In a piece published in the Thursday, July 5 Winnipeg Free Press, Lieutenant-General (ret’d) Ray Crabbe writes about the recent comments made by the Prime Minister regarding his intention to seek consensus with the other political parties about the fate of Canada’s mission to Afghanistan post-February 2009. Lieutenant-General (ret’d) Crabbe urges the Prime Minister and the other federal leaders to rise above partisan politics and compromise, and act in a manner that is in the best interest of the country.
By Freelance Writer Ray Crabbe
Winnipeg Free Press
Prime Minister Stephen Harper's pronouncement of his intention to seek consensus with the other political parties regarding the future of the <Afghanistan> mission is wrought with danger, and makes the future of the current mission beyond 2009 somewhat problematic.
At one extreme of the political spectrum is Jack Layton and the NDP calling for a total and immediate withdrawal and abandonment of the mission and the Afghan people. Although difficult to decipher the Liberal position, it appears that Stephane Dion is prepared to support a continuation of <Canada>'s commitment, providing there is an end to combat operations and a focus on development and diplomacy -- a dangerous and dichotomous approach at best.
The Liberal government took on the tough combat role in the Kandahar region knowing full well that <Canadian> soldiers would become embroiled in direct combat with the Taliban. At the same time, it was well understood that <Canada>'s military could make a huge difference in establishing security in the region so that development could occur in relative security. Given the complexity and extremely demanding circumstances under which they have been operating, the progress and performance of <Canadian> troops has been nothing short of remarkable.
The area is far from being completely secure, but the Taliban no longer rule with impunity and their influence over the Afghan people and the area has been very significantly reduced. Their efforts alongside the ever-improving Afghan army, have led to thousands of Afghans returning to their homes and taking up some semblance of normal life.
<Canadian> troops are in this area because they have the confidence and trust of the Afghans, and because they are the best; because they can get the tough jobs done, just as they have done under similar circumstances in previous <NATO> and <UN> missions. They know the area extremely well and have gained the confidence and support of the local Afghan people.
They know and understand the Taliban and their tactics, and they have the capability of continuing the arduous task of driving them out of the Kandahar region. They have broken the stranglehold on what was the Taliban's stronghold. To withdraw them from this task would be a serious blow to the gains made, and hence to all of <NATO>'s efforts in restoring the state. It would also be a blow to the sacrifices of the 66 <Canadians> who gave their lives knowing they were making a difference in this troubled region.
There are no quick fixes or easy solutions to win the war in <Afghanistan>.
Even with all the international aid and support pouring into the country and with the support of the most capable military alliance in the world, progress and success cannot be measured in terms of a few years.
<Afghanistan> was in total ruins as a result of 25 years of continuous war, and the havoc inflicted on the country by the Taliban. No central government existed. The infrastructure was destroyed. Millions of Afghans were displaced and homeless. There were no national police or military forces in the country. Basic securities and rights of citizens were non-existent. It takes years of hard work, resources and a lot of patience to restore a failed state.
Success and progress can only be assessed in terms of the extent to which various conditions have been attained, and not on meaningless timelines. The ability of the Karzai government to exercise real political control over the country and provide the needed security for its citizens, the development of the economy including the elimination of and dependence on the heroin trade, the protection of human rights, infrastructure development including educational institutions, and the presence of an Afghan style of democracy are critical success factors that the government of <Canada> should be assessing to determine the future of the mission. All of these factors directly impact on the capacity to establish a secure environment within which <Afghanistan> can exist and prosper.
In deciding on <Canada>'s future role in <Afghanistan>, it is an assessment of the success and progress in these areas that must be considered.
If <Canada> is satisfied that progress is being made in a timely way and that there is potential for reaching the end state of restoration of <Afghanistan> as a free and democratic nation, then the mission should continue. If, however, after an impartial and non-partisan examination of these factors, progress has not been made to <Canada>'s satisfaction and is unlikely to occur, then there are grounds for withdrawing or re-examining the role of <Canada>'s military.
In addition, the government needs to consider the impact of its very significant contribution to date, the sacrifices of thousands of <Canadian> soldiers and their families, and the 66 <Canadian> soldiers and <diplomat> killed and many more permanently incapacitated, and the impact of withdrawal on our relations with <NATO> and the United States.
<Canadian> troops are in <Afghanistan> by invitation from the Afghan government to help it establish the level of security required to allow democracy, human rights and the economy to grow. We are there to support our international alliances -- <NATO> and the <UN> -- the cornerstone of <Canada>'s foreign policy for decades, and to take on the much-needed leadership roles in assisting the Afghan government in the three Ds; defence, development and diplomacy. And we are there to protect our national interests by ensuring that <Afghanistan> does not again become a training ground for <terrorists> that can and will strike this country.
There are times in the history of a nation when political leadership must rise above partisan politics and political compromise -- even in a minority government. Tough and gut-wrenching decisions should be made in the best interest of the country. Let's hope that the government is capable of doing so when examining this critical national issue.
Lt.-Gen. Ray Crabbe (retired) is a former deputy chief of defence staff.
______