach to distributing additional funds.”

You know, the photo-op’s great, but I’m sure the people would rather have the money. Photo: Corporal Pierre ThŽriault

Michael Petrou paints a fairly disturbing story of CIDA’s absolute incompetence in the face of human tragedy, today in Macleans Magazine.

As of the cutoff date, the 14 Canadian charities reporting donations to CIDA raised $154.4 million, of which $128.8 million is “potentially eligible” for the government’s fund matching mechanism. This is on CIDA’s website. What accounts for the $26 million difference is not. I asked the CIDA person I actually spoke to what “potentially eligible” means. She didn’t know.

[...]

I asked how much of the money raised through the Haiti Earthquake Relief Fund has been spent. CIDA’s response included a paragraph about where Canada has spent money that doesn’t come from the Haiti Earthquake Relief Fund, before adding the line: “Funds from the Haiti Earthquake Relief Fund will be disbursed in the near future.”

In other words, they haven’t spent a penny.

According to recent figures, Canada’s $150 million aid represents the world’s second largest total of Haitian philanthropy after Norway. Shame it’s in the hands of bureaucrats who don’t seem to understand what the word “urgent” means.

Haitian-Canadian evacuees aboard a Canadian Forces CC-117 Globemaster. Photo: Corporal Pierre Th?riault, Canadian Forces Combat Camera

A 52-year-old Haitian woman from Montreal, Carmelite Massenat, was arrested after customs agents seized 1.5 kilograms of cocaine at Trudeau International airport on Sunday when the woman arrived on a humanitarian flight. The street value of the cocaine is placed at $120,000, and she will be charged with importing and possession of drugs with intent to traffic.

She told a judge in Montreal that she had been threatened in Port-au-Prince to smuggle the drugs in, but the judge said she was arrogant for trying to smuggle drugs in on a humanitarian flight intended for those devastated by the Earthquake. Ms.Massenat had taken the evacuation on Canadian taxpayer dime.

If she’s a refugee or an immigrant, cancel both of those orders and have her deported after she serves her jail time. If she’s a Canadian citizen, bill her for the cost of the evacuation.

Members of Her Majesty’s HMCS Athabaskan give sunscreen to the children at the orphanage in Leogane,
Haiti. Photo: Corporal Johanie Maheu

“Haitians are very knowledgeable about what Canada is doing in their country, and they are generally not happy about it at all.”

- Stuart Hammond, January 21, 2010

Canadian Troops. In Haitian cities. I am not making this up:

A baby girl has been born in Haiti, and her name was born in Canada.

Monique-Lucie Marie, who weighs about six pounds, was delivered today at a Canadian military hospital.

She is the first baby to be delivered there, although others have been born at the Canadian clinic a two-hour drive away in the hard-hit town of Leogane.

The Canadian military and volunteers have been handling much of the medical work for some communities in southern Haiti, most notably Jacmel, where the Disaster Assistance Response Team is deployed.

But this one had a special ending: a pair of Canadian medical technicians, Cpl. Monique Bartlett and Master Cpl. Lucie Rouleau, helped deliver the baby.

They also contributed Monique-Lucie’s first name, which was chosen by a grateful mother.

Canadians are doing other sinister things, like adopting Haitian orphans, sending lots of money and supplies, and asking for foreign debt to be canceled so they can rebuild their country.

Leading Seaman Burden, member aboard Her Majesty’s Canadian Ship (HMCS) Athabaskan, transports a little girl for medical help in Leogane, Haiti for OP HESTIA, on the 20 of January 2010. Photo credit: Corporal Johanie Maheu, Formation Imaging Services, Halifax.

The byline for a photo in this article in Vancouver’s Georgia Straight reads: “While U.S. Marines ensure security during food distribution in Haiti, it’s uncertain when Canadian and American troops plan to leave.”

When they plan to leave? It hasn’t even been a week yet, and already the geopolitical conspiracy theorists are ready to march with “troops out now” signs.

Canada’s response to the Haitian crisis has been widely praised from fans and critics of the Conservative government alike. Even one of Harper’s strongest critics, Haroon Siddiqui, of the Toronto Star, ran with the headline “Michaëlle Jean and Stephen Harper do us proud in Haiti”. Of course even Haroon couldn’t resist a jab at the government’s “reluctant relief efforts” in Lebanon from 2006, writing that Stephen Harper did not want to help the victims of the Israeli invasion he had backed.

James Travers penned a similarly backhanded compliment to the government in the Toronto Star today, writing that Canada is eagerly “rising to a humanitarian challenge even as it seizes the moment to restore Canada’s multilateral credentials.” He then goes on to say that it doesn’t excuse Stephen Harper’s “erosion of democracy” or his refusal to hold ministers and generals accountable for “complicity in war crimes” [to go along with our "occupation" of Afghanistan I suppose], even as he acknowledges Canada’s actions in Haiti are timely and encouraging.

It seems that some critics just can’t help themselves when it comes to finding sinister and ulterior motives in every effort of a government they don’t support. Nor are even countries immune from making nonsensical charges, with France accusing the United States of “occupying” Haiti with the deployment of soldiers to the region to assist in relief efforts.

The anti-American crowd appears to have got their marching orders. According to the Straight article, political activist Stuart Hammond recently returned from a two-week trip to Haiti, and expressed concern about the troop buildup of U.S. and Canadian forces.

“For the past five years, Haiti has been occupied by a 9,000-person strong UN force,” the Haiti Solidarity B.C. member told the Georgia Straight in a phone interview. “Now, within the past week, combined U.S. and Canadian forces exceed those UN forces.”

Stuart Hammond said that Haitians understand the role of Canada and the United States in the ousting of former President Jean-Bertrand Aristide in 2004, and that Canada has supported the exclusion of Mr.Aristide’s political party, the populist leftwing Fanmi Lavalas. He also told the Georgia Straight that Fanmi Lavalas is the most popular party in Haiti, and that Canada and other countries have suppressed their involvement in politics since 2004.

Perhaps some historical perspective is in order. Mr.Aristide formed Fanmi Lavalas in 1996, and won the 2000 Presidential election in a ballot that was boycotted by most of the opposition political parties. They claimed support with a voter turnout of scarcely 10%, and there were accusations of voter fraud. The President also ignored a constitutional requirement for a run-off.

As for Jean-Bertrand Aristide, he has in the past been accused of widespread human rights abuses which contributed to an erosion in democratic institutions, embezzlement and money laundering, and even drug-trafficking. In 2004 Canadian police arrested Oriel Jean, Aristide’s security chief and one of his most trusted friends, for money laundering.

Perhaps we should wait until the current humanitarian crisis in Haiti is over before we begin speculating about occupying forces being in the country for political reasons.