I’m reading a novel by best selling author Frederick Forsyth called “The Afghan”.


It’s a most instructive and well researched read, particularly in light of John Manley’s recent report on Afghanistan and his recommendation that Canadian troops remain in that Country beyond 2009.


What’s significant about Forsythe’s book is that it reminds us of a number of things that need to be considered when making a judgement about Canada’s military commitment in that country.


He reminds us that there is a whole generation of young men who were displaced by the Soviet invasion of Afghanistan and their nine year conflict with the Soviets from December 1979 to the spring of 1988.


During that period, thousands of Afghans evacuated south to Pakistan. Their children, now young men were brought up in refugee camps learning nothing but the Koran (sacred text of Islam, considered by Muslims to contain the revelations of God to Muhammad. The Koran and the Bible are both claimed as having originated from God and so both are called "Scripture" by Muslims and Christians respectively).


As a result, many of these men are unemployable and subject to easy coercion when it comes to enlistment in fanatical or religion-driven terrorist organizations. The Taliban movement developed and formed from these Afghan orphans and refugee children.


The second Forsythe reminder is that Afghanistan is ruled largely by a group of poppy-growing warlords who are constantly challenging government forces. The third reminder is the challenge of geography. Much of southern Afghanistan is a maze of mountains and valleys where whole communities live and hide in deep mountainside caves, making it extremely difficult to root out the bad guys.


The fourth reminder is the role Pakistan continues to play in the life of Afghanistan.


During the Soviet-Afghan war, more than a million Afghans were killed. A third of the population, an estimated five million fled to Pakistan and Iran. Another two million were displaced within their own country. In the worst year of the war, well over half of all the farmers who remained in Afghanistan had their fields bombed, and more than a quarter had their irrigation systems (crucial to agriculture in Afghanistan's arid climate) destroyed and their livestock shot.


The population of Afghanistan's second largest city, Kandahar, where Canadian forces are stationed, was reduced from 200,000 to no more than 25,000 inhabitants. Land mines killed 25,000 Afghans during the war. Another ten to fifteen million land mines were left scattered throughout the countryside. A 2005 report estimated that three to four percent of the Afghan people have been disabled by land mines.


Withdrawal of the Soviet forces in 1989 left the Afghan government in ruins. Islam was pushed aside; shared cultural characteristics were destroyed and the country was split into different ethnic groups, with no language, religion, or culture to bind them together.


When the Soviets withdrew, the Americans lost interest in Afghanistan and decided not to help with reconstruction, leaving the field to its allies: Saudi Arabia and Pakistan. Pakistan quickly took advantage of the situation and forged relations with warlords and later the Taliban to secure trade interests and routes.


Canada has been in Afghanistan since January 2002. There are about 2,500 troops there. We have lost nearly eighty soldiers. John Manley has recommended that we continue the fight for a few more years conditional on NATO partners adding another 1,000 soldiers. He has urged the government to rebalance its Afghanistan approach and show leadership in non-military areas. He acknowledges that the mission has gone badly with insurgent attacks on the rise and security fragile.


Mr. Manley’s recommendations raise the prospect of an open-ended war and that would be a concern for many Canadians. He also suggests that Canada's international reputation, is at stake if the mission ends next year. I’m not sure that is reason to engage in a war.


Manley’s panel members spent 10 days touring Afghanistan. That could not possibly make them expert in the affairs of Afghanistan and certainly should not be the basis for either withdrawal or continuation of Canada’s presence in the country.


He says it’s a lack of understanding of what is happening in Afghanistan that makes the war effort unpopular in Canada. I don’t agree. In my opinion, Canadians intuitively understand that the underlying Afghan need is reconstruction, not war.

The idea of having our military participate in a war with no foreseeable end is a disturbing possibility. The idea of arbitrary withdrawal without rationale and follow up is also disturbing.


I don’t envy the politicians in their debate but I caution them to set aside ideology in their deliberations and make the decision that is in the best interests of Canada and the people of Afghanistan.

W.E. (Bill) Belliveau is a Shediac resident and Moncton business consultant. He can be contacted at bill.bellstrategic@nb.aibn.com Atlantic Insight is a published Blog inventory of opinion articles published weekly in New Brunswick's print media as written by W.E. (Bill) Belliveau, who is a resident of Shediac, New Brunswick, and small business owner, operating his Moncton-based marketing consultancy, Bell Strategic. He can be reached by e-mail at mailto:bill.bellstrategic@nb.aibn.com

The Canadian Nuclear Safety Commission (CNSC) is an independent agency of the federal government that regulates the use of nuclear energy and nuclear materials to protect the health, safety and security of Canadians, to protect the environment and to respect Canada’s international commitments on the peaceful use of nuclear energy.

The Commission is comprised of two groups: a staff organization and a tribunal appointed by the Government of Canada.

The Tribunal has seven permanent members and one of them serves as President and Chief Executive of the Commission. The Tribunal makes decisions, independent of Government on the licensing of nuclear-related activities in Canada.

In October 2007, CNSC renewed the license of Atomic Energy of Canada’s (AECL) nuclear facility at Chalk River, Ontario. The license renewal was conditional on the replacement of two faulty pumps that force coolant into the reactor in the event of an external incident such as an earthquake or power interruption.

The Chalk River plant is one of the few in the world that produces isotopes. Isotopes are a bi-product of nuclear power generation and deliver the radiation used by the medical profession to make a quick, accurate diagnosis of a patient's illness. The thyroid, bones, heart, liver and many other organs can be easily imaged and disorders in their function revealed. In some cases radiation can be used to treat diseased organs, or tumors.

The flip side of nuclear power generation is the potential for accident. When something goes wrong and an accident occurs, radiation is released into the environment and people get hurt.

Two of the most famous nuclear accidents occurred at the Three Mile Island reactor in the United States and the Chernobyl reactor in the former Soviet Union.

It is impossible for a nuclear reactor to explode like an atomic bomb because the uranium used to generate power is not enriched to the point that it could trigger the chain of events that explode a bomb. What can happen in an accident is a reactor “meltdown”.

When a meltdown occurs, the reactor literally "melts". The temperature rises in the core causing the nuclear fuel rods to turn to liquid, like ice turns into water when heated. If the core continued to heat, the reactor would get so hot that the steel walls of the core would also melt.

In a complete meltdown, the molten uranium fuel rods would melt through the bottom of the reactor and actually sink about 50 feet into the earth beneath the power plant. The molten uranium would then react with groundwater, producing large explosions of radioactive steam and debris that would affect the residents of nearby towns and cities.

It’s my understanding that a nuclear meltdown would only occur if the reactor loses its coolant.

This is apparently what occurred at Three Mile Island and Chernobyl.

During a routine shutdown of the Chalk River plant in November, CNSC staff discovered that the two coolant pumps noted in the October license renewal had not been hooked up. AECL voluntarily extended the shutdown to facilitate the hookup and the regulator suspended its license until the hookup could be completed. That must have triggered a panic call from the medical community.

When the regulator refused to permit Chalk River to start up without the new coolant pumps, the Government of Canada hit the panic button and introduced legislation to override the regulator and force the Chalk River plant to fire up without the two pump replacements. The legislation was passed by all parties in the House of Commons and the plant was restarted.

Shortly thereafter, the Chairman of AECL resigned. This week, the Minister of Natural Resources, Gary Lunn fired the chief regulator Linda Keen, hours before she was to testify before a parliamentary committee investigating the affair. She was fired because she was doing her job. This despite the fact the Supreme Court of Canada has consistently held that the principles of fundamental justice require quasi-judicial administrative tribunals to be free from political influence or interference.

There are a number of issues here
(i) did parliamentarians risk lives by instructing re-start of the Chalk River plant
(ii) was there greater risk in the number of people who would be deprived of isotopes for diagnostic or treatment purposes
(iii) was the underlying motivation for the legislation a commercial fear that if the Chalk River plant was not restarted, it would lose its market for isotopes to non-Canadian competitors
(iv) does a Minister of the Crown have the authority to fire a quasi-judicial official for doing his or her job and in my view, this chain of events requires a public inquiry.

It may even be grounds for an election.

W.E. (Bill) Belliveau is a Shediac resident and Moncton business consultant. He can be contacted at bill.bellstrategic@nb.aibn.com Atlantic Insight is a published Blog inventory of opinion articles published weekly in New Brunswick's print media as written by W.E. (Bill) Belliveau, who is a resident of Shediac, New Brunswick, and small business owner, operating his Moncton-based marketing consultancy, Bell Strategic. He can be reached by e-mail at mailto:bill.bellstrategic@nb.aibn.com

Rumor has it that Bernard Lord; former Premier of New Brunswick will seek the federal Conservative nomination in the riding of Moncton-Riverview-Dieppe.


Speculation is that Prime Minister Harper will appoint Mr. Lord to Cabinet in the next few weeks as Minister of the Atlantic Provinces Economic Opportunities Agency and Industry Canada. According to framers of this scenario, Mr. Harper would also name Lord as “Regional Minister” for Atlantic Canada.


To make way for these appointments, Peter MacKay would be moved to a new Department of Energy & the Environment. John Baird would be moved to Defense. David Emerson would announce that he is not running in the next election and Jim Prentice would be appointed Minister of International Trade.

Some believe this would be a brilliant tactical move by Stephen Harper, designed to win the hearts and minds of Atlantic Canadians while laying a more sensitive hand on the environment and climate change. Mr. Lord brings impeccable economic credentials to his new portfolios.


Consider that he presided over the $750 million decision to refit NB Power’s Coleson Cove generating plant for Orimulsion. There is no Orimulsion available to fuel the plant. Mr. Lord promised and delivered the decision to scrap tolls on the Moncton to Fredericton four lane highway at a cost to New Brunswick taxpayers of some $50 million a year. That’s $1 billion over twenty years.


Mr. Lord presided over the decision to break up NB Power into five operating entities. The result has been cumulative rate increases of close to thirty percent over the last four years and the creation of a business maze that makes it virtually impossible for regulators to track the real costs of generation.

It seems we are about to witness a replay of Mr. Lord’s fascination with federal politics. Remember his on again, off again considerations about running for the leadership of the Federal Conservative Party. This is a man who spent seven years as premier of the province, yet in a 2006 winter poll, 60% of respondents could not name a single accomplishment of his Government.


This is a man who after resigning as Leader of his Party had to leave the province to find a job with a Montreal law firm.

This is a man who was mentored by former Ontario Premier Mike Harris and former Prime Minister Brian Mulroney. In fact many of Mr. Lord’s economic policies while in office were modeled on the Mike Harris school of economics.

During his time in office, Mr. Lord often boasted about cutting taxes. Consider that consumption taxes collected during his reign (gasoline, tobacco, alcohol, and the HST) increased by nearly $300 million between the years 2000 and 2006. Corporate tax collections increased by $10 million. Personal income tax collections increased by $163 million and property tax collections increased by $100 million. (Source: Auditor General’s Report 2006).


Granted some of those tax increases were the result of growth in the economy but a significant portion of the increases was generated from higher property assessments and hidden taxes (licensing fees, service fees, and alcohol prices). During Mr. Lord’s tenure as premier, more than half a billion dollars in added tax revenue was extracted from the New Brunswick economy. That is his legacy.

Under Mr. Lord’s watch (TJ July 17, 2006), NB Power’s debt increased by $216 million (1999 to 2006) while total public sector debt increased by $731 million. Mr. Lord talked about the need for a clean-up of the Saint John Harbour but did nothing about it.


He promised funding for restoration of the Petitcodiac River but failed to deliver. He dithered for years on the location of a new Court House in Moncton. He talked about convention centres but nothing happened. He begged Prime Minister Harper for funds to refurbish NB Power’s Point Lepreau nuclear plant but was turned down.

It’s hard to understand how the Prime Minister today sees Mr. Lord as his Atlantic savior. Outside of New Brunswick, he has virtually no profile. Inside New Brunswick, he is saddled with a record that would make most people wince. It’s difficult to imagine that Peter MacKay would surrender his ACOA portfolio to accommodate Mr. Lord’s candidacy.


Can you imagine Bernard Lord as the senior Minister for Atlantic Canada or Minister of Industry Canada?


Both positions require an exceptional degree of skill in salesmanship and trade diplomacy.

To Mr. Lord’s credit, he is fluently bilingual and as I understand it an exceptional family man. He should be encouraged to continue engaging those attributes in both life and the private sector.


I wish the man well but his time in politics should be laid to rest.

W.E. (Bill) Belliveau is a Shediac resident and Moncton business consultant. He can be contacted at bill.bellstrategic@nb.aibn.com Atlantic Insight is a published Blog inventory of opinion articles published weekly in New Brunswick's print media as written by W.E. (Bill) Belliveau, who is a resident of Shediac, New Brunswick, and small business owner, operating his Moncton-based marketing consultancy, Bell Strategic. He can be reached by e-mail at mailto:bill.bellstrategic@nb.aibn.com

With all kinds of political shenanigans going on in Canada, one might wonder why I would turn to the tiny farm state of Iowa for my first column of 2008.

The answer is simple. Iowa has been a traditional launch pad and/or deathtrap for aspiring candidates to the U.S. Presidency. It’s not that Iowa carries tremendous voting power at a U.S. nominating convention but it’s the first in a series of caucuses and primaries that select delegates to go to the nominating conventions that select presidential candidates.

Historically, results in Iowa have created momentum for winners and snuffed the hopes of those who thought they were winners.

Iowa has a rich agricultural tradition with its 93,000 farms and ranks first in the U.S. in corn and soybean production as well as in hog production. The State has been home to some famous Americans such as the late Herbert Hoover (Director of the FBI), movie-actor John Wayne and band-leader Glenn Miller to name a few. It has a population of 2.9 million, slightly more than the population of Atlantic Canada.

In 1976, Jimmy Carter came in second in the Democratic caucus but went on to win the nomination and the presidency. In 1980, Ronald Reagan won the Republican caucus and went on to win two successive presidencies. In 1992, Bill Clinton was trashed in Iowa but still managed to win both the nomination and the next two presidential elections.

In 2,000 both Al Gore and George W. Bush won their Iowa party caucuses but Bush managed to appropriate the Florida vote to win the presidential election. The rest is history.

This vote is important to Canada and the world because it is the start of a process that will lead to the election of the next President of the United States. That person will arrive in office saddled with a struggling economy damaged by wars in Iraq and Afghanistan, a chilling deficit, rising oil prices, a declining dollar, a climate change strategy that is out of step with the world and a healthcare system that ignores 20% of its population.

Iowa is the start of a process that will bring fundamental change to the United States or accelerate its decline. The outcome will be critically important to Canada and to all Canadians.

Going into the caucus sessions on Thursday, each party had a cadre of front runners.

The Democrats had Senator Hillary Clinton (still wife of the former president), freshman Senator Barack Obama and John Edwards (former U.S. Senator and Vice-Presidential candidate in 2004).

The Republicans had senior citizen, Senator John McCain from Arizona, the 9/11 media star and former Mayor of New York Rudolph Giuliani, little know Mike Huckabee, a former Arkansas Governor and Mitt Romney an American businessman, former Governor of Massachusetts and CEO of the 2002 Winter Olympics.

It will be very difficult for any Republican to succeed George W. Bush as president but if one of them could be successful; my bet would be on Mitt Romney. He’s a dynasty politician – his father was Governor of Michigan and a one time presidential hopeful. He looks like a president but is he a man of substance?

Nearly 70% of Americans are unhappy with the direction of their current government. One assumes they will be looking for change in this year’s election. We saw the sparks of change in Iowa this week.

On Thursday, little known Huckabee beat Romney by nine percentage points. It was a significant upset for Huckabee, a Baptist Minister turned politician. Romney outspent Huckabee 20 to 1 but Huckabee garnered support from “born again and evangelical Christians” who made up half or more of the Republican voters. That said, I would be surprised if Huckabee has legs beyond Iowa.

The Democrats offer the best prospect of change. Hillary Clinton’s inauguration would end 218 years of white male rule in a country where 64% of its citizens are either female or people of colour. Barack Obama is a breath of fresh air and would be the first black president in the history of the United States. John Edwards is the only one of the three front-runners who has a universal health care plan that could lead to a single-payer system like Canada’s.

It’s clear that Obama represents a promise of change but who is he? How much do we really know about him? Is he electable? Could more than 50% of Americans find their way to vote for a black man? When you factor in the Hispanic vote, the youth vote and the Oprah factor, I think it’s possible.

On Thursday, Democratic voters in Iowa selected Barack Obama, eight points ahead of Edwards and nine points ahead of Clinton. He has momentum. If he can carry it through New Hampshire, watch out!

W.E. (Bill) Belliveau is a Shediac resident and Moncton business consultant. He can be contacted at bill.bellstrategic@nb.aibn.com Atlantic Insight is a published Blog inventory of opinion articles published weekly in New Brunswick's print media as written by W.E. (Bill) Belliveau, who is a resident of Shediac, New Brunswick, and small business owner, operating his Moncton-based marketing consultancy, Bell Strategic. He can be reached by e-mail at mailto:bill.bellstrategic@nb.aibn.com