Kandahar mission review panel

Here are the options proposed by the government:

Chaired by former Deputy Prime Minister and Minister of Foreign Affairs John Manley, the panel will examine four main options, while not excluding others:

1. Continue training the Afghan army and police so Canada can begin withdrawing its forces in February 2009;

2. Focus on reconstruction and have forces from another country take over security in Kandahar;

3. Shift Canadian security and reconstruction effort to another region in Afghanistan;

4. Withdraw all Canadian military except a minimal force to protect aid workers and diplomats...

Quick comments:

1. Weasely, tries to downplay the combat side of the mission and implies that role will virtually cease by 2009. It says nothing about a serious military commitment to training or development (PRT) after then, much less combat.

2. Weasely straw man--how can that option be effected?

3. Aims at Liberals and Bloc.

4. Aims at NDP.

Here's the rest of the panel:

In addition to Mr. Manley, the panel includes former federal Cabinet Minister Jake Epp, former Clerk of the Privy Council Paul Tellier, former Canadian Ambassador to the United States Derek Burney, and Pamela Wallin, former Canadian Consul General in New York City...

Manley is good on his merits. This is what he said in March, 2004 (an improvement on the initial version of the post):

As I’ve said before, we can’t sit at the G8 table and when the waiter arrives with the bill, excuse ourselves to go to the washroom. We’ve been doing just that, and trading in our Pearsonian reputation rather than fulfilling the Pearsonian vision.

Tellier and Burney both know what government and foreign/defence policy are all about.

Update: Excerpts from an article Mr Manley just published following a visit to Afstan in May this year as a director of CARE Canada:

What became very plain to me, however, was that there is no possible way to separate the development or humanitarian mission from the military one [emphasis added]. There can be no meaningful progress on development without an improved security environment. This can
only exist if the institutions of rule of law can be established and the government of Afghanistan can succeed in establishing a welcome presence in more regions of the country.

Whenever we asked Afghans what they thought ISAF or Canada should do, they did not hesitate to say that we must stay [emphasis added]. Without the presence of the international forces, chaos would surely ensue.

But in looking to the future, expectations must be reasonable. Afghanistan is a deeply divided tribal society, with divisions between Sunni and Shiite Muslims [actually between the Shia Hazaras and all the other ethnic groups which are Sunni] further complicating the mix. It has been racked by decades of war, and it remains the third-poorest country on earth. There should be no belief that after five or
even ten years of Western military presence and aid, Afghanistan will resemble Kansas. With patience, commitment and some luck, it will resemble Afghanistan. But an Afghanistan in which people can live together in relative security. Democracy has very shallow roots and has yet to prove itself to Afghans as a viable system of
government.

Institutions that are respected will not be built overnight. Police and judges will need time to be trained, and the means to pay them must be established, but a functioning economy needs security in which to grow...

For me, Afghanistan is an enormous opportunity for Canada. For the first time in many years, we have brought a level of commitment to an international problem that gives us real weight and credibility. For once, our 3Ds (defence, diplomacy and development assistance) are all pointed at the same problem, and officials from three departments are working together.

Canadians hear mainly about our military role and are hardpressed to put it into a broader context of either peacekeeping, development or humanitarianism. They should hear more about the important and meaningful contribution our development assistance is making...

We often seek to define Canada’s role in the world. Well, for whatever reason, we have one in Afghanistan. Let’s not abandon it too easily. But let’s use our hard-earned influence to make sure the job is done right [emphasis added].

Amen.