Canadian soldiers and a captured Afghan insurgent

Disturbing allegations regarding the treatment of Taliban prisoners captured by Canadian forces in Afghanistan have resurfaced this week, after Parliamentary testimony by Richard Colvin, the second highest ranked member of Canada’s diplomatic service in Afghanistan from 2006 to 2007.

Colvin appeared before a special Commons committee on Wednesday November 18, 2009 and steadfastly reaffirmed previous statements he has made that senior Conservative government officials and Canadian military personnel had been aware of serious allegations that Taliban prisoners had been subjected to systematic abuse since at least 2006, that such treatment was part of sanctioned government policy, and that those he attempted to raise the issue with made it clear to him that these charges were not to be brought to light at a time when Prime Minister Stephen Harper was attempting to persuade an increasingly skeptical public that Canada’s Afghan mission was being conducted in strict accordance with international law, particularly when dealing with captured Taliban fighters.

Canadian diplomat Richard Colvin testifies before the Common Special Committee on the Canadian Mission in Afghanistan

“Canada … cloaked our detainee practices in extreme secrecy,” said Colvin, “Our detainee practices (were) unCanadian, counterproductive and probably illegal.”

Colvin’s testimony revealed that Canadian forces had captured far more prisoners in Afghanistan, primarily in Kandahar province where the bulk of its forces were stationed, than any other NATO ally, and that prisoner transfer operations and incarcerations were conducted in a clandestine atmosphere designed to prevent any investigation into these practices.

The result of this activity he claimed was that the Canadian military effort was severely undermined by what amounted to illegal, covert standards.

“We kept hopeless records, and apparently to prevent any scrutiny, the Canadian Forces leadership concealed all this behind walls of secrecy,” he said. “Instead of winning hearts and minds, we caused Kandaharis to fear the foreigners,” adding “Canada’s detainee practices in my view alienated us from the population and strengthened the insurgency.”

Colvin’s appearance before the Commons Special Committee on the Canadian Mission in Afghanistan was made possible only after an unsuccessful attempt by the Harper government to bar his testimony in a series of legal challenges which have delayed the committee’s operations since October, and only after Colvin filed an affidavit with the Military Police Complaints Commission, stating that he warned senior government officials and military brass of “serious, imminent and alarming” allegations of detainee abuse soon after he arrived in Afghanistan in 2006.

Federal lawyers have been arguing strenuously against Colvin appearing before the public inquiry into these charges, citing the inherent threat to national security interests. Colvin testified that the Conservative government has attempted to prevent his testimony by denying him legal representation and has obstructed him from making use of some of the reports he wrote while serving in Afghanistan.

Colvin named those who he says were aware of the issue of prisoner treatment as Margaret Bloodworth, Prime Minister Harper’s national security advisor, former Deputy Minister of the Afghanistan Task Force in the Privy Council David Mulroney, and retired Chief of Defense staff General Rick Hillier.

Peter Mackay and Richard Colvin in Kandahar, Afghanistan

Colvin said he was advised by Mulroney to use the phone instead of putting anything in writing about prisoner abuse, a request Colvin maintains contradicted Canadian policy and international law against surrendering to the risk of torture, saying “There was indeed a policy, but behind the military’s wall of secrecy, that’s exactly what we were doing”

For his part, Hillier has shrugged off allegations of torture in his recent autobiography as “bullshit,” and has denied seeing any reports filed by Colvin on the matter, and Colvin conceded in his testimony that he had not spoken directly with Bloodworth regarding his allegations.

Conservative MP’s immediately pointed out that Colvin himself admitted he had not witnessed any abuse first hand, and that he failed to produce anything but circumstantial evidence to prove his allegations, saying only that he had received information regarding prisoner treatment from ‘credible sources.’

Colvin maintains that at the time, Canada was reliant upon the International Committee of the Red Cross and the Afghanistan Independent Human Rights Commission (AIHRC) to evaluate the condition of prisoners post transfer, but criticized the effectiveness of these groups in doing so, saying “Unfortunately the AIHRC had very limited capacity and in Kandahar were not allowed into the NDS (National Directorate of Security) prisons … and unfortunately we’re quite useless,” adding  his contention that the Red Cross was “also no good for us as monitors,” because under its rules once a detainee is transferred, the Red Cross can only inform the Afghan authorities about abuse, and that unlike Britain, Canada was often very slow to update the Red Cross about detainee transfers, in some cases waiting months to do so.

When the Red Cross attempted to probe further into the treatment of detainees turned over to Afghan security by Canadian forces, Colvin claimed that “the Canadian forces in Kandahar wouldn’t take their phone calls.”

Beginning in May 2006, Colvin said that he and other staff members “began informing Ottawa” via written reports and verbal briefings to senior officials in both the foreign affairs department and the Canadian Forces “about the grave deficiencies in our detainee practices and grave consequences.”

Canadian soldier greets Afghan boy while on patrol

Colvin stated, “At first we were mostly ignored, but by April 2007 we were receiving written messages from the senior Canadian government coordinator for Afghanistan to the effect that we should be quiet and do what we were told.”

It is no understatement to suggest that Colvin’s testimony was explosive and that current Defense Minister Peter Mackay has been forced to mount a vigorous counter attack on Colvin’s credibility, while attempting to vindicate Canada’s policy on Taliban prisoners in Afghanistan.

This comes on the heels of the recent Afghan election debacle and the increasing concern among Canadians as to exactly what has been conducted in that hapless country in their name over the past 8 years.

If nothing else, Richard Colvin’s testimony this week is certain to bring even more scrutiny on what role the Conservative government has played in the ongoing, complex dilemma that has become Canada’s Afghan mission.

Related posts:

1. How Much Accountability is Necessary and Do Canadians Care About the Afghan Torture Story? In my honest opinion, this constant reframing of the governments...
2. Canada’s Top Commander Jonathan Vance Voices Concerns About The Afghan Mission Brigadier-General Jonathon Vance, Canada’s commander in Afghanistan, has been the...
3. Canada’s Prime Minister Stephen Harper Faces Skepticism Regarding Climate Change and Afghan Torture In a span of just a few short weeks, Stephen...
4. Canadian Soldier Accused of Murder After Killing Insurgent A Canadian Forces captain must now await a custody hearing...
5. Bloc, NDP Challenge Mackay on Afghanistan Testifying before Canada’s national defence committee on the Hill two...

Tags: afghanistan, Canadian Armed Forces, stephen harper, taliban, torture

This entry was posted on Friday, November 20th, 2009 at 4:19 pm and is filed under Canadian Armed Forces. You can follow any responses to this entry through the RSS 2.0 feed. You can leave a response, or trackback from your own site.