Rick Hillier stands up for the army he loves

A Soldier First
Bullets, Bureaucrats and the Politics of War
By Gen. Rick Hillier
HarperCollins, 498 pages, $35

Most Canadians couldn't name the chief of defence staff (CDS), and fewer still would know what he does.

But from 2005 to 2008, Canadians knew Rick Hillier.

In interviews and speeches, he urged Canadians to learn more about their military. He kept pushing for public and government support, even after the Conservatives tried to muzzle him.

His much anticipated book, A Soldier First, is both a memoir and a testimonial. It will certainly rattle some people in Ottawa. Hillier is blunt, writing from his heart and without excuses.

Prone to frank talk, Hillier is no-nonsense in print as well. But those looking for something more controversial than how he described the Taliban in Afghanistan ("detestable murderers and scumbags") won't find it here.

Growing up in Campbellton, a small fishing village in Newfoundland and Labrador, Hillier dreamed of a soldier's life even as a small boy. Now 54, he enlisted right out of high school, and quickly rose through the ranks in mechanized and armoured divisions of the Canadian army.

"I loved the army from the start," he writes, showing his life-long commitment to the Canadian Forces. Given that his early experiences came during periods of structural disarmament, government cutbacks, and slashed budgets, his enthusiasm for military life shows a remarkable dedication to an organization that, from his own account, was ignored or misunderstood.

Among his more high-profile roles, Hillier was commander of multinational forces in Bosnia-Herzegovina, and led NATO's International Security Assistance Force operations in Afghanistan. Yet the mission closest to his heart was his effort to "recruit Canada."

He wanted to connect the Canadian Forces to citizens, who had negative impression of the military. This was his goal as CDS, but he really pushed for it his whole career.

Public opinion improved, he feels, thanks to the military missions during the Manitoba flood of 1997 and the Quebec ice storms in 1998.

Although Hillier feels these missions caused the media to stop depicting them as "ogres, blood-thirsty demons and ill-disciplined thugs," he remained wary of "yellow journalism" in Canadian reporting of military issues.

It wasn't until Canada went to Afghanistan, though, that it recouped its standing among its allies. But moving to Kandahar in 2006, he says, couldn't have come at a worse time for Canadian troops.

The U.S. invasion of Iraq was a poorly timed and ill-advised mission, Hillier explains, which pulled resources and attention away from the immediate needs of the war in Afghanistan. He makes a strong link to how the Iraq War led to Canadian military deaths.

The war gave the Taliban morale and effective insurgent tactics just when Canada landed in the most dangerous part of Afghanistan. Oddly, he says he had no opinion on whether Canada should have supported the Americans in Iraq. On Afghanistan, he remains doubtful about NATO's mission, either in its deployment or its objectives.

Hillier retired in 2008. His successor is Walter Natynczyk, who hails from Winnipeg.

This is the first of two books he has contracted to write. The second will be on leadership. That book might give him the chance to expand on how Canada could have more of an impact on the global stage.

This retrospective is mostly diplomatic: he refrains from naming those he ran up against in frequent lively "debates" and emphasizes the collegial relationship he had with former defence minister Gordon O'Connor (O'Connor wanted to gag Hillier: "We want to see less of you" he told him after one media blitz).

While courteous would best describe his rapport with Prime Minister Stephen Harper, Hillier clearly preferred working with former prime minister Paul Martin and former defence minister Bill Graham.

As much as Canadians connected with Hillier when he was CDS, they may not agree with his view of what the forces should do. He is disdainful of the image of the Canadian solider as "peacekeeper, peacekeeper, peacekeeper," and critical of institutions.

The larger they are, the less he likes them. He criticizes the Department of National Defence, takes NATO to task, and utterly excoriates the United Nations.

Hillier is especially critical of the way Canada has used its military in multilateral operations. He writes, "Canada has never articulated its national interests."

This may be true, but he doesn't say what those interests are. Canada's interests are not necessarily the same as our allies. We're more dependent on trade and commercial relations, and more reliant, too, on just one ally -- the U.S.

A secure globe serves those interests, but paradoxically, were Canada to seriously use its military to achieve those interests, we wouldn't be able to afford most of what we now enjoy.

In short, we rely on others for security as a trade-off for economic stability. That means our military stays small, and relatively limited in deployments. None of that would likely satisfy Hillier, who spent a lifetime doing his job without the tools he required.

George A. MacLean is professor and head of political studies and a research fellow at the Centre for Defence and Security Studies at the University of Manitoba.

Republished from the Winnipeg Free Press print edition October 25, 2009 B10