- Reaction score
- 0
- Points
- 160
Like many of us I think I am becoming increasingly frustrated with the much of the attitude that prevails in this country with regard to international affairs.
I find the attitude 'at large' to often fall into three categories in this country.
Frankly I think all of this is piffle.
But if the approach in Afghanistan is 'defence, development and diplomacy' where's the development? In this article it is argued that Canada needs a Peace Corps.
The Peace Corps, established in the 1960's, in the US by JFK was designed to send young Americans abroad to assist less developed nations in development projects. Often these projects were micro-level, aimed at the 'grass routes'.
It seems to me that much of the development work in Afghanistan has been successful at this 'grass routes' level. It seems to me that much of the country is relatively peaceful and now ready for a sustained push at these kinds of projects. (I am not advocating that we drop a dozen U of T undergraduates in Spin Boldak to dig wells... rather some more peaceful and perhaps less prosaic activity in a more secure locale).
So my question is this, would Canadian Youth, respond to a call, presuming they do not belong to our vocation (of arms) react to a challenge to go abroad and do some good, following the much touted Axworthian principles of 'soft power'? Is this another path that the country could follow?
Anyway, read the article.
Aside from maligning CDS, calling for a Feb 09 withdrawal and generally bemoaning the fact that a detainee or two has become unaccounted for, is there anything else that our countrymen (sic) should be thinking about doing other than bitching and moaning about the usual 'cause celebres' of the left-ish?
I find the attitude 'at large' to often fall into three categories in this country.
- 'It's not winnable and it's Bush's war
- Why are we there when we could be spending money on health care
- Canada's traditional role is as 'peacekeeper'
Frankly I think all of this is piffle.
But if the approach in Afghanistan is 'defence, development and diplomacy' where's the development? In this article it is argued that Canada needs a Peace Corps.
The Peace Corps, established in the 1960's, in the US by JFK was designed to send young Americans abroad to assist less developed nations in development projects. Often these projects were micro-level, aimed at the 'grass routes'.
It seems to me that much of the development work in Afghanistan has been successful at this 'grass routes' level. It seems to me that much of the country is relatively peaceful and now ready for a sustained push at these kinds of projects. (I am not advocating that we drop a dozen U of T undergraduates in Spin Boldak to dig wells... rather some more peaceful and perhaps less prosaic activity in a more secure locale).
So my question is this, would Canadian Youth, respond to a call, presuming they do not belong to our vocation (of arms) react to a challenge to go abroad and do some good, following the much touted Axworthian principles of 'soft power'? Is this another path that the country could follow?
Anyway, read the article.
Aside from maligning CDS, calling for a Feb 09 withdrawal and generally bemoaning the fact that a detainee or two has become unaccounted for, is there anything else that our countrymen (sic) should be thinking about doing other than bitching and moaning about the usual 'cause celebres' of the left-ish?