Afstan: The media and government need to do better

Christie Blatchford of the Globe, who is about as gung-ho as Canadian journalists get, thinks the media has not covered the war well enough. She also thinks the government is doing a piss-poor job (words I'm sure she would happily use) in building public support for the war (full text not officially online).

The situation:

Public opinion polls repeatedly show that Canadians are confused about why we are in Afghanistan, that they fear young soldiers are dying in vain, and that they have difficulty distinguishing between Afghanistan and Iraq and, more generally, among Afghanistan, Iraq and the countries of the larger Middle East...

The media:

...for the most part, I think, we in my business are fairly faithfully painting the picture as it is in southern Afghanistan.

Yet we are failing miserably, somehow, in getting the message across...

...many of our fellow citizens do not appear to know that Afghanistan is a mission approved by the wider international community, with about three dozen NATO and non-NATO countries contributing to the effort (including the likes of plucky Romania, whose troops fearlessly muck about in Cold War-era vehicles) and specifically sanctioned by the United Nations [our media did not report the recent unanimous extension of NATO ISAF's combat mandate by the UN Security Council - MC]...

The government:

...the real culprit is Ottawa, that is, the elected leaders.

It was the Liberal government that first sent the troops to Afghanistan, a decision reaffirmed, the mission extended, by the Stephen Harper government.

There was little debate, even in the House of Commons, but then the House of Commons rarely hosts what could be properly called debate; instead, there is grandstanding, sniping and posing.

And since then, the Harper government has done a simply dreadful job of explaining the mission....when Defence Minister Gordon O'Connor recently deigned to utter a few words about it, he was in Australia. And when Mr. Harper spoke this week on the Sept. 11 anniversary, he made the correct link -- Canada is in Afghanistan because the 9/11 terrorists trained there -- but failed to deliver anything resembling a statesmanlike or ringing explanation of the good we are doing by being there...

Just one example of the Conservatives' economy with the truth. They have consistently tried to down-play the combat aspect of the mission (when has anyone in Ottawa, government or military, been on television live explaining in any detail any of the combat operations?), to the point that Canadians were surprised when the fatalities seriously started coming.

Why has no-one from the government been on television explaining in detail both the UN Security Council's consistent support for NATO ISAF and the extent of the involvement by other NATO members? From our media coverage one might think that Canada, the US and the UK were the only countries involved (with cameo appearances by the Dutch). The media are first to blame but where is the government effort to present clearly the bigger picture?

The people may have the will to see things through; but "Canada's New Government" needs to do a much better, and more forthright, job than it has so far.

In this connection see this Ruxted Group editorial, "The Afghanistan Debate", at Army.ca.

Update: Can anyone imagine anything like this coming from a Canadian politician--whether you agree with it or not--in terms of the strength of argument and marshalling of evidence?