Not all wars end quickly following set battles between massed troops. Some wars, especially those between ideological adversaries, last decades and are fought on many fronts in many ways. The Cold War lasted nearly fifty years and while it included military conflicts most of the struggle was non-military. Such drawn out ideological conflicts are not uncommon historically – the Peloponnesian War, the Thirty Year War and the Taiping Rebellion all lasted through generations, were fought on battlefields but were finally determined by which side won the loyalty of the populations at war.
Canada, and other nations, are now engaged in an ideological struggle as profound as any we have ever faced. It is a battle for liberal democracy against organized forces of reaction. There is an identifiable foe, a foe which is misogynistic, anti-Christian and grossly intolerant. The enemy carries many names (Al-Qaeda, the Taliban, Al-Jihad) but is a single entity being a loose cellular alliance of radical reactionaries. The radicals are not numerous, but they are focused, intelligent and patient.
The enemy we face is neither Islam nor terrorism. Terrorism is a technique of the radicals, and a war against a technique can never be won. A War on Terror is a battle against shadows, a war on nothing, and ultimately a fool’s errand. But failing to identify the radicals as the foe, and by focusing on restraining a technique, allows the radicals to paint the struggle as a battle between Western allied nations and those who follow the Prophet Muhammad. The radicals have a coherent ideology based in Islamic thought, but it is the radicals we must defeat, and not the soil from which they sprang. This is important, because, as American General David Petraeus, has said, we "cannot kill [our] way to victory" in the struggle against the radicals. Muslims in general do not support the radicals (the theocracy in Iran is wildly unpopular) but the banning of minarets in Switzerland is almost as important a recruitment tool for radicals as Guantánamo, Afghan detainees and historical Western support for tyrannies in states with largely Muslim populations.
All this goes to Canada’s role in Afghanistan. Parliament has decided that Canada’s combat mission in Afghanistan will end in 2011. By that time Canada will have had forces in Afghanistan for a decade. Canada has shown a strong commitment to the Afghanistan mission. The end of the Canadian combat mission is not “abandonment” but is simply the standard operating practice where combat is shared by allied forces; other forces must not take up Canada’s combat mission. Military action is part, but only a part, of the struggle against radicals. Canada still has a significant Afghan role.
Support for genuine local leadership together with development aid and assistance is an essential tool in the global battle and it is one tool well suited for Canada. Canada has a distinguished history of international development and technical aid. Yemen, a State of special interest recently, is the poorest Arab nation and that poverty has a role in the radicalization of parts of its population and the inability of Yemeni government officials to control their country. Saudi Arabia, with far greater resources has rehabilitated more than 4,000 radicals since 2004. Their rehabilitation has been through a combination of imprisonment and education; the former radicals have been reintegrated into mainstream Saudi society. Poverty and a lack of government capacity is a factor in radicalization in Sudan, Somalia, Afghanistan and other poor nations. Financial support for local governments can help cut off the radicals.
More generally, by supporting mainstream Islamic scholarship and pursuing joint projects between faith communities Canada can battle radicals of wealthy backgrounds in the classrooms of Europe and North America. The Canadian International Peace Project repair of a war ravaged mosque in Afghanistan with the support of a broad alliance of Canadians of all faith groups is an example of the kind of Canadian leadership possible. Intellectual alternatives to radicalism exist but they must be promoted. People need to be governed both from the outside, through compliance with rules, and from the inside, by values. Alhaji Umaru Mutallab, the father of the Christmas airline bomber, represents a Muslim consensus against the radicals – his values and ideals are those to be fostered.
Canada’s combat mission in Afghanistan will soon end but that does not mean Canada’s Afghan role is over. The focus will change from fighting the Taliban to trying to win the minds of Afghan people.
Development and diplomatic efforts must be at the core of Canada’s role in Afghanistan. Canada can pursue a “good government” strategy on the ground in Afghanistan. This would allow Canadian expertise in the development of sound judicial systems and strong political institutions, which has been so successfully deployed around the globe, to flourish in Afghanistan. Some Canadian military support will be needed to protect the development work on the ground; but such military mission would be ancillary to development and not combat focused. More generally, Canada must support liberal democratic views around the world and promote freedom, liberty and democracy for all peoples. This requires more than words – it requires close attention to what is happening and what assistance Canada can provide.
No comments:
Post a Comment