PM on crack?-Offers Us Up for More Peacekeeping-Article

[bossi]

(I'd be rolling on the floor laughing, if only the PM weren't serious ... hmmm ... isn't 'crack' illegal?)

PM offers to send troops to Mideast
Army commander doubts plan feasible
 
Robert Fife, Ottawa Bureau Chief  
National Post, with files from news services
Saturday, May 31, 2003

ST. PETERSBURG, Russia - Jean Chré'©en yesterday offered to station Canadian peacekeepers between Israel and the Palestinian Authority and to help in any resettlement of Palestinian refugees, a move designed to assist George W. Bush, the U.S. President, advance the Middle East peace process.

"If there is a need for peacekeepers there, Canada will be there," Mr. Chré'©en said. "So we will be able to help if we are needed. There is no doubt about it."

However, the new commander of Canada's army said yesterday that his soldiers are stressed and "at the top end of our capability," and doubted the troops could be found for the kind of force the Prime Minister is proposing.

Canada already has 187 troops on the strategic Golan Heights and holds command position as part of a 1,052-member United Nations peacekeeping force.

The peacekeeping force was established in 1975 to supervise a ceasefire and maintain a buffer zone between Israel and Syria.

After more than a decade of budget cuts, Canadian generals say the army is stretched too thin to provide troops for new peacekeeping missions.

As well, a force of 1,800 soldiers is already committed to a UN-mandated force in Afghanistan. The Canadian troops are to join the International Security Assistance Force in Kabul this summer.

The Prime Minister said Canada can nonetheless quickly deploy troops as part of an international peacekeeping force to the region, as it did in East Timor and Ethiopia. "Peacekeeping has always been the number one priority for Canada. We have, fortunately, evolved to be able to move faster than others," he said.

However, Lieutenant-General Rick Hillier, who took charge of the army at a change-of-command ceremony in Ottawa yesterday, warned that years of budget cuts have put so much strain on the military that a moratorium on deployments abroad would be welcome to give the forces time to rebuild.

Lt.-Gen. Hillier, a plain-talking Newfoundlander, said he would like to see either more soldiers or fewer tasks. "What we do want to see is a reduction of what we are doing, in the middle term here, and give us a chance to get the army back to the level of health that it needs to be," he said.

The general said asking the military to do more is almost impossible. "Our soldiers do magnificent work; they do it without complaint and they give Canada great service. I'd like [Canada] to support them just a little bit better."

At the same time as Mr. Chré'©en indicated a willingness to aid Mr. Bush's plan for Mideast peace, he also expressed disappointment that Mr. Bush has decided to leave the G8 summit a day early to travel to Egypt for a meeting with Arab leaders, and to Jordan for three-way talks with the Israeli and Palestinian prime ministers. Mr. Chré'©en did acknowledge that the early departure was for the cause of Mideast peace.

After criticizing Mr. Bush's economic and social policies in advance of the summit in Evian, France, Mr. Chré'©en yesterday praised him for getting personally involved in the peace process.

"We were disappointed [about Mr. Bush leaving the G8 early], but on the other hand, to see the President of the United States being personally engaged into the Middle East process is something that I welcome very much. I think to solve the problem in the Middle East will require collective will to resolve it," he told reporters in St. Petersburg, where 40 world leaders are celebrating the city's 300th anniversary.

The Bush "road map" for peace calls for an immediate ceasefire, a crackdown on Palestinian militias, an Israeli withdrawal from Palestinian towns and the dismantling of Jewish settlements erected since 2001. A Palestinian state with provisional borders could be established by year's end and full statehood could come within three years, according to the timetable.

The Prime Minister indicated Canada is further prepared to help in the resettlement of more than 3.5 million Palestinian refugees. Canada chairs a refugee working group that provides basic services to Palestinian refugees in the Arab region.

"Canada is involved since a long time with the refugee problem in this part of the world and that will become an important element at the time of the settlements ... so we can play a role," Mr. Chré'©en said.

In 2000, during a tour of the Middle East, the Prime Minister made an informal offer to Israel that it would accept as many as 15,000 Palestinian refugees now living in other Arab nations.

A decision by Canada to take Palestinian refugees would presuppose they would never be allowed to return to their former homes in the West Bank and in what is now Israel.

The Palestine Liberation Organization has always insisted on the return of the refugees to their homes in Israel, which were abandoned during the 1948 war that led to the establishment of the Jewish state, and to their homes on the West Bank, which was captured by Israel in the 1967 Six Day War.

"For a large group of refugees there, this is not their first choice," a senior Canadian official noted.

Israel has always opposed the return of the refugees, fearing they would alter the demographic balance and destroy the Jewish nature of the state.

The U.S. President will participate in talks on terrorism at the meeting but will miss Tuesday's wrap-up communiqué®Å 
Mr. Bush said yesterday he hoped to use the meeting to heal rifts with Jacques Chirac, the French President, and other allies that opposed the U.S.-led war in Iraq.

It will be Mr. Bush's first meeting with Mr. Chirac, who was the most vocal opponent of the war.

"There is a sense of frustration and disappointment amongst the American people toward the French decision," the President said. "I've got to work to convince the skeptics in France that the intentions of the United States are positive ... and the French leadership has got work to do to convince the American people that they are concerned about the security of our country."

bfife@nationalpost.com

 

[SNoseworthy]

The PM isn‘t on crack, he‘s just oblivious to the real world.

 

[Jarnhamar]

Theres a lot of class B bums for lack of a better word. (myself included).

Dispite the "unique" nature of our reserve‘s training and short falls theres still many young reservests who would jump at a chance to go to bosnia just for example. My home unit asked who all was interested in bosnia, no less then 15 were interested with another handful putting their name in after the initial question. Among the 5 being sent, 3 were troops. I think having reservests go overseas as a battle group to bosnia (with the help of the reg force filling certian positions) would really lighten the load on the reg force guys going on their 4th tour. Assume each reserve brigade per area (say 3) has each regiment field a platoon give or take, thats 3 companies atleast. For places like afghanastan maybe have the tour comprised of 15 or 20% reserves. Even if in an infantry section it‘s one or two reservests each that would really give the reg force some room to move their numbers around with out losing the experience of the full time personal.

One thing that confuses me is some of the attitude i‘ve seen with the reg force regarding this. They get stressed out from being sent on tour after tour (as well they should) but the mention of reservests going overseas as a battle group or even to some extent a company sends their heads spinning.

It would be great to have more reg force regiments and personal all around but we don‘t have that. Train the reservs to do the same job as you in the same professional manner or do tour after tour.

 

[Thaedes]

Train the reservs to do the same job as you in the same professional manner or do tour after tour.

Then would that not make them regulars instead of reserves? lol. You can‘t have your cake and eat it too. If you want training like the regulars, you gotta go regular. Otherwise everyone would have just joined reserves.

I however agree with the idea of sending in some reserves to help relieve some of the pressures on the reg troops.

 

[Jarnhamar]

Then would that not make them regulars instead of reserves? lol. You can‘t have your cake and eat it too. If you want training like the regulars, you gotta go regular.

Not at all. It would be the regular force training the reserves to or near to the same standard as them so that the reserves can, for a short time, perform the job of a peacekeeper in their place giving them a break.
Instead of a reserve soldier here and there having a tour, reserve regiments will have a consider number of soldiers who have operational experience both increasing the quality and leadership of the reserves AND giving the reg force a pool of experienced who sometimes component transfer.

 

[SNoseworthy]

Reservists are part time soldiers. They don‘t expect to be treated like regular force soldiers and trained to that extent. If you start forcing soldiers who are only in the military part time to live up to the legacy of their full time counterparts, they‘ll only get alienated.

 

[Jarnhamar]

When a reservests goes on a tour to bosnia hes not being forced to. He‘s signing up.

I wouldnt expect the standard reservist to be treated or trained to the level of a reg force one. That being said i wouldnt expect a reservist going to bosnia get anything but the same level of training as a reg force guy when heading out to bosnia.

The point im trying to make is that if you take reservists who are willing to spend a year of their life involved with a tour your going to help out both the reg force AND the reserves.

 

[SNoseworthy]

Well, the reservists who do get picked do get a high quality of training. A couple of guys I know were sent to Fort Hood (I think that‘s the one) for 6 months of work up training for the current Bosnia ROTO.

If a reservist signs up, he will get training up to regular force standards, however, to train the entire reserve force to that standard when are quite happy to stay at home, is a waste of money.

 

[Jarnhamar]

I agree with you 100 % but i didn‘t mean to imply training all the reserves. That would be a complete waste of money AND faliture considering the attitudes shown by even some of the reservests whom use this forum for example.

I ment training the reservest sub unit thats deploying to bosnia. I understand that this is already going on but there seems to be a lot of arguing, complaining and border line resentment.

The Light Vehicle Patrol Companies get trained to reg force standards. When they finally try to send over a reserve battle group im sure they will get the same training but that being said i‘m sure instead of the reg force applauding this effort they almost seem to condem it which is what i wasn‘t understanding.

 

[Jason Jarvis]

I know it‘s been said before on this site, but if you want Reservists to come out and play more often and with even more enthusiasm than most of them already have, let‘s get a political party to support job protection and associated benefits for the Reserves.

I suspect this would go a significant way towards boosting enlistment numbers AND refocus those individuals getting jaded and losing focus about why they‘re actually in the militia.

 

[SNoseworthy]

The Public Security Act offers job protection for Reservists deployed on official CF operations, such as Bosnia. However, for any reservist not being deployed on operations, the protection isn‘t offered.

 

[Bringer]

Unless the Public Security Act is new, it doesn‘t cover volunteer deployments such as Bosnia. It only covers situations where the federal government activates the reserve unit. This is from a reserve recruiter in March.

 

[SNoseworthy]

Oh right, I forgot about that little technicality. Thanks.

 

[bossi]

(speaking of "forgetting about little technicalities ...", here‘s a commentary about the PM forgetting one little thing: even though he can get away with "deficit spending" normally, it‘s difficult to "spend" troops that don‘t exist ...)

June 8, 2003
The thin green line gets thinner

Chretien is offering more soldiers we don‘t have in an effort to appease the U.S.
By PETER WORTHINGTON -- Toronto Sun

Ever since he was anointed PM some 10 years ago, Jean Chretien has been sandbagging the military - yet using it to get out of embarrassing corners.

Ironies of ironies, his denigration of the military has resulted in our military - or rather lack of it - determining Canada‘s foreign policy, instead of the other way around.

It now looks as if Canada will join the U.S. missile defence plan that would protect North America from a missile attack from outside. Unlikely, but that‘s the scenario.

This is something Chretien has always opposed, even in opposition. **** , he even opposed cruise missile testing over our north, which the Americans ignored and the previous Mulroney government okayed. Thank goodness.

Now we have Chretien softening and waffling on the missile defence system. Both Defence Minister John McCallum and Foreign Minister Bill Graham seem to support Canadian involvement. How come? The obvious answer is that Canada is so desperate to get back into the good graces of President George Bush‘s administration, that going along with missile defence is convenient to appease the Americans. This is necessary because Canada betrayed America in the war against Saddam Hussein.

It wasn‘t our refusal to send troops to Iraq that upset the Americans - they know we haven‘t the military wherewithal to actually fight - but our siding with France and wanting Saddam Hussein to remain in power.

Rhetorical support for America‘s war to eliminate a tyrant would have sufficed - a tyrant whose crimes against his people were worse than the crimes Slobodan Milosevic was supposedly committing in Kosovo that we joined the war to stop.

We didn‘t even wish America, Britain and Australia luck in this war. Instead, we talked of "principles" of not participating, as if the Chretien government functioned on any principles except expediency and opportunism.

The depleted state of our military prevented Canada from anything but token participation in four wars since 1990: the Gulf war, Somalia, Kosovo and Afghanistan. Our only battle casualties were four Canadians killed and eight wounded by "friendly fire" from a U.S. bomb in Afghanistan.

Old equipment

Our regular army is pathetically small, with equipment that‘s older than most soldiers. There were more fans at last weekend‘s Blue Jays games than there are soldiers in the army - only 20% of whom are combat soldiers.

Yet the PM keeps committing Canadian troops to impossible tasks. He once sent the head of the army, Lt.-Gen. Maurice Baril, to Rwanda to look for a country that would take us as peacekeepers, but couldn‘t find one. Baril returned home and said there was no problem.

Chretien unnecessarily ordered the disbanding of the Airborne Regiment, which would have been ideal for Afghanistan or Iraq.

In an offhand way he pledged Canadian peacekeepers for East Timor, which we couldn‘t do properly, even after we managed to get our aircraft off the ground in a logistics role.

After much hemming and hawing, Chretien sent 800 troops to Afghanistan for six months after the fighting was mostly over and mopping up was required.

The Princess Pats did well, won accolades from U.S. troops - and then came home, to be replaced by Romanian soldiers.

Canada explained we were stretched too thin to continue. In the war against Saddam Hussein, Canada said no on "principle." We wouldn‘t fight unless the UN approved. We sided with France and Germany.

Instead, Chretien okayed sending 1,800 troops to Kabul for constabulary duties. The 25 advance troops would be unarmed and defended by Germans! Good Lord, what has our army been reduced to? In other words, we can‘t replace 800 infantry in Afghanistan, but can send 1,800 to Kabul! Make sense? Of course not. That‘s three infantry battalions, which we don‘t have.

Now that Chretien hungers to get back into America‘s good books, he‘s offering more soldiers we don‘t have for duty in the Middle East. Our new army commander, Lt.-Gen. Rick Hillier, has bluntly said we don‘t have the resources to comply.

Sniping at Bush

Through it all, Chretien insists on sniping at the Bush administration, insisting he‘s handling the Canadian economy better than Bush is handling the U.S. economy, and implying the U.S. is too greedy, arrogant and bullying for its own good.

After 9/11, Chretien initially denied there were any terrorists in Canada, and consistently ignored the warnings of CSIS and others that terrorists were active here.

All things considered, Chretien‘s buffoonery toward the U.S. is not only misguided, but will hurt Canada if it ever responds in kind, considering that some 70% of our trade is with the U.S.

The PM seems to have lost it. It all stems from emasculating the military to the point where he has to call names and make boasts to compensate for our inability to pull our weight internationally.

 

[onecat]

Job protection is so easy to pass and yet the Liberals does nothing. Reforming the act and improving it so that a reservist can actually go on a tour and know their job is safe would go a long way to getting more reservist to sign on. As it stands now, if your over 25 or have a family or a good job; your out of luck.

The other thing they need to improve is a way of getting training and courses. Weekend are great, but more and more people work weekends, and longer hours at their full-time job. So getting the training and standards needed to send out the reserves is differcult. The Security act should include protection for that as well. Yes it makes it differcult for employer in the short term, but it benefits them as well. And it will increase numbers of reserves. Right now I would imagine that their a lot of 25-40 people out there who want to join, but then look at the train schedule and see its impossible for them to get any training past basic and odd ex.

Improving the act would not require the gov‘t to give the CF more money ( god knows they hate that) Hopefully it will be something that new gov‘t will put into place within the first year. Of course we have to vote out the one party of state of Liberal rule first. The good sign is that with the block in declining in Quebec the PC‘s might be able to rebuild their quebec base, and take away some liberal seats.... then maybe the AC and PC will share power......( yep I know that won‘t happen, the AC will never do that)