Q&A with chief of defence staff Lt.-Gen. Rick Hillier
'If we don't bring stability to places like Afghanistan, they will bring instability to Canada.'
JOHN GEDDES | Apr 11, 2005
Lt.-Gen. Rick Hillier, the fit 49-year-old who took over as chief of defence staff in February, doesn't like to miss his daily sweat. Even in the jam-packed final week of the month he took on the position, when the federal budget poured billions into his forces and the Prime Minister opted out of U.S. ballistic missile defence, Hillier squeezed in three midday workouts that combined running up Ottawa's Rideau Canal and skating back to defence headquarters. But he settled for a six-kilometre grind on a treadmill before an afternoon interview recently in his office, where he covered everything from how 9/11 changed defence strategy to his admiration for Afghan fighters.
Continued Below
How significant is the budget pledge of $12.8 billion in new defence spending?
We'll look back and see that this was a turning point for the armed forces. Finally, that huge reservoir of support in the population for the men and women who wear the uniform manifested itself in the budget announcement.
But there was also the decision to not join the U.S. ballistic missile defence program. What challenge does that pose for you?
My job is to make sure that, as part of our continental responsibilities, we have a very solid relationship with the United States. My focus is on the military-to-military aspect of it. I'm sure it will work out right.
Can you describe your relationship with Prime Minister Paul Martin?
What I've seen in my short time as chief of defence staff is a significant amount of time this prime minister devotes to defence and security issues. I'm pleasantly surprised. That was reflected in the budget, and it will be reflected in the defence policy statement.
You're referring to the major strategic rethinking that's in the works -- the first since the Sept. 11 attacks. How have things changed since that day?
Before Sept. 11, we were deploying men and women around the world, sometimes in very dangerous places, in essence as a reflection of Canadian values. I don't think anybody truly believed our existence, our survival, our security and stability depended on those operations. We were doing it because Canadians like to help out around the world. Since Sept. 11, we deploy men and women around the world to protect Canadian interests. We know that if we don't bring stability to places like Afghanistan, they will bring instability to Canada.
When you headed an international force in Afghanistan last year, you advocated linking defence, diplomacy and development. How should that work?
When the military goes off to a failing state, it opens a window of security which is actually fairly superficial. While you're doing security operations, you have to help in building the country, and you've got to enable humanitarian assistance to get through, or deliver it yourself, to keep people alive. I look at a Team Canada approach, a whole-government approach, so when we select a mission we pile on as a country.
What impressions of Afghanistan stay with you?
I was enthralled by the Afghan people -- hard-working, impervious to what nature and life had bestowed upon them. You had to experience their version of friendship to understand it. I experienced it from normal people we met right through to President [Hamid] Karzai himself -- and including many of the warlords. They weren't necessarily malicious, so we worked with these folks.
Did you respect the warlords as fighting men?
Absolutely. They beat the Russians pretty fairly and squarely and, at the end of the day, they were responsible for thumping the Taliban. Many of these folks were incredible leaders. Many of them had one goal: a stronger Afghanistan that was a centre of stability for the region. Others went down the road of personal greed, into the drug trade and a variety of things, but in many cases from insecurity because they didn't know what their position was going to be in a future Afghanistan. Some of them became very close friends.
Do you think of yourself as a warrior or a peacekeeper?
I'm a little uncomfortable with the term warrior. I'm even more uncomfortable with the term peacekeeper. I'm neither of those -- I'm simply a soldier.
We'll look back and see that this was a turning point for the armed forces. Finally, that huge reservoir of support in the population for the men and women who wear the uniform manifested itself in the budget announcement.
But there was also the decision to not join the U.S. ballistic missile defence program. What challenge does that pose for you?
My job is to make sure that, as part of our continental responsibilities, we have a very solid relationship with the United States. My focus is on the military-to-military aspect of it. I'm sure it will work out right.
Can you describe your relationship with Prime Minister Paul Martin?
What I've seen in my short time as chief of defence staff is a significant amount of time this prime minister devotes to defence and security issues. I'm pleasantly surprised. That was reflected in the budget, and it will be reflected in the defence policy statement.
You're referring to the major strategic rethinking that's in the works -- the first since the Sept. 11 attacks. How have things changed since that day?
Before Sept. 11, we were deploying men and women around the world, sometimes in very dangerous places, in essence as a reflection of Canadian values. I don't think anybody truly believed our existence, our survival, our security and stability depended on those operations. We were doing it because Canadians like to help out around the world. Since Sept. 11, we deploy men and women around the world to protect Canadian interests. We know that if we don't bring stability to places like Afghanistan, they will bring instability to Canada.
When you headed an international force in Afghanistan last year, you advocated linking defence, diplomacy and development. How should that work?
When the military goes off to a failing state, it opens a window of security which is actually fairly superficial. While you're doing security operations, you have to help in building the country, and you've got to enable humanitarian assistance to get through, or deliver it yourself, to keep people alive. I look at a Team Canada approach, a whole-government approach, so when we select a mission we pile on as a country.
What impressions of Afghanistan stay with you?
I was enthralled by the Afghan people -- hard-working, impervious to what nature and life had bestowed upon them. You had to experience their version of friendship to understand it. I experienced it from normal people we met right through to President [Hamid] Karzai himself -- and including many of the warlords. They weren't necessarily malicious, so we worked with these folks.
Did you respect the warlords as fighting men?
Absolutely. They beat the Russians pretty fairly and squarely and, at the end of the day, they were responsible for thumping the Taliban. Many of these folks were incredible leaders. Many of them had one goal: a stronger Afghanistan that was a centre of stability for the region. Others went down the road of personal greed, into the drug trade and a variety of things, but in many cases from insecurity because they didn't know what their position was going to be in a future Afghanistan. Some of them became very close friends.
Do you think of yourself as a warrior or a peacekeeper?
I'm a little uncomfortable with the term warrior. I'm even more uncomfortable with the term peacekeeper. I'm neither of those -- I'm simply a soldier.
Macleans.ca
WEEK IN PICTURES
