Used to free U.S. soldiers for combat a disgrace.
March 15, 2012
Since the Canadian training mission in Afghanistan began last year, the federal government has said the purpose is to help Afghan army and police develop the skills needed to take responsibility for the country's security in 2014.

But shortly before visiting Afghanistan this past Christmas, Governor General David Johnston was told of another reason 950 Canadian troops have been deployed to Kabul and two other central Afghan cities: to free up United States soldiers for combat.

The statement is found in notes that were prepared in advance of Johnston's visit to Afghanistan, Kuwait and HMCS Vancouver in the Mediterranean and obtained by Postmedia News through access to information.

Since the end of the combat mission, Canada has become the second-largest contributor to the NATO training mission in Afghanistan after the U.S.

Shortly before the federal election call in March 2011, Defence Minister Peter MacKay authorized the deployment of Canadian military trainers to about a dozen locations around Kabul as well as to the towns of Mazari-Sharif and Herat.

The goal is to train 352,000 Afghan soldiers by the time Canada and its NATO allies leave in 2014.

According to the briefing note for Johnston, "locations and billets were based on ... where it was assessed that Canada could get the greatest effect on the ground and free up American forces to move to a combat role."

It's the first time such an objective has been mentioned. The Department of National Defence did not respond to questions Wednesday.

NDP MP Jack Harris said when the government announced the training mission, "it was all about setting up military colleges and classrooms."

"If what you're doing is freeing up soldiers to fight, then you're obviously contributing to the military mission," he said. "In our view the Canadian role should have moved to one of nationbuilding."

Mark Sedra, an expert on Afghanistan at the Centre for International Governance Innovation, did not know whether the redeploylot ment of U.S. forces would have an impact on that long-term goal.

However, he said the idea of Canadian troops deploying so Americans can hunt the Taliban has been controversial since NATO first arrived on the scene in 2001.

"They must have calculated that that sort of message would not be taken lightly by the Canadian public," he said.

"It's certainly not something that the Canadian government has been upfront about, the fact that the training mission would be used in that way."

Most Liberals probably didn't think Canadian troops would be freeing up U.S. troops to fight when the party supported the new training mission last year, Liberal defence critic John McKay said Wednesday.

But the revelation wouldn't have changed the party's position.

Rather, he said the bigger concerns are the actions of American soldiers in Afghanistan in recent weeks - such as burning Qurans, urinating on bodies and the massacre of 16 civilians - that put Canadian lives indirectly at risk.

"Those things to me are far more egregious and less anticipated consequences" of Canada staying in Afghanistan, he said.