Canada losing moral authority in Afghanistan

Written By: harrisp
Date: 2006-10-16 14:08:34
<a href="/article/130833403-canada-losing-moral-authority-in-afghanistan">Article Link</a>

There has always been a strong voice for avoiding military endeavours within Canada, even during the two world wars. But there has usually been a recognition that our peacekeeping has been a good and honourable and decent service to the world. How do we explain, then, our present military forays in Iraq and Afghanistan? Back in 2001, when George W. Bush hectored the world to support his military assault in Afghanistan, Canada demurred. We neither condemned nor approved although at the outset of the Afghanistan assault, Bush really had no concern about whether any other country would stand with him. He knew he had sympathy on his side because of the September 11 events and he knew that toppling the feeble régime in Kabul would be a cakewalk. Bush isn’t smart enough to have considered what should or could come next, but it was certainly obvious to all but the feeble-minded that Afghanistan would be a mess when the government fell. While a ‘Marshall Plan’ style of post-invasion work might have sufficed to let Afghanistan rebuild, the US was not, and still is not, interested in letting the Afghanis form their own government in their own way. Frankly, neither is Canada. Bush had other plans anyway. He wanted to forget about Afghanistan almost before the first bomb hit the ground so he could concentrate on invading Iraq, a far bigger prize for his backers in the petroleum industry. When he tried to build international support for his escapades in Iraq, we were the closest and strongest ally of the United States to say no. Canadian politicians stood tough and proud and refused to participate in the Iraq invasion, despite some vigorous arm-twisting from Washington. Truth to tell, though, that was only political bluster for domestic consumption – Canadian troops have been in Iraq from the beginning. And we have subsequently whined that we aren’t getting a big piece of the post-invasion contract work that is enriching so many US and British firms. Pity. But while Canadian troops are playing a minor role at best in Iraq, the same cannot be said of Afghanistan, despite an initial refusal to have any part of it in 2001. So why is Canada in Afghanistan now? Why are we willing to jeopardize a generally positive reputation by conducting a nasty – and unwinnable – war of aggression? Why are we willing to give the opponents of the West someone else to target? Hiding the Truth in Kandahar Canadian troops were committed to the Afghanistan misadventure by Paul Martin’s government but the present administration is completely behind the effort. In fact, the Harper government has dropped all pretense that the mission of our troops is ‘peacekeeping’. Now, it is ‘peacemaking’ – and that includes beating into submission those who are unwilling to behave the way our invading forces dictate. We are not operating alone in Afghanistan; we’re the leaders of a NATO invasion of the volatile southern region, Kandahar province. A few months following the Canada/NATO invasion (late 2005), then prime minister Martin spoke to Canadian troops in Kandahar and told them the goal of the occupation was to “create a democratic, prosperous, modern country that can be a model in this part of the world.” In fact, the occupying forces have brought widespread misery, death, and destruction to the area where they claimed they planned to ‘paint schools and drill water wells’. Support at home for our military presence in Afghanistan has been mixed at best. Depending on whose polls you believe, either a slim majority of Canadians oppose it, or a large majority does. Either way, the support that is given is generally on the understanding that the Canadian troops are performing our customary peacekeeping duties, or at least behaving ourselves and doing good work. But the government and a compliant media have been careful to hide the real motives for Canada’s presence in Afghanistan: toadying up to the United States. This venture has nothing to do with creating democracy, or rebuilding a shattered nation, or human rights; it is a simple effort to convince Washington that Canada is one of the good guys and to ensure that Canadian corporations get in on the lucrative action. A sort of ‘Halliburton North’. A Fine Mess Canada’s history shows, over and again, that Canadians have a talent for compromise, for moral persuasion, for amicably settling disputes. If we were truly interested in helping out in Afghanistan, we would have sent diplomats instead of soldiers. But we aren’t there to help the Afghani people get back on their feet. Our mission is not designed to rebuild Afghanistan, it is meant to subdue it. The sham elections that placed Hamid Karzai into the presidency in Afghanistan, along with installing a cadre of warlords and war criminals in parliament, did nothing to persuade ordinary Afghanis that NATO troops were really there to help. Our government and media have also hidden from Canadians the reality of what is transpiring on the ground. Consider this: the World Bank estimates that rebuilding Afghanistan’s shattered social and physical infrastructure will cost around $28 billion. But the aid that flowed to the country in the 2002-2006 period was only $7.3 billion (give or take a few billion, depending on who’s doing the counting). During that same interval NATO’s military expenditures were $82 billion. To be sure, some structures have been rebuilt, some bridges have been restored, some schools have been reopened. But even in Kabul, electricity still flows for only about 4 hours per day and the streets are lawless. Outside of the capital, things could not be much worse than they are. Five years after the mightiest thugs on the planet crushed this backward nation because of something done by a group of Saudis, all the promises of restoring civility have proven to be what most thinking people always knew they would be: a chimera. What is different this time is that the world’s traditional ‘good guys’, we Canadians, are now in the forefront of the butchery. There has been some limited achievement in Afghanistan, and these are frequently touted by Western media, especially ours. But the achievements are so minimal as to have no significant value, they are largely confined to Kabul, and they don’t alter the fact that the Afghani government is increasingly irrelevant to the people. Meeting Resistance The Afghani government is deeply resented by the Afghani people. They all know it is a puppet of Washington, that it is rife with corruption and abuse, that it is comprised of criminals and warlords in complete mockery of the alleged NATO goal of democratization. And they know it is us who are propping it up. The US has all but abandoned Afghanistan at this point, despite their promises to rebuild what they destroyed, owing to their realization that they are defeated by a Vietnam-style resistance that they cannot overcome. So they passed the buck to Canada and NATO, who are now mired in the ‘mess that has no ending’. Historically, the Afghanis have resisted foreign invaders and this time is no different. In the Canadian media, Afghani resistance is called an ‘insurgency’ when it is, in fact, just the local people telling foreign invaders to get the hell out. If Canadian or other troops take casualties, who’s to blame? There is no justification for the gnashing of teeth or national mourning every time one of our soldiers dies — it is wholly unreasonable to expect that any nation will calmly submit to an invading force and its attempted imposition of government, social structure, societal rules, and so on that are utterly foreign to the local population. And we have to expect that if we try to kill them, they’ll try to kill us in return, using whatever methods they can muster. Canada and NATO have met some serious opposition in Afghanistan and evidence suggests that the resistance is growing. At the same time, for Canadian troops, resistance is mounting at home. Support the Troops, Hate the War Canadians are not asking enough questions and our leaders are answering even less. The government of Canada still claims that it sent troops to Afghanistan to promote democracy but we are, in fact, propping up the local criminal class and the US-installed puppet government, a government that is utterly indifferent to the social and economic crisis in the country. Local villagers have in many areas turned to the Taliban for support to protect them against the central government’s brutality, and against Canadian brutality. In Canada, there was almost universal criticism of the United States when the details of abuse in the Afghani prison system, especially at Abu Grhaib, became public. But earlier this year, it was announced that Canada does not adhere to the Geneva conventions regarding treatment of prisoners. Since Canadians were quick to accuse US troops of war crimes for this very thing, it is disconcerting to see that Canadian soldiers admit to complicity in war crimes without public outcry. Every thinking man or woman in Canada knows the Afghanistan mission cannot be won. It was sold to us in the first place as a ‘peacekeeping’ mission even though most understood this was a US venture and that entering Afghanistan was nothing more than an effort to clean up a US mess. But, increasingly, even slow-witted people have realized this fight cannot be won and a movement to bring Canadian troops home is growing. Unfortunately, the main thrust behind the demands for a troop withdrawal are directly linked to the number of Canadians dying in Afghanistan rather than for the moral reason that the war had no justification in the first place. This war was wrong in 2001, it is still wrong today. Instead of securing its place in the world as a model of decency, Canada has chosen to sink to the level of its nearest neighbour. We have abandoned our position as a moral authority and we can only hope that we don’t suffer retribution by people who have shown themselves quite capable of using whatever weapons they can muster. [Proofreader's note: this article was edited for spelling and typos on October 19, 2006]

Note to Stephen Harper, Gordon O'Connnor, & Rick Hillier:

Bring the Canadian soldiers home to Canada. No delay, no excuses, no
more pandering.

Just bring them home. And let the bagpipes play a merry tune as each
planeload of the living, arrives.

Very well written.

The more I think about it, the less I can follow "support the troops". I believe the people of Germany were required to do the same at one time. Americans base their patriotism on the size of their military. "Fight for your country" even though "your" country is the invader. In all the decades of declaring war or invading foreign countries, the American is proud to serve his country. NO MORE will I repeat the cliche' "support our troops". The brain washing cannot continue. Call me unpatriotic if you will but I cannot support what our troops have become and what they represent.

---
Expect little from life and get more from it.

nice piece! privatized war profits and 'protectionism' seem to define harper's
m.o. for afghanistan. instilling democracy my ass, what they're really
interested in is getting the oil pipeline across the barren land. silly of steve,
really, when he's announced at the g8 that canada is an exporter of raw
materials including oil. but the 'brotherhood' is strong and corporate fever
and tom flanagan seem to have a hold on harper.

maybe once we get democracy correct at home we could act a consultants,
but that's going to take some doing. we can say 'at least' about martin and
all predecesors, but there was always the hidden agenda with them
too....steve just has a knack for bringing out the flagitious flavour of the
week....it's an acceleration of all that was wrong before and nothing of what
was right.

In many ways a Harper is better to have in power than a Martin because a Harper is much more transparent, yet both are virtually equal with respect to their ultimate actions.

Harper gives Canadian's a clearer picture into what's really been going on, and perhaps they can finally understand that we need to rethink how we elect our leaders.

From my understanding, most of our federal governments were "elected" (but not really so) into power with about the same amazingly low level of support among Canadians, somewhere around 25% +/- 5%. Only a minute variance in all the right places tips the balance between a "minority government" and what is oxymoronically called a "majority government". In reality ALL of our governments have been minority governments in the true sense of the word.

To say that we have a democracy is a delusion when it's possible for a small minority of Canadians to have such a tight grip on power over the decades.

Our democracy is a very sick animal and it should be put down. We need something new that actually elects leaders who have no choice but to serve in the publics best interests - or else!

<blockquote>Unfortunately, the main thrust behind the demands for a troop withdrawal are directly linked to the number of Canadians dying in Afghanistan rather than for the moral reason that the war had no justification in the first place. This war was wrong in 2001, it is still wrong today.</blockquote> Well said and worth repeating. I have to wonder what would the case be had there been few if any Canadian deaths in Afghanistan? My guess is that there still would be almost no support for the war, but it would be in terms of "out of sight out of mind" apathy driven by mostly innocent ignorance of the true situation. For example, few Canadians are even aware of Canada's other "Afghanistan". How many know that Canada was involved along with the USA and France in directly assisting with the overthrow of Haiti's democratically elected governemt, and with propping up the coalitions own version of "democracy" in its place? The low level war of attrition in Haiti continues to the present under the guise of a UN "peacekeeping mission". There's been only a few Canadian caskets comming in from Haiti, so no one seems to care. The Propaganda: <a href="http://www.ctv.ca/servlet/ArticleNews/story/CTVNews/20051220/rcmp_death_051220/20051220/">Retired RCMP officer killed in Haiti ambush</a> <a href="http://www.cbc.ca/world/story/2005/12/21/bourque051221.html">UN probes death of Canadian in Haiti <a href="http://www.cbc.ca/canada/story/2005/12/20/bourque051220.html">Canadian peacekeeper shot by Haitian gunmen</a> <a href="http://www.ctv.ca/servlet/ArticleNews/story/CTVNews/1098100490278_37">Troops lacked basic equipment in Haiti: report.</a> <a href="http://www.ctv.ca/servlet/ArticleNews/story/CTVNews/1092021052207_40">Canadian troops arrive back home from Haiti.</a> <a href="http://www.ctv.ca/servlet/ArticleNews/story/CTVNews/1090793695890_14">New UN envoy meets Canadian troops in Haiti.</a> <a href="http://www.ctv.ca/servlet/ArticleNews/story/CTVNews/1090364854032_97">Powell thanks Canada for sending troops to Haiti. </a> <a href="http://www.ctv.ca/servlet/ArticleNews/story/CTVNews/1090258016776_85667216">Canada pledges $180M for Haiti security.</a> <a href="http://www.ctv.ca/servlet/ArticleNews/story/CTVNews/1089140391116_84549591">Canada sending 100 police to Haiti mission.</a> What's really going on: <a href="http://www.outofhaiti.ca/the_coup.html">The Coup: What happened on February 29, 2004</a> <a href="http://www.zmag.org/content/showarticle.cfm?ItemID=8490">MINUSTAH Lies, Haitians Die</a> <a href="http://www.zmag.org/content/showarticle.cfm?ItemID=7586">Haiti Mobilization</a> <a href="http://www.outofhaiti.ca/">Canada out of Haiti</a> <a href="http://www.outofhaiti.ca/the_un.html">UN "Peacekeepers" Helping Silence the Poor in Haiti</a>

rearguard: you make some good, strong points. Most Canadians do want
the Canadian armed forces out of Afghanistan, out of Iraq, out of U.S.
wars altogether.

It hurts to have you say that these feelings are knee-jerk reactions to the
40+ coffins coming home to us. This thread is for comments about
Afghanistan, after all; not Haiti. And we gave the same honoured funeral
to the Canadian casualty of Haiti troubles.

Many of us have been struggling with the Canadian participation in Haiti
from Day One. We thought Aristide was OK, if not altogether perfect. We
wonder in particular why Michaelle Jean went there, stayed longer, and
shed tears of pain. We wonder especially: what in heck to do about it.
Just like we wonder still about Rwanda, Iraq, and yes, Banff Oct 12-14.

Any suggestions?

Good on whole, but some points:

I do not think Afghanistanis are fleeing to the Taliban to be protected from Canadian troops. I think they are siding with the Taliban because they are their brothers and fathers and uncles and worship the same religion, ect ect. And the Taliban are very effective at using fear and intimidation to get people onside.

And I have always had a problem with Canada's portrayal as a moral elitist. Yes, Lester P. did some amazing things, what he did, and let's not kid ourselves, was he thumbed his nose at the Olde Empire (Britain) and Israel, who were quite happy and excited about invading Egypt and taking over the Suez Canal, and actually prevented these two major world powers from doing so. But let's not kid ourselves.

It was the refusal of the US to support the military action that halted the Suez crisis. Everybody knows this. And back then, the US was actually hailed as a hero by most muslims in the Middle East. What a change from today, all largely due to US actions since that time.

So we are not the world's moral elitist. We have this rep as peacekeepers, due to Lester's work and the subsequent requirement that the country that comes up with the idea usually has to contribute a lot of troops. Peacekeeping, UN style, though, has largely been a monumental waste of time. In Cyprus, for example, all it has done is allowed two countries, Greece and Turkey, to never resolve their differences, to let it all just sit on the back burner indefinitely, while the island of Cyrpus benefits tremendously from all the rich western troops rotating through on their obligatory sentence of boredom (present company included).

Another point is the Canadian media's role. Far from promoting any achievements in Afghanistan, which have actually occured, they have instead adopted a very offensive and disgusting parody of Fox News style, trumpeting the battles and the huge inflated Taliban casualty figures, and bemoaning the Canadian casualties. They have, then, turned back to World War II style media propaganda coverage, support the troops and golly gee lookee at the tanks and explosions, and Yay! Yay! We killed 100 Taliban today! It has been stomach turning.

I expect that by casualty 100 of our own we will be seriously considering withdrawal. Any bets?

---
“The war is not meant to be won, it is meant to be continuous, the essential act of warfare is the destruction of the produce of human labour”

I take your points ... fair comment, in my view. Except for the bit about the media ... there is a lot of the Fox-style crap; but in my neck of the woods (southern bloody Ontario) there is a lot of coverage of all the wonderful rebuilding we're doing.

I do believe, though, that people would not be turning to the Taliban, given a reasonable alternative.

Thanks.

Paul Richard Harris

"It hurts to have you say that these feelings are knee-jerk reactions to the 40+ coffins coming home to us."

What I was trying to say, was that awareness among Canadians about these horrible wars is primarily promoted through the MSM by way of coffins arriving home. The less coffins, the less awareness there seems to be.

For those of us who get our news outside of the MSM, we were made well aware of what was really going in Haiti, Afghanistan, Iraq, the 9/11 attacks, and so on, right from almost day one.

How can anyone oppose something that they would normally disagree with if they don't even know about it?

Currently, alternative news sources don't seem to be hitting the masses in high enough numbers just yet, but from what I can tell, people are tuning out of the MSM in growing numbers, and for the first time in history, MSM sources are on the way out. Once the MSM gets viewed at the level they should be at (99% propaganda), we'll have a much better chance of educating people with the straight goods.

I can tell you, to get the level of awarness that I currently have took a few years of dedicated effort, and at some expense to my own personal situation - something few people have the interest or means to do. From what I can tell I still barely know anything, as I find there's so much more to learn about that it's overwhelming.

My suggestions?

Well, I think everyone has a role they can do best. For me, I'm simply learning what I can, and passing it on as best I can. I figure the more awareness Canadians have, the more likely we can work together and gang up on the liars and fear mongers and kick them out of power for good.

We need a lot of like minded people ready to do their part by the time the next election roles around. If 25% of the elligible votes again re-elect another corporate funded government into power, the same old crap will continue, and what we can do from there is to simply ignore the government - stop contributing to it or at least do so to a minimal level that's still "legal", and we can also get more active in promoting awareness about what's really going on so that more people learn that it's for their own good (and that of their children) to take a stand, even if it's a small one.

Together in numbers we can easily defeat the liars, war mongers, and traitors, it's that simple. The power they seem to have is only an illusion - it's actually our own power that we give to them thorugh our actions and inactions.

Pass it on!

WELL SAID!

---
Diogenes said:
"I am Diogenes the Dog. I nuzzle the kind, bark at the greedy and bite scoundrels."

Rebuilding? Seems to me the only "rebuilding" you can do (and that ever has been done) with the barrel of a gun is the "reconstruction" of the demographic makeup of the occupied population.

The two recent casualties were soldiers providing security for the building of a highway. Most of the attacks Canadian soldiers come under are while on security duty for this highway. 
 
<a href="http://tinyurl.com/y2ubb9">http://tinyurl.com/y2ubb9</a> 
 
Once the highway is built, and secure, the UN will start distributing food to the victims of the drought.--- "I think it's important to always carry enough technology to restart civilization, should it be necessary." Mark Tilden

In addition . . . 
 
"Six Canadians have died along the unfinished road or the 16-square-kilometre area around it since late September." 
 
<a href="http://tinyurl.com/yaaosn">http://tinyurl.com/yaaosn</a>--- "I think it's important to always carry enough technology to restart civilization, should it be necessary." Mark Tilden

And the Taliban are very effective at using fear and intimidation to get people onside.<<

Gee! who else do we know to use those tactics? I guess if you are powerful enough to afford the propaganda......!

---
Expect little from life and get more from it.