Peter MacKay defends drone attacks

Addressing a security conference in Singapore Peter MacKay Canada's defense minister took the opportunity to defend drone attacks spouting the same sort of rhetoric in defense of the attacks that U.S. spokespeople use. Of course Canada has not mounted any drone attacks. I am not sure we even have any armed drones to carry out such attacks.

However, MacKay is no doubt trying to winning brownie points with the U.S. or perhaps the U.S. suggested it might be a good idea for him to defend the drones rather than the U.S. carrying that burden all the time.

As with U.S. defenders MacKay stressed how accurate the drones were in hitting their targets. Of course accuracy is no virtue if the intelligence about the target is incorrect as sometimes happens. MacKay said “These eyes-on systems that can literally read a license plate from outer space have increased our ability to decrease civilian casualties.”“We want to reduce if not eliminate collateral damage," Well that's comforting. I did not really think that the intention was to increase collateral damage. However it occurs anyway.

There is no mention in the article that MacKay considered the issue of mounting attacks in Pakistan even though there have been three motions in the Pakistani parliament that they cease. MacKay did his job, acting as an apologist for U.S. drone attacks.

MacKay also warned about cyber attacks and urged that intelligence and technology be used to battle cyber attacks that could shut down crucial infrastructures including communications and transport. Of course he was not critical of the U.S. and Israeli cyber attacks on Iranian centrifuges I expect. He said:“The consequences of cyber attacks haven’t really washed over us as to just how devastating they could be,” “It’s a monster in our midst.” For more see this article.

Peter MacKay chastised over low estimates of Libyan mission cost

Canada flew over 400 missions above Libya part of the costly mission that was part of enforcing the no fly zone over Libya and supposedly protecting civilians by bombing Gadaffi forces and installations. However the total cost includes costs that would have been paid in any event. The added costs however still come in at around 100 million but that is according to department estimates.

There is considerable criticism of Defense Minister MacKay who told CBC the Libyan mission cost less than 50 million. McKay said at the time last October:"As of Oct. 13, the figures that I've received have us well below that, somewhere under $50 million," "And that's the all-up costs of the equipment that we have in the theatre, the transportation to get there, those that have been carrying out this critical mission."

MacKay has defended his figures. Technically MacKay is correct as a military officer testified but he pointed out that MacKay at the time also knew that the estimate for the total was 100 million. MacKay is expert at giving misleading low ball figures. The New Democratic Party foreign affairs critic said:"Peter’s (MacKay's) got problems with his math yet again and this government’s got problems with trying to figure out how to cost things," MacKay also gave a very low figure for the cost of purchasing F 35 fighter planes but the difference in that case was in the billions of dollars! For more see this CBC article.

McKay wants to extend the Afghan Mission

No doubt at the urging of his US imperialist comrades the junior partner will take on an extended but non-combat role to make up for the demise of our combat role. At the very least any extension should be debated in parliament. But then the defender of U.S. humanistic imperialism Michael Ignatieff will no doubt support the Conservatives in extending the mission because after all it is not a combat role. As no doubt military experts will point out they could still be involved in combat because they need to defend themselves! This is from CBC.

Afghan deployment past 2011 possible: MacKay

CBC News
Defence Minister Peter MacKay leaves the Canadian HQ in Kandahar on Saturday with Brig.-Gen. Daniel Ménard. MacKay said keeping Canadian police mentors in Afghanistan to train police officers is an option Ottawa is mulling for when the combat mission ends in 2011. (Murray Brewster/Canadian Press)
Defence Minister Peter MacKay on Saturday repeated the government's official line that the country's soldiers would be withdrawn from combat in Afghanistan next year, but he also suggested some Canadians might stay.

Canada is willing to continue mentoring Afghan police after the troop disengagement begins in summer 2011, MacKay said as he wrapped up a three-day trip to the Central Asian country.

Canada currently has 48 civilian police — RCMP and municipal officers — and 40 military police mentoring Afghan police officers in Kandahar. On Thursday, MacKay announced 90 more troops would be sent to help train local police and the national army, but at the time he said those new trainers would be brought home in 2011.

"After 2011, the military mission will end," MacKay said Saturday. "What we will do beyond that point in the area of training will predominantly be in the area of policing."

Keeping up the police-training role might alleviate pressure from the United States, which has pressed Ottawa to extend its military commitment.

U.S. Secretary of State Hillary Clinton told CBC last month that "I'm not going to sit here and tell you we're happy" with Canada's plans to bring its forces home next year. But she also said the Afghan mission needs countries willing to commit to non-combat work.

"We do need non-combat forces, for example, for training and logistical work," Clinton said.

MacKay wouldn't unequivocally say Saturday whether troops might remain deployed past the withdrawal deadline to train the Afghan National Army — in addition to whatever civilians or soldiers stay behind to instruct police — but he strongly intimated it was unlikely.

"Let's be clear, it's speculation at this point. We're talking over a year before Canada's military mission will end," the defence minister said.

A parliamentary motion passed March 13, 2008, calls for Canada to "end its presence in Kandahar as of July 2011" and for all forces to have left by the following December. Prime Minister Stephen Harper subsequently said that the vast majority of troops would be out of Afghanistan, and not just Kandahar, by the deadline.

About 2,830 Canadian troops are deployed in Afghanistan, mostly in the southern province of Kandahar, as part of NATO's International Security Assistance Force. Since 2002, when the mission began, 141 Canadian soldiers have been killed. Four Canadian civilians have also been killed.



Read more: http://www.cbc.ca/politics/story/2010/04/10/mackay-afghanistan-training.html#ixzz0kq5GJtL5

MacKay: Afghan election not prettty but useful

Useful to pull the wool over the eyes of those convinced by his rhetorical tripe. The election was obviously filled with fraud and was paid for and overseen by the occupying forces. The Afghan people are not the important people involved. It is the western taxpayers who foot the bill in money and lives who must be convinced of the legitimacy of the Afghan government. I have never understood why anyone w0uld ever vote for this guy.

Afghan election process 'not pretty' but useful: MacKay
CBC News
Afghan President Hamid Karzai has promised reforms to root out the corruption that has undermined trust in his administration. (Musadeq Sadeq/Associated Press)Canada's defence minister says the process of electing Afghan President Hamid Karzai, while flawed, produced a result that was important for stabilizing the country in advance of Canada's troop withdrawal.

Peter MacKay, speaking from the Canadian military base in Kandahar, said Canada was still committed to its partnership with the Afghan government in ensuring the stability of the region.

But he said he would like to see the Afghan leader tackle corruption in his government and would be watching with interest to see who Karzai appointed to his cabinet.

Karzai was declared the winner of Afghanistan's presidential election after his competitor in a scheduled run-off vote — former foreign minister Abdullah Abdullah — dropped out just days before the vote.

The run-off was scheduled for November after the first round of voting was marred by widespread fraud, but Abdullah dropped out because he said the run-off could not be conducted freely or fairly until changes were made to the election commission.

MacKay acknowledged problems in the way Karzai was elected.

"This process, I'll be frank, was not pretty," MacKay said. "But we have an outcome — albeit [through] a process that took a very convoluted route and was flawed in many ways — and it's important to note this was a second successful election since the fall of the Taliban."

MacKay said the hope was that Afghanistan could learn from the process and build on the experience for future elections.

Defence Minister Peter MacKay, shown here with Gen. Walter Natynczyk, says Natynczyk's preparations for withdrawing all of Canada's soldiers from Kandahar by 2011 are consistent with the government's own stance. (Patricia Bell/CBC)
Having a reliable partner is important, said MacKay, as Canada works to train the Afghan security forces to take over responsibilities to protect the country's citizens ahead of Canada's planned withdrawal in 2011.

Troop pullout scheduled for 2011
MacKay also addressed the future role of Canadian Forces in Kandahar, saying the plan of Canada's top commander to withdraw all of the country's soldiers from Kandahar by 2011 was consistent with the government's own stance.

Chief of Defence Staff Gen. Walt Natynczyk had told CBC News in an exclusive interview that the parliamentary motion on the Afghan mission specifies that it ends in July 2011, and that means the pullout of Canadian Forces.

CBC News had previously reported that Natynczyk ordered his commanders to start preparing plans to pull out of Afghanistan and return thousands of soldiers and billions of dollars' worth of equipment to Canada.

MacKay said Natynczyk's interpretation of Parliament's instructions to withdraw from Kandahar was "reflective of what everyone from the prime minister on down views as those instructions."

But MacKay was unclear on what direction the mission would take after 2011 and whether it would involve regions of the country outside of Kandahar.

"The military mission is changing," he said. "It is obviously transitioning at 2011 to emphasis on reconstruction, development, things that we are doing now but we'll be able to do more.

"And clearly, there is discussion as to how this is going to take place. We're tasked with that now."

NDP defence critic Jack Harris says the military is trying to force the government to define the scope of the mission publicly so Canadians understand what their government is asking its soldiers to do. The problem, Harris said, is that the government is afraid to do that.

"If they intend to do something militarily after 2011, I think they better start a public debate because I think most Canadians are satisfied that the military mission will come to an end," Harris said.

In the absence of that kind of debate and direction from Parliament, the military must leave Afghanistan, just as the general indicated, Harris said.

Last month, the prime minister's spokesman, Dimitri Soudas, told CBC News that Canadian soldiers would remain in Afghanistan past 2011, though he suggested a force much smaller than the 2,800-troop mission now in Kandahar.

MacKay violates Conflict of Interest Act

Obviously a minister with such an imperfect memory is not to be trusted as defence minister. Imagine you were a board member of two companies and forgot that fact. Surely you would get regular letters notifying you of board meetings among other things.
The Chronicle Herald may have phrased their headline incorrectly but MacKay is at minimum guilty of violating the Conflict of Interest Act whether he is guilty of actual conflict of interest or not.

MacKay denies conflict of interest But defence minister admits he violated Conflict of Interest Act.
By STEPHEN MAHER Ottawa Bureau
OTTAWA — Peter MacKay denied Thursday that he was in a conflict of interest when he was a director of two family forestry companies while serving as a federal cabinet minister.
The defence minister and Central Nova MP acknowledged being in violation of the Conflict of Interest Act, which forbids ministers from serving on the boards of private companies, but he said that doesn’t necessarily mean he was in a conflict.
“As I have acknowledged, earlier this week I discovered I was not in compliance with section 15 of the act and took immediate steps to rectify the situation,” Mr. MacKay wrote in a letter emailed to The Chronicle Herald on Thursday. “A lack of compliance with section 15 does not, in itself, constitute a conflict of interest.”
Mr. MacKay objected to the headline on the front-page story: MacKay in Conflict of Interest.
“This headline is misleading, as it is simply not supported by the story you have published,” Mr. MacKay wrote. “Nothing in the story you have published establishes the existence of a conflict of interest.”
The Chronicle Herald learned this week that Mr. MacKay served as a director of Beaver Lumber and Lorne Resources, two companies owned by his father, former federal cabinet minister Elmer MacKay.
Through those two companies and private holdings, Elmer MacKay owns more than 8,000 hectares of Nova Scotia forest, mostly in Pictou County.
Peter MacKay resigned from the boards of both companies on Wednesday after he learned that he was in violation of the act. He said he had forgotten that he was an officer of either company as he had never received any compensation or owned any part of the businesses.
The Conflict of Interest Act for federal ministers forbids them from serving as directors or officers of corporations and from managing or operating businesses.
The violation came to light when The Chronicle Herald asked the office of Mary Dawson, the conflict of interest commissioner, about the situation. Her office called Mr. MacKay’s office and he immediately moved to withdraw from the companies.
Ms. Dawson “is looking into” Mr. MacKay’s violation, a spokeswoman said Wednesday.
If Ms. Dawson launches an investigation, and if she finds that Mr. MacKay violated the act, she would file a report with Prime Minister Stephen Harper. She could also impose a monetary fine.
The story about Mr. MacKay’s violation of the act has received coverage from national media outlets, giving Mr. MacKay and the Tories a headache on a day when they didn’t need any bad news as political parties joust over the possibility of a fall election.
Liberal deputy leader Bob Rae declined to take any shots at Mr. MacKay when a CBC Radio reporter asked about the story on Thursday.
“That’s a matter for the conflict commissioner,” Mr. Rae said. “It’s not a matter for us. We have a process in the House for that. We take ministers at their word. We’re not going to make personal attacks on people.”
The Chronicle Herald looked into Mr. MacKay’s connection with the family businesses after he announced $7 million in federal funding last month for Nova Scotia woodlot owners.
Mr. MacKay said he had nothing to do with the decision to make the federal grant and nothing to do with the management of the family companies.
This summer, Mr. MacKay, his father and his brother Andrew received an award for sustainable forestry from a conservation group that said Andrew and Peter “assist their father in managing the family woodlands.”
Mr. MacKay said Wednesday he had no role in running the companies.
“My mistake, if anything, was not to have twigged to the fact that I should remove my name,” he said. “I guess it sounds hard to believe but I completely forgot because I didn’t have any involvement with it.”
Halifax MP Megan Leslie said she finds it tough to understand Mr. MacKay’s oversight because MPs and cabinet ministers have to go through a rigorous disclosure process.
“It must be quite the life to forget that you’re the director of certain companies,” the New Democrat said. “I forget how many student loans I have, but we have different lives, Peter and I.”
(sbruce@herald.ca)

MacKay visits troops in Afghanistan

There seems to have been almost no response among the opposition to MacKay's talk about post-combat role. Canada may end up being in a combat post-combat role since many activities will be attacked by the Taliban and of course the combat will be in self-defence. The best role for Canada would be to get out period and save our money for better things than aiding US imperialism even when that imperialism has a humanitarian gloss. MacKay's prattle about avoiding civilian policies conflicts with the continuing policy of airstrikes which regularly results in new civilian casualties.



MacKay visits troops in Afghanistan, talks about post-combat role
By COLIN PERKEL The Canadian Press
KANDAHAR, Afghanistan — Canada will still have lots to do in Afghanistan even if its combat role ends as planned in 2011, Defence Minister Peter MacKay said Monday at the end of a visit to Canadian forces.
The focus will be on aid and governance, something that is already occurring as 200 new U.S. soldiers arrive every week to this ever-expanding military base in southern Afghanistan with a renewed mission to subdue a bloody insurgency.
The Canadian mission is increasingly focusing on the population centres of Kandahar province — ensuring the safety and the well being of individuals and the population itself, MacKay said.
The idea is to try to secure the populated centres to allow enhanced humanitarian aid, build schools, provide immunizations and enable micro-finance credit.
``Its microcosms of the whole of government approach in concentrated areas of population rather than simply focusing on holding swaths of land,'' MacKay said.
Canada, he said, no longer cares to concentrate its efforts on taking and ``holding swaths of land.''
The defence minister spent more than two days at the sprawling military base visiting with Canadian forces, accompanied by Veterans Affairs Minister Greg Thompson.
On Sunday evening at a meet-and-greet barbecue with some Canadian soldiers, MacKay said he had no plans to follow the lead of U.S. President Barack Obama and replace Canada's top soldier in Afghanistan.
On the contrary, he said as he stood next to a memorial to fallen Canadian soldiers, the government had ``great confidence'' in the command.
The Americans and other countries are also moving toward Canada's approach or attempting to temper military action with non-combat aid and reconstruction efforts, he said.
The comments came after he announced 11 new facilities to support soldiers who return to Canada with illnesses or injuries.
``We are very seized and very conscious of the fact that we have to do a better job of taking care of our men and women in uniform when they return from service, particularly in a mission like Afghanistan which is very demanding,'' MacKay told the soldiers.
MacKay was careful to avoid criticizing the Americans for an increasing number of civilian casualties, particularly in air strikes, something Canada does not take part in.
``We obviously take great pains not to have civilian casualties in any instance but this is a very insidious type of warfare that the Taliban are engaged in,'' MacKay said.
The Taliban, he noted, does not ``play by any rules of engagement.''
The defence minister was expected to head to Pakistan later Monday for talks with his counterpart Ahmad Mukhtar in Islamabad.
The meeting was being described as a general discussion on regional issues, but came just days after MacKay said instability was making Pakistan perhaps the most dangerous country in the world.

McKay: Ottawa ''reassessing'' Khadr's case

This is from the Globe and Mail.

MacKay seems to be taking a different tack than some other officials who are just staying with the standard bit of crap. The Canadian govt. will simply wait until the US justice process runs it course even though that process is regarded globally as a farce and the new president is putting a stop to it. Harper looks as if he dearly wants to carry on supporting the Bush farce in Guantanamo even after Bush is gone and repudiated by the present American govt.
MacKay at least wants to keep some opening in case Obama in effect forces Harper to do something other than continue spouting the same tired piffle.


Ottawa 'reassessing' Khadr's case, MacKay says
OMAR EL AKKAD AND DANIEL LEBLANC
With a report from Ingrid Peritz in Montreal
January 22, 2009
TORONTO, OTTAWA -- For the first time, the Conservative government is quietly budging from its vehement refusal to act on behalf of Canadian Guantanamo detainee Omar Khadr, with Defence Minister Peter MacKay saying the government is "reassessing" its position.
In one of his first major orders as U.S. President, Barack Obama called a time-out on the military commissions system, telling military prosecutors to request a 120-day "suspension" of the court cases - a request that Guantanamo judges granted. The suspension not only adds to the uncertainty surrounding Mr. Khadr's future, but also puts more pressure on the government in Ottawa to change its long-held position that it will not act on the detained Canadian's behalf while a legal process is continuing.
After the comments by Mr. MacKay - who went further than other federal officials on the matter - a government official explained that the Defence Minister was simply pointing out that Canada is "watching what the U.S. administration is saying very closely."
Senior federal officials said the Canadian government is still waiting to hear the Obama administration's final word on Guantanamo, pointing out that the 120-day delay does not fundamentally alter Mr. Khadr's trial. However, the Obama administration made its overall intent clear yesterday, circulating a draft executive order that calls for the Guantanamo Bay detention camps to be shut down within one year.
Print Edition - Section Front
Enlarge Image
More World Stories
BETWEEN THE LINES: PARSING OBAMA'S SPEECH
THE PIN WITH PROVENANCE
A gift for the Obamas? How could they resist?
Ottawa 'reassessing' Khadr's case, MacKay says
Congo defends invitation to Rwandan forces
Evidence suggests birds brought down jetliner
Go to the World section
getSLinks("topStoriesInSection","LAC.20090122.KHADR22",5);

Ottawa appears to be hedging its bets, preparing for a possible request from Washington to take Mr. Khadr back. The issue the Conservative government has wished for so long to avoid may well end up surfacing during the first meeting between Mr. Obama and Prime Minister Stephen Harper.
With a 120-day delay in hand, the Obama administration has bought some time to consider the legal and political minefield it will have to cross on the way to shutting down the Guantanamo Bay detention camps.
For example, human-rights groups have repeatedly called for all charges against the detainees to be dropped and refiled in U.S. federal court, but such a move risks having many, if not all, of the cases fall apart if the federal courts decide the evidence against the detainees is tainted by torture. In that context, it may be far preferable for Washington to ask Ottawa to take back Mr. Khadr - and possibly some other detainees who don't face charges but have nowhere else to go - thereby giving Mr. Obama fewer cases with which to deal.
An expert said that Mr. Khadr is likely to land back in Canada, and that Mr. Obama will want to settle this "irritant" before he visits Mr. Harper in Ottawa in coming weeks.
"My guess is that they would probably want this off the books by summit time," said Fen Hampson, director of Carleton University's Norman Paterson School of International Affairs.
Within hours of Mr. Obama's decision to halt the Guantanamo trials, human-rights groups reacted with universal approval. The American Civil Liberties Union, Amnesty International and the United Nations office for children and armed conflict all described the move as an important first step toward closing the book on Guantanamo.
In the meantime, calls are growing from within Canada to bring Mr. Khadr home.
In Montreal yesterday, Liberal Leader Michael Ignatieff called for Mr. Khadr's repatriation.
"We've said for over a year and a half that Guantanamo should be closed, Mr. Khadr should come home, and he should be reintegrated into Canadian society," Mr. Ignatieff told reporters after meeting the head of Quebec's largest labour organization.
"I don't pronounce on his innocence or guilt. I just think enough is enough."

MacKay confirms 200 new troops for Afghanistan.

Nice touch that MacKay ties these further commitments to the Manley report thus linking the Liberals with the Conservatives and the Afghan mission. While our national infrastructure of bridges, roads, etc. crumbles we spend our money on adventures in tandem with the U.S. imperialists in overthrowing existing regimes and trying to build regimes more friendly to U.S. imperialism.

MacKay confirms 200 new troops for Afghanistan
Updated Mon. Jul. 28 2008 11:46 AM ET
CTV.ca News Staff
An increase to Canada's troop commitment in Afghanistan to 2,700 would represent the additional boots on the ground needed to run aerial drones and six Chinook helicopters, said Defence Minister Peter MacKay.
Foreign Affairs Minister David Emerson was in Afghanistan on the weekend for his first visit since taking on the portfolio.
While there, he said Canada may boost its numbers in the south by 200 "as more equipment arrives," appearing to link the troops to a new squadron of helicopters and unmanned aerial vehicles (UAVs) expected to be in place early next year.
MacKay, speaking to CTV's Canada AM on Monday, confirmed the link, saying the extra troops would be part of the increases needed to meet the recommendations of the Manley report on Afghanistan which was endorsed by Parliament.
"These additional troops would be required to keep the commitment that the parliamentary motion spoke of," MacKay said.
"And this will also importantly provide the ability to transport troops and equipment inside Afghanistan's Kandahar province, as well as giving that all important eye in the sky perspective for the UAVs."
John Manley's report on Afghanistan recommended that Canada extend its commitment to Afghanistan, but only if other NATO members boosted their troop commitments and provided more equipment.
MacKay noted that many of the 88 Canadian troops killed in Afghanistan were struck by improvised explosive devices while doing ground transportation of materials needed for development and reconstruction efforts.
The new equipment, he said, will save lives.
"UAVs give us that eye in the sky, the ability to see the Taliban when they're putting these type of devices in the road," MacKay said.
"And the transport helicopters, the heavy lift capability is critically important to the mission and its success."
MacKay also previewed a list of mission benchmarks the federal government plans to release in August to help Canadians measure the success of the mission.
In addition to military benchmarks, the list will include a major dam-building project, the construction of schools and efforts to eradicate polio with medical supplies and immunizations, MacKay said.
"So in addition to security and providing greater security on the ground we'll move ahead with this type of project. This is very much in keeping with Parliament's commitments. What we want to see as Canadians is a stable society that's able to do a lot more for itself," MacKay said.
Speaking in Kabul on Saturday, Emerson said the long-awaited benchmark list will be a valuable tool.
"We want numbers that tell us when we're doing things right. We want numbers and benchmarks that will tell us when we're doing things not so well," he said.

U.S. Critique of Afghan allies wasn't aimed at Canada: MacKay

Why can't Gates speak for himself directly instead of through his Canadian mouthpiece Peter MacKay?Actually, Gates should be applauded for criticising NATO. NATO should get completely out of Afghanistan and leave the well-trained U.S. troops to do the counter-insurgency work. I am a bit surprised though at Gates criticising the bombing. The bombing is done by the US and the command of NATO in Afghanistan is under the US general Bomber McNeill.

U.S. critique of Afghan allies wasn't aimed at Canada: MacKay
Last Updated: Wednesday, January 16, 2008 | 7:41 PM ET
CBC News
U.S. Defence Secretary Robert Gates wasn't talking about Canada when he verbally attacked the skills of the allied troops working in southern Afghanistan, Defence Minister Peter MacKay said Wednesday.


U.S. Secretary of Defence Robert Gates told the Los Angeles Times that he's worried about the training of soldiers serving in southern Afghanistan.
(Kevin Wolf/Associated Press)
MacKay said Gates called him Wednesday to explain that the comments he made in the Los Angeles Times were meant to be a general reflection on NATO's shortfalls when it comes to battling insurgents.

"His comments were certainly not directed at Canada,'" MacKay told reporters in Ottawa, recounting the conversation he'd had with Gates five minutes earlier.

"He said, 'I specifically made no reference to any country and Canada is the last country I'd make those comments about.'"



Gates's interview with the Times was published Wednesday. In the article, Gates says NATO forces in southern Afghanistan do not know how to properly combat a guerilla insurgency and that could be contributing to rising violence in the country.

The article notes that NATO troops working in the south are primarily from Canada, Britain and the Netherlands.

"I'm worried we're deploying [military advisors] that are not properly trained and I'm worried we have some military forces that don't know how to do counter-insurgency operations," Gates says in the Times article.

"Most of the European forces, NATO forces, are not trained in counter-insurgency," he adds.

The article notes that other senior U.S. military officials have criticized NATO for an overreliance on heavy weaponry in the south, including air strikes.

'I was a bit taken aback'
MacKay said he was surprised when he read the article Wednesday, especially since he had spoken to Gates on the telephone only the day before and Gates had only talked about "respect, admiration and appreciation" for Canada, according to MacKay.

"I'll admit I was a bit taken aback when I saw it," MacKay said of the article.

He said Gates was quick to call Wednesday to explain himself.

"He was extremely complimentary in what he said about Canadian forces and in fact expressed regret and embarrassment over those comments being in any way reflected towards our troops," MacKay said.

"He said, 'This was not a criticism aimed at you or anyone else, this is a general comment about how we need collectively, in the alliance, need to train our troops to deal with counter-insurgency, counterterrorism,'" MacKay added.

"I take him at his word."

MacKay noted that Canada and the rest of NATO should be thinking about how to improve their training and equipment in order to better cope with insurgent attacks, which are increasingly becoming a part of modern warfare.

Brits, Dutch lash out at Gates
Canada's Liberals were not as understanding on Wednesday. Liberal defence critic Denis Coderre said the comments were insensitive, especially given that a Canadian soldier was killed Tuesday in Afghanistan.

"We are paying the price in lives," Coderre said. "Our men and women know how to fight. We need to know who he was talking about, what countries."

Parliamentarians in Britain and the Netherlands also lashed out at Gates's remarks. British Conservative legislator Patrick Mercer called the comments "bloody outrageous."

"I would beg the Americans to understand that we are their closest allies, and our men are bleeding and dying in large numbers," Mercer said. "These sorts of things are just not helpful among allied nations."

Meanwhile, NATO Secretary General Jaap de Hoop Scheffer defended his troops.

"All countries that are in the south do an excellent job. Full stop," he said.

Gates did not address the criticism directly on Wednesday, but his spokesman, Geoff Morrell, fielded questions. Morell said he did not challenge the accuracy of the quotes in the Times article, but thought they left the wrong impression.

"For the record, [Gates] did not — to the L.A. Times or at any time otherwise — publicly ever criticize any single country for their performance in, or commitment to, the mission in Afghanistan," Morrell said in Washington, D.C.

Instead, Morrell said, Gates was only pointing out that "NATO, as an alliance, does not train for counter-insurgency. The alliance has never had to do it before."

Where did MacKay get his information.

I always thought that MacKay got his info from David Wilkins the US ambassador to Canada but then MacKay's spokesperson said he didn't. That is strange, Wilkins was invited by MacKay to go to Afghanistan with him. Wilkins would have had ample opportunity to have given him the info. Perhaps it went like this:
Wilkins: You know Peter it would be a nice New Year's gift if you helped us beat up on Iran a bit. Here is some dirt from our TOP administration officials.
Peter: Sure Dave. Always ready to help out our freedom loving friends to the south. Just don't send us back that Khadr kid. The press will lap up this stuff and I will make sure your name is never mentioned..

Monday » January 7 » 2008

Where did MacKay get information?
Targeting iran. Anyone can make a roadside bomb

MIKE BLANCHFIELD
CanWest News Service


Monday, January 07, 2008


As far as international bad guys go, Iran has proven to be a convenient and safe target for Canada.

So when Defence Minister Peter MacKay turned up in Kandahar on Christmas Day and accused Iran of arming the Taliban insurgency against Canada and its allies in Afghanistan, few eyebrows were initially raised.

But to anyone with even a passing knowledge of recent history in the region, MacKay's broad assertion - short on nuance or explanation - triggered alarm bells.

"I think we're going to have to ask him where he got his information," Brig.-Gen. Marquis Hainse said several days later.

In recent months, other prominent figures have raised doubts about whether Iran's ruling clerics are behind the shipment of guns and bombs over its eastern frontier to the Taliban-Al-Qa'ida insurgency in southern Afghanistan: Afghan President Hamid Karzai and Canada's former ambassador to the country, Chris Alexander, now the deputy United Nations envoy to Kabul who Prime Minister Stephen Harper has touted as a leading expert on Afghanistan. So where did MacKay get his information?

His office isn't saying. But his spokesman made clear Friday where it didn't come from: U.S. ambassador David Wilkins, who accompanied MacKay on his lengthy journey to Kandahar.

The original source of the Iran-meddling-in-Afghanistan narrative began with top Bush administration officials.

"Canada is very concerned by allegations that arms are reaching Taliban groups through Iran," a Foreign Affairs spokesperson said. Through the Iranian embassy in Ottawa, Canada has "urged the government of Iran to take appropriate measures" to prevent any support from reaching insurgents in Afghanistan, France Bureau added, without providing details.

U.S. experts suggest it is unlikely that Tehran is directly supporting the insurgency.

In western Afghanistan, Iran is a positive influence and evidence is easy for any visitor to see, said Anthony Cordesman, a senior analyst with the Centre for Strategic and International Studies in Washington.

In Kandahar, MacKay said he was concerned about information on how to make improvised explosive devices was coming into Afghanistan from Iran.

But Gary Sick, a member of the National Security Council in the 1970s, said there is nothing inherently Iranian about the IEDs. "Anyone with a decent machine shop who knows what they're doing" can build IEDs."

© The Gazette (Montreal) 2008








Copyright © 2008 CanWest Interactive, a division of CanWest MediaWorks Publications, Inc.. All rights reserved.

Wilkins encourages Canada to stay in Afghanistan beyond 2009

This is from the Charlotte Observer. Notice that Wilkins was invited to go to Afghanistan by MacKay! MacKay is sucking up to his American advisors. Of course there is no need to convince MacKay that we ought to stay on and on to be junior partners in US imperialism. It is the Canadian public that needs to be primed and pumped to continue sending our troops to the slaughter.


Wilkins encourages Canada to stay in Afghanistan beyond 2009
By SEANNA ADCOX
Associated Press Writer

COLUMBIA, S.C. --The U.S. Ambassador to Canada said Friday he's unsure how the death of Pakistani opposition leader Benazir Bhutto will affect the Canadian parliament's upcoming vote on troops in Afghanistan.

"It remains to be seen," Ambassador David Wilkins said from his native Greenville after returning from his first trip to Afghanistan. "I think we're all not only expressing regret of a tragic death but concerned about the stability of Pakistan and how that instability, if it turns to instability, affects Afghanistan."

As ambassador, he is encouraging Canadian officials to extend that country's military operations in Afghanistan beyond its current commitment that ends in February 2009. "But we fully understand and appreciate it's up to Canadian elected officials to make that decision," Wilkins said.

He expects the parliament to vote early next year. About 2,500 Canadian troops are in Afghanistan's southern region bordering Pakistan, where former Prime Minister Bhutto was assassinated Thursday. Canadian troops first deployed to the Kandahar area nearly two years ago and there is growing public unease.

Canada, with 73 combat deaths, has suffered higher casualties in Afghanistan than other countries because of their location in an area with high insurgent activity, Wilkins said.

The ambassador left Afghanistan on Wednesday after a three-day visit with troops, at the invitation of Canada's Defense Minister Peter MacKay. Wilkins said he spent 45 minutes in a bunker on Christmas night after a rocket hit an airstrip at an Air Force base he was visiting in Kandahar. But he said the explosion was not near him.

Afghan Diplomat: No proof Iranian gov't behind IEDs

Where do Mackay's great ideas come from?
U.S. Ambassador David Wilkins accompanied MacKay to Afghanistan -- at Canada's request -- for the Christmas Day visit with troops
The US does not need proof and neither does its representative in Canada Peter MacKay. Perhaps MacKay's attack on Iran was his Xmas present to the US and Wilkins.
No doubt Karzai finds such attacks embarassing and counter-productive since Afghanistan has relatively good relationships with Iran but that does not matter to the US or Canada either it seems. Who are the Afghanis to say what their relationship to Iran is?

No proof Iranian gov't behind IEDs: Afghan diplomat
Updated Wed. Dec. 26 2007 6:52 PM ET

CTV.ca News Staff

Afghanistan's Ambassador to Canada appears to be cautious about blaming Iran for improvised explosive devices (IEDs) being used in attacks against Afghan and NATO soldiers in his country.

On Tuesday, Defence Minister Peter MacKay alleged that many IEDs in Afghanistan have come from Iran.

"We're very concerned that weapons are coming in from Iran, we're very concerned these weapons are going to the insurgents and keeping this issue alive," he told reporters in Kandahar, where he was paying a Christmas visit to Canadian troops.

But Omar Samad, the top Afghan diplomat in Canada, told CTV Newsnet on Wednesday that there is no evidence about where the IEDs actually originated and who brought them to Afghanistan.

"Iran is a neighbor and we have good relations," he said. "The point is -- and the questions that have to be answered (and) are being looked at as far as who is involved in this. Is this a smuggling issue? Is this a policy issue by some government? Is this maybe an attempt by arms dealers to bring arms from a certain source?"

The Afghan government is working with its partners, including Canada, in attempting to find answers to those questions, he said.

Samad pointed out that Iran, which shares a 1,000-kilometre border with his country, hosts one million Afghan refugees. He said it must still be determined whether or not certain groups in other countries are involved in sending weapons to Afghanistan or if governments are involved.

U.S. Ambassador David Wilkins accompanied MacKay to Afghanistan -- at Canada's request -- for the Christmas Day visit with troops. In the past the U.S. has accused Iran of supplying weapons and materials for IEDs to insurgents in Afghanistan and Iraq.

U.S. officials have also accused Iran of having a nuclear weapons program, which was refuted by an intelligence assessment by 16 American spy agencies just a few weeks ago.

Canada had not linked Iran to weapons in Afghanistan before MacKay's and Wilkins' trip.

MacKay said in French that Canada has repeatedly demanded that Iran halt the flow of weapons to Afghanistan.

But Samad said more investigation is needed before assigning blame to a specific source.

"First, we have to establish the facts, and then we will look at the options that exist," he said.

Iran's Shiite government has historically had frosty relations with the Taliban, which is the main insurgent force fighting against NATO and Afghan national forces. The Taliban and al Qaeda insurgents are composed of Sunni Muslims, who have traditionally been antagonistic towards Iran's Shiite Muslims.

MacKay also warned Pakistan to stop supplying weapons to Afghanistan, which has a strained relationship with the government in Kabul in the past few years.