Afghan Mission Must Balance Security and Development
By Gregory D. Morrow
It should be clear to all Canadians that Afghanistan is to Canada as Iraq is to the United States. Both are breeding grounds for terrorists, both populations are often without basic services, both have witnessed civilians and foreign forces being killed at an increasing rate, and both are occupied by a Western military presence that everyday people now do not want. The problem in Iraq, as every reasonable people knows, is the U.S. emphasis on fighting the enemy (a confusing mix of imported terrorists and local Iraqis who just want foreign occupiers out), without the same time, energy and resources committed to helping build the institutions, civil society, and economy for Iraq to be truly independent. Clearly, both the immediate security problems and the long-term development problems must be addressed in both Afghanistan and Iraq. Unfortunately, Canada has adopted the failed U.S. policy in Iraq, i.e. that development can only occur once the country is secure. Moreover, any debate in Canada about the relative weight of security vs. development has been largely stifled, much like it has in the U.S., by those who argue any change from the status quo is a betrayal of our troops, and framed as a “cut-and-run” policy.
With this in mind, Liberal leadership candidate Gerard Kennedy this week called for a new strategy in Afghanistan. As Kennedy said:
“By focusing solely on military objectives in Afghanistan, Prime Minister Harper is making the same mistakes that the Bush administration made in Iraq and it will lead to similar long-term failure. The Prime Minister has failed to answer the fundamental question of whether we are building a civil society in Afghanistan along with the Afghani people, or simply occupying a troublesome part of the world. ”