THE WEST BLOCK
Episode 28, Season 3
Sunday, March 16, 2014
Host: Tom Clark
Guest Interviews: Paul Johnson, Mike Armstrong, Christopher Westdal, Deborah Lyons, Graeme Smith, Murray Brewster
Location: Kyiv, Ukraine
Please check against delivery at thewestblock.ca
Tom Clark:
On this Sunday morning, Crimean’s are voting on whether to leave Ukraine and join Russia. It is a vote condemned by most of the world, but Russia’s army is on the move. We have the latest.
Then we take you to Kabul, Afghanistan, to mark the end of Canada’s mission there. The flag is lowered. The final boot leaves the ground. What did we accomplish and what lies ahead? Some tough questions and a reflection on service and sacrifice.
It is Sunday, March the 16th. I’m Tom Clark with another special edition of The West Block from Kyiv. Well the people in Independence Square behind me are waiting and watching with the rest of the world to see what the next few hours will bring. All eyes are on Crimea and the referendum that’s under way. The results of the vote are really a foregone conclusion. The referendum essentially is rigged to produce the answer that Crimea indeed wants to leave Ukraine and join Russia. It is why the Russian Army is amassing as many as 10,000 troops along its entire border with Ukraine. If it takes Crimea, will it stop there? Is this all just a prelude to war?
We have Global news crews throughout the country today. In the very volatile Eastern Ukrainian area of Donetsk, we find Global’s Mike Armstrong. And in Crimea, Global’s Paul Johnson and that’s where we start. Paul, give a sense this morning of what you’re seeing, what you’re hearing on the ground as this drama is unfolding.
Paul Johnson:
Tom this really feels like the successful conclusion to a carefully orchestrated campaign to obtain a yes vote to join with Russia, despite all of the opposition to this internationally and up in Kyiv. The referendum got underway this morning at 8 o’clock and from what we’ve been hearing from people who have been out to those polling stations and have voted, it seems to be coming off really without any problems. There’s fairly heavy turnout. We’re not hearing about any incidents at any of the polling stations. And among the people who have voted and have talked to the news media, who are gathered here, so far the result seems to be a yes vote to join Russia. Most of these people have said they voted yes. A couple of important things to consider though, this vote as we understand is being boycotted by the Muslim Tatar minority that lives here. It’s also being boycotted by a lot of the Ukrainian people who live here. The polls will close at 8 o’clock tonight. We expect we might get a result tonight a couple of hours after that. And then we’re going to have wait and see how the rest of the world reacts to this.
Tom Clark:
Okay thanks Paul. That’s Paul Johnson in Crimea. Well let’s go now to the very volatile Eastern Ukrainian region and the City of Donetsk where we find Global’s Mike Armstrong. Mike what is your sense this morning in that area? What are you seeing? What are you hearing?
Mike Armstrong:
Well Tom I think one of the things I’ve been struck by is the level of distrust in this region. There’s a lot of finger pointing between the pro-Russian and pro-Ukrainian factions here. It’s been all about demonstrations and counter demonstrations in recent days and they’ve come to blows at times. What you hear from both sides is that their opponents are not from here, that they’re outsiders bussed in and paid to cause violence. There’s also a great deal distrust of the media here. We’ve been called provocateurs at times as well in anger, and the media is a big factor here. People in this region watch mostly Russian news and there is an anti-western slant; stories that have been discredited by major news organizations are reported as fact on television here. For example, the demonstration Thursday where the pro-Russian group went after the pro-Ukrainian side was reported as a pro-Ukrainian mob attacking peaceful women, children and seniors. That’s simply not what happened but hearing it over and over is one of the reasons for all the distrust here.
Tom Clark:
Okay Mike, thanks very much. That’s Global’s Mike Armstrong in the Eastern Ukrainian city of Donetsk.
Well one person who has been following this crisis very closely is Canada’s former ambassador to both Ukraine and to Russia, Christopher Westdal. He’s in Ottawa and I spoke with him earlier today.
Ambassador Westdal good to have you on the show, thanks for being here. When you take a look at the landscape this morning, just how close are we to armed conflict in this region?
Christopher Westdal:
Well I think there’s a very real danger of armed conflict. These are days of great drama and danger. I think that Crimea is a line in the sand that is being crossed and there will be consequences in terms of sanctions, but I think that the mainland of Ukraine is a red line; a blood red line. You were not in Ottawa Tom when the Ukrainian Ambassador here said that he would fight, and were there to be a fight between Ukrainians and Russians, effectively a Slavic Civil War that would jolt security structure of Europe. I don’t think and I pray that that’s not in prospect but these are dangerous times, and all the time we speak, a single shot could lead to extensive violence.
Tom Clark:
Yeah you hear that too a lot in Kyiv, people saying that they would take up arms if it came to it. But let’s take a look at the west’s response. Would coordinated economic sanctions have an impact on Vladimir Putin at this point?
Christopher Westdal:
I don’t think they’d have a decisive effect. I think they belie a misunderstanding of the crisis. I think that this is a crisis about security and I think it needs to be addressed in those terms and in the right forms. I think that the NATO Russia Council should address this issue among other bodies, but the council was created for the purpose. I think that there is a deal that can be done, although it’s very hard for diplomats to do a deal in the middle of the kind of strife and the sanctions, and the anger, and the rising tempers, and so on. But that deal essentially has to do with Russia recognizing a legitimate government in Kyiv and giving it peace and quiet and cooperating with it, and giving it a measure of political and economic freedom. And that is in exchange for the neutrality of Ukraine achieved through the reaffirmation of the 2010 law against military alliances. And I would think that NATO should want to note that reaffirmation.
Tom Clark:
Prime Minister Stephen Harper has announced that he’s going to be here next week. What sort of effect do you think that’s going to have?
Christopher Westdal:
Well I think that his visit, the first of the G7 country, certainly confirms that we recognize the new government in Kyiv; whatever Moscow makes of it. I think that he will arrive and we don’t know what the situation will be Wednesday when he arrives. There will have been a few days to see what becomes of the result of the referendum. But he will have a lot of baggage. He will be carrying the hopes and now the deep fears of Canadians, millions of whom, and not only those with relatives or ancestors in Ukraine. Millions of whom, including myself who have worked there and left part of my heart and sensibilities there, who are taking this very personally. So he’ll want to speak and express the solidarity of Canadians, heartfelt and non-partisan. He will also have the baggage of our harsh rhetoric and hostility toward Russia and the status that we have proudly sustained as the last cold warrior standing and the most stubborn advocate of further NATO growth. We still think that NATO should be driven further up Russia’s nose. He will also have the history of the expectations and hopes that we have generated for EU integration which is not our gift to give and for NATO membership; hopes for NATO membership. And I think that he will have the responsibility to explain what the West and what Canada can and will do, and what it can’t and won’t do.
Tom Clark
Ambassador Westdal awfully good to have your views on this subject this morning. Thanks very much for being here.
Christopher Westdal:
You’re welcome, thank you.
Tom Clark:
Well still to come on The West Block, we shift our focus to Afghanistan.
After 12 years, Canada’s mission in Afghanistan is now over. As the last boots leave the ground, what’s our legacy? That’s next.
Break
Tom Clark:
The Canadian flag is hauled down after flying for more than 12 years at military bases in Afghanistan. The mission reshaped our forces and redefined who we are as a country. Now, Canada’s war is over.
Welcome back to Kyiv where we are keeping a standing watch on war. But a few days ago, we went to Afghanistan where last week, Canada’s military mission came to an end with little fanfare. And yet for more than a decade, it was a major part of who we were as a country. So what lies ahead? Well in a very heavily guarded Canadian embassy in Kabul, I sat down with Canada’s Ambassador, Deb Lyons.
Ambassador thanks very much. Awfully good having you on the program.
Deborah Lyons:
It’s great to have you Tom.
Tom Clark:
You actually volunteered for this job and a lot of people might say are you out of your mind?
Deborah Lyons:
I think a few people did, yeah.
Tom Clark:
Yeah, yeah, and not only that, but you’ve asked for an extension on this job.
Deborah Lyons:
Indeed, yeah.
Tom Clark:
Why?
Deborah Lyons:
Because it’s the right place to be at the right time; it’s very important, the work we’re doing here. It’s some of the most exciting work I’ve ever done in my career. It’s important work at an important time and a very important part of the world.
Tom Clark:
Describe to me a little bit though what’s going on. We’re not talking about the military sphere now; we’re talking about aid and development and building a civil society here and so on. What is so unique about this place that we haven’t seen anywhere else?
Deborah Lyons:
Well there’s a lot that’s unique about it. First of all, one thing I remind people about is that this region of the world is probably one of the most important for the 21st century. Three of the BRICs are neighbours or near neighbours of Afghanistan. This region is critically important…
Tom Clark:
Now just explain what you mean by the BRICs.
Deborah Lyons:
Sorry, we talk about the most important economies going forward Brazil, China, Russia and India. Three of those countries are neighbours or near neighbours of Afghanistan. Of course you’ve got Pakistan and Iran as neighbours; this part of the world is critical from a security perspective and an economic perspective. If this part of the world can have the peace and prosperity it needs, Canada and other parts of the world will have the peace and prosperity that we’re going to need in the 21st century.
Tom Clark:
So but to achieve that then, this is…is this an experiment then in the 21st century that you’re witnessing?
Deborah Lyons:
I think what we’re witnessing is a very unique experience where the world community, the international community has come together; some 60 countries to work both from a security perspective but also from a development perspective, building institutions, helping with governance, helping with policing, helping to build the economy. This I think is a model for the 21st century and what is important is that we get it right for the Afghans, but also that we get it right for the world community because we are going to have to be helping one another out. It is a global neighbourhood now and part of foreign policy, part of trade development, part of aid and development is to make all those countries stronger so that we’re stronger as well as a world community.
Tom Clark:
Now the army has left, how on earth do you continue to convince Canadians to invest money into a place that we’re quickly forgetting?
Deborah Lyons:
This is a country that is trending towards stability, and it’s trending towards stability because of Canadian treasure and Canadian blood that has been sacrificed here and because the Afghan people so badly want it, and so badly deserve it. There are enormous indicators of success and I’m seeing, on a daily basis, which is not getting reported sadly in the press, the enormous human infrastructure that is here. Afghans saying we’re staying, we’re not going away. This is our country, this is our future. We’re going to make it work. And the international community has given us that opportunity.
Tom Clark:
Okay I understand that in your job as ambassador here you have to be positive. You’ve got to have a sunny outlook.
Deborah Lyons:
No, I have to be realistic.
Tom Clark:
Well okay, let’s be realistic for a second. Surely you’re not saying at this point that this is total victory. That we have won.
Deborah Lyons:
Absolutely not, no.
Tom Clark:
That the Taliban are going to disappear and that the Taliban in fact are not going to come back into this town and take over again. You wouldn’t say that.
Deborah Lyons:
No I wouldn’t say that. What I would say is that we as a world community came in, particularly Canada came in, to the tough battle in the south to help the Afghans. Then we turned around and worked with them; trained them to help them help themselves, particularly in security, as a sovereign country. It was always intended that they would take over responsibility for their own security. Canada has trained them and helped them to do that. We’ve seen great success there. It is not all a happy picture at all. There are loads of challenges and loads of problems but this is an infrastructure that is building from a security perspective. From an economic perspective we’re starting to get some of the legislation in place we need. We’ve got enormous institution building happening. We’ve got a human rights commission that is recognized by the rest of the world as having a top “A” rating. We’ve got kids in school. We now have kids graduating. As our soldiers leave Afghanistan, we have got kids graduating from high school who started when our soldiers came. They’re building another future.
Tom Clark:
Ambassador Lyons awfully good talking to you. Thank you so much.
Deborah Lyons:
Come on back in a couple of months Tom.
Tom Clark;
I will.
Deborah Lyons:
Thanks.
Tom Clark:
Still to come, the ceremony that closed an important chapter in the history of the Canadian forces. We’ll bring you that moment and reflect on what the mission meant when we return. Stay with us.
Break
Tom Clark:
Welcome back to The West Block here in Kyiv. Well as this crisis unfolds literally by the hour, we want to just take you back to Afghanistan for a moment and the end of Canada’s military mission.
For more than 12 years we had soldiers in harm’s way try to bring peace to that very troubled land. While they were there, politicians were reluctant to say much about the mission but now that the flag has been lowered, it is time to ask the tough questions.
Well joining me now, two veteran observers of Canada’s involvement in Afghanistan: Murray Brewster of Canadian Press, you’re eighth tour of duty over here Murray, and Graeme Smith formerly of The Globe and Mail, the author of The Dogs Are Eating Them Now, currently with the International Crisis Group living in Kabul. Welcome to you both.
Let me start just by quickly getting your thoughts on Canada’s departure.
Graeme Smith:
Well it’s a sad moment in some ways. This is the moment when the lights switch off and everyone goes home, and the Afghans are left to fight this out amongst themselves. And the war is growing, you know the number of women and children dying every single month rises. We’re leaving behind a vicious, vicious war, and hopefully Canada can still help the Afghans survive that war and prevent this state from collapsing. But we’ll see, whether or not after these lights turn off if anyone’s still paying attention.
Murray Brewster:
What struck me about the ending yesterday was the fact that there was no member of the Harper government that was present at the final ceremony. It was all military and it struck me as very strange because this was a government that tightly embraced this war in the beginning and yet nobody was around for the end.
Tom Clark:
We by no means had the biggest force here but in many respects just being here with the military gave us a place at the international table. Did we leave too soon?
Graeme Smith:
Well Canada was a really big deal when it arrived. I mean when Canada sent a battle group south to Kandahar, we doubled the number of international forces in the entire southern region so it was a massive military shift. But you’re right, over the years we sort of got lost in the maelstrom of troop surges so that by the time the Canadians pulled out, it was a tiny little drop in the bucket. And so militarily did we leave too soon? Do we not leave too soon? In some ways it doesn’t matter because it’s a tiny, tiny fraction of the overall international forces. But like Murray said, when you have a complete absence of major Canadian figures here for the final ceremony, that doesn’t really leave me with a whole lot of hope that we’re going to keep paying attention.
Tom Clark:
I want to get Murray to the question of Afghanistan in a minute but just conclude for me the thoughts on the Canadian military here because this is the end of an extraordinary deployment for our country. It’s hard to see this sort of thing happening again.
Murray Brewster:
Oh it’s very, very unlikely. I think that we’re going to see anything like this happen again within our lifetimes, the experience of Afghanistan was absolutely politically searing for the Harper government and I honestly do not see them deploying troops anywhere; boots on the ground. I mean perhaps they’ll contribute aircraft, perhaps they’ll contribute ships the way previous governments have. It was the taking of casualties but I think it was also the enormous expense of the war because you see that the government is driving towards a balanced budget for 2015, and a good significant chunk of that is coming out of National Defence. And I think that the Harper government despite many of its pronouncements about how much it loves the military has recognized that National Defence in the biggest discretionary line item in the federal budget. And it can be very helpful if you want to be able to balance the budget for I don’t know, things like income splitting.
Graeme Smith:
Canada’s literally cutting up its armoured vehicles and selling them for scrap. Which you know, strongly suggests they’re not going to go do one of these things ever again.
Tom Clark:
What have we learned from this experience? I mean in many ways this was sort of the Petri dish for how the international community comes together and works. Was it a success overall Graeme? What did we learn from this? What’s the takeaway?
Graeme Smith:
Well this whole idea of intervening militarily in countries that are deeply messed up and trying to make things better with boots on the ground is still a nascent science. Nobody really knows how to do it. I think Afghanistan will probably go down in the history books as an example how not to do it. Libya maybe was an example of how you can have a temporary benefit but then things can still end up getting pretty messy in the medium term and you know the international community is still learning. I’m afraid that Afghanistan casts a really long shadow on our policy internationally because if you look at Syria, probably a big reason why we’re incredibly gun-shy around Syria is we do not want to go do one of these things again.
Tom Clark:
And Murray, it seems to me that places like Afghanistan are going to lose out because of all the competing interests out there. I’m thinking right now the world’s eyes are more on Kyiv and Ukraine than they are on Afghanistan.
Murray Brewster:
Well in coming over here for the final haul down of the flag, I had a friend e-mail me and say where are you going? Are you going to the Ukraine? And I said, well no I’m going back to Kabul for the flag lowering. Oh Afghanistan, that’s your grandfather’s war. And that just sort of sums up I think the attitude of the public and the attitude of policy makers. And I, like Graeme, share his very deep concern about whether or not the policy makers are going to stay focused on this country because it is still on the knife’s edge.
Tom Clark:
Murray Brewster of Canadian Press, Graeme Smith of the International Crisis Group and author of the excellent book on Afghanistan: The Dogs Are Eating Them Now. Thank you very much for being here and I’m glad we could do this final chat; Canadian chat here.
Graeme Smith:
Nice to see you.
Murray Brewster:
Nice to see you too Tom.
Tom Clark:
Well as one war ends another one threatens to start right here. The next move is Russia’s, and everybody’s watching. We leave you though today with some images of the end of an era in Afghanistan. From Kyiv, I’m Tom Clark. Thanks for being with us. See you next Sunday.
Visuals and clips from the flag lowering ceremony in Afghanistan:
Deborah Lyons:
The Government of Afghanistan can now take responsibility for its own security.
Canadian Forces Padre:
A red field, a white square and an eleven pointed red maple leaf; the Canadian flag probably one of the most easily recognizable flags in the world.
Gen. Tom Lawson:
Our flag was in the region early; in the air, on the ground and at sea. And since then, our experiences in Afghanistan have been woven into the very fabric of the Canadian Armed Forces.
ISAF Deputy Commander John Lorimer:
We here will regret that we will no longer see the famous maple leaf adorn our bases and on the uniforms of troops.
Gen. Tom Lawson:
The passage of time will afford all of us a more fulsome perspective and appreciation of the mission but for now, ladies and gentleman, it is clear that this mission mattered much. It cost us much. And it will be remembered deeply.
Deborah Lyons:
You have left a legacy here; one that you can look back on with pride as you depart for your most highly deserved journey back home to Canada.
In memory of those who served and the 158 who died.
Comments