Martin Regg Cohn's piece in the Star is worth a close read:
http://tinyurl.com/295po3g
"Mike Pearson was a peacemaker and a peacebuilder, but he was no pacifist," Ignatieff notes.
On Afghanistan, the Liberals deserve credit for offering clarity amidst the banality of foreign policy under the governing Conservatives. It borders on the bizarre to run away from our human and material sacrifices in Afghanistan without mapping out our next moves.
“Mr. Harper behaves as if the Afghan mission never happened,” Ignatieff argues. “He’s walking away from it as if it never occurred.”
First broached by Bob Rae, when the Liberal foreign affairs critic flew to Afghanistan with MPs from other parties, Ignatieff’s proposal cries out for an informed debate. Yet Harper has shown a conspicuous lack of leadership on this issue.
The Liberals want to focus on training the military in Kabul while continuing other aid work in the country, so that Afghans can start defending and rebuilding by themselves. They are also calling for a special envoy to Afghanistan to raise Canada’s profile in Kabul, and Afghanistan’s profile in Ottawa.
“However difficult it may be to say so, I think there is more work to be done (in Afghanistan),” Ignatieff said — and good on him for having the political courage to say so, along with Rae.
4 comments:
I couldn't agree more.
Canada needs to have an honest and upfront debate regarding Afghanistan and our continuing presence there. Non-emotional. And we won’t get it.
Someone needs to explain to Canadians exactly what we hope to accomplish, how our being in Afghanistan helps to advance the country's national interest (or not), security interests, etc ... There is a good argument, for example, (not that I subscribe to it) that it is ridiculous for Canada to attempt to modernize Afghanistan when we haven’t finished building our own country, i.e. the far north.
Our course, for the Conservatives to articulate why being in Afghanistan is in Canada’s national interest they would have to articulate what they believe Canada’s national interest to be. To do that they would have to develop an understanding of the international sphere beyond the current collection of biases, misunderstood history masquerading as ideology and pure ignorance that currently guides Canadian foreign policy. And since the Conservative base views the world outside Canada through a prism of biases, emotion and superstition disguised behind a crass ideology which is really a front for their biases, to offer anything else would offend the sensibilities of that base. Therefore it is not in Stephen Harper’s Conservative government’s interest to have such a debate, because they might lose, so Canada will not get a debate (unless the liberals force one).
Think about the directions that debate could go. Do you think Harper really wants to publicly and repeatedly defend Canada’s current reflexive support for Netanyahu’s Likud party? Do you think he wants to debate why Canada gives knee-jerk support to a foreign government? Because that is where a debate over foreign policy will end up; and I don’t think the Liberals want to have that debate either. Because at that point, like with Afghanistan, the debate stops being abstract and it gets specific, and emotional. It’s a loser all around. To have that debate would expose the neo-conservative principles which inform Harper’s government. So he won’t do it and the Liberals won’t force it (though they should, because the earlier, Liberal approach to Israel and the unique diplomatic challenges the Middle East presents was sensible; and positive for Israel).
wsam
The Liberals couldn't even agree to disagree on the future of the mission in the HofC. Half of them want out,the other half want to stay.
It’s telling that he had to go back to Pearson because every Liberal since then has flip-flopped more than a fish. Even during the Manley votes, Liberals were changing their positions on a weekly basis. The only people that have stayed consistent here are the Conservatives and the NDP.
Am I the only Canadian who can remember the Liberal opposition in question period trying to get the government to admit that they might keep some troops in Afghanastan as trainers.
Their position then was that this was a Tory plot to stay there.
Were either out or were in, they said.
whats the position now.
Post a Comment