Skip navigation

 Login or Register | Member Centre

Fired Kandahar police chief says Canadians let him down

GRAEME SMITH

From Friday's Globe and Mail

Latest comment posted at 4:11 PM EST 06/07/08

Prison break was military failure, Sayed Agha Saqib says, adding that soldiers did nothing to help round up prisoners ...Read the full article

This conversation is closed

  1. Nick Wright from Halifax, Canada writes: When asked why the nearby Canadian Quick Reaction Force did not respond to the jailbreak, which lasted at least an hour according to eyewitnesses, Kandahar commander Brigadier-General Thompson "(C)onfirmed that NATO surveillance tracked the fugitives as they fled. But he said it's not Canada's job as part of the International Security Assistance Force to hunt down escaped prisoners.

    “You can ask yourself the rhetorical question, what if we find 100 fugitives in the fields? . . . What is ISAF's duty in that circumstance? Is it to go arrest people?”

    Why is Brig-Gen Thompson responding with a "rhetorical question", instead of telling us what the rules of engagement are for the Canadian security force? We won't know what the CF should or should not have done until we know what those rules are.
  2. ImaCANADIAN ! from Canada writes: From Lawrence Martin's column today ("Big Oil pumps up the ugly Afghan and Iraqi mix", theglobeandmail.com):

    "In the late 1990s, an American-led oil consortium held talks with the Taliban about building a pipeline from Central Asia - where oil and gas reserves are gigantic - through Afghanistan to Pakistan, from where it could be shipped westward. The talks broke down in mid-2001. Washington was furious, leading to speculation it might take out the Taliban."

    A few months later, they invaded Afghanistan (Oct. 2001), installed former pipeline project consultant Hamid Karzai in power, and appointed former Unocal consultant Zalmay Khalilzad as Special US Envoy. On Feb. 8, 2002, a short 6 weeks after being sworn in, Hamid Karzai announced a pipeline deal with Pakistan.

    American analyst Kevin Phillips recently wrote that the US military and its allies have become an "energy protection force." Our Canadian troops are being used, and getting killed - at a rate of about one every week and a half (77 since 2006) - to help the US militarily impose "stability" so this $7.6B mega-pipeline can be built through Kandahar.
  3. Reg Anderson from Canada writes: Sayed Agha Saqib, dining on a lavish meal of lamb and chicken at his home in Kandahar city last night, asked why Canadian soldiers did not chase the fugitives running away from Sarpoza prison on June 13.

    ---

    Now just how blind to you have to be to give this article any credibility for un-biased reporting?
  4. david toynbee from Nanaimo, Canada writes: When in doubt, blame the unbelievers.
    Islam has followed this policy for 1386 years CE. Why change now?
    Get the unbelievers out of their country then the chaos and deaths can be attributed to heretics and enemies of Allah.
    We're looking at the death of a civilisation . We can't bring them all to Canada to shelter behind The Charter. Christianity can't win'em all!
    Dave Toynbee
    Nanaimo.
  5. Steve; No Oval Office for Obama's pastors from Canada writes:
    I guess Saqib is not familiar with the concepts of prison guards or lock down.
  6. Canadian Eh from Canada writes: Sniff...I'm really feeling for him...Sniff. :(
  7. Just Checking Things Out from Canada writes: Nick Wright, Canadian rules of engagement are kept secret for the protection of soldiers, (I believe) under The Official Secrets Act.
  8. Herring Choker from Acadie qui estive, Canada writes: Canadians have been made fools of, used as gunmen and occasional cannon fodder by the Bush crowd and their oil companies. The Afghans have every right to fight to boot us out of their country. It's all a hopeless mess, and we only stay there because we can't stand the thought of appearing as losers, and can't think of a face-saving way out.
  9. Nick Wright from Halifax, Canada writes: Just Checking Things Out: Agreed. However, the fact that the Canadians didn't respond kind of makes it obvious to the insurgents what the policy is. In a previous article an insurgent expressed surprise that they got away unmolested, and were even able to camp out for the night a few kilometers from the jail.

    There now appears to be a dangerous and exploitable gap in Kandahar's security, with the ANA/AFP obviously unable or unwilling to stand up to the insurgents on their own, and the Canadians apparently under orders not to intervene or take the initiative during an attack on Afghans. Something will have to change or the insurgents will be quick to take advantage.
  10. R. M. from Regina, Canada writes: Dining on a lavish meal? Does this reporter work for CSIS or the CIA and think this is somehow going to influence our opinions. I can't think of any other earthly reasons for using such a stupid descriptor.
  11. Dana Cruickshank from Canada writes: sounds like he might be right
  12. harry carnie from Northern, B.C., Canada writes: How many escaped prisoners are on their way to Canada ..where our Immigration Services will welcome them with open arms?
    ..joking...I hope!
  13. James C from Shenzhen, China writes: "A Canadian commander has said it was not his troops' responsibility to round up the confused mix of Taliban and criminals who straggled through the fields south of the prison in the hours after the jailbreak. The Canadians gave information about the fugitives' location to Mr. Saqib that night, saying it was a police matter."
    _________

    had canadian troops done so, it would have upset numerous canadians, and human rights lawyers.

    "Nick Wright from Halifax, Canada writes: Why is Brig-Gen Thompson responding with a "rhetorical question", instead of telling us what the rules of engagement are for the Canadian security force? We won't know what the CF should or should not have done until we know what those rules are."
    _________

    the only people who need to know the ROEs are the soldiers on the mission.
  14. Dick W. from Toronto, Canada writes: It's all BS. All of it. It likely isn't the job of the Canadian Forces to round up prisoners. And the Ex-Police Chief is right when he say's that we ought to be doing a better job of training the Afghan Police. We can build a 'nation-state' under rule of law, or we can let it degenerate again after we leave, whenever that may be. Those are the only two options, and it sounds like we aren't working hard to build up the police who will enforce that rule of law.

    There hasn't been a decent democratic army, morally, legally and politically speaking, since the Roman Legions. Those soldiers weren't just soldiers, they were the property of their CO and none of them had citizenship or the right to issue orders to citizens of Rome. It’s time to start recruiting out of foreign nations for twenty year tours with the promise of education and full citizenship at the end of that tour. Start with battle hardened veterans of Africa or even Afghanistan and work your way out from there. Then we could know the ROE and not really care about the enemy knowing.

    Then we could at least know what the hell our politicians are doing in our names, eh?
  15. david ferguson from halifax, Canada writes: there is a difference between training people to do their job, and them being competant at it, the one does not necessarily imply the other.

    while the Afghan in the street seems to be in no hurry to fight for either their future nor that of their children so long as foreign troops will do so, the ranks of the government and army are staffed with the what passes for privileged, or the family or tribal associated and the just plain useless at their tasks. welcome to the real world.

    it is unfortunate, that the government of Afghanistan is not inclined to root these lost souls out before an act is committed. they would save themselves significant face, and it is after all, all about the show and not the substance.

    nato has unfortunately hitched their wagon to a star.
  16. Expert Eel from OttaPettaOshawawawawa and Wawa, Canada writes: When there is a job that needs to be done, I really hate when people (on both sides of this issue) cry "It's not my job!"
  17. Anuradha Bose from ottawa, writes: It is not the job of the Canadian Forces to act as gaol guards-besides this was an inside job and if this chap was not actively involved he was asleep on the job!
  18. Winston Churchill from London, Canada writes: I'm thinking that if the ROEs don't authorise Canadian soldiers to respond at such a time then they need to be revisited. I'm thinking that in the act of escaping, the prisoners renewed their combatant status. Why chase what you can just shoot?
  19. Nick Wright from Halifax, Canada writes: Winston Churchill has a point. If 400 German officers and soldiers were sprung from an Allied POW camp behind the lines in Occupied France (and presumably re-armed by their liberators), would the Allied command say: "It's not our job to chase escaped prisoners; it's a job for the French police."?

    This seems ridiculous--unless of course the Taliban/al Qaeda are no longer considered enemies of Canada, and North America in general. If this is the case, it blows apart the Harper government's main rationale for keeping us in Afghanistan past 2006; i.e., that "we need to fight them over there so we don't have to fight them here."

    Half of the people who escaped the Sarpoza prison were intent on killing Canadian soldiers when captured; it is reasonable to assume that they will resume their efforts in that direction.

    Something does not add up here.
  20. Richard Soley from writes: The Afgahnistan forces ( all of them) need to do the heavy lifting if they want a country. Blame cannot be pointed at others, there is only one boss and the responsibilty is his. Personally I find his comment not worthy of print by the Globe and Mail but having said that his lack of leadership certainly stands out. The Canadian Soldiers were accused in these blogs for handing prisoners over to the authorities and now are accused of not catching them when they escape, utter nonsense! The Canadian Soldiers serving in Kandahar are the finest troops in the world, we are there to help a country not suffer accusations from any civil servant that can't do his job. Maybe along with this story the G&M could print the rules of engagement and display the chain of authority chart,just to be fair!
  21. Gogh Forit from Canada writes: Nick Wright: A little accuracy in your criticism. While Harper was elected in 2006, Canada's commitment to stay until Feb 2009 was set by the previous Liberal government. I know that you don't like Conservatives but please a wee bit of getting the facts straight would be in order.
    We're committed until Feb 2011. After that even politicians will be of the consensus that we've done enough. Besides the Afghanis themselves have no commitment to their own country where you have 20% of your military complement resigning every year.

    So for correct perspective the Liberal governments of Chretien and Martin kept Canadian troops in Afghanistan for seven years, 2002 - 2009. The Conservatives are responsible for keeping them there until 2011. There is one telling difference between the Libs and Cons in this and that is that the Liberals expected the troops to do a competent job with no new equipment and little financial support. At least the Conservatives have committed money to help our military do their job more efficiently and safely.
  22. Stude Ham from Outremont, Canada writes:

    this afghan poohbah can definitely be blamed for having allowed the prison break to take place so successfully. if he had really been doing his job the possibilities of the jail break would have been severely minimized.

    he wasn't doing his job and the more he spouts the more we vomit and gag on the srench of his deeply rooted corruption.
  23. Winston Churchill from London, Canada writes: I agree Nick. If German commandoes sprang captured colleagues, a local allied military commander, I would imagine, wouldn't have looked for instructions. Those escaping might have been detainees initially, but in participating in a taliban jailbreak their status immediately clarified.

    I would hope that if the ROEs permitted, and if a Canadian commander were in position to act, that he be removed from command as somebody unclear on his duty.
  24. Tom Morrison from Calgary, Canada writes: Sounds like he is a prodigy of David Miller.
  25. sam johnson from Canada writes: tom morrison from calgary - i think you meant "progeny".
  26. Richard Roskell from Canada writes: Former Police Chief Saqib hasn't quite figured out how things work under NATO's occupation. When all the chickens escape from the hen house, they shoot a cow.
  27. Nick Wright from Halifax, Canada writes: Gogh Forit: Thanks for the correction: the 2006 vote extended Canada's mission in Afghanistan by two years from 2009 to 2011.

    As to my political leanings, I don't support any party, and I share many traditional conservative views. But I do have major problems with the Harper government, which I see as undermining Canada's interests in the name of a mean-spirited, cynical ideology. (I note your own dislike of the Liberals)

    As to past Liberal support for our military, you repeat a slanderous myth. Apart from a 2005 budget of almost $13-billion in extra military spending over the following five years, the Liberals were also active in procuring and updating important military hardware.

    The LAV III and Bison APCs entered service in 1999 in 1990, respectively. The Coyote reconnaissance vehicle entered service in 1996. The Leopard C1 tank entered service in 1979 and was upgraded in 2000 at a cost of $139 million. The G-Wagon was ordered in 2003 as a replacement for the Iltis and started entering service in 2004. The Armoured Patrol Vehicle (APV) was ordered by the Liberal government and entered service in 2006. With the exception of the Bison, all the current vehicles, or the current versions of them, entered service or were ordered under the Chretien government.
  28. Catherine Medernach from Winnipeg, Canada writes: Prisoners in a pow camp are not the same as prisoners in a civilian jail. A pow camp would be under the supervision of military police. A civilian jail is the responsibility of civilian police. And what would our troops have done with criminals that escaped? They have no facility for them. How would they know which were Taliban and which were common criminals? They are soldiers not police officers.
  29. sam johnson from Canada writes: g&m is my favourite canadian newspaper, but i do read a lot of american papers. somehow their views don't gibe with the cdn outlook. much darker and many are critical of the complete lack of rebuilding in afghanistan.
    the u.s is building an enormous prison in bagram military base north of kabul, so some might call this rebuilding infrastructure.
    the u.s. has been in afghanistan for seven years and has next to nothing to show for it.
    they are sending several thousands of troops, so that should settle things down.
  30. L.B. MURRAY from !! from Canada writes: Herring Choker from Acadie qui estive, Canada writes: Canadians have been made fools of, used as gunmen and occasional cannon fodder by the Bush crowd and their oil companies.
    _________________________________________________

    Exactly. And the worst is yet to come as U.S. Defence Secretary Gates is lamenting that there aren't enough troops in Afghanistan and the top U.S. Generals in Afghanistan are lamenting that there aren't enough troops and asking that ''pressure'' be put to NATO to provide more troops and money for Afghanistan. Plenty of articles on the subject in all major U.S. newspapers as well as in the German press and some of the U.K. press.... Our Canadian mainstream media seems very, very quiet on the subject.... wonder why....

    -
  31. Nick Wright from Halifax, Canada writes: Catherine Medernach: Point taken about military vs civilian jails; and yes, the civilian prisoners would have been a nuisance for the Canadians to handle. But surely they are not as big a problem as an insurgent offensive to free the people who have been trying to kill Canadian soldiers--many of whom Canadian soldiers probably sacrificed a lot to capture in the first place. I think you are ignoring the essential point.

    That is, unless we don't officially regard as problematic 400 more newly armed insurgents and their leaders in our backyard in Kandahar.
  32. Tom Paine from Every tory is a coward, Canada writes: .
    GET OUR TROOPS OUT OF AFGHANISTAN NOW!
  33. lary waldman from Qualicum Beach, Canada writes:

    Canadians have no business in Afghanistan. Let them solve their own problems, the insecurity their civil war would impose on us, is negligible at best. I don't care anymore about being a Peace Keeper to the World. I want the Canadian Military used now, to help improve conditions here in Canada, which are badly in need of attention. Harper is an idiot, if he thinks he can have any affect at all on the Heroin Production Capital of the World. He is out of his Howdy Doddy reality.

    Lary Waldman
  34. UCant Haveitall from Canada writes: To cover a number of posts...ROEs are reviewed and revised continuously and are SECRET for obvious reasons. While certain equipment may have been initiated by lib govts, it was the cons who fast tracked items like the globemaster, the Nyala vehilces, and the lease of Leopard tanks. Next is the prisoners escaping - that is/was an Afghan problem. Lastly - Go pats go!
  35. Mark Tilley from Brampton, Canada writes:

    Just wondering what the distinction is between "Not my job" and "I was only following orders"?
  36. Mark Tilley from Brampton, Canada writes:

    To those who say we have no business in Afghanistan, or, "let them solve their own problems", I wonder if you know the story that begins with the question "And who is my neighbour?"
  37. Winston Churchill from London, Canada writes: With respect Catherine Medernach, I think we have to make a distinction between what I understand to be the Afghan system and our own. ANP are federalis -- gendarmes (i.e. more soldier than police). I doubt that they hold Taliban suspects with law and order criminals. To make the thing more comprehensible, imagine the IRA organising a breakout from the Maze Prison back in the day. I would expect that this prison was more Maze or Leavenworth than Kingston's Magic Kingdom.
  38. Just Checking Things Out from Canada writes: No doubt you wonder about the distinction of a great many things in the run of a day.
  39. Winston Churchill from London, Canada writes: I do Just Checking. Devil is in the detail, right?
  40. Just Checking Things Out from Canada writes: Mark Tilley from Brampton, sorry about that. A mischivious part of me just couldn't resist, no harm or serious insult intended.
  41. Mark Tilley from Brampton, Canada writes:

    Just Checking: No sweat.
  42. Dean The Machine from Winnipeg, Canada writes: I'm thinking it's just an experience both the Afghan Authorities and the Canadian troops to learn from. I'm sure if it was put to the Canadian Troops by the Afghan Authorities, that they were under attack from the Taliban, the Canadian's would of responded better. Part of the Canadian mission is to help the Afghan Authorities to become self sufficient.
  43. Nick Wright from Halifax, Canada writes: Dean The Machine: You raise a good question: Did the Afghan police posts that were pinned down during the raid, and the jail guards who were directly attacked, call for help from the Canadian base? If they did, what was the response?
  44. Winston Churchill from London, Canada writes: Whatever the state of play for the Canadians involved, the ANP is notoriously corrupt (although getting better) and I think there's been some backsliding here. Might be worthwhile for Karzai to take a page from Britain's book and make some real examples, pour encouragez les autres.
  45. Ted Andrews from Canada writes:
    TROOPS OUT NOW!
  46. Nick Wright from Halifax, Canada writes: Winston Churchill: If only it were that simple; i.e., a clearly defined enemy that drastic encouragement would "encourage" the Afghan security forces to resist. There are a number of problems for the ANA and the AFP.

    Many of the locals were either sympathetic to the jailbreak or afraid to resist it. Those sympathetic were so because they had relatives in the jail, often for years, without any due process whatsoever, or they are so disgusted with the Karzai government that they are willing to hold their noses and support the insurgents--who are Pashtuns, whereas the Karzai regime is mostly former Northern Alliance Tajiks, and very prejudiced against the Pashtuns.

    Those who were afraid were so for obvious reasons--the insurgents live among them and would exact revenge for what they would see as betrayal of the Pashtun cause.

    The ANA and AFP contain both kinds of people--sympathisers and those who are afraid. Expecting the kind of behaviour from them that you would from Canadian armed forces or police is unrealistic, and I'm afraid will remain so--positive spin notwithstanding.
  47. Winston Churchill from London, Canada writes: I understand that Nick. I guess my point is that to hold somebody personally responsible, might move the police some way to becoming primarily agents of the state and not simply Uzbeks or Pashtuns in uniform. I'm thinking that the police chief, for example, is either complicit or negligent, depending on how you cut it, and is now trying to blow smoke to escape censor. Some of what he says is probably true (i.e. if there were NATO troops there they should have used their initiative, even if without positive instructions). He, however, should certainly be on the hook for this one, without fear or favour.

    I think that Voltaire's point was that in executing Admiral Byng, the Brits were making it clear to their Admirals that they expected success and that there were no excuses for failure: fear us (in failure) more than the French, essentially. Perhaps there was nothing that the police chief could have done. There was lots, however, that he might have tried to do.
  48. Catherine Medernach from Winnipeg, Canada writes: Winston Churchill - from what I understand, the majority of escapees were in fact common criminals which were let go by the instigators of the prison break - perhaps to make the job of pursuing them more complicated? It is these common criminals that many locals are concerned about because they are more likely to remain in the area and commit more crimes. And I dare say the Maze prison would be more secure. We have to keep in mind that the Taliban were in control and would be very familiar with the layout of the prison which was not constructed like ones we are accustomed to here. Plus, the plan was most likely prepared in Pakistan by al-Qaeda which has some very educated people in its ranks.
  49. Winston Churchill from London, Canada writes: Catherine. I concede your point. Just did a quick search, and it appears that 1,500 prisoners escaped -- about 1,200 common criminals and somewhere between 200 and 400 Taliban, depending on which source you believe.

    OK. I don't think, then, that a order to shoot should have been given (although I do think that shooting escapees who flee re-capture now might be in order). I still think that any soldier nearby, given that their mission is to help the Government of Afghanistan, should have tried to assist.
  50. LJ Brody from Canada writes: I hear roadside bombs are in fashion this season.........vroom vroom...boom!

    Sucks to be in the CF, but I am sure the bumper stickers help, eh?
  51. Nick Wright from Halifax, Canada writes: Winston: Yes, the local police chief should be held to account because "he should have done something", but my underlying question is: "him and what army?" In a guerrilla war rooted in the very population you the foreigner are trying to protect and "bring along" your have to allow for a great deal of ambivalence, unwillingness and downright hostility on the part of the populace, including the members of its institutions.

    Catherine: All good points, but the information on who escaped was learned after the fact. When the shooting started, and continued, all the Canadians knew was that the jail was being attacked. As I said before, it would be no shame on them if the strong likelihood of Canadian casualties in close combat without supporting heavy arms kept them out of it. I don't think the brass and the government are willing to risk that much. What would be the point, because it would just be repeated every time the Afghans fall apart, with no noticeable long-term benefit.
  52. Richard Roskell from Canada writes: Nick Wright, you stated that:

    "Many of the locals were either sympathetic to the jailbreak or afraid to resist it."

    I'm assuming you mean that the locals were afraid to inform the authorities after the Taliban warned them of a pending operation. Could you please provide a reference for your claim that the locals were afraid to warn the authorities?

    A matter of note is that the Taliban went to significant lengths to inform the local civilians in advance of the operation. They did not have to do so under the laws of war. In other words, in order to protect the civilians the Taliban were willing to risk the success of the entire operation even though they didn't have to. The Taliban went above and beyond the minimum requirement they had to show under the Geneva Conventions.

    I commend all combatants of all the Parties to the conflict who place such a high priority on the safety of civilians.
  53. Catherine Medernach from Winnipeg, Canada writes: Richard Roskell 'The Taliban went above and beyond the minimum requirement they had to show under the Geneva Conventions. I commend all combatants of all the Parties to the conflict who place such a high priority on the safety of civilians.' lol! yes, they are learning new strategies thanks to the advice of Al-Qaeda who apparently learned some lessons in Iraq. Of course that would be the one point you would focus on - what about the rapists and murderers they set free to prey on the civilian population? They are definitely poster boys for the Geneva Conventions in your book but don't think many will buy that idea
  54. Nick Wright from Halifax, Canada writes: With all due respect to my co-posters; if we want to offer opions/questions of benefit, we have to go beyond our projections.

    Richard: All reports on Kandahar describe a population split in its loyalties. Some want the Taliban to prevail; others want the central government to prevail. It is no mystery who is intimidated by the insurgents.

    Catherine: Sooner or later you are going to have to acknowledege that a large part of insurgency in the South and East is local Afghans.

    How else to explain (genuinely, without spin) the actions of the principal players?
  55. Richard Roskell from Canada writes: Nick Wright, can you please explain what you mean by "all reports" describing a population split in its loyalties? Personally, I see few reports (virtually none in the Western media) describing a population that significantly backs the insurgency. While I personally assume that a significant portion of the population supports (or is ambivalent) to the insurgents, I don't know of good reports on that matter.

    If you can flesh out my assumption with sound references, it would be appreciated.

    Can you likewise provide some reference for your comment that those who aren't in favour of the Taliban are intimidated by them? That would seem to be a general statement, one for which I know of no independent backing. Doubtless there are those who the Taliban make a point of intimidating: those they view as working for the Karzai regime in Kabul; or working for the foreign armies. But as far as the general population goes, is it black and white as you indicate? Do the Taliban make a point of intimidating all who don't overtly support them?

Comments are closed

Thanks for your interest in commenting on this article, however we are no longer accepting submissions. If you would like, you may send a letter to the editor.

Report an abusive comment to our editorial staff

close

Alert us about this comment

Please let us know if this reader’s comment breaks the editor's rules and is obscene, abusive, threatening, unlawful, harassing, defamatory, profane or racially offensive by selecting the appropriate option to describe the problem.

Do not use this to complain about comments that don’t break the rules, for example those comments that you disagree with or contain spelling errors or multiple postings.

Back to top