The Macleans.ca Interview: Omar Samad

As Afghanistan’s Ambassador to Canada gets set to move to France, he reflects on the mission in Khandahar and his relationship with the Harper government

by Michael Petrou on Friday, May 22, 2009 12:46pm - 2 Comments

The Macleans.ca Interview: Omar SamadFor many Canadians, Omar Samad has been the most visible face of Afghanistan ever since he was posted here as Ambassador in September 2004. Born in Kabul, he fled Afghanistan after the Soviet occupation began in 1979 and settled in the United States, but he remained actively involved in Afghan politics from abroad. Following 9/11 and the subsequent overthrow of the Taliban, he returned to Afghanistan to join the new government’s Foreign Ministry. He is leaving Canada this month to become Afghanistan’s new ambassador to France.

M: When the attacks happened on September 11, did you have an idea of what they would mean for Afghanistan?
A:
I happened to be living less than a mile away from the Pentagon and was at home when the plane hit. I felt the shock of it. Within an hour or two, I was on the phone with some Afghans, including one of President Karzai’s brothers, Qayoom. We assumed that this was al-Qaeda related and then concluded that if it was al-Qaeda related, it is going to be a turnabout for Afghanistan and may signify the end of the Taliban. It turned out to be true. I decided that this was a momentous historic shift for my country, and this was the time to be there and to serve in any way possible. On December 22, 2001, I was back in Kabul.

M: How big of a decision was that for you to leave what had been your home?
A:
It was a heavy decision, but one that was very simple to make. I felt that this was the natural thing to do. Afghanistan needed people like myself. And I had invested so much of my time and energy–during the Soviet occupation, the post-Communist period, the Taliban occupation of the country–trying to promote the cause of Afghanistan and also be an advocate for it.

M: What was it like to go back?
A:
I knew that Afghans were suffering under the Taliban and al-Qaeda. I just didn’t know the extent to which this suffering had demoralized people and made them so hopeless. So when I went back in December 2001, you could clearly see the signs of hopelessness and fear in the eyes and on the faces of the average Afghans, especially women, who still for many months following these changes, out of fear, were reluctant to get rid of their burkas, for example. The Taliban and that regime had such an impact on the psyche of the people that it took a while for them to overcome it.

M: What instructions did President Hamid Karzai give you when he sent you to Canada?
A:
He basically pointed to the fact that Canada has become more involved in Afghanistan over time. Canadian aid was a fraction of what it is today, but historically speaking, it was the largest ever. So we knew that Canada was becoming a major donor. I was told to work on expanding those relations, because Canada not only has a large Afghan population, but it also has this eagerness to help.

M: In late 2005, the Canadian mission in Afghanistan expanded and shifted from Kabul to Kandahar. What discussions did you have with members of then Prime Minister Paul Martin’s government about that?
A: One factor that came into play had to do with how fast countries were signing up for this new NATO expansion. It seems that the quicker the decision made by the partners, the better the chance of selecting a certain region of Afghanistan that was their choice. It seemed to us on the Afghan side that the Canadian discussion was going on for a long time. And this led to some extent to fewer choices by the time the decision was taken.

M: Where would Canada have rather gone?
A:
There were several options that were discussed and studied. And I’ll leave those names to the Canadians to share. All I can say at this point is that the fact that the decision was not taken quicker did have some effect on the choice of Kandahar.

M: Do you think the Canadians realized when they took Kandahar how much more intense the mission would be, how much more likely casualties would be?
A:
Yes. Once Kandahar became one of the more obvious choices, everyone was aware of the fact that it was not an easy location. The proximity to the border regions, the fact that the insurgency may pose a greater threat, was on the minds of both Canadians and Afghans.

M: Shortly after Canada’s mission shifted to Kandahar, Stephen Harper was elected prime minister and was initially very robust in his support of the mission. What can you say about your relation with the Harper government?
A:
His first foreign trip was to Afghanistan, and we were delighted to see such attention given to Afghanistan in early 2006 and beyond. Afghanistan really became the main focus of Canada’s foreign and security policy. To this day, the commitments in terms of aid have increased by eight-fold, at least. Unfortunately, the casualty costs have also increased because of the inherent dangers in Kandahar.

I believe that any party in power would have had to deal with the situation, and we feel that since then, Afghanistan has become a very controversial issue in Canada. The issue just exploded. I don’t’ think that anyone expected the casualties to reach three-digit numbers. And we all underestimated the intensity and violent nature of the insurgency itself. That had to do to some extent with the fact that we assumed that post-2001, until 2005 or so, the Taliban were basically defeated–whereas that was not the case. There was a worry with some Afghans, including myself, that they might find sanctuaries and be able to regroup and reorganize, find funding and arms and make a comeback, which they did. This was to some extent influenced by the attention given to Iraq while the job in Afghanistan was not completed. And the resources provided to Afghanistan between 2002 and 2006 also did not match the needs of the country.

Bookmark and Share
  • A. G. Meyers

    Interesting. I was part of a european team tasked to survey the diplomatic service in Afghanistan a couple of years ago. Coincidentally, Mr. Samad was evaluated in the top 5% of the most competent afghan senior diplomats. Your interview also proves that the survey was not off by much. Afghanistan has suffered from weak capacities in almost all fields and it is people like Samad who make a difference. We should encourage and support such people who prove to be skilled and sincere.
    Our survey also showed that the bureaucratic system is so weak and inefficient that most talented Afghans leave or are pushed out by inept and conspiracy-prone ministers and officials. I hope that never happens to such individuals who are the last hope for Afghanistan.

  • TOR Zai

    i am afghan live in canada in toronto and i want to say thanks to mr ambasador for good work. he did lots and afghans are happy of his work and service. we hope to have more ambasador like this who speak good english and french and has good relation with afghan comunity and canada. good luck in france. good interview.

From Macleans