:
Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
Good afternoon everyone.
[English]
Mr. Chair, members, you have chosen a very important topic for the Department of Foreign Affairs and International Trade. It's key to how we view Africa. The African Great Lakes region is suffering from a long-standing chain of humanitarian crises, including the present one in the Democratic Republic of Congo. The government shares your concerns and looks forward to your report on this issue. Peace, stability, and development in the Great Lakes region, and indeed in central Africa, will not be achieved unless there is peace, stability, and development in the DRC. The two are tied.
Let me talk a moment about individual countries and some of the issues there. Then we'll pull it together in a region. The humanitarian situation in the eastern DRC is the longest-lasting and most severe in the world. Two successive regional wars and an ongoing conflict have claimed close to five million lives. Close to 1.4 million people are currently internally displaced. Nevertheless, strides have been made on the road to peace and reconciliation in the past years, despite the recent outbreaks of violence in the eastern part of the country.
Only a regional solution will bring about long-term stability to the Democratic Republic of Congo and the region. As co-chair of the Group of Friends of the Great Lakes Region, Canada was intimately involved in the establishment of the International Conference of the Great Lakes Region. The conference brought together 11 regional leaders for meaningful dialogue that gave birth to the Pact on Security, Stability and Development, the first peace treaty in the region.
Canada, mainly through CIDA, contributed approximately $1.5 million--as well as a DFAIT team, led by our then special envoy--to the success. In this context, Canada co-funded, with the Netherlands, the November 2008 Nairobi summit, which led to the present demobilization and reintegration of CNDP, the rebel group responsible for the humanitarian crisis, in the fall of 2008.
Sexual gender-based violence has reached epidemic proportions in the eastern DRC. Canada has been contributing about $15 million since 2006 to support a multilateral effort to help victims of this crime. This initiative helps tens of thousands of victims of sexual violence through medical care, psychological support, access to civil justice, and socio-economic reintegration. We have made the fight against sexual violence a priority, and underline this at every opportunity, including at the UN Declaration of Human Rights' 60th anniversary...which took place at the Department of Foreign Affairs.
On December 10, 2008, we chose to bring to the forefront the extent to which sexual violence is used as a weapon of war by screening the film The Greatest Silence, a moving documentary that bears witness to this tragedy.
Since April 2006, Canada, through CIDA, has provided over $80 million for both humanitarian and long-term development assistance in the DRC. This includes $15 million for the support of the 2006 elections, the largest UN-organized election in the world, and the first democratic multi-party election in the DRC since 1960.
Current development support focuses on democratic and economic governance and basic health, with gender equality as a substantial cross-cutting element of all programming. To date, in 2009, CIDA has provided $14.6 million of humanitarian assistance, which is non-food, and $7 million in food aid to the DRC alone. In the past 10 years, through UN peacekeeping, Canada has contributed $235 million to MONUC, the largest UN peacekeeping mission ever.
DND's contribution to MONUC supports professionalization of the Congolese army, disarmament, demobilization, and reintegration initiatives, as well as justice reform. In looking for the future in sustainable development, we need to find how we can assist the country and the region. In an extremely challenging business and governance environment, Canada's trade commissioner service strives to improve the business environment and promote an integrated approach to corporate social responsibility as it relates to mining, natural resources, and energy. These are vital sectors for the DRC.
As of December 31, 2008, the Canadian cumulative mining assets in the DRC were valued at over $5.7 billion. We continue our regular dialogue with both the Canadian NGO community and the Congolese diaspora throughout Canada to ensure that our efforts are inclusive of their views.
Turning now to Rwanda, after the genocide in Rwanda, Canada identified the importance of women working together to improve their lives. To this effect, among other projects in this vein, through CIDA, Canada has provided about $1.5 million in support of civil society organization to promote women's strategic interests such as rights related to inheritance or violence, and political participation. We also provided assistance to help women build and repair thousands of homes in support of Rwanda's reconciliation and reconstruction program.
Our lead in this sector was followed by others. Women in Rwanda have assumed a greater role in society. Rwanda women continue to make inroads in the country's highest seats of power. They hold half of the seats in the cabinet and 56% of the seats in Parliament, representing the highest percentage of women lawmakers in the world.
In 2007-08, total CIDA disbursements in Rwanda amounted to $18.4 million, including $7.5 million through bilateral disbursements. As Rwanda is an agricultural-based society, CIDA's bilateral programming focus is on integrated rural development through private sector development, rural infrastructure initiatives, and local democratic governance. It helps strengthen the capacity of decentralized local authorities and rural associations to plan and manage development programs.
In Burundi, Canada was directly involved in the lengthy peace process ultimately leading up to the signing of the 2000 peace accord. Since then, national reconciliation and peace negotiations have led to greater stability. This has brought security sector improvements and progress in social reforms such as free maternal health care. In 2007-08, CIDA's assistance to Burundi totalled $6.3 million. From 2004 to 2006, Ms. Carolyn McAskie, a Canadian, served as a senior UN envoy and head of the successful UN peacekeeping operations in Burundi.
Since 2008 Canada has supported the efforts of the UN Peacebuilding Commission, a body created to manage war-to-peace transition in fragile states. Canada has contributed $20 million to the related UN peacebuilding fund, which provides supports for post-conflict capacity-building projects in Burundi and other states in the region.
On Uganda, Canada's engagement aims to assist the government and people of Uganda to lay the foundations for lasting peace in the region and in the country. Canada was among the principal international supporters, and contributed $8 million to the northern Uganda peace process. Although the LRA leadership declined to sign the final peace agreement, the negotiations have brought relative peace to northern Uganda, allowing hundreds of thousands of internally displaced persons to return home. Canada also provided technical assistance to the government of Uganda to support their efforts to implement the agreement on accountability and reconciliation. To date in 2009, Canada through CIDA has contributed $4.5 million to humanitarian assistance to Uganda.
Turning more broadly to the region, Canada also supports the Great Lakes region through regional programs supported by CIDA. One such program provided $4.8 million to strengthen institutional technical capacities of training institutions in three central African countries, especially the DRC, so that they can become centres of excellence for the whole region in sustainable management of natural resources. As well, $25 million has gone to the multi-country demobilization and reintegration program, which supports the demobilization and reintegration of ex-combatants in the Great Lakes region. It is the largest program of its kind in the world, and currently targets over 400,000 ex-combatants in seven countries, including Burundi, DRC, Rwanda, and Uganda.
Canada's diplomatic regional efforts continue to promote respect for international and humanitarian law with a view to protecting civilians and facilitating humanitarian access to those in need. We continue to work for peace and stability in the region through national and regional peace processes and peacebuilding initiatives.
Mr. Chairman, I'd like to add that our team on the ground at our embassy in Kinshasa and the high commission in Nairobi have close relations with partners in the Great Lakes region, including the NGOs, the international community, and the member states of the region.
Our personnel in Ottawa, both at DFAIT and CIDA, travel regularly to the Great Lakes region to meet with partners and obtain first-hand knowledge and awareness of the situation there. As you know, parliamentary secretary Obhrai visited the DRC, Rwanda, Burundi, and Kenya to obtain on-the-ground perspective of possible areas of Canadian involvement in the Great Lakes region. He represented our minister at the summit when the Pact on Security, Stability and Development was signed.
Mr. Chairman, we'd be happy to answer the committee's questions on the Great Lakes region of Africa. As you have already indicated, we have a combined delegation here from CIDA and from Foreign Affairs and International Trade.
With that, I turn it back to you. Thank you very much for this opportunity to outline a few of the issues that we're covering in the region.
:
Thank you very much, Mr. Chairman.
Mr. Sunquist, I want to thank you and your team for coming here today.
I am going to talk about the Congo, the DRC. You said that the humanitarian crisis in eastern DRC is the longest standing and most serious in the world. MONUC has indeed been involved there for a very long time and has cost the United Nations a fortune. You said that only a regional solution will bring about long-term stability to the DRC and the region, and that Canada co-chaired the Group of Friends in the region as well as the setting up of an international conference in the Great Lakes region.
My question is very simple: What has happened since that International Conference on the Great Lakes? The way I see the situation currently unfolding in the DRC is that last February, Ms. Oda, our Minister responsible for CIDA... The four countries in the Great Lakes region, Rwanda, Uganda, Burundi and the DRC, are no longer Canada's partners.
Is Canada dissociating itself from what is currently happening in the DRC? What does Canada intend to do? Canada should be playing a very important diplomatic role. We are not doing enough for the francophonie. Yet the DRC is part of that. I would like a little more information on that issue.
The international conferences yielded results, and things are going well. The situation has improved somewhat in Rwanda and the DRC. However, we cannot talk about peace. But since Rwanda is the country that exports the largest amount of coltan in the world without having a single coltan mine, we are entitled to ask a number of questions.
What is Canada doing at present? I don't want to know what Canada has donated in recent years nor whether Canada participated in MONUC. However, from a diplomatic perspective, what is Canada currently doing?
Thank you.
:
That is a twofold question.
[English]
First of all, I think you asked the right question, which is that you work to get to a point in time, but then what do you do to follow up afterwards to make sure that it works?
I think there are a couple of answers I would give to that.
One is that not only do we support through resources of people and dollars; we also support the people and the leaders of the region in tackling the problems together. Indeed, for the first time you're starting to see joint military action; you're seeing the establishment of embassies there. So you're starting to see the actual countries working together. It doesn't happen overnight.
The second part is that, as I mentioned in my opening presentation, Canada, with the Netherlands, co-funded the Nairobi summit, which was the follow-up, and which led to a political process by the UN, as well as other regional leaders. There have been revised accords that have been signed and followed up, and the present disarmament exercise is part of that process.
So there are discrete functions where we're getting people together...if you want to call it diplomatically, I'd call it a little bit more politically. We have different disarmament groups working.
Perhaps I could ask my colleague Mr. Culham to comment on the second part, on CIDA.
:
Thank you very much, sir.
You mentioned the very important role that Canada played in the past, but I must confirm that Canada continues to participate in events in that part of the world.
[English]
CIDA has a long and rich history in the Great Lakes region. This includes not only the four countries that we're talking about, but also Tanzania, which is part of this area of the world. As you mentioned, the conflict is much larger than these three countries. It encompasses that whole region--Uganda, Sudan, Tanzania, and the whole region.
did announce, three or four weeks ago now, that CIDA would be concentrating its aid in a number of key development partners. But what's been lost in that message is that we are not going to be abandoning these countries for bilateral assistance. While they're not going to be a country of concentration, we will continue to have bilateral programs in that part of the world well into future, in much the same themes that were mentioned by Mr. Sunquist. For example, this year, on the bilateral side, we're scheduled to spend up to $14 million in the Congo and $7 million in Rwanda, and we look to continue into the future at more or less these exact same levels.
The other message that has been lost is that it's not just the bilateral channel that we'll continue, but it will be the multilateral and the partnership branch. So we will continue programming with our Canadian civil society groups that are active in that region. We will continue to funnel assistance through the multilateral organizations, whether it be the United Nations or the international financial institutions that are active in that part of the world. So the totality of Canadian involvement in that region will continue to be quite significant for the foreseeable future.
I would simply like to answer your question about what Canada has done since the second summit of the International Conference on the Great Lakes which was held in 2006.
To answer your question, in November 2008, as Mr. Sunquist pointed out, Canada and The Netherlands co-funded the November Nairobi summit which made it possible to bring together all of the protagonists and to come up with a political process, at a time when the crisis was at its worst in eastern Congo.
As you know, that process was led by former president Obasanjo and the former president of Tanzania, and led, later, to all kinds of meetings—as you also know—with the CNDP. That also made it possible to arrest the current leader of the CNDP, a decision that Rwanda and the Congo made alone, since our common objective is for countries in the region to make decisions on their own. So, that was one of the contributions, which was perhaps not well known enough but which is attributable to the international process for the Great Lakes region.
I would like to add two other points on human rights, because significant action was taken on human rights, in particular women's rights and the issue of sexual violence. During the special session of the Human Rights Council held in Geneva last November and December, Canada insisted that the issue be put on the agenda and be made a resolution, which was the case.
A few months earlier, in the summer of 2008, Canada was one of the co-sponsors of UN resolution 1820, which for the first time recognized the close link between sexual crimes and problems with peace and security.
Thank you.
:
Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
I would like to welcome the team back here to again brief us on the issues. Thank you, Ken and the team.
To Madame Lalonde, welcome back. I must say, it's good to have you back.
Thank you, Ken. As you mentioned, I was in the region, and we did an extensive thing; you mentioned the summit.
I want to tell colleagues about the extensive engagement Canada has been undertaking in that region, working on many facets. My colleague here will talk about CIDA's involvement, but I was there with John Gauthier, who is sitting in the back of the room, who was also heavily involved. We are heavily involved—as we said, we were co-chairs—with the Netherlands in working with the Great Lakes region.
The challenges of the Great Lakes region are not limited to development. There is also the conflict that has been going on for such a long time, and that conflict has resulted in this humanitarian crisis. Paul Dewar was recently involved in discussions on the issue of sexual violence, which is so prevalent in that region. It is all coming out of this instability in the Great Lakes region, where there is a lot of fighting. This pact that was signed in Nairobi was one of the first steps we took leading to ensure that there would be peace and that with peace there would be more development and engagement taking place.
One result was the establishment of a secretariat in Bujumbura, with a Tanzanian as secretary to oversee this pact and oversee the development.
I would like you to tell us what the secretariat has been doing, and speak about how calm the region presently is, allowing CIDA and the NGOs to move in to do development and to work towards a reduction in the very high level of sexual violence, an issue of great concern to Canadians.
I know that the two countries have worked together, Rwanda and the Congo, to bring peace to the region, but let's talk about the long term: the secretariat in Bujumbura, and whether the Africans are actually picking up this ball by themselves and running with it, because that was the whole idea.
Please go ahead.
:
If you'll allow me, Mr. Obhrai, I'll answer in French.
[Translation]
Thank you.
That is precisely the point that was emphasized through the international process on the Great Lakes region. It is the issue of ownership; in other words, the countries themselves sat around the table. Bringing these 11 countries to the table—nine of which ratified, in 2006, the pact Mr. Obhrai mentioned—so that they could resume the dialogue was in itself a challenge. As you know, the Congo was recovering from two successive wars during which, for some time, more than seven foreign armies from neighbouring countries battled it out on their territory.
What is unique and important about this pact that was ratified by nine of these neighbouring countries is that it deals with all aspects of economic, social and political life affecting these countries. It is not simply a pact dealing with peace and security, but also one dealing, for example, with basic trade relations among these neighbouring countries.
If I may, I will draw a link with Ms. Lalonde's question. Trade relations among these countries is an essential aspect they have asked for our help with. This week, a trade mission will be traveling to the five countries of East Africa, including Rwanda and Burundi, since these two countries belong both to Central Africa and East Africa. This is a trade mission that they wanted, and on which they have worked a great deal for many months, and it is chaired by the Rwandan minister. There are five ministers from these five countries: Rwanda, Burundi, Kenya, Tanzania and Uganda. Private sector development is precisely one of the issues covered by the pact on security, stability and development in the Great Lakes region.
So to reiterate, that is what is unique about the pact, because it deals with all aspects of reconstruction and not simply with overcoming conflict, as was so necessary a few years ago.
Thank you.
I had a meeting yesterday with some representatives who had travelled to Canada from the east Africa community. I'm talking about Rwanda, Uganda, Burundi, Kenya, and Tanzania. We were discussing the country-of-focus initiative that our government has undertaken, which is to make our bilateral aid more effective and accountable.
There are two things they were not aware of. Of the $4.3 billion total that is in the CIDA budget, $1.5 billion is bilateral. Furthermore, this is a focus of 80% of that $1.5 billion, so we're talking about $1.2 billion being focused now.
Kenya is one of the focus countries. They were surprised to hear that, because they had been persuaded that all of the aid was going to be cut off. I pointed out to them that in addition to the $4.3 billion that is administered by CIDA, there are many other sources of foreign aid funding available to them from Canada. As a matter of fact--this is really important--from 2005 to March 2009, we have doubled the amount of aid to Africa to $2.1 billion, obviously not all from CIDA, but from all of the sources. They were really quite encouraged by that information.
I also pointed out that the other countries that had made the commitment to double their aid to Africa were still at least one year away from reaching the goal that we have already reached. So it's something that we, as Canadians, can be very proud of.
My question for our panellists is on the east Africa community. During the course of the dialogue I had with the group, they were quite persuasive that they were pulling together their equivalent of a European Union and a trade group and so on. Relative to the issues that we're trying to wrestle with in respect to the Great Lakes region, how much significance is there, or how does this concept of the east Africa community, these five countries formally coming together as best they can, and the fact that you have the DRC, relate politically and economically, and particularly, in the geographic movement of persons within that area?
:
I won't answer it for that long, then.
Our comments are that where you had warring states before, they are now starting to cooperate--economically, politically, militarily. In effect, that is what Canada has been trying to do, that they take charge of their own destiny.
asked the question around prosperity and sustainable development, whether it's the Canadian investment fund for Africa, whether it's Export Development Canada, the Canadian Commercial Corporation, or CIDA, using a number of instruments of the Government of Canada to move towards.... We can give aid, but in the long term, it's how to get sustainable development. And the only way you can do it as a region is if all the countries contribute to it.
The answer is very clear: we have to build those institutions one by one and make sure that the countries and the region benefit from them. So you've asked the right question.
This gets back to the other question, about what has happened since the peace accord started to come together. They're actually working together. I mean, to have a trade grouping? I couldn't have even fathomed that five years ago. To have military action together? Well, they were fighting each other.
In fact, they are far better off today than they were five years ago.
I'm sure my colleagues from CIDA can also help on this one.
I think you're absolutely right that Canada's efforts in Africa are made by NGOs, companies, and governments. In fact, what makes it work is that they're all working with the same ideals in mind.
You talked about corruption. Well, where companies may want to make sure that there are level playing fields, transparency, and no corruption, clearly within the CIDA program around governance you want to minimize it at first, but then get rid it. One of the greatest failures in much of Africa is around corruption, and the fact that resources don't flow to those who should be receiving them.
So it's working with educational institutions, judiciary, and governments at all levels. I'm sure you can find programs from either Foreign Affairs or CIDA, or in really different places. If you go to Angola, the Canadian Commercial Corporation is working with them in terms of procurement issues and making sure that there's transparency. That's a little thing just sitting out there, but it's working.
In fact, that's why we kind of look at the study that this group is doing, those kinds of areas that we should be pursuing, and the priorities the group has here. It's all designed to make sure that Africa, as a continent, is a partner for us. It's not just something out there for aid. The reason we want to be there is to help them help themselves.
I don't know if that gives you the answer. As The Economist would put it, I think it's civil society; it's governments; it's business; it's how it all comes together.
One of the biggest problems we can see is that, for instance, there are some countries in the world that believe in a little bit more corruption. If you look at Africa today, you find that there are some places where their public policy is swayed by those kinds of things. We fight against it. We bring it to the attention of the people who can do things and to the attention of the people.
:
Thank you. I will make some brief general remarks.
First of all, I can only emphasize the importance of the standing committee's study on the Congo. I assume that you are already aware of the importance of the DRC, the Democratic Republic of the Congo, in Canadian policy. We are very happy to be here.
There are good reasons to study Canadian policy as it pertains to the Congo. I came in late, unfortunately, and so I did not hear the presentations made by your guests from the Department of Foreign Affairs and CIDA. As far as we are concerned, on the civil society side, we note and deplore Canada's loss of interest in the Democratic Republic of the Congo, and we don't understand it. We deplore it and feel the situation must be rectified.
If I may, I am going to go back in time a little to make some comparisons, but very briefly, without giving any history lessons. In recent years, for 10 years, Canadian policy has focused on building sustainable peace and dialogue with other partners. That is because Congo is very important for stability in the region, but also because Congo plays a major role in rebuilding and kick-starting economic development in the continent.
Despite that, we seem to be seeing, and I reiterate, a loss of interest by Canada. One might think that since the last election, stability and peace have returned to the region and to the Congo, especially since the agreements, the Rwanda and Congo joint peacekeeping mission in North Kivu to combat the FDLR. On the ground, we are hearing that is not really the case. We hope that is the case, but we cannot say that peacekeeping and sustainable peace are there to stay.
There have been significant improvements over a large part of the territory, but I remind you that in one of the five territories of the province of North Kivu, 100,000 people have been displaced over the past month. Those numbers may seem negligeable for the Congo, because there is always a tendency to exaggerate, the problems are so enormous, but that is the case.
I want to take a step back to point out how Canada's involvement has been consistent and regular. May I remind you that in 1996, Canada launched a military and humanitarian mission to mitigate the crises: the humanitarian crisis and the security crisis in the Rwandan Hutu refugee camps in eastern Congo. That was a Canadian initiative. I won't go back over that mission, which was doomed to fail, and we could see why. Today, Canada's involvement in MONUC is limited to a military contribution of some eight or nine officers. In that regard, the contribution is somewhat lacking.
Since the signing of the Lusaka peace accord in 1999, Canada has been quick to provide political and financial support for the work of Botswana's former President Ketumile Masire, the facilitator organizing the inter-Congolese dialogue. Canada provided that support until the conclusion of the inter-Congolese dialogue, which led to the creation of a transitional government. That was up until 2003. From 2003 to 2007, at the invitation of other influential foreign countries involved in the Congo, Canada participated in the Comité international d'accompagnement de la transition (Congolese transition support committee), which existed to closely support the government. At the same time, Canada became massively involved with the Netherlands as a coordinator of the Group of Friends of the Great Lakes Region, from 2003 to 2006. In 1998, Canada appointed a special envoy who had the status of an ambassador.
In July 2008 that position was abolished, and since then, Canada's diplomatic position in the Congo has been unclear. What remains at present is an ambassador-at-large position, as it is called, or an advisory position that is now linked to Central Africa, with considerably less power, of course. That led to a considerable loss in terms of understanding of broad political issues in the region, what is happening, and knowledge of political players, which we had during that period.
I will conclude by saying that one of the reasons why we don't understand Canada's loss of interest is that Canada, as you know, has become a mining superpower on the African continent. That is how statistics from Natural Resources Canada present the situation. Thirty-three to thirty-four per cent of all investments in mining on the African continent come from Toronto, Canada. The only other country that invests as much—a little bit more—is South Africa, but it is investing in its own country. I will give you an example, and I am talking about the Democratic Republic of the Congo. In 2001, Canadian assets were worth $340 million. In 2007, Canadian assets in the Democratic Republic of the Congo were $2.6 billion, or eight times higher. In the Congo, Canada is the leader in mining. When we introduce ourselves, when we travel around now, people who do not know us and who learn that we are Canadian ask us if we work in mining.
Of course these investments come from agreements signed during rather troubled times. The contracts signed by Canadian companies—there are now about a dozen—were signed during the transition period, at a time when the government or the authorities were dealing either with people from Kinshasa or rebel groups. That is why the legitimacy of these contracts leaves a lot to be desired, and has resulted in the Congolese questioning, and lumping together all of these contracts saying that these contracts are leonine ones which have clearly lost some legitimacy, as I was saying.
There have been several reports, three, including a United Nations report by the Panel of Experts on the Illegal Exploitation of Natural Resources and Other Forms of Wealth in the Democratic Republic of the Congo, which singled out nine Canadian companies from among the 90 foreign companies involved for having violated OECD guiding principles. The United Nations Security Council did not want to take further action. But the Congolese government did. The Congolese government set up two commissions of inquiry. The Lutundula Commission, during the transitional period, raised the rather dubious aspects of most of these contracts. The report was never debated in the Congolese parliament. However, Mr. Kabila's new government, which was formally elected, set up a commission for negotiation, a commission of inquiry, on 60 mining contracts including eight or nine Canadian contracts. None of the 60 contracts were spared criticism, but on the list of contracts to be rejected completely were four from Canadian companies. The renegotiation process is underway, at present, and there seem to be some problems. Arrangements have been made for the majority of contracts. Among the last six contracts, where companies are slow to reach an agreement, are four Canadian companies.
I will conclude by saying this: Last year was a record year on the stock exchange. Mining securities hit unprecedented highs. What was the benefit in the Congo for the people of the Congo? Nothing. There were very few benefits for the Government of the Congo.
So for the Congolese whom we meet with regularly, life in the mining zones depends on foreign markets, the Toronto or the London stock exchange. As a result, during the period I mentioned a little earlier, Canada was seen as a middle power but an effective one. At present, Canada is part of the problem.
Thank you.
:
As a Canadian civil society organization in discussion with African civil society organizations, particularly civil society in Central Africa, we are asking questions about Canadian foreign policy which, like that of a number of wealthy countries, is promoting half measures to resolve deep-rooted problems. If we look at Central Africa, we should realize that this series of half measures that we have supported since 1994 has resolved nothing. At present, people are being killed and raped, houses are being burned and villages are being emptied, after having subscribed to the belief that support for a joint initiative between the Rwandan army and the Congolese army would be a solution.
We know that combatants are responsible for the massacres, and Canada, like the entire international diplomatic community, supports initiatives that seek to integrate rebels who are responsible for killings and rapes within the Congolese army. We then see that the Congolese army is unable to resolve the problems caused by the rebels.
We supported a joint initiative with an army that supported other rebel groups. So, each time we appeal to the international community, for example to reinforce the United Nations peacekeeping mission in the Congo and to ensure increased participation by wealthy nations, we wind up with a short-term solution being passed off as a local solution.
Denis talked about initiatives that Canada took in 1996. Following the disaster in Rwanda, more than one million refugees wound up in the Kivu regions. At the time, the Canadian government initiated a peacekeeping mission. It claimed that there was a local solution that would enable the problem to be resolved. This local solution was supporting the Rwandan army when it bombed refugee camps to force some of the refugees to go back home and when it pursued those refugees throughout the Congo. In fact, this destabilization continues in the Congo and has led to five million deaths and left the country in ruins.
So something that was presented as a local African solution—in fact a less costly solution for the wealthy nations—could not have turned out worse. For example, when we engaged in the inter-Congolese dialogue, we supported the inclusion of the various rebel groups within a national unity government. So, people who are criminals can become ministers, can share the power and not adopt policies on good governance or policies to fight impunity, to the extent that no progress is made.
Now, integrating the rebels within an army is being proposed, only to then see how powerless this army is in resolving the problem. Then we are told that this is a failing state. We believe that it is essential to reflect on these policies and on the refusal of wealthy nations to make a clear and effective commitment to peacekeeping missions in Africa.
After Rwanda, everyone said that peace missions in Africa were under-equipped, too small and underfinanced. Denis said that there are no more than five or six Canadian soldiers taking part in the largest peacekeeping mission on the planet. In fact, all western nations together, out of 18,000 troops, have provided no more than some 100-odd soldiers over the years.
Generally, when the situation on the ground becomes truly troubling, when there are problems, the troops there will hole up in their barracks. Canada and wealthy nations are paying, but they are refusing to get involved. Consequently, we wind up with peacekeeping missions on that continent which are quite ineffective. Afterward, local governments are blamed.
I would like to reiterate the request made by representatives of civil society organizations and churches in Ottawa to members of Parliament and the Minister of Foreign Affairs for Canada, which is for the Canadian government to more actively take part in this peacekeeping mission involving a large part of Africa. The Democratic Republic of Congo shares a border with nine countries and has vast resources. A destabilized and weak Congo has negative consequences for a large part of Africa.
I would also like questions to be asked about Canada's policy on cooperation in that region. The Democratic Republic of Congo is a country that shares one of our languages and it is the largest member nation of the francophonie. It has immense resources in which Canada has interests or, at the very least, expertise, and could contribute to development both there and here. I am referring to mines, forests, energy, electricity and transportation. I would note that this region is experiencing the worst humanitarian crisis since the Second World War. Yet, since the mid-1980s, not one single Canadian minister has set foot in that country.
With regard to the envelope for cooperation, we salute the fact that, after about a decade of attempts, a program framework for Canadian cooperation has been developed and adopted. We feel that this is important. Last year, the regular program envelope, excluding humanitarian aid, for the Democratic Republic of Congo was lower than it had been during the years under Mr. Mobutu. Despite the fact that we're talking about a country that has a key role to play, and despite the fact that it has been stated that we need to double Canada's aid to Africa, the envelope was lower in 2008 than during the 1980s.
Going last is both an advantage and a disadvantage. Many people have already said the things that I had wanted to speak about, but I fully agree with them. If I may, since I agree with what my colleagues have said, I will continue on from where Serge left off. Perhaps he would have gone on, had he had more time.
CIDA's current cooperation framework was put in place, and we are extremely pleased with it. We hope that it will have a significant impact in the areas of health, governance and women's rights, which we talked a lot about during the previous meeting when we arrived a little late.
This is not just about the Congo; it's a much broader issue. However, since I have but few opportunities to appear before you, this is the time to say it. In some way, this code of cooperation excludes players with important political knowledge about the Democratic Republic of Congo. We can talk about the Congolese civil society, which plays an extremely minor role in the implementation of Canadian initiatives and, of course, Canadian civil society.
I really feel it is important to mention this, since Canadian civil society organizations—mine, that of my colleagues and many others—have not been involved in implementing the choices that Canadian cooperants have made recently with regard to implementing programs such as Alesse, in the context of women's rights. Instead they have chosen to turn to multilateral organizations under the UN, which are clearly quite efficient in some ways, but which have at least two small defects. First, they are quite expensive. That little detail is often forgotten. Second, they are not required to report back to the Canadian government. There are few to no Canadian organizations benefiting from this support, from this work. It's important to say this because Canadian civil society organizations, including mine, have been working in the Democratic Republic of Congo for many years now.
There are perhaps several hundred local Congolese partners working on women's issues, who could implement projects. Finally, a project was undertaken that had been supported by another country, fortunately or unfortunately. It concerned the rights of women in Kinshasa and was an opportunity for us to provide information in all the national languages. Thanks to this project, we were able to turn the spotlight on this issue, but unfortunately, Canada has not undertaken the same kind of initiative. In my opinion, this is a significant loss.
That is essentially what I wanted to say.
Thank you very much, Mr. Blais, Mr. Lambert and Mr. Tougas.
The Congo is a huge country, geographically speaking, and the Kivu region is quite far from Kinshasa. I have never been there, but my colleague Mr. Dewar has just returned.
Mr. Tougas, you talked to us about the importance of Canadian mining companies in that region and the difficulties they have at present negotiating with the government, particularly since there are very few benefits for the population and for the government. That is what I understood.
In the DRC, is the fighting limited to the Kivu region or is there fighting elsewhere in the country?
You also said that, starting in 2008, there was no longer a Canadian special envoy in the DRC and that there was only a special advisor for Central Africa. Central Africa is an extremely vast region, so ultimately this means that there is no special envoy or advisor for the DRC as such. It's as simple as that.
Would the appointment of a special advisor ensure better understanding and, then, better ability to find solutions along with other European partners?
Do you think that the African Union is throwing spanners in the works, with regard to northern nations finding solutions for Africa? By the African Union, I mean in particular Libya, headed by Mr. Khadafi whom I mentioned earlier.
As far as I know, I will say it again, there are now between eight and nine Canadian companies on site among the biggest. We always remain on the ground with the voluntary commitment of companies to apply their own internal policies on the environment and in other areas.
With regard to individuals who have visited the Congo, the nation has not been able—and is still not able—to assume its responsibilities. I can give you an example. Part of the Department of Mines burnt down. The mining companies built the new building. Just to give you an idea, only two government employees are conducting the feasibility studies of some 100 companies. Do you see what I mean?
Currently, companies are applying their own, self-defined standards on the environment, hiring, local development. In some provinces, such as in Katanga, there is a civil society and provincial administrative officials checking things out, but probably in light of the status quo.
What we have heard about the current situation is that the effects of the financial crisis mean that all companies, except for three, have actually stopped operations by laying off—putting on technical unemployment—large numbers of individuals. That's all. The only answer I can give you, is that, consequently, companies are being left to apply their own standards.
With regard to the Canadian Embassy, based on my experience, it is very vigorously promoting Canadian interests, in keeping with its mandate, I believe. This is problematic in a country that is one of the poorest economically speaking, but also one of the richest in terms of resources. The problem is figuring out what Canada's interests are. Do they take precedence over the interests of the people? Since the review and renegotiation of mining contracts has not yet been completed, it seems that, for the embassy, Canadian interests take precedence over the country's development.
Thank you to our guests.
It is notable that in the last couple of days, about 60 to 90 people have been killed. As was mentioned, this goes on, this is regular. The sad thing is that this is normalized somehow, because we hear the stats and it gets washed away.
We've talked a little bit with department officials about some of the programs we're funding, and maybe some of the initiatives we should continue to fund, but one of the questions that didn't get asked, and you've touched on it, was on MUNUC. We know that they've been asking desperately for resources. It's a peacekeeping mission that has had the stamp of approval of the Security Council, so it's not a matter of waiting for a plan from the UN, which often is the case, because there is one in place.
First of all, would you agree that we should be supplying troops? When I was over there and talked to some of the Casques bleus, and some of the peacekeepers from Ghana and Africa, I asked, first of all, if they had seen any Canadians: “No”. Secondly, I asked if they would welcome them: “Yes”. We are seen as leaders, still.
Of course, as we go back to 2004, there were problems with the peacekeepers. They were actually abusing civilians, along with some of the others.
So they see us as being able to bring in some professionalism, some management that is needed. Do you agree that we should do that?
Secondly, if we look to corporate social responsibility and we look to Canadian companies, what is your opinion of where the government is going in response to the round table that was recently laid out by the government?
I don't have a preference; any one of you.
As far as the involvement of MONUC is concerned, you are right, there are problems in terms of the rules of engagement. That is why, when a top Spanish general was appointed, he resigned. Seeing that his hands were tied and realizing what the rules of engagement were, he stepped down. On this subject, you are correct. However, the amount you mentioned is enormous, and this has been going on for years. You must understand that this could last for many more years. All of the expenses incurred with this kind of organization, with these kinds of rules of engagement, with the available troops, have produced this result, which means that this goes on and on and costs an enormous amount of money.
Canada could always find a niche within MONUC where it could be effective. Whether or not it is in terms of training police, as we mentioned earlier, I believe it is important. Canada did so in Haiti and could very well do it there, given its ability. The problem with the United Nations mission is that no country providing troops is francophone. That poses a major problem, because interpreters must always be used, or, rather than speak, people give commands using hand signals. This always causes friction. This is an advantage Canada could have.
As far as the companies are concerned, if I may, I would suggest having a meeting specifically on that issue. In order to find out what we criticize the companies for, one has only to look at the report of the Congolese commission of inquiry. That will tell you—it is written down there—what the difficulties are with each of these contracts, and I could easily bring you these reports.