Afstan: A "misjudgment of historic proportions"

That is what those who oppose our combat mission are making, according to this piece by UN Secretary General Ban Ki-moon--which the Globe and Mail chooses to publish only on the Web. Why not in the print edition? And the minds of those opponents will remain closed to his assessments and arguments despite their professed devotion to the UN (via Bruce Rolston):

Afghanistan is a potent symbol of the costs inherent in abandoning nations to the lawless forces of anarchy. That alone justifies international efforts to help rebuild the country. Lest there be any doubt, remember Sept. 11, 2001, and its worldwide reverberations. We learned then how a country, shorn of its civic institutions, becomes a vacuum to be filled by criminals and opportunists. In its chaos and poverty, Afghanistan became a home base for terrorism.

Must we learn that lesson all over again?..

Yet, this progress is in jeopardy. Once again, the opportunists are on the rise, seeking anew to make Afghanistan a lawless place — a locus of instability, terrorism and drug trafficking. Their means are desperate: suicide bombs, kidnappings, the killing of government officials and hijacking of aid convoys. Almost more dismaying is the response of some outside Afghanistan, who react by calling for a disengagement or the full withdrawal of international forces. This would be a misjudgment of historic proportions, the repetition of a mistake that has already had terrible consequences...

The United Nations, alongside national and international counterparts, non-governmental organizations and Afghan civil society, will continue to provide the Afghan government whatever assistance it needs to build on these achievements. Our collective success depends on the continuing presence of the International Security Assistance Force [emphasis added], commanded by NATO and helping local governments in nearly every province to maintain security and carry out reconstruction projects.

In December, the Afghan National Army, supported by ISAF forces, reclaimed the town of Musa Qala in the southern province of Helmand, occupied by insurgents since February of 2007, and a major poppy-growing area. Significantly, it was led by the Afghan army and carried out at the request of the local population. At long last, development work can begin anew in Musa Qala.

The Afghan government has far to go before it regains control of its own destiny. But that day will come. It is hard work. There is little glory. It requires sacrifices. And that is why we are there [emphasis added].

Rather better than what Prime Minister Harper has been saying. Please read it Stephen, Stéphane, Gilles and Jack. And all those self-satisfied pundits.

John Manley, for his part, put the case for the mission superbly. Here's a good post by Aaron Wherry at his Maclean's blog (also via Bruce Rolston).

Update: The "Comments" at the Globe site are, er, revelatory.

Upperdate: Terry Glavin picks up on this post and writes:

...
It's not the first time the UN Secretary-General has appealed to NATO-ISAF countries to maintain their combat-troop levels in Afghanistan to ensure the country doesn't revert to “a host for terrorist and extremist groups.” But this latest appeal was far more frank, candid, plain-spoken and stern than anything he's said to date, that I'm aware of.

After the Secretary-General's blistering rebuke, is it really possible to continue to take anyone seriously who says things like "It's time to move NATO troops out, and UN peacekeepers in"?

How many more UN resolutions on the subject do we need?..

An earlier guest-post of mine on the "anyone" whom one can't take seriously is here.

Uppestdate: And maybe, just maybe, the Liberal leader is starting to see the light:

Liberal leader Stéphane Dion yesterday reiterated his party's position on the Afghan mission -- that Canada's involvement in combat must end in 2009 -- but added his party was "open to debate."..

Members of Mr. Manley's panel have also suggested the government delay any debate in the House of Commons on the Afghan mission until after NATO leaders meet in April.

This is a reasonable recommendation, Mr. Dion said. "There is no rush to vote right away."