Afstan: Dutch really seem like going in 2010/Effect on our government/Brit Update

Which will certainly make it harder for our government to consider any military role past 2011 (and a bit harder for President Obama to go for a substantial US force increase):

Dutch troops look set to leave Afghanistan
...
The Dutch military presence in Afghanistan will almost certainly end next year. Coalition partners Labour and ChristenUnie will block any move to extend the mission.

• Interview - Afghanistan needs timetable for withdrawal, says US expert
• News - Dutch F-16 kills Afghan civilians
• Analysis - Dutch still support soldiers, but not mission in Afghanistan

The surprise motion by coalition partners Labour and the orthodox Christian ChristenUnie was tabled late on Wednesday night at the end of a debate in parliament about the Dutch participation in the Nato mission in Afghanistan. A vote will follow later this week.

Prime minister Jan Peter Balkenende (Christian Democrats) had come to parliament together with foreign minister Maxime Verhagen (Labour) and defence minister Eimert van Middelkoop (ChristenUnie) to explain the government position about Afghanistan.

The Netherlands currently has around 1,450 troops in Uruzgan province in Afghanistan. Confusion had risen in the past months over the future of the Uruzgan mission. The Netherlands joined the Nato mission in Afghanistan in 2006 for what was supposed to be a two-year operation. When the mission was extended for another two years the government said Dutch troops would definitely be out of Afghanistan by the end of 2010.

But foreign minister Verhagen suggested last week in New York that an extension of the Uruzgan mission was still a possibility. Verhagen wondered if "the Netherlands can just pass the buck" in Uruzgan. Other countries taking part in the ISAF mission in Uruzgan, including the US, have been lobbying the Netherlands to stay longer in Uruzgan, possibly in a different role.

But Labour and ChristenUnie now say they want to stick to the original government's decision of two years ago, leaving the third coalition party, the Christian Democrats, in the lurch.

Foreign minister Verhagen asked parliament to keep an open mind, and warned that a Dutch departure could have a snowball effect on the other countries participating in the Uruzgan mission.

21 Dutch soldiers have died in Afghanistan since the Uruzgan mission began in 2006.

That F-16 strike (more here) will surely have a very negative impact on the public--and illustrates why our government will not send CF-18s.

Meanwhile our NATO allies are hoping the government can, er, make up its mind. Good luck on any real decision before an election. Especially with the fear of a "Gotcha!" moment regarding future plans.

Update: We and the Dutch are certainly not going to help the Brits to do more:

Britain is considering sending more troops to Afghanistan in the short term, Downing Street said today [Oct. 1], but the commitment will be made only if Nato allies also pledge more forces...

David Miliband, the foreign secretary, said yesterday [Sept. 30]: "We back our troops in support of a clear plan, but we expect every other government in the coalition to do the same, not by turning round but by recommitting to the mission. We came into this together. We see it through together [emphasis added]."..

Right. 'Twould be nice if our media reported such things. So much I guess for the Canadian commitment to collective security. How much we (and most of the "West") have changed over 60-some years.

The irony is that in 1948 Secretary of State for External Affairs Louis St. Laurent was advocating the creation of what became NATO in light of the failure of the UN to provide collective security, the latter body's fundamental duty. Yet these days the UN Security Council has repeatedly mandated the NATO mission in Afstan (indeed "SEEKS REINFORCEMENTS TO BOOST SECURITY")-- and most NATO members don't really want to know.

Sauve qui flippin' peut. So much for great ideals of internationalism. I'm alright Jack. For now.