This article first appeared in October 2017
Andrew Ellis is the chief executive officer of the ICEN Group and a former assistant director of operations at CSIS
"They're all safe and will soon be home." An accented voice crackled over the long-distance line. The call ended seemingly as quickly as it had begun. After five years of brutality at the hands of the shadowy Haqqani network, the Boyles were free and would soon return to their loving families.
While this crisis is seemingly over, Canadians who find themselves in danger abroad face an unmitigated and increasing risk. We deserve better from our leaders. An elected government and their bureaucracy's first responsibility is to protect their citizens. In the Boyle case, if the public accounts are accurate, they were rescued by the Pakistani military acting on American intelligence.
For an incredibly complex operation of this nature to succeed, it required teamwork, professionalism, finesse, intelligence and courage. The Pakistani forces demonstrated that in spades. While the U.S. support was rendered through other means, it is no less worthy of praise and certainly no less courageous. The American intelligence community gathered highly sensitive and obviously accurate intelligence. While that was taking place, the White House began a concerted campaign to pressure and influence Pakistan to take greater regional responsibility for fighting terrorism.
The final stroke was the American decision to share extremely sensitive intelligence with Pakistan. There is an enormous risk in making that call, given Pakistan's inconsistent record of collusion in dealing with organizations such as the Taliban and the Haqqani network. That decision would not have been made by a low-level analyst in the CIA but rather taken at the highest level of the U.S. administration. Sharing that information and pressuring the Pakistanis to act on it took guts and cunning.
The risk was large but the reward, as we have seen, made it worthwhile. A young family is alive as a result.
What did Ottawa do? What risks did Mr. Trudeau and his government take and encourage? What have we done to improve a broken system since the tragedy that cost two Canadians kidnapped in the Philippines their lives? Canada and Canadians owe a debt of gratitude to the Pakistani military and to President Trump and his administration for taking the risks where others would or could not. Thank you, America.
While it may be difficult for Canadians to swallow, given our sometimes sanctimonious and superior attitude to our American sisters and brothers, Mr. Trudeau apparently got Trumped.
The ICEN Group, a bespoke international safety and security firm run by former intelligence and law-enforcement professionals, had been working with the Boyle family in Canada since the late spring of 2017. Joshua Boyle's parents, Linda and Patrick, had reached out to us out of a sense of desperation and fear. While the people that the Canadian government had assembled to support the Boyle family and to investigate the kidnapping was well meaning, it seemed to have reached a point of stagnation. To Linda and Patrick Boyle, the kidnapping of their family members might continue forever.
As a former Canadian intelligence executive, I was not surprised by the fears of the Boyle family. I survived decades navigating the bureaucratic labyrinth that is the Canadian government. The fact that nothing has changed and may have become worse isn't surprising; it's sad. Since the days of former prime minister Lester Pearson, Canadians have increasingly relied upon our friends and allies to protect our way of life and our citizens while haughtily sitting in judgment on how they do it.
The Canadian government agencies who worked on the Boyles' case, and dozens of similar national security and consular cases, believe that they were doing the right thing. They exploited the scant resources that were provided to them. They are kind, generous, motivated and intelligent people. Where we fail is in the willingness to take institutional, corporate and political risk.
Risk-taking in the government is discouraged by political leaders at every level and in every organization. Where risk is taken and success is realized, those who had the courage to take the risk aren't recognized. Where risks taken do not succeed, the courageous people who stuck their necks out are vilified. Courageous officials and operators in the government work around the edges of the web of contradictory policies to succeed. Most often they do so at great personal and professional risk to themselves.
The very few steps that have been taken in an attempt to protect Canadians facing threats overseas have been an abject failure. Our government's aggressive stance on the refusal to pay ransoms has been futile. People are kidnapped through opportunity, not because of their nationality. Where nationality comes into play is after the abduction. Since the government's hardline position on ransoms was announced, a new reality has donned making this the most dangerous time for our fellow citizens.
Terrorists break the captives into three groups. First the Europeans who will pay a ransom. Keep them safe; they're a commodity. Then the Americans and the Brits. They won't pay a ransom but they can influence international decision making and if we hurt their citizens they will hit back at the terrorists, and hard. Then the Canadians. Sitting alone in the third group, huddled on a wet jungle floor. Their government won't pay ransoms and they threaten to punish family members who do so. Canadians rarely exercise or even threaten to exercise hard power. Canadians now hold no value as a commodity and there is no risk if they are harmed. So who will be chosen to be the first victim?
We can bask in the success of the Boyle case, but that outcome does not appear to be as a result of anything Canada did or was willing to do. The government needs to take responsibility to protect Canadians and stop counting on others to do it for us. As countless reviews and studies have said, the security apparatus in this country needs to be resourced appropriately and quickly. More importantly, the insidious risk aversion or perhaps risk avoidance that has crept into the Canadian government's psyche needs to be addressed. True courage and exceptional leadership is not in platitudes but in having the daring to take action.