May 1, 2006 News Items

This weekend was a busy one for national security policies, politics, and discourses. Here are a few highlights:

Canada

The Government of Canada has announced a full, formal inquiry into the Air India bombing of 1985 (to date, the largest terrorist event in Canadian history). The inquiry will be led by retired Supreme Court Judge John Major.

The purpose of the inquiry, according to Prime Minister Stephen Harper, is “about finding answers to several key questions about the worst mass murder in Canadian history.”

This decision differs from the conclusions of Bob Rae’s November 2005 report for the Canadian government, which called for a focused inquiry but stopped short of recommending a full, formal inquiry.

The Commission’s terms of reference call for it to report on these questions (as presented on the Government of Canada website):

· whether any systemic issues relating to the assessment of the potential threat posed by Sikh terrorism prior to 1985, and the response to that threat by Canadian government officials, have been resolved and, if not, the further changes in practice or legislation that are required to resolve them,
· whether any systemic problems in the effective cooperation between government departments and agencies, including the Canadian Security Intelligence Service and the Royal Canadian Mounted Police, in the investigation of the bombing of Air India Flight 182, either before or after June 23, 1985, have been resolved and, if not, the further changes in practice or legislation that are required to resolve them,
· the manner in which the Canadian government should address the challenge, as revealed by the investigation and prosecutions in the Air India matter, of establishing a reliable and workable relationship between security intelligence and evidence that can be used in a criminal trial,
· whether Canada's existing legal framework provides adequate constraints on terrorist financing in, from or through Canada,
· whether existing practices or legislation provide adequate protection for witnesses against intimidation in the course of the investigation or prosecution of terrorism cases, and
· whether the unique challenges presented by the prosecution of terrorism cases are adequately addressed by existing practices or legislation and, if not, the changes in practice or legislation that are required to address these challenges, in particular whether there is merit in having terrorism cases heard by a panel of three judges.
· whether further changes in practice or legislation are required to address the specific aviation security breaches associated with the Air India Flight 182 bombing, particularly those relating to the screening of passengers and their baggage.
The Inquiry’s terms of reference also call for the Commissioner to accept as conclusive or to give such weight as he considers appropriate to the findings of other examinations of the circumstances surrounding the bombing of Air India Flight 182.
Note that the focus of the inquiry – and its mandate – is the production of a report on ‘lessons learned,’ as opposed to formal conclusions about guilt, innocence, or wrongdoing.

US

The US State Department has released its annual Country Reports on Terrorism document, with data from the US National Counterterrorism Center. The report proposes that terrorist attacks worldwide quadrupled in 2005, with a total tally of 11,111 incidents. 30% of terrorist attacks took place in Iraq. Closer reading shows that the report methodology casts a much wider and more comprehensive net than the one used in previous years, which limits comparability.

The Washington Post notes that the State Department report uses the term ‘the long war’ to describe current global anti-terrorism efforts. This fits with current US administration discourses on the ‘war on terror.’

The report describes terrorist attacks as “premeditated, politically motivated violence perpetrated against noncombatant targets.” This definition is similar to that used by the US State Department, although the full State Department definition (Title 22 of US Code, Section 2656f(d) ) has traditionally added “by sub-national groups or clandestine agents, usually intended to influence an audience.”

The report tracks trends in organization and methodology, and it emphasizes an increase in ideologically motivated attacks perpetrated by unskilled / untrained and independent groups. Iran is mentioned as the “most active state sponsor of terrorism.”

The State Department has harsh words for Canada as well. It argues that Canada has become a safe haven for Islamic terrorists, and it proposes that open immigration policies and ‘weak’ counterterrorism efforts are to blame. Of note, the report argues that the political fallout from the (ongoing) Arar Inquiry is to blame for poor information-sharing between Canada and the US. It is clear from the report that, contrary to the Canadian position, the US still believes that Maher Arar was or is involved in terrorist activity. From the report: “However, media outcry over the U.S. deportation to Syria of a dual nationality
Canadian/Syrian terror suspect, and his alleged mistreatment there, threatened to disrupt
valuable information sharing arrangements between the United States and Canada.” Note that the report uses the word ‘alleged,’ which does not fit with the publicized and official conclusions of the Arar Commission’s Fact Finding Report, where Maher Arar’s experience in Syria is clearly described as torture. In fact, the ongoing Commission of Inquiry is not actually referred to in the State Department report; instead, the ‘fallout’ from the Arar case is described as being grounded in politics and media pressure. The State Department report also points out that ‘only one person’ has been arrested under the C-36 Anti-Terrorism legislation in Canada, with the implication being that countries that are serious about counter-terrorism ought to be arresting more people. Interestingly, the examples the report uses to condemn Canada are (in addition to Arar) the ‘secret trial five’ currently being held on Immigration Security Certificates (some since 2001), as well as the Khadr family’s activities. How the long-standing detention of these men (none of whom were apprehended in 2005) indicates a heightened terrorist presence in Canada or poor Canadian security efforts is unclear. The report was obviously written prior to the banning of the LTTE in Canada, as it identifies this as a problem area. I highly recommend reading the section of the report that relates to Canada, as it gives a brief but telling example of how the US administration and the Canadian public appear to be on completely different wavelengths regarding counter-terrorism (the position of the new Canadian government remains to be seen).

The report describes the Internet as a “Virtual Safe Haven” that has “empowered the enemy with the ability to produce and sustain its own public media outlets and to present its own distorted view of the world to further its agenda.” By contrast, Iraq is NOT currently described as a terrorist safe haven.

- Mike