This record is a partial extract of the original cable. The full text of the original cable is not available.

C O N F I D E N T I A L OTTAWA 000435 
 
SIPDIS 
 
E.O. 12958: DECL: 02/13/2013 
TAGS: MOPS PREL AF IZ CA ISAF
SUBJECT: CANADA TO PROVIDE BATTALION AND BRIGADE 
HEADQUARTERS FOR ISAF IV AND V 
 
REF: STATE 29380 
 
Classified By: Political Minister Counselor Brian Flora, 
Reasons 1.5 (b) and (d). 
 
¶1. (C) SUMMARY: Canadian Defense Minister John McCallum 
announced on February 12 that Canada will contribute a 
battalion and a brigade headquarters - a total of 1500 to 
2000 personnel - to the International Security Assistance 
Force (ISAF) in Afghanistan beginning in August.  Two 
rotations of Canadian Forces will be in Afghanistan for six 
months each, covering ISAF IV and ISAF V.  Canada is looking 
to partner with Germany, the Netherlands or a NATO contingent 
in ISAF IV, and with Italy in ISAF V.  While the official 
opposition Canadian Alliance Party has criticized the ISAF 
commitment as an easy alternative to military participation 
in Iraq, the GoC still has its options open, especially for 
naval and air assets already in the region as part of 
Operation Enduring Freedom.  The Chretien Government's 
unwillingness to take deployment steps that could be seen as 
prejudging UN inspections in Iraq made ISAF a more attactive 
option for the use of Canadian ground forces.  END SUMMARY. 
 
¶2. (C) While McCallum had discussed Canada's ISAF 
contribution with Defense Secretary Rumsfeld on February 4, 
the GoC had put off announcing this decision because it 
wanted this to be seen as separate from a Canadian decision 
on a military contribution against Iraq.  McCallum emphasized 
to the press that the ISAF contribution does not affect 
Canada's decision on Iraq, though he admitted it limits the 
availability of certain forces.  The far more likely 
contribution for Iraq is Canadian naval and air assets 
already in theater as part of Operation Enduring Freedom 
(OEF).  Canada is currently in command of Naval Task Force 
151, and is deploying a Destroyer to the region. 
 
¶3. (C) Ever since the GoC announced that it would not be 
replacing its light infantry battalion that served in 
Afghanistan January - July 2002 as part of OEF, it has kept 
open the possibility of sending troops back to Afghanistan in 
2003, when operational tempo made it more feasible.  After 
his January 9 meeting with Secretary Rumsfeld and discussions 
with other allies, McCallum told Cabinet that Canada was 
being encouraged to take on a leadership role in ISAF. 
Internally, the Canadian Forces complained that this 
foreclosed the ground forces option in Iraq, but they were 
overruled.  As Ron Hoffman, Foreign Affairs Director for 
Defense and Security Relations, told us, the GoC takes 
seriously its obligations in Afghanistan and wants to help 
ensure the success of the transition there. 
 
¶4. (C) Wendy Gilmour, Foreign Affairs Deputy Director for 
Regional Security and Peacekeeping, told us that German and 
Dutch military officials will be briefing Canadian 
counterparts on ISAF on February 18.  The Canadian Forces do 
not have sufficient resources available to lead ISAF on their 
own, Gilmour said, and they hope to partner with the Germans, 
the Dutch or (if France relents) a NATO contingent in ISAF 
IV.  Prime Minister Chretien has already discussed a possible 
partnership with German Chancellor Schroeder.  For ISAF V, 
Canada hopes that Italy will be able to join.  Gilmour noted 
that Italy has expressed interest in that time frame, coming 
after an Italian battalion is scheduled to depart Kosovo. 
 
¶5. (C) Canada will be working on a force generation plan as 
it sees what capabilities are needed to complement other 
partners.  Transport for the Canadian Forces is likely to be 
commercial, assuming the security situation in Afghanistan 
does not deteriorate.  We asked about Canada's views on 
possibly expanding ISAF beyond Kabul.  Gilmour said that she 
did not expect the ISAF mandate to change.  As for working 
with Provincial Reconstruction Teams (PRTs - reftel), Gilmour 
had earlier expressed concern about PRTs blurring the line 
between combat and peace support missions, but said that she 
recently had gotten positive feedback from NGOs and the UN 
about PRT efforts in Afghanistan. 
CELLUCCI