Manley Report – No End Date Makes Sense
| 1/22/2008 | Posted by Patti under Afghanistan, Canadian Politics |
I spent some time today reading carefully through the report from the “Independent Panel on Canada’s Future Role in Afghanistan” chaired by John Manley, the former Liberal Deputy Prime Minister. The report on the whole seems to be in depth and well thought out. It doesn’t sugar coat the mission in Afghanistan nor is it doom and gloom. It raises some tough issues and makes some tough recommendations.
Partisan politics aside, the report lays out some obvious truths that don’t fit well in sound bites for partisan politicians.
For Dion, setting an arbitrary end to our combat role as February 2009 and then expecting our troops to focus more on training and mentoring Afghan National Army recruits just doesn’t make sense. You can’t train and mentor effectively from within the wire, you need to be able to accompany and support the raw troops on the battlefield and that means taking part in combat. You don’t train an army from a classroom.
For Layton, aka Taliban Jack, you can’t take on a peacekeeping role unless there is a peace to keep. Did you not learn your lesson in Rwanda where Canadians were there as peacekeepers whose hands were tied from responding to the violence? They were reduced to watching a genocide unfold. You also can’t arbitrarily withdraw troops when the going gets tough and still expect to have a say on the world stage.
For Harper, you need to step up to the plate on a lot of fronts. Most vital being you need to be providing Canadians with a clear, frank and open explanation of why Canada is in Afghanistan and why it is important for us to finish the job. You, not your minions, need to use the political capital our fighting forces have gained you to get them what they need from NATO.
The Panel assessed prevailing conditions in three connected dimensions: security, governance and development. Each dimension, of course, affects the others in dynamic interaction. Security enables development; effective governance enhances security; development creates opportunities, and multiplies the rewards, of improved security and good governance. In this virtuous circle of cause and effect, security is an essential condition of good governance and lasting development.
It is security that our combat troops are working hard to provide in Kandahar, the province that was the birth place of the Taliban. Prior to our troops deploying there in 2005 the Taliban operated with impunity in the region. Since their deployment our troops have fought some fierce battles with the Taliban to push them out of the region. They have been reduced from engaging our troops in head on attacks to hit and run attacks, most notably using IEDs.
The insurgents that our troops are battling are able to take advantage of the political turmoil in neighbouring Pakistan and the largely lawless frontier where they find sanctuary to rest and regroup. Canadian and other ISAF forces report significant successes in their strategy of “clear, hold and develop,” pointing to communities where people are safer from violence and where reconstruction and development are under way. And there is no indication of popular Afghan enthusiasm for a return to Taliban rule.
As the troops push out from Kandahar city to widen the circle of security, more troops are needed on the ground in order to maintain what has been secured. It is that need that forms the basis of the panel’s primary recommendation. They recommend that our troops remain beyond February 2009 if one or more NATO countries provides 1000 troops to partner with the the Canadian combat groups.
The objective for victory is not necessarily the defeat of the Taliban but the provision of enough stable security to enable the effective training of Afghan National Army and Afghan National Police to the point that they can take over control of their own country.
The panel recommends that if NATO fails to produce those troops then Canada should give notice that we are leaving Kandahar. Departure is not what the panel wants, but the firm threat of doing so would help to send the message to NATO members who have not stepped to the plate on the heavy lifting that they need to do their part. Of the 39 countries currently involved in Afghanistan, only a handful are doing the heavy lifting against the insurgency. If even 5 of the other countries contributed 200 troops each, the additional need would be met.
It is interesting to note that countries not engaged in combat operations are still taking casualties. Spain, which is not directly engaged in combat has taken casualties at the same rate as Canada who has taken the biggest hit in relation to the number of troops deployed. You’d think these countries would get the hint, that they are not immune just because they don’t have the political will to step to the plate.
It was in the development area that the report seemed to hit hardest. It doesn’t take much reading between the lines to pick up that there is a lot of jockeying between aid agencies and departments that is producing more chaos than results. The report urges a task force based in the Prime Minister’s office to coordinate and direct aid resources. It also recommends that the task force provide latitude to those on the ground in Afghanistan to determine where it is safe to operate.
Overall, my read is that Canada needs to finish the job we started or risk abdicating our reputation and status on the world stage. Failure to complete the job is not only a failure for Canada but would likely subject the Afghan people to another round of chaos, violence and repression. Those are the conditions that allowed not only the Taliban to come to power, but allowed them to provide sanctuary to Bin Laden and his followers.
While we need to finish the job, ‘finishing’ is based on outcomes that turns over control of Afghanistan to Afghans, not necessarily the annihilation of the Taliban as a force. The government needs to do a better job of allocating and applying resources as well as communicating with the Canadian people.
I’m hoping first that Harper admits to what he needs to do and gets on with it and second that Dion comes off his academic pedestal long enough to find the gonads to do what is right.
Now to hunt down other response to the report, going to be interesting to see the spins.
[...] » Out of the Shadows – Out of the Shadows wrote an interesting post today on Manley Report – No End Date Makes SenseHere’s a quick excerpt I spent some time today reading carefully through the report from the “Independent Panel on Canada’s Future Role in Afghanistan” chaired by John Manley, the former Liberal Deputy Prime Minister. The report on the whole seems to be in depth and well thought out. It doesn’t sugar coat the mission in Afghanistan nor is it doom and gloom. It raises some tough issues and makes some tough recommendations. Partisan politics aside, the report lays out some obvious truths that don’t fit well in sound b [...]