Harper Proposes Air-Strikes Against ISIS

Debate ensues over Canadian action

On Friday, Oct. 3^rd, Prime Minister Stephen Harper announced his plan to the House of Commons for Canada’s contribution to the effort against ISIS.

ISIS (the Islamic State in Iraq and Syria) has begun a ruthless and violent campaign in Iraq and Syria, targeting religious minorities and other innocents.  Stephen Harper stressed in his address that ISIS has recently targeted Canada and Canadians specifically, and that “left unchecked, this terrorist threat can only grow and grow quickly.”

As part of his proposition, Harper emphasized that Canada must join its allies and support this offensive effort.  He went on to say that “[it] has never been the Canadian way to do only the most easy and praiseworthy actions, and leave the tough things for others.”

The outlined plan involves a six month air-strike effort, consisting of half a dozen CF-18 fighter jets, two CP-140 Aurora surveillance aircraft, a CC-150 Polaris air-to-air refueling aircraft, and close to 600 men to crew the aircraft, respectively.   The effort will also include the extension to a proposed 69 special operations officers to carry out security detail in northern Iraq, 26 of which are already on the ground.

Both opposition parties have taken a stand against the motion.  Their main concern is to obtain answers from the Harper administration as to the details of the mission, such as cost, duration, and rules of engagement.

Thomas Mulcair, leader of the NDP, said that Canada’s effort should be comprised of diplomatic means, with a concentration on humanitarian actions and works to strengthen political institutions in Iraq and Syria.  Mulcair went on to say that “the tragedy in Iraq and Syria will not end with another Western-led invasion in that region.”

Liberal leader Justin Trudeau added that “Canadians have a lot more to offer” than the military effort that Harper proposed.  “We can be resourceful, and there are significant, substantial non-combat roles Canada can play,” Trudeau said.

Harper responded to the opposition by stating that it is not an “either/or” situation.  He assured the House that the militant effort would be an “addition to large-scale financial assistance already being furnished.”  The proposition also does not exclude humanitarian assistance.  Regarding these humanitarian efforts, however, there is little detail to be found in the proposition.

The intentions of the mission are to restrict military movements made by ISIS, and their ability to operate bases in the open.  Harper acknowledged that air-strikes are not likely to end the ISIS presence, but ignoring the jihadists means a threat against Canadians.  “As a government, we know our ultimate responsibility is to protect Canadians, and to defend our citizens from those who would do harm to us and to our families,” Harper said.

The necessity for Canada’s involvement with the terrorist organization is yet unclear.  ISIS has control over a large territory and the group has expressed intentions to launch a jihad on a global scale.  However, The United States, United Kingdom, Denmark, France, Saudi Arabia, and others have already responded on a military scale.

Moving forward, more questions need answers, as the opposition has suggested.  Among those needed are plans for an exit strategy and agreed upon terms to the extent of resources used for the mission.  These areas of the proposal are foggy at best.