Lefty Loose Lips
The NDP revealed Canada's secret talks with the United Arab Emirates to join the effort in Afghanistan. Were they trying to sabotage the war?
Kevin Steel - June 4, 2007
The federal NDP has made no bones about their opposition to the war in Afghanistan. But it was still surprising when NDP MP Libby Davies stood up in the House of Commons on April 19 and criticized the Canadian Department of National Defence for secretly negotiating with the United Arab Emirates to join the NATO effort in Afghanistan.
Davies' language made it clear that she wanted to blow the deal. She accused the Conservatives of trying to put together a "Bush-style troop surge," a reference to U.S. President George W. Bush's effort to increase troops in Iraq. In lefty jargon, "Bush" is synonymous with "bad," and though there was no surge of Canadian troops involved, the sound bite was used.
It was Dawn Black, NDP critic for "defence and peace advocacy"--as the party calls her--who managed to obtain a situation report on the secret negotiations through an access to information request. The report, written by the commander of Canadian troops in Afghanistan, Brig.-Gen. Timothy Grant, revealed that Col. Fred Lewis, deputy commanding officer of the Joint Task Force Afghanistan, met with UAE military brass for five days in January, exploring "the feasibility of a bilateral agreement," the report stated. UAE Special Operations Command was prepared to commit two platoons of armoured infantry, a reconnaissance unit, four battle tanks, two 155-mm artillery guns and an unmanned aerial vehicle detachment to join the Canadians. "This development could have very significant positive effects on the situation in Kandahar Province, especially if it leads to greater involvement of the UAE," wrote Grant. The result of those negotiations is not known, but so far the UAE hasn't shown up in Afghanistan.
Somebody at DND clearly screwed up; access to information requests regarding diplomatic relations with foreign countries are right at the top of the list of exemptions detailed in sections 13 through 26 of the Access to Information Act--things that should not be revealed. It's the first sentence, in fact. Section 13.1 reads, "The head of a government institution shall refuse to disclose any record requested under this Act that contains information that was obtained in confidence from (a) the government of a foreign state or an institution thereof . . . "
The reason for this is straightforward. What country would want to get into sensitive diplomatic talks with another country that releases the substance of those talks to the public through access to information? Jack Granatstein, senior fellow at the Canadian Defence and Foreign Affairs Institute, says government-to-government negotiations should always be private because they can cause embarrassment to both the foreign government and ours. In this instance, Canada looks good, at least to those who support the Afghanistan effort. "I am a little surprised that the Canadian government was trying to get a commitment to Afghanistan from an Arab government. It actually sounds quite farsighted on the government's part. How clever of them to try it," Granatstein says.
But the UAE might see things differently. That country is walking a delicate line. As one of the most progressive Muslim nations, it is constructing an economy based on more than just oil. More important than natural resources, the UAE has a system of property rights and the rule of law, making it the envy of the Arab world. And they are on the leading edge of Muslim reforms. Canada already maintains an airbase there. That the UAE is apparently willing to go a step further and consider involving themselves in Afghanistan with NATO could attract some unwanted attention from less progressive Muslim nations or radical Islamists.
The Department of National Defence now acknowledges something went wrong, but in typical bureaucratic fashion is not willing to provide any details as to why or how. "In this specific instance, the document was released without the severance under Section 13 applied. The case is being reviewed and they are looking into it, and so I can't provide any more specific details on this case at the time," says DND spokesperson Melanie Rushworth.
Ian Capstick, press secretary for the NDP caucus, says his party did its due diligence before making the information public. "We have reviewed all the relevant access to information laws and national security laws and believe that there was no violation of those by the access co-ordinators who released the information to us," Capstick says. He's relatively certain this was signed off by the highest levels of the military. "They knew full well this information was going out the door," Capstick says.
Page 1 of 2