Inkless Wells

Inkless Wells

Inkless Wells

Paul Wells on all the latest out of Ottawa—along with the occasional post about jazz. Follow Paul on Twitter: @InklessPW

Holbrooke and Canada: still waiting

by Paul Wells on Tuesday, December 29, 2009 12:18pm - 55 Comments

On December 15 Richard Holbrooke, the U.S. Special Representative for Afghanistan and Pakistan, spoke to a meeting of the Council on Foreign Relations in Washington. You can watch video of the meeting here and read a transcript here. It’s worth watching at your leisure for any number of reasons. Near the end, however, Holbrooke introduces his staff, who attended the event with him. It’s a big staff. Seventeen people got up and said a few words to the audience. None were Canadian.

Nor was the Canadian staffer simply working late at the office and unable to get out to the think-tank schmooze. This wire-service story from the same day, Dec. 15, has a Holbrooke staffer confirming that Holbrooke continues to expect a Canadian to be assigned to his office, but that nobody has been named yet.

Now, why would anyone expect a representative of the Canadian government to be working in Holbrooke’s office? Only because Holbrooke asked for one. Six months ago. And I reported, nearly three months ago, that the Harper government was about to name such a representative to Holbrooke’s office.

“Canada is currently considering potential candidates for an assignment in Mr. Holbrooke’s office,” Jamie Christoff, a Department of Foreign Affairs spokesman, told me in early October.

“This contribution is being considered as we are partnering even more closely with the U.S. to deliver on crucial governance, reconstruction and development work in Afghanistan.”

Holbrooke already had an official from the British government working on secondment to his office. Foreign Minister Lawrence Cannon confirmed to my colleague John Geddes that Holbrooke personally requested a similar Canadian presence in his office during Cannon’s visit “a couple of months ago” to Washington. The only Washington visit by Cannon that fits that time-frame was in mid-July, half a year ago.

So what? Well, Holbrooke is the highest-ranking U.S. civilian official with direct responsibility for the entire Afghanistan-Pakistan theatre during a period of massive turmoil, in which U.S. actions bear directly on the safety and the work assignments of every Canadian soldier and civilian in Afghanistan. Just the scale of U.S. action in Kandahar already dwarfs, and will continue to dominate, anything the smaller Canadian contingent does. This is combat, reconstruction and counterinsurgency with an elephant. As an “Af-Pak” envoy, Holbrooke is not directly comparable to any official with responsibility for only Pakistan, or only Afghanistan. When Barack Obama appointed him at the beginning of 2009 (Holbrooke reports to Secretary of State Hillary Rodham Clinton), several countries immediately named Afghanistan-Pakistan envoys who would serve as direct interlocutors for Holbrooke. The Brits, the Germans, the French, the Japanese. The official opposition started asking, in the Commons, when the Harper government would do the same. At first, of course, the government dismissed the notion. But by early autumn, at Holbrooke’s personal request, they were reconsidering.

In fact, a credible source gave me the name of a public servant who was being considered, in early October, for the assignment to Holbrooke’s office. Because I couldn’t get the name confirmed by another source I didn’t report it. (A U.S. associate of Holbrooke’s told me Holbrooke was surprised to learn there was a name floating around Ottawa. Could Holbrooke know who it was, since Ottawa wouldn’t tell him?)

That was three months ago. Meanwhile other countries continue to appoint direct interlocutors for Holbrooke. Twenty-eight countries have done so thus far, he said at the Council on Foreign Relations shindig, the latest being Belgium in early December. “We’ll meet again in the United Arab Emirates in early January,” Holbrooke said of this international clan of Af-Pak envoys. “And this is the central mechanism through which we’re coordinating an international effort.”

Holbrooke has had his job for a year and has been waiting for a Canadian interlocutor, specifically, for half of that time. More than two dozen other countries have given him somebody to talk with. Obviously Canadian Forces and Canadian civilian public servants can continue to work in Kandahar without fulfilling Holbrooke’s request. But this astonishing delay in the face of a personal request from a trusted ally is baffling.

CODA: In response to an email I sent late last night, I have just received this response from an official at Foreign Affairs: “Paul, in response to your query I can tell you that a Canadian official has not been appointed to Holbrooke’s office. We will be happy to provide new information as soon as we can.”

Bookmark and Share
  • BCer in Mtl

    They had someone in mind, but other priorities kept coming up.

    Digging into CIDA grantees to weed out the anti semitic ones

    Commissioning all those oversized cheques

    Poring over tapes of non-CPC MP's to find something – anything – to put in ads against them

    Printing and photocopying pages and pages of spreadsheets to give to the PBO

    Digging up fake quotes so the PM can indulge in partisan politics on foreign soil

    Setting up photo-ops with the Navy

  • http://intensedebate.com/people/Crit_Reasoning Crit_Reasoning

    Great coverage of Foreign Affairs' perplexing delay. I have no idea what is going on behind the scenes, but the sloth-like response to Holbrooke's request reflects poorly on the department.

    Hopefully your reportage will put a rocket up Cannon's behind and a Canadian interlocutor will be appointed to Holbrooke's office before the UAE meeting in January.

    • http://intensedebate.com/people/tedbetts tedbetts

      Why do you assume it is Cannon's delay or the department's delay?

      • http://intensedebate.com/people/Crit_Reasoning Crit_Reasoning

        Whose delay do you think it is?

        • http://intensedebate.com/people/tedbetts tedbetts

          Well, I don't know so I wouldn't assume and I certainly wouldn't give Harper a free pass.

          All appointments, especially such appointments, go through the PMO. This was one of the Great Evils, apparently, of Martin, that he couldn't make decisions about appointments.

          Harper seems to do the same thing, except that he has been around long enough that the appointments seem to go in fits and spurts: tons of vacancies mounting and mounting, until someone senior enough gets Harper's attention and says he must make some decisions, and then he does. I think I have anectodally observed this to happen twice now: a ton of long outstanding vacancies and then, over a course of a few weeks, suddenly tons of announcements.

          • http://intensedebate.com/people/Crit_Reasoning Crit_Reasoning

            I thought you were going somewhere else with that (something along the lines of Jesse's comment below).

            So you think the delay could be Harper's fault, because Harper personally makes every decision and approves every appointment, creating a bottleneck of decisions and appointments? So this particular appointment just got caught up in the supposed bottleneck, because nobody senior enough was able to get Harper's attention?

            Like you, I have no idea what the real reason was, but here are so many things going on behind the scenes here that I have a hard time believing the explanation is as simple as "Harper didn't notice it" or "Harper hasn't gotten around to it yet".

          • http://intensedebate.com/people/tedbetts tedbetts

            Lordy knows that Harper passes the buck enough without me helping him do it some more.

            Reading back, I think I was blurring two separate points.

            One – all appointments go through Harper so it is at least as likely if not more likely that Harper is the hold-up of this particular appointment as it is Cannon or the Department generally. Whatever the reason for the delay, if it is Harper's I would think it has more to do with politics than bottlenecks.

            Two – Harper is making a mess of appointments generally. There was an article today in fact about how his constantly shuffling of Deputy Ministers is causing real havoc in the civil service and getting things done. This is exasperated by the bottlenecks he's created.

            That is a separate point tied to the first only in the sense that Harper is screwing up a lot under the radar of the typical Canadian in ways that are increasingly making government highly dysfunctional.

          • http://intensedebate.com/people/tedbetts tedbetts

            Part of the problem – in my opinion, admittedly – is that he sees the civil service as beneath him and unanimously anti-Conservative. He is trying to re-make the civil service but (a) doesn't have the interest or patience in the tediously long and heavy lifting process of appointments and (b) there simply aren't enough hardcore conservatives around to fill the spots.

            With respect to this particular appointment though, it seems to me that Harper has only ever really been interested in Afghanistan insofar as it can give him a good photo opportunity. He's never really stuck his neck out to defend the mission or explain it and certainly not try to convince Canadians (attacking opposition members as being soft on the Taliban is not the same thing, Steve-o!). He seems wholly uninterested in the details of what it takes to win and be fully engaged in Afghanistan.

            This I think – again, my opinion – reflects how he sees things as political winners or losers (or as Wells put it earlier, political swords or shields) and not matters of principle or policy.

    • Jesse

      There's some speculation that tension exists between Holbrooke and Clinton despite his previous work in her husband's admin. He campaigned openly for her job and she resents her power as SecState being given out to these super ambassador posts (there's another one for Israel-Palestine). Regardless, there is talk that the system (Obama's idea) has failed and HIlary will assume more direct control over her realm soon.

      So another angle to consider in all of this is Cannon is trying to freeze out Holbrooke at the request of Hilary.

      OR another angle to consider is that Holbrooke is too cozy with Ignatieff and Cannon doesn't want Afghanistan policy being leaked to Iggy.

      Just some other possibilities other than beaurocratic delay/ministerial incompetence.

    • http://intensedebate.com/people/Stewart_Smith Stewart_Smith

      Congrats "reportage rocket" both rolls off the tougue and has great imagery potential.

  • BCer in Mtl

    Leaking classified documents to sympathetic – ahem – journalists

    Issuing talking points to drunken senators for use in political interviews

    Constantly revising surplus, no, deficit, projections

    Pretending to write a hockey book

    Practicing Beatles tunes on the piano

    Devising new ways to disrupt committee work

    Figuring out who would be least qualified to be a senator, then arranging their appointment

    Practicing Bollywood dance moves

  • Anon

    Betchya the name being considered in early October was Richard Colvin.

    • http://canadiansinafghanistan.blogspot.com Neil Kitson

      I'm with Anon. Who else could it be?

      • ADF

        Had you heard of Richard Colvin four month ago? There are other senior civil servants in DFAIT and Defence who could fill the position who you probably have never heard of.

    • http://canadiansinafghanistan.blogspot.com Neil Kitson

      OK, OK, I had a brainwave: Pamela Wallin!

  • http://intensedebate.com/people/Inkless Inkless

    Sadly life isn't usually that fun. That's not the name I heard.

  • wellwell

    Richard Holbrooke is a good friend of Michael Ignatieff. With the Harper government, everything is personal.

  • Mike T.

    maybe there was a guy but he was in the washroom when the pictures were being taken.

  • nonpartisan

    Apparently this government does not trust its officials within Foreign Affairs- and never has. (If it's filled with Axworthy-era "UNish" alumnae then no wonder.) Bernier's appointment as minister was an indicator of the status the department held in the eyes of the government.

    Defense has been the driver of Afghan policy so far and the government may go outside FA for a representative if necessary- someone like a "junior Manley". Western foreign affairs departments seem to be on the warpath against their former overseers and defense departments in their respective countries so there probably won't be an elevation of an insider for the foreseeable future.

    • http://intensedebate.com/people/BCVoiceOfReason BCVoiceOfReason

      Bernier's stint as head of Foriegn affairs had him go to Afganistan and declare Karzai's relative as the governor of Kanduhar as a corrupt swindler.

      The press and the Foreign Affairs boys jumped all over him as a undiplomatic dolt… a symbol of all that was wrong with the CPC's world view.

      Bernier was exactly correct.

      Funny that this is not ever brought up in the Afghan debate.

      • Dave

        Actually, they laid into him for placing Karzai in a position where he couldn't do anything about it because to do so after public comments would make him look like a foreign puppet and thus delayed his removal.

        Which, given how much DoD appears to have by all accounts favoured the man may be exactly why it was done.

        • http://intensedebate.com/people/BCVoiceOfReason BCVoiceOfReason

          So Canada ( through Bernier) should have shut up and went along with the corruption that he saw as obvious, Chretienesque in nature?

          Should Canada also remain silent about torture as that discussion will make our Afghan allies more intransigent in their rights to torture?

          Sounds like the DoD (civil service) is/was the prime movers in the cover-ups. In Bernier's case they even went as far as vilifying their political "masters" when he pointed out the obvious.

          The Canadian diplomatic corps got soft and lazy after the years of soft power ( being UN puppets) and being compliant with the bad guys for fear of upsetting..

  • norman spector

    Paul

    I'm wondering if it has something to do with this:

    http://www.timesonline.co.uk/tol/news/world/Afgha…

    • http://intensedebate.com/people/PoliticalPundit PoliticalPundit

      Thanks for the link, Norman. The Afghan mission chaos extends to the United States!!

    • http://intensedebate.com/people/Inkless Inkless

      Mayyyyyyybe. It's certainly an interesting piece. But the timing's a bit approximate — that story lands a month after the feds seem to have thought they had somebody, and two months before Holbrooke's UAE meeting with the Af-Pak Pack. I'd hate to be the person who held off making an appointment because I thought the other guy might get fired eventually, someday.

      • Kremlinology

        Or because Cannon was more interested on being on Hilary's good side than Holbrooke's ??

  • nonpartisan

    Chris Alexander might be good choice if one had to be made.

    • http://chuckercanuck.blogspot.com chuckercanuck

      Chris Alexander has bigger fish to fry than having brain storming sessions with the appointees from Djibouti and Paraguay on what to put in their memo to Mr. Holbrooke.

      But its true, a committee of 36 appointees will only get productive once you hit 37 members. But let's Big Dream and imagine what a committee of 46 could accomplish! Please, Tivalu, get off your ass and join the committee!

  • http://intensedebate.com/people/jolyon jolyon

    "Ten months after his appointment as President Barack Obama's trouble shooter in Afghanistan and Pakistan, US special envoy Richard Holbrooke seems to be sidelined from major events relating to the region, raising question marks over his future."

    http://www.indianexpress.com/news/is-afpak-envoy-…

    From what I have read, Holbrooke and Karzai can't stand one another, so nothing is really happening. Obama is focused on domestic issues, and not his Commander In Chief role, so he's not bovvered if negotiations are not progressing.

    I also of fail to understand how adding another layer of bureaucracy is going to help anything, and most conservatives understand that, but who knows what these bunch of Cons are thinking. It would be nice for once if Con/Harper words matched their actions but that's just a dream, I guess.

    • http://intensedebate.com/people/Crit_Reasoning Crit_Reasoning

      Two weeks ago, the NY Times broke a story about an American plan to replace Karzai, which probably didn't help relations between Holbrooke and the Afghan leader:

      Mr. Karzai, the officials said, became incensed when he learned of the plan and was told it had been put forth by Mr. Galbraith, who had been installed in his position with the strong backing of Richard C. Holbrooke, the top American envoy to Afghanistan. Mr. Holbrooke had himself clashed with the Afghan president over the election.

      Mr. Galbraith abruptly left the country in early September and was fired weeks later.

      http://www.nytimes.com/2009/12/17/world/asia/17ga…

  • http://intensedebate.com/people/PeteTong PeteTong

    Maybe no one wants the position. It sounds like a career killer.

    • http://intensedebate.com/people/tedbetts tedbetts

      Not necessarily. You'd be reporting to Holbrooke, not to the Harper government. So your reports are not necessarily going to be ignored, then denied and you are not necessarily going to be pilloried for saying you provided reports that were ignored then denied.

  • Wascally Wabbit

    Well – let's see…Afghanistan is a tough sell to anyone – in the best of times.
    A certain career diplomat volunteered for it (after his friend had been killed there) – and what did he get from his government? Condemnation and ridicule.
    Could it be that this government cannot find another volunteer?

  • officerfarva

    Can' they just send Con talking points to Holbrooke? They would be cheaper and as effective as the Harper parrot they would send anyway.

    • http://intensedebate.com/people/sea_n_mountains sea_n_mountains

      what about an actual parrot? that could be fun!

  • MBToday

    Just another example of the Harper regime not doing the thing a responsible government would do. It is either
    A: Incompetent
    B: Unable to find a name and the perfect timing to absolutely wring out the maximum political mileage with the base and the population at large
    C: Not enough true conservatives in the Foreign Affairs
    D: All of the above

  • peter

    I am staggered by the stupidity I read here. Maybe, just maybe, Mr. Harper does not want to want to have any more to do with Obama's policy than good taste would dictate with our interconnected economies.

    The only fans Obama has are Wall St. insiders who infest the Whitehouse like termites and are seeming to have a similar structural effect on the US's stability and integrity.

    Will your next post be on how Mr. Harper is shunning Al Gore? (thank God).

    • http://intensedebate.com/people/craigola craigola

      Staggered! Staggered, he says, by the stupidity. Is there no one here who is willing to be as smart as peter? Why, that's just…staggering!

  • http://intensedebate.com/people/OntarioTown OntarioTown

    Harper hasn't time. He's so, so busy doing photo-ops. It takes up a lot of his time you know – by the time he gets his hair done and sprayed, makeup, etc. etc.

    • Anon #2

      Thank you for this substantive, manly commentary.

      • http://intensedebate.com/people/OntarioTown OntarioTown

        You're obsession with manliness is disturbing. Besides, I'm not required to make manly statements – I'm a girl

        Grow up . Considering you're pathetic comments on Aaron Wherry's blog today – you should worry about yourself.

  • supernonpartisanist

    "Canadian interlocutor"

    Hahaha, that phrase makes me giggle. Then fall asleep. A whole lotta ado about an "interlocutor"; we have a late addition to the "most boring story by a Canadian journalist in 2009" here.

    • YSP

      If I may misquote BH "Red" Fisher, "But you still read it."

    • http://intensedebate.com/people/Inkless Inkless

      And besides, if you think this one was boring, you can't have read much of my other stuff.

      • supernonpartisanist

        Ha, that's kinda true: the "more tax n' spending for research" schtick is reaching near-Jeffery Simpson-on-about-the-cod-stocks level of boring.

        • http://intensedebate.com/people/OntarioTown OntarioTown

          Gosh, you find everything boring. What do you want special effects, loud music and smoke and fire?

  • http://chuckercanuck.blogspot.com chuckercanuck

    Here's more shame:

    Belize and Barbados have both sent their delegates. That makes 42 countries…. this committee is fast growing into an IPCC for Afghanistan… and once again, we are on the outs looking in!

    • MJH

      Who cares besides a few political junkies, and journalists in the Ottawa bubble? Jack Layton's "ordinary Canadians" pay zero attention to such political details!!

  • MJH

    Who is Richard Halbrooke? Boring!!
    Canadians could care less.!!

    • Jan

      Halbrooke ? No idea, why do you ask?

  • Peter K

    It's the Afghanistan issue – Harper wants the public mind off it until the next election. Harper will want to keep the Canadian forces there indefinetely, but he won't get an opposition that will agree. He knows Ignatieff will turn it into a winning election issue – it's a "shield" issue for the Tories. This is why he's not appointing anyone to the role yet – it begs the question of "how much longer are we going to be there" and "what will our role be"?

    This is also the reason for today's prorogation of parliament, also to keep the public's mind off Afghanistan. The committees will be silent until parliament resumes.

    Also, the winter is a relatively quiet time in Afghanistan. A March election is a perfect time to start an election campaign, given that the yearly spring Taliban offensive won't have started yet. No bad news of Canadian LAVs getting blown up means Afghanistan is out of people's minds.

    Keep parliament suspended until after the Olympics, and use the post-Olympics national high to launch an election campaign.

  • some thoughts

    Once upon a time people would proudly wear maple leafs when travelling abroad confidant in the fact that it was the symbol of a respected member of the international community of nations. Even non Canadians (mostly americans) were known to sport our national symbol on their backpacks because of the general level of goodwill towards Canada in the world. Harper's incompetance and sheer stupitdity is destroying that. Fortunately I have two passports and henceforth will be travelling under my other nationality. It is a sad day when Canadians can rightly be ashamed of their country because of the narrow ignorance of its leader.

  • http://intensedebate.com/people/Gaunilon Gaunilon

    Pretty hard to excuse that kind of foot-dragging. There's either a good reason or there isn't, and if there is it should have been announced.

  • wsam

    So, are you (Mr Wells) doing the Foriegn Affaires beat?

    Awesome!!!

  • http://intensedebate.com/people/PoliticalPundit PoliticalPundit

    The Harper government's policy on the Afghanistan mission is in chaos. The logical thing for Harper to have done was to cooperate fully with Holbrooke, the U.S. Special Representative for Afghanistan and Pakistan. Two possible explanations and both may be correct. Harper does not trust President Obama or Holbrooke and has decided to keep his distance. Harper is having considerable trouble finding a candidate for the job, someone whom he can trust implicitly.
    PM Harper, in order to survive as a minority government, was forced to compromise twice with the Opposition Parties twice – he gave up partial control of Canada's Afghan mission by agreeing to a first renewal of the mission without a condition and then lot full control by extracting a second renewal with a withdrawal date, of December 31st 2011.
    Then the leader of the Democratic Party, Obama, whom Harper tried to derail as leader with dirty tricks concerning free trade, was elected President of the United States. Obama was incredibly popular with Canadians. Harper, again wanting his government to survive politically, decided, for tactical and strategic reasons having to do with the oil and gas industry and the future of the Canadian Armed Forces, to forgo Canada's sovereignty and tie himself and his government, on domestic and foreign policies, to President Obama's domestic and foreign & defence policies. He knows that this is unpopular with many middle class, urban Canadians whose votes he needs so he has decided to take a stand on the Holbrooke file to demonstrate that he and his government are not completely embedded in President Obama's administration.

From Macleans