Shift some troops from Afghan mission to Darfur
Getting engaged in Sudan would help us return to our historic, moral role, says Haroon Siddiqui
May 7, 2006. 01:00 AM
HAROON SIDDIQUI
T he peace agreement in Darfur opens up an opportunity for Canada to get back to its trademark United Nations peacekeeping role and ease its way out of the ill-advised U.S.-led war in Afghanistan.
There is no opportunity for peacekeeping in Sudan anywhere in Sudan without a willingness by the agressors to cease hostile actions...which they have no indication they are willing to do....
Our initial deployment in Kabul in 2001 involved peacemaking. Our troops secured the city with force and tact, using little of the former but a lot of the latter, winning kudos worldwide.
Sorry I have to comment on this...2001? This person is obviously mistaken in his facts thereby prejudicing the crdibility of the rest of the information in the piece...
But without telling Canadians the whole truth, Gen. Rick Hillier and the Paul Martin Liberals committed our troops in Kandahar to U.S. command and also the failed U.S. war on terrorism.
Quite the oppositie, I believe Mr.Martin and Gen. Hillier have been a couple of the most outspoken public figures we have ever had! I wish more of their predecessors had been as bold!
By most accounts, the Taliban are all over the south in greater numbers than at any time since they were toppled and are ambushing foreign troops and terrorizing the local population.
Opinion...
Foreign soldiers and their Afghan helpers may rule by day but it is the Taliban writ that runs at night, with the civilians caught in-between, pressed for "intelligence" by one side and squeezed for food, money and protection by the other.
Propoganda...
This is the archetypal nightmare scenario of societies under siege, like Chechnya and Vietnam. We need to get out of it, not because it is dangerous but because it is of dubious value.
PC answer - On this I agree it is of dubious value, but it is a noble and righteous venture, being committed to a goal of a stable Afghanistan.
If the U.S. tactics were going to work, they would have by now.
No comment....
Osama bin Laden would have been killed or caught and we would not still be reading the tea leaves in his taped messages.
Completely inaccurate - no cups of tea were in any of the taps I know of. The writer makes a common journalistic error; you can write satire or you can write facts, but never do both in the saem article or you discredit yourself!
Afghans would have known security and been hugging the Americans, not hating them.
A popular propoganda technique; state what could have been to make it appear that a failure has occurred.
The land would have been bearing fruit, not poppies.
I would like to know how this could have come about! To get rid of the popy trade you have to get rid of the Pakistani elements who are paying gold for this product. This will take years to do. Plus, very little of the land is suitable for planting fruit trees...
Fortunately, most of the Americans are to depart soon — to, where else? Iraq — and our Afghan operations are to come under the NATO umbrella, under British command. The rules of engagement may improve.
See Teddy...
Our commitment ends in February. Instead of extending it, as Stephen Harper and Hillier want, we should plan to move half, if not all, our troops to Sudan, depending on the effectiveness of our Afghan operation.
What the hell for? The writer fails to outline the benefits of such a move.
Such redeployment would please George W. Bush, given his passion for Darfur. It would also be the right thing to do.
False information, more propoganda...
Both Martin and Harper have dodged this pressing moral issue. Canada did contribute humanitarian aid and some logistical support for the African Union's peace force in Darfur. Our envoy to the United Nations, Allan Rock, has been part of the peace talks. But, overall, Ottawa has been peripatetic.
Not true, Canada has been one of the leading proponents of help to Darfur but is realistic enough to know that they cant do it themselves or with the current government hostile against any intruding forces. Thus, more propoganda
The horrors of Darfur are stamped on our conscience:
In 2003, rebel groups attacked government targets to protest widespread neglect of and discrimination against the inhabitants of the arid region. Khartoum unleashed its proxy militia, which went on a rampage of arson, looting, rape and murder.
Completely inaccurate. The militia attacks supported by the government occurred much earlier.
About 180,000 people were killed and 2 million displaced.
At least he got that part right...
The intra-Muslim conflict has been portrayed as one between Arabs and non-Arabs. It is, but only in part, as the earlier one in the south was not just about Muslims and non-Muslims.
Ethnicity and religion are but two of many fault lines that have plagued Sudan since independence from the British in 1954.
The real conflict is between an authoritative central government, rich on oil revenues, and the remote regions that remain ignored and poor, leaving the people to, first, fight among themselves over the meagre resources and, then, the federal government.
Until that imbalance is corrected, no patched-up peace agreement, as welcome as it is, can lead to a lasting solution any more than the 2005 peace deal with the south has.
Canada can play a role in guiding Sudan toward a democratic and decentralized federation.
What role? What is the purpose of the writers tirade? Does he approve or disapprove of the Sudan government actions? He never states it explicitly. If the Sudan government is merely responding to rebel attacks, as the writer suggests, then why are we needed?
As a start, Senator RomeóDallaire, former commander of the ill-fated UN mission in Rwanda, suggests that Canada help translate the peace deal into a strong Security Council mandate for a peacekeeping force, with the power to penalize Khartoum if it does not fulfil its promises to Darfur.
Why does he cast Dallaire as a failed commander if Dallaire has the right opinion? Why was the UN Rwanada mission ill-fated? Did everyone know it would fail before it started? Security Council deal likelihood as already been covered, unsuccessfull, choice ditto with economic sanctions - you cant make punitive economic sanctions on a nation whose majority of funds are blackmarket activities that are unaffected by the WMF and other institutions.
Getting engaged in Sudan on those twin fronts would help us return to our historic role and also rediscover our moral core.
The ultimate military disaster - missions on two fronts! Thank you Haroon Clauswitz...
http://www.thestar.com/NASApp/cs/ContentServer?pagename=thestar/Layout/Article_Type1&c=Article&cid=1146865815526&call_pageid=968256290204&col=968350116795
It is this kind of irresponsible journalistic efforts which discredit the entire profession...