Afstan: The Globe and Mail manufactures a story undercutting our mission

A front-page (why?) non-story created to suit the paper's agenda:

Canada's once-lofty Afghan goals downgraded, defence files show

The Globe manufactured the story by comparing a February 2007 memo from then-CDS Gen. Hillier's office, obtained under Access to Information, with broad government priorities outlined in June 2008. Though the story purports to discover telling discrepancies between the two, it's really an apples and oranges thing--unless the story is also maintaining that the CDS's office set government policy as a whole. As Alain Pellerin, Colonel (Ret'd), Executive Director, Conference of Defence Associations, writes:

...this February 2007 CDS directive was meant to “provide overarching military strategic guidance for the conduct of operations in Afghanistan” to the Canadian Forces, while the goals set out in the government website links above describe the Canadian government’s stated goals for the mission in Kandahar until 2011. Furthermore, in February 2007 the Canadian Forces had just participated in Operation Medusa in fall 2006, and the Canadian government’s goals in Afghanistan were not fully articulated...

Moreover the story makes much of this:

...
Now, a key focus of the Harper government's strategy in Kandahar is turning over responsibilities for maintaining order and fighting insurgents to local army and police. The Tories said in their June statement of priorities that they plan to "maintain a more secure environment and establish law and order by building the capacity of the Afghan National Army and Police."..

Some "now". That was the announced policy exactly a year ago. No change there. Funny that the story doesn't mention that. What's the blinking big deal? Unless one is trying to give the impression that there has been some great and recent policy shift that shows weaknesses in the mission.

And how come the Globe reporter didn't remember that his paper (along with much of the media) made a huge stink last year about fabricated differences between Gen. Hillier and then-MND O'Connor over how rapidly the Afghans could assume that greater combat role?

Globe really has its guns out
Media create fake war: Hillier et al. vs. O'Connor

The Globe and Mail, committing "journalism" yet again.

Meanwhile, the Toronto Star (!?!) cuts CDS Gen. Natynczyk some slack in an editorial. Go figure.

Update: Yet the next day the Globe publishes a reasonable editorial; really go figure:

CANADA IN AFGHANISTAN
Staying the course with realistic goals

Plus an excellent letter:

Afghan aspirations

ERIC MORSE
July 23, 2008

Toronto -- A question for James Laxer (It's Time To Recalibrate Canada's Mission - July 22): Since when are identical values, legal or otherwise, a prerequisite for military alliance? The Karzai government is no worse (by our standards) than most Afghan regimes have been in terms of values and is considerably better than the Taliban one it replaced.

The assumption that Canada is in Afghanistan to impose our value system on a society that does not accept it is both false and pernicious. We are there to ensure that a political and strategic vacuum is not once again filled by a regime that is a dedicated enemy of the West and its values. Progress in other directions is a necessary part of that process, but it is not the strategic objective.

Values cannot be imposed by any outside force, though local values can be temporarily suppressed by force and fear. As for withdrawing because Afghan values are not ours, if perfection is your only standard, you will be forever disappointed. Indeed, you might as well go home.