We don't need another hero

The Skipper has already chastized John Baird, who should never ever wear a turtleneck, for his objectionable conduct and general stupidity related to the Afghan prisoner denial-fest, but this part caught my eye too:

From Macleans:
"Mr. Baird was ready with a response. “Mr. Speaker, let us be very clear. Let us talk about the facts,” he boldly declared. “The then-Vice Chief of the Defence Staff, General Walter Natynczyk, a decorated war hero, someone who has served our country in uniform for decades..."

(Baird then went on for a while in this vein before excusing himself )

Decorated war hero? In what war? Was Natynczyk at Vimy Ridge? Did he storm Juno Beach? Did he fight in Korea? Did he lead some heroic commando mission in Somalia or withstand the seige of Sarajevo or lead F-18 sorties over Kuwait in the first Iraq war? Has he been out battling the wily Pathan in the Afghan hills? Where was he decorated and for what?

A little checking revealed Gen. Walter Natynczyk does have some medals, some of them are even for serving in a war. In addition to being a Commander of the Order of Military Merit, which is awarded for "Outstanding meritorious service and demonstrated leadership in duties of great responsibility" (in other words longstanding excellence in military service in the same way the Order of Canada is doled out to politicians who manage to stay in office long enough to be considered "statesmen" without getting embroiled in a scandal), in 2006 Natynczyk was awarded the Meritorious Service Cross.

Governor General of Canada; Media release. Jan 24, 2006. "MGen Natynczyk is recognized for his outstanding leadership and professionalism while deployed as Deputy Commanding General of the Multi-National Corps during Operation IRAQI FREEDOM. From January 2004 to January 2005, MGen Natynczyk led the Corps' 10 separate brigades, consisting of more than 35,000 soldiers stationed throughout the Iraq Theatre of Operations. He also oversaw planning and execution of all Corps level combat support and combat service support operations. His pivotal role in the development of numerous plans and operations resulted in a tremendous contribution by the Multi-National Corps to Operation Iraqi Freedom, and has brought great credit to the Canadian Forces and to Canada."

So Natynczyk was decorated for his wartime command of forces in a war that Canada was rather pointedly not taking part in. And the award was for his leadership and professionalism, not battlefield valour.

I don't wish to denigrate Gen. Natynczyk's service to this country or to discount the honor done to him and other recipients of these impressive decorations. Nor do I doubt his personal bravery--his record shows that he has served honorably on peacekeeping missions and elsewhere. But none of that makes him a "decorated war hero" to anyone except the kind of mindless uniform fetishists that seem to populate the Conservative benches and form the core of support for the ongoing military adventure in Afghanistan.

Wearing a uniform doesn't make you any more honorable or any smarter or any braver than anyone else and outranking an eyewitness doesn't make you more credible than they are. I think Natynczyk, like most sensible people, realizes this, even if Baird does not.

Baird is an braying brass-kissing ass who loves to wrap himself in the flag and use the Canadian Forces for his own political ends. But this is the Stephen Harper party of Canada and as much as Harper, Baird and Peter McKay love to be photographed playing soldier or sailor, and love to the military as a wedge issue--decrying any opposition to their policy or attempts to hold them responsible as hatred for the sacred troops--as soon as the political bullets start to get too close, somebody is going to be sent to draw fire and that somebody isn't going to one of their own.

Natynczyk seems to understand this and is now making it clear that he isn't going to be falling on his sword for them.

Why won't John Baird and the rest of the Conservative Party of Canada take the word of both our heroic troops in the field and our top soldier? Why won't they hold a full public inquiry?

Wear it well, Baird. Someone just knocked over a domino

From the Maclean's:

Rising for his second question, Mr. Ignatieff offered the obvious follow. “Field notes by Canadian soldiers make it clear that a detainee was beaten in Afghan custody after being transferred by Canadian troops, way back in June 2006. Our soldiers saw it firsthand. They took photographs. They did the right thing. They rescued the man. They reported it up the chain of command. However, the government did nothing,” he ventured. “What kind of Canadian government refuses to act on firsthand accounts by its own troops, credible accounts, of detainee abuse in Afghan jails?”

Well... a Harper government styled on their US southern Republican brethren. That's who. But, according to John Baird, who pulled the foreskin off his neck long enough to say... (emphasis mine, even though Baird was screaming)

“Mr. Speaker, let us be very clear. Let us talk about the facts,” he boldly declared. “The then-Vice Chief of the Defence Staff, General Walter Natynczyk, a decorated war hero, someone who has served our country in uniform for decades, stated very clearly more than two and a half years ago that the Afghan in question was not detained, was not captured by Canadian Forces, and he repeated that statement yesterday. I say to the Leader of the Opposition, why can he not trust General Walter Natynczyk?”

War hero??! Tout ce qui brille n'est pas or. Perhaps Baird should have simply pointed out that Natynczyk is a pretty good general in his own right and not have gone down that "war hero" path. In any case, Baird, typical of his ilk ranted that which might be fraught with hidden bombs.

With his third try, Mr. Ignatieff attempted to sidestep this entirely. “Mr. Speaker, the issue is much simpler than this,” he reckoned. “It is an issue about what happens when Canadian soldiers report credible accounts of detainee abuse. Those accounts are not in question. They take photographs of the abuse, they report it up the chain of command and, for a year, the government does nothing about it. That is the issue.”

Sidestep. But as Ignatieff points out, there were pictures and reports.

Then, "Airshow" Mackay gets in on the act. Blathering on he gets to this...

Mr. MacKay stood to various off-the-record requests from the Liberal side to support the troops.

“Simply put, Mr. Speaker, we are not,” he said to Foote’s question. “We are applauding them.” In the next breath, he repeated Gen. Natynczyk’s contradiction of said soldiers.

Judy Foote:

“Mr. Speaker, either they believe the eyewitness accounts of our soldiers on the ground or they do not. It is as simple as that,” she ventured. “In 2007-08, two senior Canadian officers further corroborated the accounts of the soldier and the medic under oath in court. Detailed notes show the name of the Canadian platoon that captured the Afghan before he was handed over and beaten. There are even photos. The Conservatives not only refuse to release this information, but they deny it exists. Why will they not come clean? Why will they not believe our soldiers?”

Oy. There's enough there to give a Chief of Defence Staff the willies. Natynczyk wasn't personally present at the alleged event. Best check this out further. But before that happens, Mackay dispenses more of his traditional wisdom...

“Mr. Speaker, last time I checked, the chief of the defence staff is not only a soldier but the top soldier,” the Defence Minister replied. “I will take his word.”

Top serviceman is more accurate. But the awkward thing about this is that Mackay has not done the requisite ministerial inquiry to get his own facts. If he has, then he has ignored the results. I don't think Natynczyk is a liar in any respect. But I also don't believe he had the whole story. That means Mackay was dancing though a minefield, attempting to deflect responsibility.

Then... uh oh.

Gen. Walter Natynczyk, Canada's top military commander, is now saying a suspected Taliban fighter abused by Afghan police in June 2006 had been detained by Canadian troops, contrary to comments he made Tuesday.

[...]

Natynczyk read from a report on the incident by the section commander, who said they had the suspect get down on his stomach before they conducted a detailed search, which included emptying the Afghan's pockets, cataloging all the items and photographing him.

"I did not have this information in May of 2007 nor yesterday when I made my statement," Natynczyk said. "But I am responsible for the information provided by the Canadian Forces and I am accountable for it today."

Section commander. An NCO, on scene, provided a written occurrence report. And, given all the bits of fur that have been flying around on this incident in particular, it just now manages to find its way to the desk of the CDS?

There will be loud and unpleasant noises coming out of 101 Colonel By Drive tonight.

Always wanted a pony? General Natynczyk will give you a pony.

The Harper government and the senior leadership of the Canadian Forces have been roundly criticized in the past for failing to communicate the truth about conditions in Afghanistan. Boris pointed out that when the senior leadership of government downplay the indicators which suggest that serious problems exist, it is intellectual dishonesty and done with a clear intent to hide the truth from the public.

There was some speculation that, as Rick Hillier stepped down and General Walter Natynczyk took over as Chief of Defence Staff, that there might be a chance to provide unsanitized information surrounding the Afghanistan mission. Well, the speculation is over and it looks like the same Harper standard is to be maintained as General Natynczyk took the opportunity to blow sunshine up everybody's ass in the face of data which makes his statement worth nothing. (Emphasis mine)

The new head of Canada's military has completed a five-day visit to Afghanistan and offered a uniquely cheerful assessment of the security situation that contrasts sharply with the grim data.

The upbeat prognosis from Canada's new chief of defence staff that the violence is holding steady in Kandahar province this year flies in the face of independent analysis documenting a 77 per cent surge in Taliban attacks.

That increased violence was underscored Sunday in a pair of devastating insurgent strikes.

Nine U.S. soldiers were reported killed as militants launched a fiery assault on a remote outpost, and 24 Afghans died in a separate suicide blast on a police checkpoint in the province next to Kandahar.

The comparatively sunny estimation from Gen. Walter Natynczyk after his tour of Afghanistan was also at odds with the increasingly bleak portrait being painted by Canada's allies.

The Pentagon has cited a 40 per cent increase in insurgent attacks in eastern areas of Afghanistan where U.S. forces operate, and notes that it is now losing more soldiers here than in Iraq.

Anyone else want to weigh in?

Britain's defence secretary calls Afghanistan a generational struggle that will require a foreign troop presence for many years.

Local businesspeople say they're increasingly discouraged about the security situation in their city, and fear that economic gains made after 2001 are being wiped away.

As Ottawa continues to be a font of "good news" Afghanistan is spinning into oblivion. Natynczyk has plenty of experience in Afghanistan so he would be fully aware of how things are actually going. That makes this even more curious.

"We're generally along the same lines as we have been the past few years," Natynczyk told a news conference at Kandahar Airfield.

"Looking at the statistics, we're just a slight notch - indeed an insignificant notch - above where we were last year."

Yeah?! I wonder if Natynczyk was in the right country because everyone else in Afghanistan is seeing something completely different.

According to a prominent security firm that compiles insurgent incidents reported by NATO and local security forces, that insignificant notch is actually a 77 per cent increase in attacks from 2007.

Statistician Sami Kovanen at Vigilant Strategic Services Afghanistan says the number of assassinations, bombings, kidnappings, suicide strikes, mine explosions, and mortar assaults by pro-Taliban insurgents through July 6 was 532 incidents this year, compared to only 300 last year.

That coincides with what the United Nations is reporting.

So what do Canadian defence officials have to say when they are shown the numbers? (Hang on to your ass, this gets really good.)

They note that the economy has grown since 2001, far more children are going to school, and human rights have expanded exponentially since the days of the Taliban.

But when asked about security, their optimism appears based on anecdotal evidence; some locals have tipped them off about the location of a roadside bomb, they've seen a traffic jam - a sure sign of activity in Kandahar city, a bazaar has reopened and there are new businesses.

Rrrriiiight! A bazaar opens and a traffic jam happens therefore the economy is expanding. And as for talking to the locals, perhaps those Canadian defence officials should have done a little more of that to see how their observations stacked up.

A well-known Kandahar businessman offers some anecdotal evidence of his own.

"I don't see businesses opening," says the restaurateur, shaking his head when asked if things are getting better in the city.

"All I see are businesses closing."

And as for the exponential increase in human rights, Canadian defence officials and the new Chief of Defence Staff should talk to a few of the organizations that have compiled statistics which tell a completely different story.

From Womankind Worldwide:

Seven years after the US and the UK ‘freed’ Afghan women from the oppressive Taliban regime, our report proves that life is just as bad for most, and worse in some cases. Maternal mortality rates ? one in six women dies in childbirth ? are the highest in the world alongside Sierra Leone. Afghanistan is the only country in the world with a higher suicide rate among women than men.

You can read the juicy details in this (pdf) report. Terri Judd of the Independent read it and reported under the title Women's lives are worse than ever:

The statistics in the report from Womankind, Afghan Women and Girls Seven Years On, make shocking reading. Violent attacks against females, usually domestic, are at epidemic proportions with 87 per cent of females complaining of such abuse – half of it sexual. More than 60 per cent of marriages are forced.

A more recent report from the New England Journal of Medicine this past May paints the same picture: An increase in self-immolation among women because nothing in their lives is improving.

Then this from Canada's new CDS:

The defence chief says he's encouraged that the Taliban no longer even bother trying to muster up forces for conventional battlefield fights because they are crushed every time.

"They are not 10 feet tall," Natynczyk said of the enemy.

"They know that if they take us on directly, they'll either lose or they'll have to flee."

Now there's a dangerous metric. One would expect a full general to be a little more careful tossing that kind of statement around.

The Viet Cong and North Vietnamese never won one major engagement in head-to-head combat with US forces. Not one. Shall we discuss the results?

Mushrooms. Natynczyk is feeding the mushrooms.

Muddy waters, prisoner abuse and a sworn affidavit

First, go over and read liberal catnip's post about the contradictions being cast over Colonel Steve Noonan's sworn testimony that Canadian troops demanded the return of a prisoner after they discovered he had been beaten.

We'll wait here.

OK, now consider two things.

1. Colonel Noonan uses the word "we" in his affidavit. That is as it should be since he would have been made aware of the incident by way of a situation report. But it should be taken into account since it suggests there is an entire group of people who are aware of exactly what happened. Lt. General Walter Natynczyk, the Vice-Chief of the Defence Staff, who is disputing Noonan's account, was not there at the time. Noonan, on the other hand, was.

2. If the Vice-Chief of Defence Staff is suggesting that Noonan got it wrong intentionally, then it is Natynczyk's responsibility to charge Noonan, under the National Defence Act, of having committed perjury and to send that charge to a convening authority.

So, what's it going to be, General? The choice is a court-martial or a retraction.

Update: For more crunchy goodness on this subject, go here.