Afghanistan

Saturday February 2, 2019

Editorial Cartoon by Graeme MacKay, The Hamilton Spectator – Saturday February 2, 2019

No victory for U.S. as it leaves Afghanistan

The long and pointless Afghan War may finally be coming to an end. If so, this will be a relief for the U.S. and its coalition allies operating there. It certainly won’t be a victory.

June 21, 2013

The broad strokes of a deal in principle between the United States and Taliban insurgents were released this week. They are not likely to bring much solace to the families of soldiers — including Canadians — who fought and died in the 17-year-old conflict.

There is no mention of ensuring that girls can go to school, which at one point was given by Canada’s government as the rationale for this war.

There is no mention of defeating the “scumbags” as Canada’s then top general Rick Hillier described the Taliban. Indeed, it seems likely that the Taliban will be guaranteed a major political role in the country.

There is no mention of bringing democracy and development to Afghanistan — another of the Canadian government’s ostensible reasons for the war.

 

March 11, 2009

The essence of the deal, as described to the New York Times by chief U.S. negotiator Zalmay Khalilzad, is simple and familiar.

The Taliban will ensure that terrorists don’t use Afghanistan as a base to attack the West. The Americans, along with the 38 allied nations still operating there, will withdraw their troops.

Ironically, the agreement in principle bears a marked resemblance to the offer that Afghanistan’s then Taliban government made to the U.S. in 2001 after the 9/11 terror attacks.

Don’t invade, the Taliban said then. And in return we will expel terror mastermind Osama bin Laden to a third country. (Continued: Toronto Star) 

 

Thursday August 24, 2017

Editorial Cartoon by Graeme MacKay, The Hamilton Spectator – Thursday August 24, 2017

Canada won’t join U.S. missile defence, send troops to Afghanistan, Trudeau says

Prime Minister Justin Trudeau has thrown cold water on suggestions the Liberal government wants to sign onto continental ballistic missile defence, or that it might send troops back into Afghanistan.

The question over whether Canada should be part of the U.S.’s continental missile-defence shield has been rekindled in recent days amid concerns about North Korea’s growing nuclear arsenal.

Canada opted out of ballistic missile defence in 2005 following a divisive national debate, but many defence experts and parliamentarians, including some Liberals, want the issue reopened.

Meanwhile, U.S. President Donald Trump’s plan to send thousands more troops to Afghanistan has also resurrected questions about whether Canada will be asked to follow suit.

Speaking in Montreal on Wednesday, however, Trudeau appeared to close the door on both ideas.

“On those cases, we will always take the decisions in terms of what is the best interests of Canadians,” Trudeau told reporters after a meeting with federal and provincial immigration officials.

“And our long-standing positions on those two issues are not going to be changed any time soon.”

The comments on ballistic missile defence were the strongest yet from the Liberal government, which had largely sidestepped questions about its intentions in recent weeks. (Source: Toronto Star) 

 

SaveSave

Friday, June 21, 2013

Friday, June 21, 2013By Graeme MacKay, The Hamilton Spectator – Friday, June 21, 2013

Afghan president has halted negotiations

Hopes dimmed for talks aimed at ending the Afghan war when an angry President Hamid Karzai on Wednesday suspended security negotiations with the U.S. and scuttled a peace delegation to the Taliban, sending American officials scrambling to preserve the possibility of dialogue with the militants.

What provoked the mercurial Karzai and infuriated many other Afghans was a move by the Taliban to cast their new office in the Gulf nation of Qatar as a rival embassy. The Taliban held a ribbon-cutting ceremony Tuesday in which they hoisted their flag and a banner with the name they used while in power more than a decade ago: “Political Office of the Islamic Emirate of Afghanistan.”

U.S. Secretary of State John Kerry spoke with Karzai on the phone, telling him that his concerns were justified and that he would work to resolve the issue.

An American official, speaking anonymously because he was not authorized to disclose the information, said he still expects to have the first public meeting with Taliban representatives in the next few days in Qatar but that no exact meeting date has been set.

Nevertheless, the militants’ attempt at a publicity coup clearly played to Karzai’s longstanding distrust of both the Taliban and the United States, who had announced Tuesday that they would pursue negotiations in the Qatari capital of Doha — at least initially without the Afghan government.

It may have also given Karzai an excuse to try to head off the Doha talks, which he probably agreed to support only reluctantly and under U.S. pressure. Karzai has for years opposed talks outside Afghanistan and dominated or directed by the U.S. The Taliban, on the other hand, have never really wanted to negotiate with Karzai, preferring to talk directly with the U.S. (Source: CBC News)

February 7, 2008

A column written in today’s Toronto Star (of all papers) sums up my view of Canada’s mission in Afghanistan. I cheered the columnist along to myself as I read it.

Canadian pettiness is showing
Feb 08, 2008
The Toronto Star – Rondi Adamson

The “deploy more NATO soldiers to Kandahar or we quit in 2009” threat contained in the Manley report strikes me as a sad reflection on current Canadian attitudes. It isn’t that more troops would not be desirable. But what if no NATO country sends us a military “partner”?

According to the report, in spite of the ongoing violence, the Afghan economy has been growing, millions of refugees have returned, more children (of both genders) are in school, child mortality rates are improving and infrastructure is being built.

Are we so small-time and penny ante in our world view as to dismiss the progress made? Do we tell the unprepared Afghan forces and population, “Sorry, you’re on your own”? Do we allow Afghanistan to again become a safe haven for Al Qaeda, again a threat to us and others?

I hope not, because another thing we would lose in the process is our reputation. I would argue that it has improved internationally due to our involvement in Afghanistan.

Far from the myth that most of the world used to view us as benign peacekeepers and now view us as pawns of the Great Satan, it is more likely that most of the world either never thought twice about us, or simply viewed us as an extension of the United States.

Now we are included in adult discussions and asked, in return, to behave like adults, responsibly and with integrity.

Instead we not our soldiers, but citizens and leaders behave like accountants with calculators in hand, tallying up every percentage, dollar, headline, slight or snub (real or imagined) and counting every sacrifice as a cause for indignation and (more) anti-Americanism, rather than as, well, a sacrifice.

Canadians like to believe they are broad-minded global citizens. But the pettiness on display when we complain about the “disproportionately” large load we are carrying in Afghanistan shows us to be self-absorbed, miserly and ignorant of history.

Venturing into the debate over “disproportionate” contributions is dangerous. A small number of countries (including Canada) carried a disproportionately great burden in defeating Nazism, fascism and the Soviet empire. Should those countries have not done so, crying foul instead?

Washington could point out that our military is disproportionately small, given our population and economy. In fact, for our military to be anywhere near proportionately the size of the U.S. military, we would have to double it.

It could also be pointed out that we have given disproportionately little in previous decades, in terms of NATO commitments and international conflicts. During the years leading up to 9/11, our armed forces were effectively defanged, making us unable to contribute proportionately to just about anything.

One of Jack Layton’s wishes is that we abandon Afghanistan in favour of “saving Darfur,” which, if it could be done, would necessitate doing things (invading, killing, getting killed) Layton objects to when done in Afghanistan. That aside, if we had a military proportionate to our size, we could contribute to both wars.

Many Canadians seem to have forgotten two things about Afghanistan. The first is that the 9/11 attacks were attacks on the West. Osama bin Laden himself said as much. This is our battle.

The second is that our military presence in Afghanistan has been authorized under international laws we purport to respect. The Manley report reminds us of this. It also offers a realistic assessment of what it calls a noble mission. Not rosy, not hopeless, but one that requires our continued and valuable (be it disproportionate or not) presence. Rondi Adamson is a Toronto writer.

Tuesday, April 10, 2007

Editorial Cartoon by Graeme MacKay, Editorial Cartoonist, The Hamilton Spectator – Tuesday, April 10, 2007

Afghanistan deaths hang over Vimy commemoration

A day in Ottawa and France to mark sacrifices by Canadian soldiers 90 years ago at Vimy Ridge was overshadowed by the deaths of six soldiers in Afghanistan.

“We’re celebrating a victory of 90 years ago, but we also remember the six soldiers who continued to serve our country,” said Gen. Rick Hillier, Canada’s top soldier, in France on Monday.

“We also remember their peers and colleagues, who are still on that mission and do the great work we ask of them.”

The Easter Sunday blast in the western part of Kandahar province caused the worst single-day loss of life for Canadian soldiers in more than 50 years.

Gov. Gen. Michaelle Jean said Monday at the National War Memorial in Ottawa that she was in Afghanistan just a few months ago.

“I was with them and I’m terribly sad, saddened by the news and I’ll be with the families,” said the commander-in-chief of the armed forces.

“My heart breaks. I cry every time a soldier goes. I think it’s hard for any mother to lose a child,” said Wilhelmina Beerenfenger-Kohler, this year’s Silver Cross mother. (Source: CTV News)