Roger Jordan
In the wake of the revelation that Canadian special forces had engaged Islamic State fighters in a gun battle, further exchanges of fire have taken place on two separate occasions.
Last Monday, at a military briefing on the progress of the mission in
Iraq, officials also noted that Canadian CF18 jets had intensified
their bombardment of ISIS targets, striking 12 times within a week.
Although they did not indicate how many of these attacks had been
directed by Canadian ground troops, the military had confirmed the
previous week that special forces were pinpointing targets from the
ground with lasers during air attacks.
The growing involvement of Canada’s armed forces in ground combat
makes a mockery of the Conservative government’s claim that the
six-month deployment to the US-led Mideast war, authorised in early
October, is purely a training and assistance mission to support the
Iraqi army and Kurdish militias. On the contrary, it appears ever more
likely that it will be the prelude to a broader deployment of Canadian
ground troops in alliance with US imperialism.
Conservative Prime Minister Stephen Harper responded to the latest
developments by claiming that the military’s actions were in keeping
with the goals of the original mission. Answering criticism that
Canada’s military was spending more time at the frontline than the
several thousand soldiers now in Iraq on “training” missions from other
countries, he told the House of Commons on Wednesday, “I do not know
what other militaries are doing, but I know that ours is doing exactly
what parliament asked it to do, and that Canadians are behind it.”
Other leading officials have been more explicit in pointing out that
military operations in Iraq are entering a new stage. Paul Forget, the
military official who revealed the latest two cases of Canadian special
forces returning fire, commented that such incidents could be expected
to increase. “The role of our specialists was initially to show them
some basic aspects. At this point we are in a position to advise them,
assist them in a combat zone,” he told reporters. The military has
stated separately that Canadian troops are spending 20 percent of their
time in Iraq on the front line of battle.
Although the Canadian special forces gun battles with ISIS are the
only combat incidents involving Western forces in Iraq that have
officially been recognised, a spokeswoman for the international
coalition involved in the mission indicated that other countries may be
doing more than is being publicly admitted. Questioned by the CBC as to
why it was only Canadian troops who were involved in firefights, she
responded that she could only comment on incidents that had been
reported to the high command.
The special forces mission was initially scheduled to last six months
when it was approved last October. On top of the growing number of
combat incidents, there are further signs that an expansion of Canada’s
operation is already being prepared.
General Tom Lawson, chief of the Defence staff, travelled to Irbil
last week for meetings with leading Kurdish regional officials. The
defence department noted that his discussions included a meeting with
the chancellor of the Kurdistan regional security council, Masrour
Barzani. The department commented that the meeting was held “to exchange
information, and update them on Canada’s ongoing contribution to the
advice and assist mission.”
BasNews, a Kurdish media outlet based in the city, reported that
Lawson was pressed by officials on the need for more Western assistance,
including armoured vehicles and arms.
Another factor fuelling this speculation is that Ottawa continues to
refuse all attempts to disclose the costs of Canada’s Iraq mission.
Defence Minister Rob Nicholson has said only that figures will be
published three months after the conclusion of all operations.
The natural evolution of the mission as portrayed by the military top
brass and defence politicians has been carefully prepared by the ruling
class. From the outset, the deployment of Canadian air power and
special forces in the Mideast war was a predatory move to assist
Washington in the consolidation of its predominance in the region.
Harper is going all out to stir up the most reactionary and
jingoistic Canadian nationalism over the conflict. Hailing the troops
for their courageous role following the recent clashes, he declared that
it was a “robust mission” and added, in the style of a military
commander, “If those guys fire at us, we’re going to fire back and we’re
going to kill them.”
This marks a ratcheting up of the flag-waving nationalism and
militarist propaganda that have characterised Harper’s period in office.
From the Libya intervention in 2011, to the investment of additional
resources to upgrade the Canadian military and its deployment around the
world, the Conservative government has sought to implement an
aggressive foreign policy. This is being justified by the false
portrayal of Canada historically as a democratic and peace-making power,
expressed most cynically in Harper’s speech on the anniversary of the outbreak of the First World War last August.
There is also a domestic component to this strategy. The Harper
government is using the nationalist fervour whipped up over Iraq to
enforce a further draconian assault on democratic rights. On Friday, it
tabled its latest anti-terrorist bill, which grants even more
wide-ranging powers to the intelligence services and gives police the
right to detain people without charge for an extended period.
A right-wing nationalist campaign of militarism abroad and attacks on
democratic rights at home is to be the Harper government’s platform in
the upcoming federal election due later this year. Since the twin
attacks on armed forces personnel by disoriented individuals last
October, Harper has sought to present Canada as a country under siege
from terrorists so as to justify the continued build-up of state power
and his government’s latest military intervention.
Any attempt to question this right-wing agenda is to be met with
intimidation and the threat of repression. This was illustrated by the
manner in which Harper responded to questions posed by the leader of the
official opposition New Democrats (NDP), Thomas Mulcair on the Iraq
mission. Mulcair stated that the recent clashes with ISIS were a breach
of the original mission approved by parliament last October, accusing
the Harper government of misleading Canadians.
Harper retorted, “I know that the opposition thinks it is a terrible
thing that we are standing up to the jihadists. I know they think it is a
terrible thing that some of these jihadists got killed when they fired
on the Canadian military.”
The equating of even the most limited questioning of the government’s
course with support for the terrorism of ISIS has ominous implications.
Under Canada’s anti-democratic terrorist laws, supporting a terrorist
group is a criminal offence punishable by a long prison term. The
technique of associating political opponents with Islamic
fundamentalists has been employed by Harper previously, labelling former
NDP leader Jack Layton as “Taliban Jack” for his advocacy of talks with
the Taliban in Afghanistan.
The reality is that the NDP, and the opposition Liberals, are in full
agreement with the turn by Canada to a more aggressive foreign policy.
Despite voting in opposition to the Iraq deployment last October, the
NDP and Liberals both supported a so-called humanitarian mission to the
region, as well as sending arms to the Kurds.
The NDP’s true position was clearly indicated by the remarks of Paul
Dewar, the party’s foreign affairs spokesman, who said of the exchange
with Harper and other government officials in parliament, “This isn’t
about who can say that they support the troops more than the other.”
No comments:
Post a Comment