at what cost peace?

Scribbled down on September 4th, 2006 by she
Posted in Those Who Volunteered

I’ve often complained in this blog about Canadians (safe at home) demanding we pull our troops out of Afghanistan. With the CTV reports of the most recent deaths of our troops outside of Kandahar, I expect the clamouring to begin anew.

One thing I don’t think I have done well is explain why I think we need to remain in Afghanistan despite the losses on both sides. As Canadians – I’m sure I’m guilty of this – we tend to sit back and watch world affairs from afar. We then pass judgement on other countries politics, behaviours, etc. from on high while smugly sipping our coffees and munching on Timbits.

There needs to be stability before there can be lasting peace. Peacekeeping requires both sides of any armed conflict to be willing to put down their arms and commit to a cease-fire. Afghanistan is not a good candidate for peacekeeping at this time. What use is laying down arms to build schools if the Taliban will destroy all that you build? Why should the people and democratically elected members of the Afghani governement be asked to sit back, stop fighting, and resign themselves to a return to the “old ways” of the Taliban? Isn’t this what we’d be condemming the citizens of Afghanistan to if we walk away now or replace our fighting force with a band of peacekeepers? Peacekeepers are not allowed to intervene – even if they’re watching someone being murdered in front of them – unless directly fired upon. Ask Romeo Dallaire how successful UN peacekeeping measures are in a country where one or both sides of a conflict are bound and determined on slaughter, occupation, domination, and death.

I’m sure it’s obvious that I don’t believe the main purpose of the Canadian Forces is peacekeeping.

There’s a near mythical attitude towards the term peacekeeping in Canada amongst civilians. Modern Canadians have deluded themselves into believing that the only reason why Canada was respected on a world scale was due to it’s peacekeeping efforts. They completely ignore the actions of Canadian soldiers in WWI and WWII where Canada proved herself worthy of standing up for her convictions. Peacekeeping is but one tool in a chest of options to select from. When you’re building or repairing anything, you have to choose the best tool for the job. At this time, I believe it would be folly to select peacekeeping as the preferred course of action in Afghanistan. There is no point in selecting a hammer to repair a leaky pipe…

Additional Reading
Sun columnist, Licia Corbella, hits the nail on the head in her response to Jack Layton‘s most recent call to negotiate peace settlements with the Taliban. I’ve often argued that we cannot hold our heads high and claim we support international women’s rights and yet walk away from the current conflict in Afghanistan. Ms. Corbella paints a vivid picture of what life under the Taliban was like for Afghani citizens, especially women.

Technorati Tags: , , , , ,


You can follow any responses to this entry through the RSS 2.0 feed. You can leave a response, or trackback from your own site.


One Response to “at what cost peace?”

  1. […] forgive the mess […]

Leave a Reply