Canadian Afghanistan
Just a quick word to keep this blog on life support. The Canadian military involvement in Afghanistan has become increasingly controversial up here. People are asking whether we should be involved in one of Bush's pointless conflicts, what good we are doing, and what the military action is doing to Canada's reputation abroad.
My first reaction is that Afghanistan in the only 'good' conflict going right now. That country was - and is - the home base of the Taliban and al Qaeda. The Taliban and al Qaeda are the real enemy - the religious absolutists who plotted and executed the 9-11 attacks. Going after those guys is a slam dunk. You gotta, or else you're asking for more attacks.
The second question is more difficult to answer: what good are we doing? Like the Iraq debacle, it was not the attack itself that was an operational nightmare, it's been the occupation and reconstruction. We were welcomed (to the extent that we were welcomed) on the understanding that we would clean up after ourselves.
But the staggering incompetence of the Bush Junta has prevented reconstruction. They've not only cheaped out on soldiers for domestic security, they've failed to rebuild and refurbish. To the extent that money is spent, it's spent on security.
It's like there's a leak in the dam, but instead of fixing the leak, they've chosen to buy mops and buckets to haul away the water. Under the current circumstances, the water will never stop. We're just waiting for the dam to break, or the water-carriers to decide to stop carting the stuff away.
Canadian lives and treasure are being wasted on a non-solution to a problem that cries out for a real solution. And to answer the third question above, it hurts Canada's reputation as a premier peace-keeper to keep carrying water for the Bush Junta.
What's the solution? Canada has always had clout in the world community greater than the proportion of our military strength or population. We've been a moral leader for a strong peace, and that's what we need to advocate within a NATO-led Afghan mission.
Canada should lead to build international forces in that country to control it from border to border. Afghan PM Karzi has been called the "Mayor of Kabul" because that's all the central government really controls.
International forces need to fulfill the promise of the first incursion. In order to establish a fledgling democracy, there needs to be, well, order. And Canadian forces can be a if part of that. Second, there needs to be investment. The opium trade has hit an all-time high there - clearly, people need to be able to make money in legitimate pursuits, and they need to be safe from extremists to do it.
It's probably too late to do those things for Iraq. But can Canada lead an international effort to do right by Afghanistan? Probably, but it strikes me that PM Stephen Harper is about the last guy to do that. He's already called his opponents "anti-Israel" and is a George W. in waiting.
And if there is no serious international effort to save Afghanistan, why throw good lives and money after bad? Do Canadians need to bleed to satisfy Georgie's twisted vision of a rampant America?
I think not. I think that unless a real strategy for victory - security + investment - is implemented, Canada should bow out.
My first reaction is that Afghanistan in the only 'good' conflict going right now. That country was - and is - the home base of the Taliban and al Qaeda. The Taliban and al Qaeda are the real enemy - the religious absolutists who plotted and executed the 9-11 attacks. Going after those guys is a slam dunk. You gotta, or else you're asking for more attacks.
The second question is more difficult to answer: what good are we doing? Like the Iraq debacle, it was not the attack itself that was an operational nightmare, it's been the occupation and reconstruction. We were welcomed (to the extent that we were welcomed) on the understanding that we would clean up after ourselves.
But the staggering incompetence of the Bush Junta has prevented reconstruction. They've not only cheaped out on soldiers for domestic security, they've failed to rebuild and refurbish. To the extent that money is spent, it's spent on security.
It's like there's a leak in the dam, but instead of fixing the leak, they've chosen to buy mops and buckets to haul away the water. Under the current circumstances, the water will never stop. We're just waiting for the dam to break, or the water-carriers to decide to stop carting the stuff away.
Canadian lives and treasure are being wasted on a non-solution to a problem that cries out for a real solution. And to answer the third question above, it hurts Canada's reputation as a premier peace-keeper to keep carrying water for the Bush Junta.
What's the solution? Canada has always had clout in the world community greater than the proportion of our military strength or population. We've been a moral leader for a strong peace, and that's what we need to advocate within a NATO-led Afghan mission.
Canada should lead to build international forces in that country to control it from border to border. Afghan PM Karzi has been called the "Mayor of Kabul" because that's all the central government really controls.
International forces need to fulfill the promise of the first incursion. In order to establish a fledgling democracy, there needs to be, well, order. And Canadian forces can be a if part of that. Second, there needs to be investment. The opium trade has hit an all-time high there - clearly, people need to be able to make money in legitimate pursuits, and they need to be safe from extremists to do it.
It's probably too late to do those things for Iraq. But can Canada lead an international effort to do right by Afghanistan? Probably, but it strikes me that PM Stephen Harper is about the last guy to do that. He's already called his opponents "anti-Israel" and is a George W. in waiting.
And if there is no serious international effort to save Afghanistan, why throw good lives and money after bad? Do Canadians need to bleed to satisfy Georgie's twisted vision of a rampant America?
I think not. I think that unless a real strategy for victory - security + investment - is implemented, Canada should bow out.
posted by fiduciary at 9:48 AM
2 Comments:
As usual, your commentary hits the mark! I'm very proud of how Canada's Army is facing the nastiness in Kandahar. However, I'm afraid anything with the title "US led" has ceased to have any credibility with Bush, Cheney, Rumsfeld and Rice playing "American Government: The Board Game." NATO....I worried about its survival when I heard musings of creating an EU military wing. I can only imagine it's beyond tough to balance "provincial reconstruction" with fighting the chimera called "Taliban." Sorry to ramble! Love your commentary!!!
Hey - thanks! I join you in being proud of Canda's fighting forces, but I, too, despair of what their sacrifices are in aid of. Without reconstruction and a true national government, where is the exit? I think the conflict, as it goes now, could go on forever. And nobody signed up for that.
Post a Comment
<< Home