Noble fight or lost cause?

What to do in Afghanistan was the subject of a Maclean’s panel debate last week in Halifax, broadcast live by CPAC.

by macleans.ca on Friday, November 20, 2009 2:35pm - 16 Comments

Stephenson: I’m wondering if Scott is maybe confusing Canadian soldiers with some of our allies. Trevor Greene had an axe put through his head at a village shura because he was sitting there with his helmet off to show respect. They are very, very good at connecting with the local population. They don’t go blowing through villages on “presence patrols” and not get down off their vehicles. This is where Gen. Stanley McChrystal got the idea to expand the entire NATO strategy: from watching the Canadian Forces and the way they connected to the local people.

Alexander: There are two things that have made it worse that we didn’t anticipate. First, that the Taliban would regroup and come back in large numbers. And secondly, we would not have predicted that in late 2009 the world’s opium production, by and large, would be concentrated in Helmand and Kandahar, fuelling this insurgency.

Building institutions takes time, and mobilizing resources from the U.S. and other countries has taken time, especially when they had a different priority in 2006-2007, namely Iraq. So we haven’t had the resources to have a chance of doing the job. President Obama has deployed more troops, he’s thinking about deploying still more. That may just bring us to the point where we start to see light at the end of the tunnel.

Coyne: Chris, we’ve talked a bit about the humanitarian and the military benchmarks. What about the democratic standpoint? Is there any good news in that election, or is it true, as Scott said, that democracy is dead?

Alexander: I think it’s far from dead: 5.6 million votes were cast. Hundreds of thousands were fraudulent but the vast majority were cast in good faith. It’s the rights of those Afghans that everyone’s been trying to protect. The result, President Karzai’s second term, is legal. The fraudulent votes were by and large thrown out thanks to a very tough, admirable, hard period of work by an electoral complaints commission headed by a Canadian but with UN authority. All of that speaks to due process that wouldn’t have been possible in Afghanistan five years ago.

Taylor: That’s a pretty good spin on what happened! This is actually Karzai’s third term. He was appointed for two years, then he was elected, and now we’re hearing that maybe even that first election wasn’t as legitimate as we were told. He’s not able to unify the country. We’ve provided him the troops, the money, staged these elections, and if after all that gasoline on that fire, it ain’t sparking up, that doesn’t really bode well.

Stephenson: We’re always talking about central government in Afghanistan, and Karzai, but what Afghans have the most experience with is local, and there’s been very little focus on local. And it’s much easier to maintain integrity at the local level: it’s perceived by Afghans as being much less corrupt, and it’s a program that many of the Provincial Reconstruction Teams could focus on to a much greater degree if we had a NATO-wide policy that gave people flexibility in their local areas. Why are we focused only on the central government?

Coyne: We’ve also had a lot of justified complaints about the conduct of our NATO partners. We’ve done the dangerous work, while a lot of our NATO friends have not contributed as much.

Alexander: There are 41 countries with troops, they all have different rules, but NATO has brought more countries into combat than anyone predicted. There are now 16 with troops in the south. Denmark has a higher casualty rate than Canada. They haven’t fought a war since 1864.

Stephenson: Afghanistan is the test of NATO, the only functioning military alliance in the world. This isn’t just about Afghanistan. What is the broader geostrategic outcome if NATO is seen to no longer be relevant? It’s highly destabilizing. And for Canada, one of the founding members, to be the first to leave Afghanistan? NATO already is very fragile. What’s going to deploy into zones of conflict in the future? The nature of conflict has changed and this is the only alliance capable of deploying allied troops. Are we ready to be the first country to begin pulling that thread that will pull apart NATO?

Bookmark and Share
  • Immanuel

    To watch the 2-hour debate on CPAC go, to http://www.cpac.ca/forms/index.asp?dsp=template&a…

  • Katie Smith

    Words without feet mean nothing. It is admirable that Macleans and CPAC are undertaking this initiative to hold public debates on issues affecting our democracy. It is disappointing, however, that Macleans and Mr. Coyne in particular have nothing more than words to offer.

    It is easy to chant courage from the sidelines. I know of at least one serious threat to our democracy in which they have declined to take action. Perhaps Mr. Coyne will be less critical now of the politicians he so frequently accuses of failing to live up to their principles. But in any event, I think it will be difficult for them to try to engage Canadians in discussions on democracy when they themselves are not willing to defend it when called to do so.

  • Ron Mac Donald

    This is the type of debate that our country's politicians should have.
    Politicians have to come out and identify clearly why we are there. Only then can we measure the "true" level of support for the Mission among Canadians. Once we know why we're there, it will be possible to decide to "stay the course" or pull out. Our troops, who I support, deserve no less.
    Pulling out arbitrarily in 2011 regardless of the consequences will be to dishonour the sacrifices made by our service men and women who have served in Afghanistan.

  • Lost Cause

    This is interesting. However, I have to conclude that one salient point of discussion was missing: The strategy of the Obama Administration has yet to be announced, and won't be for weeks. Not knowing (and being suspicious of) his plan is disconcerting, and should have been lent more discussion. I disagree about the argument that "We're building schools, though!", as I really don't care. Our Troops should be fighting terrorists outright, and not be handing out candy to future jihadists. In my opinion, Scott Taylor won this debate.

  • Stewart

    This is a good debate, and I like a lot I've heard, but Mr. Taylor's comments are counter-productive, as he seems to have already adopted a defeatist attitude, like the rest of Canada.

  • ahm

    This was an awesome panel discussion. The debate seemed over pretty quickly: this is not a lost fight, was the consensus, but a lost cause that needs serious reassessment.

  • janicemaerose

    I just finished listening to this debate. I think if we pull out and Nato eventually does, the people we so wanted to help in Afghanistan will be in serious harm for years and years to come. The country will take ten huge steps back and get as ugly as its ever been.

  • http://imnodhimmi.com Anti-Ummah

    Going into Afghan and Iraq the purpose (unstated of course) was to replace Muslim extremist regimes with moderate ones giving the people a hope and chance to get on their feet with some semblance of democracy, and have them cull their own herd of fundamentalists. In both cases Iraq and Afghan immediately after their first elections enshrined Shari'ah Law into the constitution. Since that moment we have been supporting those governments that may offer fascial form of human rights to their benefacttors, but in essence will be beholden to the wretched brutaland despicable Shari'ah Laws. These countries cannot be trusted to come around to Westernization with that yoke, nor in my opinion were they intending to from the beginning.
    So here we are losing valuable Western civilized lives supporting Shari'ah. Completely insane and counterproductive to the end goals. We should have said a firm "NO!", when they implemented the laws and I would be in much fuller support of our efforts. As it is now, we are fighting for oppression. No wonder we haven't achieved much of anything.

  • janicemaerose

    MACLEANS: Tch, tch: You missed an important female contributor – Mercedes Stephenson in the pictured ad for the article. It doesn't reflect positively on you. I wouldn't blame her for feeling slighted.

  • janicemaerose

    …continued – to clarify: I received an email ad of the current MacLeans issue with the same title and a picture of a soldier in combat; it listed all the men in the debate, but not Stephenson for some reason.

  • http://intensedebate.com/people/Bernie37 Bernie37

    I believe these kinds of programs are very useful. especially true for those who are not up to scratch on our involvment there. I opposed our involvment from the beginning and everything since has convinced me further that I was right.
    Taylor was spot on, also Wells mostly. The other three were wrong, mostly because what they were saying was not on the reality of the situation.

  • Jim

    The war in that desolate fly blown turd hole is both a nobe fight and a lost cause. As long as liberal pacifists and defeatists like Hillier have a say in the operation, it can't succeed.

  • wunjo

    'Noble Fight or Lost Cause"? The preamble should define for whom? The Afghanistan mission is a NATO and UN mission and any assessment of the NATO response to the attack of 9/11 on the United States would conclude that the response of many NATO countries has been anything but noble. To place the question in context, consider the statement issued by the North Atlantic Council, 12 September 2001 that stressed that in accordance with Article 5 of the Washington Treaty; "an armed attack against one or more of the Allies in Europe or North America shall be considered an attack against them all". Canada responded admirably, but many other NATO allies, including the US, provided only half hearted or no response. The US turned their attention to Iraq which truly "suckered" Canada. Our politicians have let down our service men and woman by not confirming that all allies would meet their international obligations under Chapter 5. This was only made worse by historic underfunding, drastic cuts to personnel levels and a refusal to provide adequate equipment for the CF. If Obama does not commit to the additional US troops and if NATO continues to shirk their responsibilities then it is time to bring our troops home. Furthermore, it is time to reassess the viability of NATO.

  • cleargreen

    Noble fight? Canada has aided and abetted the USA in yet another invasion of a country without a declaration of war. Agreed it was intended to stop human rights abuse, not just like say the suspension of human rights under the patriot act as an example, but real torture… no wait I mean… ummm, never mind.
    It is notable that no mainstream journalist has noticed that just prior to that invasion it was reported that there was no evidence on satellite imagery of poppy production in Afghanistan (the USA disapproved of the government then in place for another reason), since the USA arrived however Afghanistan is once again the world leader in the production of opium (now that the government the USA wants in power is in place). You don't suppose Air America has opened a branch office… ?

  • Robert Johnston

    I think we should get our troops out of Afghanistan, but whether we do or not, here is an idea that could help the people there, and further Canada's aims without combat.
    It is simply to air drop or otherwise distribute crystal radios and leaflets, both easy to hide, and thereby supply educational material.
    Crystal radios require no batteries and are very small. They were one of the earliest forms of radio and have also been sold as a child's toy, and used in Nazi controlled areas in europe. They run off the power of the transmitter. and use an earphone. See "crystal radio" in wikipedia and google "foxhole radio"
    In this age of chip technology they could be extremely small (easily hidden from the Taliban) and probably made for about a dollar. Accompanying leaflets should be designed for low visibility, and support the radio program material.
    It is said that educating the women transforms a society, since they in turn educate their children. The transmitted content should be educational, not propaganda. While this strategy would be slow to effect change, the war strategy does not promise to be any faster- we have already been there 8 years, there is no end in sight, and we are making enemies.
    Radio has been used in Canada for educational purposes. CBC programs were broadcast to the schools.

    Yours Truly
    Duncan Johnston

  • http://intensedebate.com/people/wiskers55 wiskers55

    Even the opening comment has no proof, North America was attacked by Al-Qadea. Just because some people in position say so "it is true". Why do the goverments want to hide behind the national security curtain? The governments are supposed to be serving the people not the other way arround. How come people have such short memories who is the creator of Al-Qadea and what is there to say the same Master does not pull the string of the same pupet still? how come the Master of Al-Qadea is not even on the most wanted list where as Sadam Hussain was? Interesting even the inteligesta can be herded like sheep and brain washed in this part of the world.

From Macleans