Fulfilling our Reputation
Canada’s moral responsibilities in Afghanistan
Jesse Beach, volunteer staff
The values of Canadians have long been considered superior to other nations, specifically to those of a certain southern neighbour who shall remain nameless. We feel that others see us as nicer people, more open-minded and humane than the next guy over. Even today, when some believe that our current foreign policy is undermining Canada’s sterling reputation, we remain to be viewed as a very honest people, genuinely concerned about human rights and freedom all across the globe.
Can Canada, a leader in both the fight for human rights and in the Afghan conflict, continue to send troops to a country that so callously
violates the basic rights that we are there to defend?
So says Michael Byers, the holder of the Canadian research chair in international law and politics who came to the University of Manitoba recently to speak of Canada’s moral responsibilities on the world stage. Byers says that Canadian values are superior to those of other nations, in spite of, and not because of, our current government.
Byers’ speech seemed clairvoyant only days later when, on Oct. 7, 2007, 15 prisoners were executed by gunfire at Afghanistan’s main prison outside of Kabul. Public executions were routinely held during the Taliban regime in Afghanistan, but were put to a stop after the Taliban were removed from power in 2001. These executions are the first state-sanctioned capital punishments by the Afghani government since 2004, when Afghan President Hamid Karzai assured that there would be a moratorium on the death penalty.
These executions not only draw the notion of Canada’s values into sharp focus, but also question those of all NATO countries with armies in Afghanistan who routinely hand over prisoners to the Afghan government for holding into focus as well. Can NATO continue to hand over prisoners to a government that may ultimately kill them? Can Canada, a leader in both the fight for human rights and in the Afghan conflict, continue to send troops to a country that so callously violates the basic rights that we are there to defend?
Canada’s current military involvement can only continue past February 2009 with parliamentary approval, but Prime Minister Stephen Harper has stated that Canada has a “moral responsibility” to continue military deployment until Afghans can take responsibility for their own stability. Harper has also clarified that he doesn’t need full consensus to continue the mission past this date, only enough parliamentary support for a vote to pass.
Alternatively, the Liberal party is demanding that Canada clearly and formally announce its intent to end the combat mission in Afghanistan by that date. NDP leader Jack Layton has been a consistent critic of Canada’s presence in Afghanistan, demanding immediate withdrawal of all troops. Layton maintains that the mission has strayed from Canada’s traditional role as peacekeeper, even urging the Afghan government to engage the Taliban in peace talks last year. While the idea was harshly received at the time, more recently Karzai has offered negotiations and even government positions for Taliban leaders who come forward. The Bloc Québécois has also stated that they will not support the current government unless Canada withdraws from Afghanistan by February 2009. It seems that the prime minister is going to have trouble gaining the necessary parliamentary support to extend the Afghan mission. This only seems reasonable considering that the values and reputation which Canadians have long enjoyed and prided themselves upon are being debased due to the current foreign policy which is clearly not supported by any of theopposition.
The Canadian support of a country which flagrantly ignores basic human rights goes against everything we pride ourselves in fighting for. Yet it is also why we must continue to fight for it. What the opposition parties do not realize is that it is because of the very morals Canadians pride themselves on that we have our made current foreign policy, not in spite of them. Canada, as a global leader in human rights and freedoms, may not choose to fight injustice only in stable countries. We cannot wave our flag and preach our values to places where they already exist. It is in war-ravaged nations like Afghanistan where we are most needed. There have been 71 Canadian soldiers and one diplomat killed since the Canadian military deployed to Afghanistan in early 2002 72 Canadians who have given up their lives in hopes of establishing a stable Afghanistan. While there are valid concerns about not wanting to risk more Canadian lives in a conflict not supported by much of the country, we must realize that these men and women died for a reason, a cause that they believed in. To leave now, to abandon that cause, would be to say that these people died in vain.
Our current government may indeed be straying from its traditional role as a peacekeeper, which some could see as an abandonment of our traditional values. But in fighting the immoral and inhumane practices that are clearly present in countries like Afghanistan, we exemplify these values that we claim to hold so dear. We are not, as Byers claims, undermining our reputation; we are fulfilling it. The execution of 15 prisoners must not be seen as Canada allying with an immoral nation, or as a reason to leave Afghanistan. It is the very reason we are there in the first place.
Jesse Beach is a fourth-year English student.
