In The Media

Canadians deserve better answers about the IS mission

by David Bercuson

The Globe and Mail
December 18, 2015

Justin Trudeau’s position on the use of Canadian air assets in the bombing campaign against the Islamic State in Iraq and Syria raises more questions than it answers and begs answers from the Prime Minister himself.

Throughout the election campaign, Mr. Trudeau repeated the mantra that, if elected, he would withdraw the six-pack of CF-18s currently flying bombing missions against IS, the group of pitiless murderers that has declared war on all of us. He never explained why. Whenever he was asked the straightforward question “If you aren’t prepared to use force against these people, just who would you use force against?” the answer was always evasive.

A majority of Canadians supported the air campaign when it was started about a year ago – and still do. It’s a good guess that even more are perfectly happy to continue killing or containing IS after the horrors of the downing of a Russian airliner over the Sinai Peninsula, the Nov. 13 massacre in Paris, the IS-inspired killing rampage in San Bernardino, Calif., and deadly bombings in Ankara and Beirut.

There is no indication that Mr. Trudeau is a religious or moral pacifist and thus against the use of force in principle. Indeed, government “insiders” have told various reporters that Canada will keep its air tankers and reconnaissance aircraft in the region to help the bombing campaign. That makes little sense. If we are against the use of force to contain IS, why are we directly willing to aid those who are prepared to do so? As any fighter pilot knows, when a tanker is needed to carry out a mission, any old mission tanker will do – U.S., Canadian, British, etc. No tankers, no missions.

As for our CP-140s, they have long been configured to guide bombers to hit ground targets, as they did in Libya. They may not pull the trigger on the sniper rifle, but they do call out the windage and elevation for the sniper who is actually doing the shooting.

Mr. Trudeau says he is going to carry through with his promise because Canadians gave him a mandate to do it. That’s not a viable explanation. Canadians voted for him and his party for a lot of reasons last October, but the mission in the Middle East was hardly high on anyone’s political agenda. And besides, that vote took place before the last round of murder and mayhem by IS.

The people around Mr. Trudeau claim that all the major leaders he has talked to are okay with his projected withdrawal. That is no doubt a fig leaf. The French are increasing their bombing, as is the United States; the British just joined the air campaign; and even the Germans have sent military planes, though only to do reconnaissance for now. So they are all going in one direction while Mr. Trudeau is moving in the opposite way? That makes no sense either.

More likely those leaders are loath to interfere in the internal politics of another country by openly declaring their disappointment in Canada.

There is the possibility that Mr. Trudeau has decided – and is telling our allies – that Canada’s training mission (currently consisting of fewer than 60 soldiers) will be considerably ramped up as the jets are withdrawn. But training is fraught with problems of its own, as the U.S. and other countries have found out in Africa, Iraq and other places. You can train until you are blue in the face, but if the trainees are not motivated to fight, they won’t, no matter how well trained or equipped. IS’s triumphs over the Iraqi army proved that. And, as our new Minister of National Defence has declared, a country that wishes to “train” had better know who it is training and what the blowback can be in a place where so many armed groups are competing and killing each other.

Most Canadians no doubt wish the new government well, especially in its most important task: to defend Canada, its people, its interests and its allies. The new government might start by explaining why it’s so determined to get Canadian jets out of the region.

David Bercuson is a fellow of the Canadian Global Affairs Institute and director of international policy at the University of Calgary’s School of Public Policy.


Showing 1 reaction

Please check your e-mail for a link to activate your account.
  • commented 2016-01-08 07:16:19 -0500
    excellent review with some pointed questions of a shoddy policy intent on the part of Trudeau up until the start of his new government. his revising his F-18 policy is justified: our troops will often need air support & not have to depend on another country’s.
Donate to Canadian Global Affairs Institute Subscribe
 

SEARCH


 

EVENTS

4th Annual Defence Procurement Conference
October 26th, 2017
Ottawa, Ontario

David Frum - Speaker Series Dinner
November 15th, 2017
Calgary, Alberta

 

IN THE MEDIA


Trump's 'influential' pick for ambassador to Canada faces Senate hearing
by Matt Kwong (feat. Colin Robertson), CBC News, July 20, 2017

VIDEO: Trading with Trump (starts at 7:30 mark)
with Rob Brown (feat. Colin Robertson), CBC News Calgary, July 19, 2017

When it comes to NAFTA negotiations, we need to stand united
by John Ivison (feat. Sarah Goldfeder), National Post, July 19, 2017

Omar Khadr and Canada's War on Terror
by Ira Wells (feat. Stephen Saideman), The Walrus, July 19, 2017

U.S. eyes changes to NAFTA's rule of origin, potential disruptor for auto sector
by Alicja Siekierska (feat. Eric Miller), Financial Post, July 18, 2017

 

LATEST TWEETS


Donate | Submit | Media Inquiries
Making sense of our complex world. | Déchiffrer la complexité de notre monde.
 
HEAD OFFICE
Canadian Global Affairs Institute

Suite 1600, 530 8th Avenue SW
Calgary, Alberta, Canada  T2P 3S8
 
OTTAWA OFFICE
Canadian Global Affairs Institute

8 York Street, 2nd Floor
Ottawa, Ontario, Canada  K1N 5S6

Phone: (613) 288-2529 
Email: contact@cgai.ca 
Web: cgai.ca
 
2002-2015 Canadian Global Affairs Institute

Charitable Registration No.  87982 7913 RR0001