It’s Time to Rethink Canada’s Mission in Afghanistan
(This piece was published on the Oped page of the Globe and Mail on July 22)
The Harper government has hunkered down on the issue of Afghanistan and is committed to keeping Canadian troops on the frontline there until at least 2011. The government has constructed its own sanitized version of events in Afghanistan while steadfastly ignoring reality. Tragically, Canadians continue to die in the conflict---88 soldiers to date with the latest a few days ago---earning us the dubious distinction of having the highest per capita death toll of any NATO member in the conflict, including the United States and the United Kingdom.
In January, in response to a request I filed under the Access to Information Act for records from the Department of Foreign Affairs and International Trade, I received documents that made clear what the Harper government wants Canadians to think about the mission in Afghanistan and exposed its strategy for managing the public relations campaign.
At what are called “message events” where journalists are updated on developments in Afghanistan, officials from DFAIT, the Canadian International Development Agency (CIDA), and the Department of National Defence present the government line following “dry runs” to make sure the briefing motivates journalists to adopt what is called the “desired soundbite.” The soundbite includes a reference to the restoration of “the rule of law” in Afghanistan as a primary Canadian objective.
The “key messages” the government wants conveyed to Canadians via the media include the following:
· We are making steady progress on the ground.
· Afghanistan is Canada’s largest recipient of bilateral development assistance and we are among the top donors in the world with over $100 million in annual development assistance and a total pledge of $1.2 billion until 2011.
In the aftermath of the deadly bombing of the Indian embassy in Kabul earlier this month, as well as other developments, Canadians need a reality check to counter Ottawa’s soothing message that steady progress is being made.
The Afghan government was quick to point the finger for the murderous assault on India’s embassy at Pakistan’s intelligence service. While the Afghan authorities did not name Pakistan directly, their not very subtle message was received in Islamabad where it was sharply denied by members of the Pakistani government.
The bombing calls our attention to Pakistan’s duplicitous role in the conflict. Although Pakistan is depicted as an ally of NATO in the war, Canadian soldiers in Kandahar are constantly being hit by new recruits or refitted Taliban units that can slip back and forth across the border. Although from time to time the Pakistani military undertakes missions against the Taliban on their side of the border, for the most part they leave the Taliban alone in the semi-autonomous regions next to Afghanistan. Moreover, both the Pakistani government and the Karzai government in Afghanistan have been negotiating with elements of the Taliban to reach their own peace settlements.
The truth is that the regime we are supporting in Kabul is not committed to a version of the rule of law that is remotely compatible with our own. The post-Taliban constitution of Afghanistan is based on Sharia law. Under the law, rejecting Islam is punishable by death. When to the theory of the Afghan regime is added the practice, the picture becomes much worse. The Kabul government is the author of repeated atrocities against prisoners who fall into its hands. It is riddled with corruption, and its officials have been repeatedly linked by reputable observers to the country’s poppy trade, the source of over ninety per cent of the world’s heroin. For instance, last month the respected Times of London referred to the repeated accusations that President Hamid Karzai’s half-brother Ahmad Wali Karzai, who is the head of the provincial council in Kandahar province, is involved in the narcotics business. While the brothers Karzai deny the allegations, they are constantly reiterated in Kandahar, and have even been the subject of humour on Afghan private television.
While Ottawa stresses the amount of aid Canada is providing to Afghanistan, the ratio of dollars spent on the military mission compared with aid is roughly ten to one. If Canada truly wanted to help educate girls, as Ottawa says it does, there are more direct ways to do this in many parts of the world than by waging war against an insurgency. And the government’s constant reiteration of the fact that we are members of a broad coalition in Afghanistan cannot conceal the fact that as of this week 83 per cent of the allied casualties have been suffered by the armed forces of only three countries: the United States, the United Kingdom and Canada.
Contrary to the Harper government’s claim that the war in Afghanistan is going well, there have been repeated and authoritative assessments that reveal that the opposite is true. In February of this year, U.S. National Intelligence Director Vice-Admiral Mike McConnell told a U.S. Congressional Committee that the situation facing the U.S. and its allies is “deteriorating.” His assessment was that sixty per cent of Afghanistan was controlled by local warlords and that Taliban insurgents controlled about ten per cent of the country.
While Senators Barack Obama and John McCain, in their race for the White House, have been stressing the need for a greater emphasis on America’s so-called forgotten war in Afghanistan, there is every reason to believe that the fatigue of the American public with Iraq would quickly spread to Afghanistan if the U.S. military deployment was sharply increased there.
Although the Harper government has not yet leveled with Canadians on the situation in Afghanistan, Canada’s Chief of the Defence Staff General Walter Natynczyk did acknowledge this past weekend that Taliban attacks are increasing and that more troops are needed to counter the insurgency.
When a settlement does come in Afghanistan, and one is certainly possible between the Karzai government and elements of the Taliban, it will not create a country that is firmly on the road to democracy and a regime based on the rule of law and respect for the rights of women as the Harper government would have us believe.
Hasn’t the time come for us to end the bleeding of our soldiers in a conflict in which our vital interests are not at stake and the side on which we are fighting upholds values that are remote from our own?
In January, in response to a request I filed under the Access to Information Act for records from the Department of Foreign Affairs and International Trade, I received documents that made clear what the Harper government wants Canadians to think about the mission in Afghanistan and exposed its strategy for managing the public relations campaign.
At what are called “message events” where journalists are updated on developments in Afghanistan, officials from DFAIT, the Canadian International Development Agency (CIDA), and the Department of National Defence present the government line following “dry runs” to make sure the briefing motivates journalists to adopt what is called the “desired soundbite.” The soundbite includes a reference to the restoration of “the rule of law” in Afghanistan as a primary Canadian objective.
The “key messages” the government wants conveyed to Canadians via the media include the following:
· We are making steady progress on the ground.
· Afghanistan is Canada’s largest recipient of bilateral development assistance and we are among the top donors in the world with over $100 million in annual development assistance and a total pledge of $1.2 billion until 2011.
In the aftermath of the deadly bombing of the Indian embassy in Kabul earlier this month, as well as other developments, Canadians need a reality check to counter Ottawa’s soothing message that steady progress is being made.
The Afghan government was quick to point the finger for the murderous assault on India’s embassy at Pakistan’s intelligence service. While the Afghan authorities did not name Pakistan directly, their not very subtle message was received in Islamabad where it was sharply denied by members of the Pakistani government.
The bombing calls our attention to Pakistan’s duplicitous role in the conflict. Although Pakistan is depicted as an ally of NATO in the war, Canadian soldiers in Kandahar are constantly being hit by new recruits or refitted Taliban units that can slip back and forth across the border. Although from time to time the Pakistani military undertakes missions against the Taliban on their side of the border, for the most part they leave the Taliban alone in the semi-autonomous regions next to Afghanistan. Moreover, both the Pakistani government and the Karzai government in Afghanistan have been negotiating with elements of the Taliban to reach their own peace settlements.
The truth is that the regime we are supporting in Kabul is not committed to a version of the rule of law that is remotely compatible with our own. The post-Taliban constitution of Afghanistan is based on Sharia law. Under the law, rejecting Islam is punishable by death. When to the theory of the Afghan regime is added the practice, the picture becomes much worse. The Kabul government is the author of repeated atrocities against prisoners who fall into its hands. It is riddled with corruption, and its officials have been repeatedly linked by reputable observers to the country’s poppy trade, the source of over ninety per cent of the world’s heroin. For instance, last month the respected Times of London referred to the repeated accusations that President Hamid Karzai’s half-brother Ahmad Wali Karzai, who is the head of the provincial council in Kandahar province, is involved in the narcotics business. While the brothers Karzai deny the allegations, they are constantly reiterated in Kandahar, and have even been the subject of humour on Afghan private television.
While Ottawa stresses the amount of aid Canada is providing to Afghanistan, the ratio of dollars spent on the military mission compared with aid is roughly ten to one. If Canada truly wanted to help educate girls, as Ottawa says it does, there are more direct ways to do this in many parts of the world than by waging war against an insurgency. And the government’s constant reiteration of the fact that we are members of a broad coalition in Afghanistan cannot conceal the fact that as of this week 83 per cent of the allied casualties have been suffered by the armed forces of only three countries: the United States, the United Kingdom and Canada.
Contrary to the Harper government’s claim that the war in Afghanistan is going well, there have been repeated and authoritative assessments that reveal that the opposite is true. In February of this year, U.S. National Intelligence Director Vice-Admiral Mike McConnell told a U.S. Congressional Committee that the situation facing the U.S. and its allies is “deteriorating.” His assessment was that sixty per cent of Afghanistan was controlled by local warlords and that Taliban insurgents controlled about ten per cent of the country.
While Senators Barack Obama and John McCain, in their race for the White House, have been stressing the need for a greater emphasis on America’s so-called forgotten war in Afghanistan, there is every reason to believe that the fatigue of the American public with Iraq would quickly spread to Afghanistan if the U.S. military deployment was sharply increased there.
Although the Harper government has not yet leveled with Canadians on the situation in Afghanistan, Canada’s Chief of the Defence Staff General Walter Natynczyk did acknowledge this past weekend that Taliban attacks are increasing and that more troops are needed to counter the insurgency.
When a settlement does come in Afghanistan, and one is certainly possible between the Karzai government and elements of the Taliban, it will not create a country that is firmly on the road to democracy and a regime based on the rule of law and respect for the rights of women as the Harper government would have us believe.
Hasn’t the time come for us to end the bleeding of our soldiers in a conflict in which our vital interests are not at stake and the side on which we are fighting upholds values that are remote from our own?
Thankyou, that was the best reasoned position I've seen on our involvement in Afghanistan.
and great that it made the G&M
Also happy to learn this was published in the G&M, inelegant phrasing of the final sentence not withstanding.
Our losses may be severe, but like those in the Korean War, they aren't felt by the general population, despite its opposition to the war. Don't expect an Obama victory to bring relief. The war in Afghanistan is his idea of the Right War. He'll not let us off the hook. We'll be there until the Afghan government wants rid of us.
By the way, a recent article in the Independent revealed that Taliban leaders NATO is killing are the result of Taliban info. In other works, NATO is acting as a Taliban hit man. Whose interest this serves, Al Quaida's, Pakistan's, we'll never know.