NDDN Committee Report

Dissenting Report of Her Majesty’s Loyal Opposition

The Conservative Party of Canada

Standing Committee on National Defence

Canada’s Contributions to International Peacekeeping

May 2019

 

James Bezan, Vice-Chair, Member of Parliament (Selkirk – Interlake – Eastman) 

Cheryl Gallant, Member of Parliament (Renfrew – Nipissing – Pembroke)

Richard Martel, Member of Parliament (Chicoutimi – Le Fjord)

 

The Conservative Party believes important witness testimony was absent or understated in the Liberal Party report and that the recommendations are an inadequate reflection of that testimony.

Liberal members of the Committee neglected to demonstrate how a United Nations (UN) peacekeeping mission in Mali serves the national interest, are unable to substantiate their own rhetoric on Canada’s so-called return to peacekeeping, fail to address the elevated risk environment inherent in all modern peacekeeping missions, and most concerning of all, fail to acknowledge the importance of consulting parliament before committing troops to active war zones.

Furthermore, the Conservative Party believes it was short-sighted of the Liberal Party to omit discussion of the Liberal government’s lack of future peacekeeping plans and priorities and remain silent on the proposal from the Ukrainian government to support a United Nations peacekeeping force along the Ukraine-Russia eastern border in Donbas.

Finally, Conservatives believe the Liberal report’s failure to adequately address issues of crimes committed by troop contributors during United Nations peacekeeping missions undermines the Liberals’ stated commitment to renewing modern peacekeeping.

Absence of Parliamentary Endorsement

The Liberal government did not provide elected parliamentarians the opportunity to debate and vote on this overseas mission in the House of Commons as is customary.  Operation PRESENCE was undertaken with no parliamentary debate[1] or public discussion which calls into question the legitimacy of the manner in which our Canadian Armed Forces were committed to a complex conflict zone with improper parliamentary oversight.  A unilateral decision to deploy our troops overseas taken by a Liberal Prime Minister with questionable motives does not provide the Canadian public with the level of transparency they are entitled to.

The Committee heard that all modern United Nations peacekeeping missions operate under a Chapter VII mandate, where the use of deadly force is authorized to counter threats[2].  What has necessitated this escalation is the increased threat environment facing United Nations missions where the nexus of trans-national terrorism meets civil war[3], such as in Mali.  The committee heard that all future UN peacekeeping missions will have a counter-terrorism dimension[4],  and therefore represent an elevated risk for deployed troops comparable to that of traditional counter-terrorism operations.

“We will see now a world in which UN peacekeeping is essentially only deployed in a context where there are CT components, and we have to evolve and develop the capacities for that if we're going to have the instruments available to us to help manage fragile states and civil wars with a CT component.”

Bruce Jones (Vice-President and Director, Foreign Policy, Brookings Institution), 2 October 2018. NDDN

Conservatives believe parliament should be consulted and ultimately vote on whether to deploy our Canadian Armed Forces on UN Chapter VII missions.

Serving the National Interest

Since the Liberal government failed to publicly debate Operation PRESENCE, they have exempted themselves from providing a justification for this operation and demonstrating publicly how it serves Canada’s national interest.  The Liberal Prime Minister announced that Canada would return to UN peacekeeping in a significant way and committed the Canadian Armed Forces to Operation PRESENCE in order to secure a rotating seat on the United Nations Security Council.  The eight helicopters Canada committed to Mali falls short of their own rhetoric and international expectations ahead of the mission announcement.  The Prime Minister also failed to send the 20 police and 600 peacekeepers to Mali that were promised, sending two police and a fraction of the peacekeepers. 

The Conservative Party notes the Liberal government’s opacity and indifference regarding the mission in Mali.

Means to Measure Success and Evaluate Risk

The committee was urged to consider the importance of properly evaluating risks when considering participation in UN peacekeeping missions.[5]  

”Let's talk about risk… So study the risk factor. That would be my recommendation to anybody doing planning for peace support operations in the future.”

Major-General (Retired) Lewis MacKenzie, 24 April 2018, NDDN

Another witness illustrated the lack of clarity regarding Canada’s contribution in Mali[6]. The committee heard that no clear metrics exist to evaluate what constitutes “success” at the end of the 12-month air task force operation. 

“… what is not clear (with the mission to Mali) is the national end state.  What are the metrics for success following the 12-month participation of our helicopter contribution?  I asked myself this question, which is probably not what most Canadians have asked themselves to have a better understanding of what our UN strategy is.”

Major-General (ret’d) John Fraser, 1 May 2018, NDDN

Conservatives believe a clear strategy with measurable outcomes should be a component of any deployment of the Canadian Armed Forces.

Responding to International Allies

The Conservatives believe the Liberal Party erred in not addressing in the report the request from the government of Ukraine to support a peacekeeping operation along the Ukraine-Russian border in Donbas.

If the Liberal Party is serious about re-committing Canada to peacekeeping, it should begin by advocating for a solution to the Russian invasion and occupation of Ukrainian sovereign territory, the goal of which would be to secure Ukraine’s internationally recognized borders, ensure its territorial integrity, and for the United Nations to maintain a peacekeeping force along the Ukraine-Russia border.

Prioritizing the Rule of Law

The Conservative Party is disappointed the Liberal Party did not see fit to recommend stronger measures against troop contributing countries (TTCs) whose military members commit human rights abuses against civilian populations,[7] engage in criminal activity, and corruption.  Presently, crimes committed by United Nations peacekeepers are not routinely investigated and the perpetrators not brought to justice by their governments.

“You have a problem with underpaid soldiers in areas where there is potential for human trafficking, prostitution rings, and black marketeering. I'm not saying they're all doing it, but boy the temptation is there for these poorly equipped, and in some cases poorly trained, so-called contributions to UN peacekeeping.”

Major-General (Retired) Lewis MacKenzie, 24 April 2018, NDDN

 According to testimony[8] little is being done by UN troop contributing countries to increase accountability and establish mechanisms to ensure crimes and abuses are investigated and prosecuted when appropriate.

”I am not aware of any UN member state pushing for the withholding of reimbursements to TCCs that fail to investigate, prosecute and when appropriate punish perpetrators. Perhaps this is a cause Canada could take up.”

Ian Johnstone, NDDN briefing note, 4 October 2018

Conservatives believe the Liberal Party’s failure to endorse these reforms in its report are symptomatic of a Liberal government that simply espouses the rhetoric of peacekeeping for its own political purposes.

Conclusion and Recommendations

The Conservative Party cannot support the Liberal Party report because it fails to draw accurate conclusions based on testimony, neglects to endorse appropriate criteria for evaluating missions, identifies the dangers of modern peacekeeping without recommending an oversight role for parliament, ignores direct requests for support from Ukraine, and fails to stand up for the rule of law which must apply equally to allies as it does to hostile actors. 

Therefore, the Conservative Party recommends the following:

Recommendation

That the Government of Canada commit troops to peacekeeping missions only after it demonstrates how the operation serves Canada’s national interest and the operation is debated and voted on in the House of Commons. 

Recommendation

That the Government of Canada establish precise criteria to evaluate risk factors and measure outcome success in all United Nations missions in which Canada participates.

Recommendation

That the Government of Canada support a United Nations peacekeeping mission along the Ukraine-Russia border in Donbas to facilitate the peaceful withdrawal of Russian and irregular forces from Ukrainian sovereign territory.

Recommendation

That the Government of Canada strongly encourage the United Nations to withhold funding from troop contributing countries that fail to investigate and prosecute human rights abuses, corruption, and criminal acts committed by their militaries while serving on United Nations operations.