Friday, July 21, 2006
Crisis in Lebanon (II)
A few surprising (to me, and maybe to you) facts have come to light recently in the face of a crisis in Lebanon.
1% of Canadians are Lebanese. (300,000 according to the CBC)
20% of Lebanese Canadians were in Lebanon when the crisis broke out.
The majority of those people wanting evacuation in Lebanon who spoke to CBC television reporters (19 July, The National) somehow imagined that the Canadian government had an immediate and painless plan for transporting tens of thousands of people from the Middle East in case a war broke out.
The same members of Parliament (and incidentally, opposition critics) who criticized the Cabinet decision to go ahead and buy 4 strategic airlifters (along with dozens of tactical lift airplaines, and a joint sealift capability) are the same opposition critics who believe that the Canadian government should have had the Lebanese Canadians back in Canada yesterday. According to DND: "DND will procure four strategic lift aircraft to provide rapid transport of large amounts of passengers and equipment over long distances, including Canada?s disaster assistance response capability (DART)." Large amounts of passengers? Over long distances? Sounds like something we could use right about now. See, when you own it, you can use it whenever you want and your forces can react immediately to strategic priorities. When you rent it, you gotta get in line and wait for the nice guy or gal at the rental outlet to come pick you up (Most know this intuitively, and most buy a car as soon as they can possibly afford one).
The only army combat unit capable of rapid deployment, the Canadian Airborne Regiment, to a danger zone in order to secure and aid Canadian citizens was disbanded by the government in 1995. (This is not to say that such a unit would have been deployed in this case, but it was a capability).
Historically, the evacuation of Canadian soldiers from Europe following the end of WWII took over a year.
Whereas other countries are using their military assets to evacuate their citizens from Lebanon (citizen evacuation is typically a military task in times of crisis for obvious reasons, ie. the military is the only organization that is normally equipped and trained for operating in war zones), Canada is chartering pleasure craft to accomplish the task.
Be it resolved that:
If Canadians want to be assured of the governments capacity to mass-evacuate its citizens from warzones half-way around the world, we should recognize that such a capability is costly and must be maintained. We should not be surprised if, failing to maintain such a capacity, we end up failing to accomplish the evacuation in a timely and organized manner.
1% of Canadians are Lebanese. (300,000 according to the CBC)
20% of Lebanese Canadians were in Lebanon when the crisis broke out.
The majority of those people wanting evacuation in Lebanon who spoke to CBC television reporters (19 July, The National) somehow imagined that the Canadian government had an immediate and painless plan for transporting tens of thousands of people from the Middle East in case a war broke out.
The same members of Parliament (and incidentally, opposition critics) who criticized the Cabinet decision to go ahead and buy 4 strategic airlifters (along with dozens of tactical lift airplaines, and a joint sealift capability) are the same opposition critics who believe that the Canadian government should have had the Lebanese Canadians back in Canada yesterday. According to DND: "DND will procure four strategic lift aircraft to provide rapid transport of large amounts of passengers and equipment over long distances, including Canada?s disaster assistance response capability (DART)." Large amounts of passengers? Over long distances? Sounds like something we could use right about now. See, when you own it, you can use it whenever you want and your forces can react immediately to strategic priorities. When you rent it, you gotta get in line and wait for the nice guy or gal at the rental outlet to come pick you up (Most know this intuitively, and most buy a car as soon as they can possibly afford one).
The only army combat unit capable of rapid deployment, the Canadian Airborne Regiment, to a danger zone in order to secure and aid Canadian citizens was disbanded by the government in 1995. (This is not to say that such a unit would have been deployed in this case, but it was a capability).
Historically, the evacuation of Canadian soldiers from Europe following the end of WWII took over a year.
Whereas other countries are using their military assets to evacuate their citizens from Lebanon (citizen evacuation is typically a military task in times of crisis for obvious reasons, ie. the military is the only organization that is normally equipped and trained for operating in war zones), Canada is chartering pleasure craft to accomplish the task.
Be it resolved that:
If Canadians want to be assured of the governments capacity to mass-evacuate its citizens from warzones half-way around the world, we should recognize that such a capability is costly and must be maintained. We should not be surprised if, failing to maintain such a capacity, we end up failing to accomplish the evacuation in a timely and organized manner.
Comments:
<< Home
As one rescapé from the region pointed out, is it unreasonable to think that the Canadian government would have an evacuation plan for it's own diplomatic staff (which was not the case) for a country that has been marked by military strife for the past ... how many decades? This isn't a new issue, my friends. Contrary to how people seem to be spinning this, the crisis in the Middle East didn't start with Hezbollah a few days ago.
Additionally, the Lebanese 'army' has consisted until recently of Syrian military forces. Usually, it is the responsibility of the host country's military to worry about tiny logistical details like evacuation. That's kind of hard to do when bombs are raining down on your military installments, your only international airport has been bombed, you're under an air and sea blockade, and you don't even have a plane capable of making it into the air (even if you could find a runway to take off from). Yes, ladies and gentlemen, it does suck to be a country whose military isn't financed from Washington.
And for the record, the next time someone feels the need to bitch about the previous government, let's consider one or two things. First, the issue of bringing Canadian citizens back home is / should be an issue entirely separate from Canada's position on the crisis in the region. We can all smile and be very happy that Mister Harper used his jet to ferry people back to Canada (what is 200/50000? ... umm 0.004% of the Lebanese Canadians in the region), but still not like his position on Israel's raids into Lebanon.
It's gotten to a humiliating point when other world leaders are offering to help bring your own citizens back home (i.e. Chirac to Charest) because we are incapable. And for all the whining and finger pointing going on at the Liberals, all I have to say is this: When does it stop? How far back do we go? When will the Conservatives start taking responsible for their own decisions and actions? Oh, perhaps when they start making some (i.e. SG of the OIF, refusal to let various political leaders into the country or to land their planes, etc.)
One final thing: for those saying that 50,000 is simply too many to have anticipated, might I ask if this is the first time that Canadian - Lebanese people have travelled to Lebanon in the summer? Tourism is / was the one and only industry in the country. and as for the impressive quote about Canada's Lebanese population only being 1% (who are apparently all in the Middle East this month), I would say that number is very high given the size of Lebanon. We're not talking about a bordering country or a super power, after all.
Post a Comment
Additionally, the Lebanese 'army' has consisted until recently of Syrian military forces. Usually, it is the responsibility of the host country's military to worry about tiny logistical details like evacuation. That's kind of hard to do when bombs are raining down on your military installments, your only international airport has been bombed, you're under an air and sea blockade, and you don't even have a plane capable of making it into the air (even if you could find a runway to take off from). Yes, ladies and gentlemen, it does suck to be a country whose military isn't financed from Washington.
And for the record, the next time someone feels the need to bitch about the previous government, let's consider one or two things. First, the issue of bringing Canadian citizens back home is / should be an issue entirely separate from Canada's position on the crisis in the region. We can all smile and be very happy that Mister Harper used his jet to ferry people back to Canada (what is 200/50000? ... umm 0.004% of the Lebanese Canadians in the region), but still not like his position on Israel's raids into Lebanon.
It's gotten to a humiliating point when other world leaders are offering to help bring your own citizens back home (i.e. Chirac to Charest) because we are incapable. And for all the whining and finger pointing going on at the Liberals, all I have to say is this: When does it stop? How far back do we go? When will the Conservatives start taking responsible for their own decisions and actions? Oh, perhaps when they start making some (i.e. SG of the OIF, refusal to let various political leaders into the country or to land their planes, etc.)
One final thing: for those saying that 50,000 is simply too many to have anticipated, might I ask if this is the first time that Canadian - Lebanese people have travelled to Lebanon in the summer? Tourism is / was the one and only industry in the country. and as for the impressive quote about Canada's Lebanese population only being 1% (who are apparently all in the Middle East this month), I would say that number is very high given the size of Lebanon. We're not talking about a bordering country or a super power, after all.
# posted by 
: 5:05 PM
: 5:05 PM << Home
