CANADA/AFGHANISTAN: GOVERNMENT SHOWS RESOLVE IN

C O N F I D E N T I A L SECTION 01 OF 02 OTTAWA 000137 SIPDIS E.O. 12958: DECL: 01/16/2016 TAGS: MARR AF CA NATO SUBJECT: CANADA/AFGHANISTAN: GOVERNMENT SHOWS RESOLVE IN FACE OF KANDAHAR ATTACK, BUT QUESTIONS LOOM Classified By: POL M/C Brian Flora. Reason 1.4 (b) and (d) ¶1. (C) Summary: Canada lost its first diplomat in fifty years in Kandahar on Sunday when a suicide bomber killed its PRT chief and seriously wounded three soldiers. Canadian officials are resolute in the face of the casualties about continuing with the mission, but the Canadian public (despite being warned repeatedly by senior government officials) is only slowly facing the fact that the current Afghan deployment is not like the conventional peacekeeping missions Canada is accustomed to, and could involve sustained casualties. End Summary. ¶2. (C) On the afternoon of January 15, a suicide bomber pulled up beside a Canadian Mercedes jeep that was returning to the Kandahar base after meetings with local officials and exploded. The blast destroyed one of the lightly armored vehicles, known as G-wagons, and damaged a second, killing Glyn Berry, a 59-year old Canadian diplomat and head of the Canadian PRT, and seriously wounding three soldiers. Two of the soldiers remain in critical condition and the third lost a leg. Three Afghans were killed and ten injured in the attack. ¶3. (C) The killing, coming on the heels of several other attacks, was a bit of a wake-up call for the Canadian public, confirming the very threat that Defense Minister Graham warned against last November. It brings to nine the number of Canadians killed in Afghanistan since 2002, and is the first Canadian diplomat killed in the line of duty since the 1950,s (two in Vietnam and one in Egypt). ¶4. (SBU) All political leaders were united in showing continuing resolve in the wake of the attacks. Prime Minister Martin offered his sympathy and condolences to the families and said that the mission would continue. &Our participation in the mission in Kandahar is essential to establishing peace and security. It,s a nation that,s struggling to find its way.8 Later he said, &the work these individuals is doing in Afghanistan is of paramount importance to Canada and to the international community as a whole. We will continue our work in Afghanistan, knowing that Mr. Berry gave his life for the pursuit of peace and stability.8 Martin also added, &the more that we can do to establish democracy and institutions and do it in the tougher parts of Afghanistan, then the more we protect ourselves at home.8 ¶5. (SBU) Conservative Defense critic Gordon O,Connor was even more strident in expressing support for the Afghan mission -- &The terrorist came out of Afghanistan and attacked the twin towers. In those twin towers, 25 Canadians were killed and in killing 25 Canadians they were basically attacking us.8 Conservative Leader Stephen Harper affirmed his support for the mission, saying &Canadians serving abroad put their lives on the line every day in the name of freedom and democracy, and for that, we are grateful. This incident is a reminder that we cannot take our security for granted -- that those who serve face dangers we can only imagine.8 NDP Leader Layton stated &it is with courage and honour that they put their lives on the line to serve our country and to further the pursuit of peace, justice, and democracy around the world.8 The incident received considerable coverage in the Canadian press, with especially positive personal stories told about the diplomat who lost his life. ¶6. (C) Ambassador passed on our condolences to Assistant Deputy Minister David Malone in a pre-scheduled meeting today. Malone thanked the Ambassador for his concern and said he would pass it on to the Minister, who is on the campaign trail, and convey the Ambassador,s condolences to the widow. Malone said he had heard of no calls for a pullback from the Kandahar mission and judging from the editorial pages of major newspapers, believes the incident would not weaken Canada,s resolve. ¶7. (SBU) Editorials this morning were indeed resolute. The Globe and Mail wrote on &Canada,s Necessary Role in Dangerous Kandahar,8 suggesting that &Canadians are truly on the front line between Afghanistan,s preservation and the topple back into the barbarism of the Taliban.8 The National Post focused on &The Courage of Our Diplomats,8 a moving piece about Mr. Berry,s commitment to the mission and his belief that he was involved in something larger than himself. The Ottawa Citizen focused on the price for continued instability for Afghans. In an op-ed entitled &Afghanistan Needs Us,8 the Citizen said &the 20 Afghans who died in a suicide attack in Afghanistan yesterday remind us why out soldiers, police, and diplomats are putting themselves in danger halfway around the world.8 ¶8. (SBU) There were, however, several voices that tried to put the choice Canada has taken to participate in the Afghan mission in more serious terms. Richard Gwyn, writing in the Toronto Star, says &Afghanistan is the first real war Canada has taken part in since the Korean War more than half a century ago.8 He does not shrink from the mission, suggesting that the Afghan people, unlike the Iraqis, don,t see foreign troops as occupiers but rather as &strangers who,ve come to help rebuild their shattered country.8 He concludes that &we should be there. But we should be there with out eyes open.8 ¶9. (SBU) Peter Goodspeed in the National Post warns that the growing Afghan resistance is copying jihadist techniques from Iraq, leading to more than 20 suicide bombings against U.S.-led or NATO forces in Afghanistan in the past four months. &The fighting in Afghanistan, like the original Islamist jihadist movements it spawned,8 he concludes, &may now be undergoing a major transformation. . . Afghanistan,s militants. . .are a younger, more brutal group of jihadists who have spent the last three years fighting the United States in Iraq.8 An editorial in the same paper by Dominion Institute Executive Director Rudyard Griffiths, is, like Gwyn, supportive of the Afghan mission, but similarly tries to point out the importance of leveling with the Canadian people about what they have signed up for. He fears Canadians have grown accustomed to relatively casualty-free peacekeeping like the Balkans and may not be prepared for the upcoming bloodshed in Kandahar, which he describes as &more like Iraq than the Balkans.8 He suggests that &for Canada, Kandahar is the 21st Century equivalent of Vimy ridge and the Suez,8 and Canada should &show the world a new model to rebuild Afghanistan and win back some of its lost influence.8 ¶10. (C) Comment: Canadians understand the reason for being in Afghanistan and what is at stake. But there does appear to be a gulf between the conventional peacekeeper role that they, for decades, have seen as &right8 for themselves versus the brutal requirements for success in a place like Kandahar. Griffith,s thoughts are perhaps most telling, suggesting that perhaps there can be a Canadian way of nation-building that provides success without a resort to &American-style8 aggressiveness; curiously, he does not suggest what that Canadian style might consist of. More realistic are the views of people like General Hillier and Minister Graham, who understand that the Kandahar mission is going to be a long, hard slog with no short-cuts and a share of bloodshed. Visit Canada's Classified Web Site at http://www.state.sgov.gov/p/wha/ottawa DICKSON