February 10, 2016 - 08:16 — Timothy Gillespie
'The Liberals have announced they would continue the ground mission—in fact triple the number of the Canadians on the ground—and call it “advise and assist.’’ It wasn’t “non-combat’’ then and it certainly isn’t now,' writes THE HILL TIMES columnist Tim Harper.
The new Canadian role in the anti-ISIS coalition actually takes its roots from a decision taken 16 months ago when Justin Trudeau decided he could not align himself with Stephen Harper.
'The Liberals have announced they would continue the ground mission—in fact triple the number of the Canadians on the ground—and call it “advise and assist.’’ It wasn’t “non-combat’’ then and it certainly isn’t now,' writes THE HILL TIMES columnist Tim Harper.
If Harper wanted to bomb Islamic State targets, then the Liberals didn’t want to do that. There was principle at play and internal Liberal debate, but with an election looming, a third party leader had to put as much daylight between him and an unpopular prime minister as possible.
So it is strange that Trudeau this week has adopted the language of Harper in promoting his broader anti-ISIS effort because that language could cause him even more trouble than it caused Harper.
When Harper announced his decision to commit six CF-18s and 69 advisers on the ground in northern Iraq, he told the House of Commons three times in one speech that the advisers were engaged in a “non-combat” role.
Bookmark/Search this post with