It seems that everyone, including the last issue of my church's magazine
The Observer,
has concluded that public opinion is sharply divided Canada's role in Afghanistan, divided in a manner far more complicated that any survey can truly capture.
Unlike many people of the left or centre-left to whose opinions I would ordinarily find my own very similar, I am a very strong (but not unqualified) believer in Canada's present role/mission in Afghanistan. Every time I try to understand the position that would see Canada's military immediately withdraw from that country, I run squarely into reasons why I think that decision isn't wise or even moral.
Before I further explain that conclusion, here are some points that I understand to be true and that if you're not following the issue closely, of which you may not be aware.
- Canada has a battle group of over 2000 soldiers active in Southern Afghanistan. Technically, they are engaged in development security work and through that, an anti-insurgency conflict with remnants of the Taliban, their allies or other anti-government irregular forces. This work is authorized through a United Nations mandate.
- Canada maintains a focus on development an rebuilding society in Afghanistan. Many Canadians feel that the balance is wrong and that money spend on maintaining the battle group should go directly into development. Others claim that development cannot happen without security and that this security means being prepared to meet anti-government forces with a military response.
- Negatively colouring many people's responses to our army in Afghanistan (including my retired Air Force Chief Warrant Officer father) is the "gung-ho" confident attitude projected by Canada's current Chief of Defense Staff (the Canadian equivalent of the U.S. Joint Chiefs). General Rick Hillier inspires very little indifference and his style has both helped and hindered public opinion.
- Afghanistan under the Taliban was a medievally brutal cesspool of suffering. Post-Taliban Afghanistan is filled with suffering, extreme poverty, violence, and gross inequality, but its impossible to conclude anything but that on the whole, history should judge Canada by how much we do to prevent a return to fundamentalist theocratic rule.
Its conceivable that this return to the Taliban may happen regardless of our efforts but to think we would chose to avoid doing everything that we can to stop this return is morally repugnant. To think that stopping this return involves only development and not active security is naive. Any mission which also includes building schools and placing value on girls being allowed to go to school is not just violence for violence's sake. These are our fundamental values and we need to try to achieve them in Afghanistan with considerable cost.
A failed, theocratic "state" in Afghanistan would be both a moral failure and a reality that would cost the rest of the world in ways we cannot yet anticipate. Schools and roads, democracy and peace are things for which we should be prepared to struggle. Its easy for me to suggest this as I will not be going to Afghanistan and my children are not directly threatened- that doesn't make me wrong.
What do you think?
B.
