Excerpted: Senate Report On Afghanistan

Posted on Thursday, February 15 at 08:33 by bracewell
Our troops deserve more than patriotic bumper stickers. Our troops deserve thoughtful assessments from honest and impartial observers as to:
...... 1 - why Canada is in Afghanistan,
...... 2 - what we can expect to achieve there,
...... 3 - what we cannot expect to achieve there, and
...... 4 - how best to proceed to try to ensure that the benefits outweigh the costs.

AFGHANISTANS “NEW GOVERNMENT”:
Whatever changes are made here are going to take many generations to effect, and any early reforms are unlikely to present Canadians with the kinds of successes that might easily be seen to justify our involvement in Afghanistan.

Chris Alexander (former Ambassador to Afghanistan) said it would take 5 generations of effort to make a difference in Afghanistan.

Afghans are used to killing– they have been in a state of war for most of the last two centuries.

Anyone expecting to see the emergence in Afghanistan within the next several decades of a recognizable modern democracy ... is dreaming in Technicolor.

Afghan government officials are notoriously corrupt at all levels. It is a pipe dream to believe that this deep-seated tradition will go away overnight.

If we aren’t willing to hang in for the long haul what will have been the point of our efforts?

MAKING A DIFFERENCE:
CIDA has a number of projects underway, but no one was able to show us. Journalists say they have seen some evidence of useful programs, but these appear to be limited.

NATO troops may see themselves as defenders - but are the Taliban more repugnant than foreign troops (who have been despised each and every time they have come to Afghanistan over the past two centuries)?

Where Canada is trying to have its biggest impact – in Kandahar – life is clearly more perilous because we are there.

The death of many innocent people and the destruction of property are undermining efforts to portray our troops as “the good guys.”

Only when our military is seen to be there to assist rather than conquer, is there any hope that we can start being seen as a positive alternative to the Taliban.

Canadians we talked to strongly suggested that Afghans will always tell foreigners what they want to hear, which may have nothing to do with reality.

We met one Afghan police colonel who, said that the local population will simply wait until we disappear; that siding with the Canadians is a bad bet the way things are going; and that the incentives aren’t there to risk annoying those people up in the hills.

Unless the situation changes, most Afghans won’t have much trouble deciding which side to snuggle up to: the rich guys who aren’t foreigners; versus the foreign guys who can’t hide, who will eventually run out of time and patience, and who don’t pay big bucks.

WHY WE ARE INVOLVED:
...... To support our international allies;
...... To help one of the poorest countries in the world;
...... Because it was a training ground for terrorists who have disrupted our lives and economy.
...... We cannot let instability abroad ruin the prosperity of our country.

THE COMMITTEE’S VIEW:
The Committee was impressed by the optimism of Canadian troops and their leaders ... but ... we found it hard to square that with reality.

It is in our view doubtful that this mission can be accomplished given the limited resources currently being invested.

The kind of collateral damage and lack of developmental progress so far, (and the Taliban’s ability to retreat to and redeploy from Pakistan) makes success even more doubtful.

Ours is an enormously difficult task. Meanwhile, the task of our enemy is relatively easy - keep attracting disaffected people to their cause; use those people to disrupt reform; and persist for as many years as it takes for Canada and our allies to lose heart.

If our only mission is to distract the Taliban while our allies make progress on other fronts ... this hasn’t been properly explained to Canadians.

If Canada is to give Afghans a better chance to live decent lives – then Canada and NATO must deploy more resources in Afghanistan and use those resources in a better way than we have done to this point. If this proves impossible, Canada should be prepared to consider withdrawing its troops from Afghanistan as soon as our current commitment ends.

-------------------------------------------
THE SENATE REPORT
Canadian Senate Report on Afghanistan – Condensed (4 from 10 pgs)

Canadian Senate Report on Afghanistan – Full Text

RECALL:
Canadian Privy Council: Vast majority of Afghanis struggle for the "bare essentials of survival"
The bleak forecast of the heavily censored report is at odds with recent claims by other Canadian officials

It says the vast majority of the population still struggles for the "bare essentials of survival," just as they did in the days of the Taliban

Note: Senate Report on Afgha... Canadian Senate Report... Canadian Senate Report... Canadian Privy Council...

Contributed By


Topic


Article Rating

 (0 votes) 

Options




Comments

  1. Thu Feb 15, 2007 6:26 pm
    Another question:

    Do the Afghan people want Canada in their country?

  2. Thu Feb 15, 2007 6:43 pm
    The most important question is indeed, "do the Afghan people want us in their country?" The answer is a qualified yes. Polling done recently by ABC/BBC found about 60% of Afghans will tolerate (for now) the presence of foreign troops to avoid a Taliban resurgence. This percentage has declined from previous polls. Additionally, the BBC (I think) published a interesting cross section of Afghan opinion which generally was conditionally suportive of ISAF troops. Of course, most Afghans would switch to the insurgents side, out of self-preservation, if it looked like the Taliban was winning. This does not mean they want to live under Taliban rule.

    There is other evidence that a majority of Afghans are content with our presence, and very little evidence that they want ISAF forces to leave. No official Afghan organization I know of is calling for ISAF troop withdrawal. Similarly, the Senate Report seems basically supportive of the Afghan mission, conditionally.

    ---
    Brett Mann

  3. by
    Thu Feb 15, 2007 6:58 pm
    EXCERPTED FROM THE REPORT:
    SECTION: The Challenges
    Problem 2: Home Team Advantage
    NATO troops see themselves as defenders of the majority of Afghans versus powerful minority groups – the Taliban and regional warlords – who are the true enemies of the Afghan people. But how do Afghans see us? Do residents of Kandahar province – home of the Taliban – see the situation our way? The harsh and sadistic Taliban government was repugnant to westerners, and to many Afghans.

    But are the Taliban more repugnant than foreign troops, who have been despised each and every time they have come to Afghanistan over the past two centuries?

    We think we’re the good guys. What do Afghans think?

  4. Thu Feb 15, 2007 10:20 pm
    "the Taliban and regional warlords – who are the true enemies of the Afghan people"

    The Taliban and regional warlords are two separate groups not to be confused with each other. Currently the warlords have been given a great deal of power in the US installed puppet government while the Taliban have been completely excluded.

    The inclusion of warlords (i.e., criminals with small armies) into the puppet Afghan government makes a farce out of the claim that NATO is in Afghanistan to help the Afghan people. Furthermore, the report ignores the established fact that the pretext for the invasion - 9/11 - was in fact a lie. The initial reason Canada went into Afghanistan was due to the 9/11 attacks, however everyone in power seems to want to forget about that little detail because they know full well that no one believes the official 9/11 story anymore.

    It's clear to me, that the 9/11 fable has turned into a liability as no one wants to play that card anymore.

  5. Thu Feb 15, 2007 10:44 pm
    "Polling done recently by ABC/BBC found about 60% of Afghans will tolerate (for now) the presence of foreign troops to avoid a Taliban resurgence"<br />
    <br />
    If the poll in question is to be believed, I read 55%, down from 65% last year. <br />
    <a href="http://abcnews.go.com/images/International/afghanistan_poll_061205.pdf">http://abcnews.go.com/images/International/afghanistan_poll_061205.pdf</a><br />
    <br />
    The most important question of all, considering that Canada is supposed to be a democracy: Do the Canadian people want Canadian troops in Afghanistan?<br />
    <br />
    And forget about NATO obligations, when the so-called "ally" surrounding this war was caught lying about 9/11 which is why we're in Afghanistan to start with, and was also caught lying about their illegal war in Iraq.<br />

  6. Thu Feb 15, 2007 11:20 pm
    With respect to the recent ABC/BBC poll showing that the Afghan people do not want foreign troops to leave, things are not so black & white. <br><br> <a href="http://www.zmag.org/content/showarticle.cfm?ItemID=7899">Protests in Afghanistan</a> <blockquote>The reason I am cautious in judging the implications of the demonstrations stems from a recent trip to Afghanistan I made with Sonali Kolhatkar. In contrast with what appears to be happening now, we couldn't find anyone that thought foreign troops should leave immediately. To the people we talked with, withdrawal of foreign troops at the current stage would be a disaster. People feared the many warlords who were armed by the US to oust the Taliban after 9/11. The US has essentially engineered a situation that requires its presence. If foreign troops left, people told us, the warlords would fill the power vacuum and end any possibility for secular democratic change in Afghanistan. This strategic decision was expressed even by some who took part in the recent demonstrations, people obviously well aware of the abuses committed by US troops. For example, Ahmad Jawed, a 19-year old literature student at Kabul University. Even though he demonstrated against US behavior, Jawed "believed the U.S. presence is necessary for the country's security," but emphasized that the foreigners should answer to the Afghan people and not stay any longer than necessary. "Up until the time they are needed, they should stay. But then they should go."</blockquote> From what I read out of the situation, the Afghan people want their country back but not left in ruins (of course!). Unfortunately the people behind the invasion have no intention of giving full control back to the Afghan people, since their true motives have to do with securing the country's resources and strategic location for their own selfish needs. <br><br> What has "gone wrong" has everything to do with the true reason for the invasion, otherwise there'd be a relatively high level of peace in Afghanistan by now.



view comments in forum


You need to be a member and be logged into the site, to comment on stories.




Your Voice

To post to the site, just sign up for a free membership/user account and then hit submit. Posts in English or French are welcome. You can email any other suggestions or comments on site content to the site editor. (Please note that Vive le Canada does not necessarily endorse the opinions or comments posted on the site.)

canadian bloggers | canadian news