The House

From sunny ways to 'unhappy choices' in 2016 for Canada's defence decision-makers

As tensions in the Middle East continue to rise, John McKay, parliamentary secretary to the Minister of Defence, and Tony Clement, the Conservative Party's Foreign Affairs critic, debate what defence tactics the country should take in 2016.
Iraqi men protest against the execution of Shi'ite Muslim cleric Nimr al-Nimr in Saudi Arabia, during a demonstration in Najaf January 4, 2016. (Alaa al-marjani/Reuters)

Defence issues are ever-evolving, and 2016 promises to be no different for shifting files like the government's fight against ISIS and growing tensions in the Middle East between Saudi Arabia and Iran.

While world affairs can often shape debates and back governments into a corner, will the Liberals manage to keep one of their key campaign promises — to bring home Canada's CF-18 fighter jets and trade air strikes in Iraq and Syria for a training mission? 

John McKay, parliamentary secretary to the Minister of Defence, and Tony Clement, the Conservative Party's Foreign Affairs critic, debate what tactics the country should take in 2016.

Terry Milewski: Your parties both agree Canada should go ahead with the $15 billion sale of armoured vehicles to Saudi Arabia, despite the country's grotesque record on human rights, which includes executing 47 people last week and flogging dissidents like blogger Raif Badawi. Don't we undermine the noble sentiment of demanding other countries respect human rights by putting our hand out for Saudi cash?

John McKay: The contract that was entered into under the previous government would be very difficult to unwind. At this point, what's done is done, and I don't think we'll be going back on it.

Saudi Arabia is going after its own citizens and has for years, and is an appalling government, frankly, as far as human rights are concerned. Having said that, it is a very difficult situation and there's not a lot of happy choices in here for any government, particularly any government trying, as we are, to figure out the appropriate role for Canada to play.

Tony Clement: The arms contract was not only implicit, it was explicit that any arms that are conveyed by Canadian private companies to Saudi Arabia cannot be used against their own people or violate human rights conventions.

Look, I agree with John on this. The situation in the Middle East has become further de-stabilized. Saudi Arabia is in a dangerous neighbourhood. It has to protect itself as a state actor, and it also has to go after the bad guys. That's the context in which this battle is being played out. The issue going forward is to make sure that any arms manufacturers or private contractors in Canada aren't used for those purposes.

TM: One issue your parties don't agree on is bombing ISIS. When will the Liberals keep the promise to withdraw the CF-18s?

JM: The position of Canada is well-known among our allies, and that was step one. The second thing was to make sure this was not perceived as a drawing-out of Canada's commitment to that area. [Withdrawing the CF-18s] is still a commitment that will be actioned very shortly.

TM: Very shortly?

JM: I can't really say that and you know that, Terry.

TM: Tony Clement, how important is air power in this fight?

TC: We know that our current CF-18s are making a difference. They've been active in the context of shrinking the territory of the Islamic State. So we are having an impact. It's important strategically, it's important politically, it's important symbolically that we don't step back at a time when our allies are stepping up. I would really encourage the Liberals to rethink this decision. 

JM: I disagree entirely with that view. We are changing — we are not drawing back — we are changing our focus. 

TC: I think the important thing is that we need to have a meaningful role in this conflict, because it affects us as well. It's about our internal security here at home and that's why we have to continue to be part of the coalition.

Listen to the full interview in the player above.