Stephen Harper has tied himself to the Manley Report on Afghanistan, and is prepared to wager the survival of his government on it. Fine. It’s time Canadians had a real debate on the Canadian military mission in Afghanistan, and the hustings is the best place for it.
Harper is determined to extend Canada’s military commitment in Kandahar beyond 2009. To make himself look tough, Harper has dressed himself in the garb of the Manley report and has issued an ultimatum to NATO: unless the alliance provides an additional one thousand troops in the Afghan south by February 2009, Canada will pull its own troops out.
The ultimatum is a phony. NATO has 35,000 troops in Afghanistan. Units are arriving and leaving all the time. Shifting a few more troops to the south in time for Harper’s deadline is no big deal, and it won’t be necessary to convince the French, the Germans, the Spaniards or the Italians to send the troops. It will be easy enough to do it with U.S. and British units.
All this posturing is intended to convince Canadians that Harper is standing up to the Big Guys and not simply pandering to the Bush White House.
Public opinion polls have made it clear that Canadians want our military operation in Kandahar ended as soon as possible. If not now, then at least by February 2009. They are dead set against any extension beyond that date. The polls show that Canadians do not believe in the mission, in the idea that the war against the insurgency is a war for human rights and democracy.
To date, only one political party has taken a consistent position that is balanced, based on Canadian values, and gives voice to what Canadians actually want, and that is the federal NDP.
In his recent speech at Carleton University, NDP leader Jack Layton offered a way ahead for Canada in Afghanistan: pull our combat units out of the south and pay serious heed to the provision of aid to Afghanistan that is not tied to our military operation---so far Canada’s military spending in Afghanistan has outpaced the aid effort ten to one. His speech concludes with a summary of how a Canadian foreign policy can truly contribute to the achievement of peace and human development, rather than scoring brownie points with the White House, which is the main objective of Stephen Harper’s foreign policy.
Here is an excerpt from Layton’s speech:
“We should be using the considerable skills and expertise of Canadians to bring the various actors in Afghanistan to the table.
We should be working to put in place an effective disarmament programme.
65% of Afghans say that disarmament is the most important step toward improving security in Afghanistan.
But the current effort has not gone far enough to make a significant impact.
Taking the path to peace through diplomacy also means involving regional actors in discussions. Pakistan in particular.
Regional cooperation is vital to any successful strategy for regional security and peace.
The path to peace requires a political, not a military, approach.
To carry out this vision, the key international body involved in Afghanistan must be the UN, not NATO.
Unlike NATO, the UN’s explicit mandate is to preserve and promote international peace and security.
The UN agencies tasked with carrying out this mandate have a vital role to play in meeting the challenges of Afghanistan:
UNICEF
The United Nations Development fund for Women
The World Health Organization
The United Nations Development Programme
The United Nations Disarmament Commission
And of course, the United Nations Peacebuildng Commission headed up by Canadian Carolyn McAskie”
For the most part, the media has dismissed the NDP position as isolationist, which it is not. Layton’s position is balanced and genuinely multilateralist. It is in line with the best thinking on Afghanistan that has emerged in the West as well as in Afghanistan itself because it recognizes that this conflict will never be settled by arms alone.
Canadians should be trusted with the Afghanistan issue during an election campaign. Let the parties lay out their positions in a national debate and let the country decide.
For this to happen, Stephane Dion will have to get off the fence, stand up to Harper’s ultimatum, and commit the Liberals to voting against Harper’s coming confidence motion on Afghanistan.
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
9 comments:
I hate the UN as well.
Let's use this excuse to kill it off.
No to the UN
No to multilateralism
Si vis pacem, para bellum.
Whooee! The actual motion is yet to be seen but the general opinion seems to be that Harper wants to adopt some parts of the Manley Report while ignoring others.
He's all for the extension of the combat mission as per Manley. But what about Manley's aid, diplomacy and communication suggestions?
Manley pointed out how lopsided the efforts are. If Harper wants to adopt Manley's recommendations, he should pay attention to all of them -- not just the ones that appeal to a War Prime Minister.
JB
I don't agree with the idea of giving Harper an election based on Afghanistan as he wishes.
While it would be valuable to have a reliable, non-biased poll which determined whether Canadians think we should withdraw from Afghanistan or not, and when and whether we should continue to play any (non-combat) role or not, I don't see an election as providing the answer. People will vote based on a variety of issues and even some who think we should withdraw from Afghanistan will vote for Harper because of financial self-interests or other reasons.
2500 troops are risking their lives in Afghanistan but what will be the toll for Canadians and immigrants living in poverty, for not acting on global warming, as well as for a whole slew of other issues involving social programs, justice, safety, jobs, economy, etc? I can't support the idea of Afganistan pushing all these other matters to the side.
I am sure Harper thinks Afghanistan will be a great election issue. H knows that he will lose no votes whatsoever on it (many conservatives support extending the mission and this isn't the highest priority item for those who don't) and if he can further split the vote for the other parties (and Afghanistan is a great issue for doing this) and thereby gain some seats, he could get a slim majority or at least an increased minority.
But, why would anyone except for Harper-supporters, want to help Harper in this matter? Let's insist that the election be timed by the opposition and not by Harper and be on all issues which affect the lives of so many Canadians and not on one issue of Harper's choosing.
It's illegal, unjust, murderous, wasteful and unwinable. Here's why!
Richard Sharp
http://www.smirkingchimp.com/thread/11803
If you actually spent some time studying waht is going on in Afghanistan, or talked with teh tropps who ahve served over there, you would see what a great job we are doing there.
Please stop this simple minded NDP rhetoric of "Taliban Jack" and use your own judgement.
In a world of bullies (yes the bad people of Afghanistan are bullies) you need to have a BIG stick to keep them in line. Without that, we will accomplish nothing.
The problem is with the media. When The NDP has to courage to take the correct position, such as with their position on Afghanistan, the media ridicule that position and make it sound as if it is coming from planer Mars. Any position not acceptable to the Washington consensus is treated that way in the mainstream media.
Should we be in Afghanistan?
if a democratically elected nation asks for assistance, we have a Humanitarian obligation to render assistance.
Education is the key to opening the door of poverty, plight and flight.
We can't leave Afghanistan now, it's an international open wound and obligation for all democracies.
We can't go into a combat zone without abilities either. [thats like being the tethered goat invited to a banquet]
Through dialog and education we can win this, but we are lacking a major key to unlocking the door of progress... we require the assistance of the Islamic community...
Where are they in this fiasco of human suffering?
Some here would rather we not get involved with the internal affairs of other nations but we have in the past met our international obligations to the struggle of humanity when asked and even contributed when not asked...
We can and should be asking for volunteers which is after all the Canadian way.
Is it just me or is the Canadian political scene in a drought of faceless inept-lectuals
incapable of accepting decisions previously made and living with the consequences of those decisions good or bad?
Where are our political visionaries...
and the plan for where we want to be as a society in ten, twenty, fifty and one hundred years from now...
Currently I see nothing but darkness.
some political machinations want to emulate a pax "Project for a new Canadian Century" ala David Frum and the "New" Canadian Neo-Cons...
the current cabal is intent on leading us down the same path that the Bush Cabal lead the Yanks...
Our national reputation is "only just" hanging by a thread...
The only light I see is with the hollowed out core of whats left of the National PC's [now the Progressive Canadians]...
but without leadership, finances and hope, there's nothing there either...
whats a visionary to do?
Currently all I see is a featureless world of darkness.
Where at one time I saw Canada as a leader of light, I see it now as a reduced pawn and follower of darkness united.
no vision, no plan, no hope to share
living in a bare overpopulated world of no future
with the masses outside,
dying to get in.
where are our visionaries to pick up the reins.
we come from a present and seem complacent to follow the blind and the heartless into their planned future ghetto's made specifically for us by US
I am Canadian, at home with the brave.
I've done my time in War and Peace, and passed the torch... I hope our politicals wont let them down as they did my generation.
Appreciated this post, as I have others in the past. So, thanks.
Your point about Canadastan being a hustings-worth issue is well taken, makes sense.
But for my part, when I track Canuck politics, I have a kneejerk and emotional 'Anyone but Harper & The Cons' kind of reaction.
My fear:
Given Iggy's toy-soldier musings about Canada's "military-security" role post-2009 -- and Iggy's implicit critique of the NDP position vis-à-vis Afghanistan -- the Cons would win any vote on the issue.
After all, our news orgs (even the CBC) continue to bring us rather romantic images of Canada's role there.
And if Canadians perceive a need for war, they might err on the side of carnivores.
(That said, our political carivores are even softer and pudgier than America's neocons...)
Next week Wednesday The CBC will have a show about Canada's role in The Afghanistan War & peace ..
they asked me to write my opinion /based on one of my post /
here it is.
This war In Afghanistan is about 6 years old and we are not one inch closer to see what the outcome will be or should be.
No clear objectives reasons to be there with arms .
I say it is no More Legitimate then when the Sovjets were occupying this sad Land for ten years and with about 100 000 armed forces and killing a million of them… ended up without the slightest change in their way of life ..
..
Why we think it is our right To force the people to change their life as we please .?? Afghanistan is a sovereign state ..can't we agree on that? They will never be different The Islam is their Rule and way of life .. Their law.
This so called "Mission " is a misguided misadventure what cannot land in any
decent fashion .. Canada was drawn into by the USA / Bush/ By threatening
our economy ..it was a ransom situation we went there for peacekeeping purposes under the Nato 's umbrella.
It started out about getting the * bad guys * and punish THEM. They
are Ghosts now* no one knows where the original "enemy" now.
No one knows what is the goal and everybody knows it became a quagmire
without clear achievable Goals.
This all Changed when Harper actively enthusiastically applauded and accepted For our military the combat role . and two years later more then 70 young men buried and hundreds injured .. we still at the question why are we there ?
No one can "control" that land and those people. Our Troops are just like a pepper spray
on that Huge unforgiving land * almost inhabitable For our guys . We
are mostly forced DEFENDING our positions ..
the Soviets needed 10 years to admit it can't work. Are not we smarter then them??
It is a pure reckless waste of human lives and money.. /yes taxpayers money ./
This so much Touted Manley 's panel and report is a dishonest piece of work.. It Doesn't really answer any of the pressing questions.. inadequate and was "bought up" by Harper . He knew exactly what to expect from this panel out of the political dustbin.. Harper needed this panel to wash his hands spread the Blame * when It
became obvious It wont Give him the GLORY he is washing his hands *.
When a Country wages a war the PM can't deflect his responsibilities this way.. can't even face the obvious truth..This is Not a leader in My mind..
We should offer humanitarian economic aid with strings attached it should be big enough To expect cooperation..
This would make the actual changes we would like to see really happen
We fight ISLAM and that is a hopeless task.
marta
We need a very strong military to defend our land and people… I am not disputing that but not for misadventures to wage wars in half a world away.
Post a Comment