Canadians to Train (But Not Mentor) Afghan Troops Post-2011...
...according to the latest steps in Canada's "Mission Messaging Mambo"©, this time from Dimitri Soudas, spokesperson for the Prime Minister's Office, who is quoted by CBC.ca saying (highlights mine):
A bit more on possible relationship and Taliban info ops implications here.
.... there will be Canadian troops in Afghanistan after parliament's mandate expires, though "exponentially fewer."It's good to see more details.
"I would caution you against saying dozens or hundreds or a thousand, there will be exponentially fewer," Soudas said.
"Whether there's 20 or 60 or 80 or 100, they will not be conducting combat operations."
Soudas said the government would shift focus from combat operations and in-the-field training of Afghan police and soldiers to a development and reconstruction mission.
The military's training mission will continue, but it will take place in the safety of protected facilities, he said.
The combat-mentoring role currently undertaken by Canadian troops would end, according to the plan.
"You can do training in training facilities," Soudas said. "And when I say training, I mean Canadian soldiers will not be doing combat training of Afghan soldiers in harm's way."
A bit more on possible relationship and Taliban info ops implications here.
posted by milnews.ca at 5:22 a.m.
6 Comments:
An interesting comment about internal Conservative politics by E.R. Campbell at Milnet.ca.
Mark
Ottawa
Also, since the Commons' resolution says we must be out of Kandahar, presumably any post-2011 training will take place elsewhere (Kabul area would seem likely, HQ for both US-led CSTC-A and the new NATO Training Mission-Afghanistan, see 9th para here)--unless a new resolution allows it to take place at Kandahar.
Mark
Ottawa
Horrible. The Canadians should send OMLTs for the ANP, or the ANA. I don't mind Canada transitioning completely to a reconstruction, CSTC-A/NTM-A and OMLT mission; and ending all "combat" operations. As one American, I am very disappointed with the Canadian "contribution" post 2011. Many Americans feel likewise. Are we wrong to feel betrayed by our Canadians "fair weather" friends?
Anand; Yes my wanky-yanky pal, you are wrong.
a)137/Canadian Pop > 872/USA Pop.
b) Read icasualties.org. Read because FOX news won't read it to you.
c) Compare with your dinky-di Aussie "alliance manager" pals, or French or Germans if you prefer.
d) give your best guess as to when dual US "bugouts" happen. (Hint: answer is before 2012)
e)estimate USA's influence in METO at end of 2011
f) consider "fair weather" friends comment and which direction it applies to (in spite of our wishful thinking...)
and get stuffed!
rdmntfrd1, love you Canadians. Very grateful for what you have done. You folks have punched far above the level that your troop contribution would suggest. Canadian OMLTs and troops kick ass.
I would still feel betrayed if you Canadians abandoned your ANSF allies by refusing to send them OMLTs.
Hell, if it were up to me, Canada would be responsible for all OMLTs for Kandahar ANP, including the Americans ones.
Might the Canadians agree to "one" severely overstrenght augmented SFA type advisory battalion, if America agreed to deploy three US troops under Canadian command for every Canadian soldier under Canadian command?
The Afghans need you bro. I know you need to withdraw "combat troops" by the end of 2011, and support that completely. But can't you keep some OMLTs in Kandahar province after 2011?
Anand; No doubt that telling the enemy that we are quitting in 2011 was really stupid; but, minority government considered, probably about what was achievable within Candian political context at the time. Still, when Canadians were appealing for assistance in Khandahar a couple years back, who came? The end date for Canadian combat troops has been posted for 3 years now, so talk about "deserting allies at their moment of need" is a bit rich. Only the Americans, Brits and Canadians have given a real effort and paid the only price that matters.Harper's recent comments show how happy he has been to take the out offered by the Manley commission all along. Moral contingency, absolutely committed to blame avoidance; do the right thing as determined by all party committee, and do it as long as it takes for voters to lose interest. No blame, no political committment. Not much, but a hell of a lot more than other "allies" or as they should be known, "risk maneged alliance managers". More recently, from the pro politician's view, he's probably hedging bets against the nouveaux Nobel laureate's impending, ahhh, peace solution. Personally, I believe the abandonment of Afghanistan will lend decades of encouragement to the enemies of liberty, but it seems to be in the cards now. At some point, western voters are going to have to realize that either we fight for real or we surrender. So you are wrong to feel betrayed by Candians; absolutely right to be concerned about all of us.
Post a Comment
<< Home