Name your price

Canada’s mission in Afghanistan is worth it

MICHAEL SILICZ/ ILLUSTRATION DIRK BLOUW

The most contentious issue involving Canadian foreign policy is the military’s role in Afghanistan. With speculation of a possible federal election in the spring, the issue of Canada’s purpose in Afghanistan may very well come to dominate the political discourse in the near future. As this happens, many politicians will call for the return of Canadian soldiers from a mission that they see as increasingly costly, deadly, and ill-defined.

Despite these opinions, it is important to recall the purpose of Canada’s role in Afghanistan: to fight the social and economic conditions that breed terrorism. It is therefore vital that Canada remains committed to its role in Afghanistan until the country is stabilized with a strong, legitimate government. If Canada were to abandon its mission, we would not only be turning her back on our NATO allies, but would also pass up a rare opportunity to set the example of how future military missions should be carried out against failed states in the 21st century.

Canada is a major contributor to NATO’s UN-mandated International Security Assistance Force. Of the 30,000 NATO soldiers in the region, only a fraction are doing the very dangerous job of using armed force to fight the resurging Taliban and regional Afghan warlords. And it is the more than 2,000 Canadian men and women who are doing exactly that. By eradicating the Taliban’s military capabilities through force, the government of Hamid Karzai can finally do something that no government in Afghanistan has accomplished for a very long time: gain a monopoly over armed forces, thus allowing for the stabilization, spread, and legitimization of a strong central government and the rule of law. Jan. 30, 2007 marked the first anniversary of the five-year “Afghanistan Compact.” According to NATO, “the agreement affirms the commitment of the Government of Afghanistan and the international community to work towards conditions where the Afghan people can live in peace and security under the rule of law, with good governance and human rights protection for all, and can enjoy sustainable economic and social development.”

Thus, Canada and other NATO nations must give Afghanistan the time and security it needs in order to recover from decades of war. Furthermore, Canada has pledged over $10 billion of aid over the next 10 years to rebuild Afghanistan. With such lengthy time commitments, Canada and other NATO members should remain steadfast before contemplating any sort of withdrawal.

And remain steadfast Canada must. Forty-four Canadians have already given their lives in Afghanistan. Furthermore, Afghanistan represents one of the greatest chances since the end of the Second World War for the international community to practice the international liberalism it all-toooften preaches.

Yet for those who call for an abandonment of the Afghanistan mission, the above arguments will offer little persuasion. Critics will continue to question whether or not this is “Canada’s war.” They will argue that since NATO’s involvement, the worldwide supply of opium has vastly increased. They will insist that the simple disruption of the Taliban is mission-accomplished. And some may go so far as to assert that Canada is simply aiding American imperialism. But to all those who oppose Canada’s role in the NATO mission in Afghanistan: what do you wish to see in NATO’s place? Current reports indicate that 15,000 Taliban troops are preparing for a spring offensive to disrupt the Karzai government’s legitimacy. Should Canada (or worse, NATO) leave, who would fill in the void?

Thankfully, Prime Minister Stephen Harper and the Conservative government understand the stakes in Afghanistan. Despite calls to reevaluate the mission from both Jack Layton’s NDP and by Liberals such as Michael Ignatieff, the Conservatives remain steadfast in upholding Canada’s commitments to the international community and Afghanistan. The recent $3.4 billion purchase of four C-17 heavy cargo planes is a further step in the right direction for Canada, and the Harper government should be praised for bolstering the military. Harper has described the Afghan situation aptly: “it’s about the best traditions of this country, brave men and women putting on the Canadian uniform, defending freedom and democracy and protecting the rights of people around the world.”

What if NATO is wrong, and even after years of aid and military support, Afghanistan slides back into factionalist chaos? Well, then another tragic page of Central Asian history will be added to an already lengthy tome. But think of the bright side; what if NATO is right, and a viable democratic government is created in Central Asia? Then the NATO alliance, with a very significant contribution from Canada, will have created a masterful blueprint for managing failed states that spawn anti-Western militants and ideologies. Ask yourself, is that not worth the price?

Michael Silicz is a first-year law student with a background in political studies and history.