Canada votes for air strikes against Islamic State, 157-134

Canada's Parliament authorized air strikes in Iraq for up to six months and explicitly stated that no ground troops be used in combat operations.

Adrian Wyld/The Canadian Press/AP
Canadian Prime Minister Stephen Harper speaks about the government's motion on a combat mission in Iraq following Question Period in the House of Commons in Ottawa on Friday, Oct. 3, 2014. Canada plans to launch airstrikes against the Islamic State militant group in Iraq following a US request and may extend airstrikes into Syria if invited by President Bashar Assad's government, Harper announced.

Canada's Parliament voted Tuesday to authorize airstrikes against the Islamic State militant group in Iraq following a US request.

Prime Minister Stephen Harper's Conservative Party introduced the motion last week and it was debated this week. Harper has a majority of seats in Parliament so the vote was all but assured. The motion passed 157-134.

The motion authorizes air strikes in Iraq for up to six months and explicitly states that no ground troops be used in combat operations.

The combat mission includes up to six CF-18 fighter jets, a refueling tanker aircraft, two surveillance planes and one airlift aircraft. About 600 airmen and airwomen will be involved.

Canada is among dozens of countries that have joined the U.S.-led coalition fighting the Islamic State militant group.

"The threat posed by ISIL is real," Harper said in a statement, referring to the Islamic State by one of its acronyms.

"If left unchecked this terrorist organization will grow and grow quickly. They have already voiced their local and international terrorist intentions and identified Canada as a potential target."

The White House welcomed Canada's deployment.

"Canadians and Americans have fought alongside each other in several major conflicts over the past century, and we are grateful for Canada's further contribution against terrorism," a White House statement said.

Canada has more than two dozen special forces advisers already in Iraq and has plans for up to 69 advisers as part of an effort to advise Kurdish forces against Islamic militants after a request from President Barack Obama. The U.S. followed that up with another request for an air combat role.

Although the mission didn't need parliamentary approval, the government submitted it to a vote to show consensus.

Harper's government won the support of the opposition parties for air strikes in Libya in 2011 but not for this mission. Opposition New Democrat leader Thomas Mulcair said the Conservatives are plunging Canada into a prolonged war without a credible plan to help victims of Islamic State terror.

Canada's former Liberal government refused a request to send troops when the U.S. invaded Iraq in 2003, straining ties between the two neighbors. Canada then stepped up its Afghanistan mission.

Harper formally ended Canada's combat role in Afghanistan in 2011. The mission cost 157 soldiers their lives since 2002, shocking Canadians unaccustomed to seeing their troops die in battle.

You've read  of  free articles. Subscribe to continue.

Dear Reader,

About a year ago, I happened upon this statement about the Monitor in the Harvard Business Review – under the charming heading of “do things that don’t interest you”:

“Many things that end up” being meaningful, writes social scientist Joseph Grenny, “have come from conference workshops, articles, or online videos that began as a chore and ended with an insight. My work in Kenya, for example, was heavily influenced by a Christian Science Monitor article I had forced myself to read 10 years earlier. Sometimes, we call things ‘boring’ simply because they lie outside the box we are currently in.”

If you were to come up with a punchline to a joke about the Monitor, that would probably be it. We’re seen as being global, fair, insightful, and perhaps a bit too earnest. We’re the bran muffin of journalism.

But you know what? We change lives. And I’m going to argue that we change lives precisely because we force open that too-small box that most human beings think they live in.

The Monitor is a peculiar little publication that’s hard for the world to figure out. We’re run by a church, but we’re not only for church members and we’re not about converting people. We’re known as being fair even as the world becomes as polarized as at any time since the newspaper’s founding in 1908.

We have a mission beyond circulation, we want to bridge divides. We’re about kicking down the door of thought everywhere and saying, “You are bigger and more capable than you realize. And we can prove it.”

If you’re looking for bran muffin journalism, you can subscribe to the Monitor for $15. You’ll get the Monitor Weekly magazine, the Monitor Daily email, and unlimited access to CSMonitor.com.