Canadian Prime Minister Ready to Throw in the Towel in Afghanistan

10 September 2008

Canada PM: Troops home from Afghanistan in 2011
By ROB GILLIES


TORONTO (AP) — Canada's prime minister vowed Wednesday to pull troops from Afghanistan in 2011, the first time he has said Canadian forces will leave the country.

Prime Minister Stephen Harper said that Canadians do not want to keep soldiers in Afghanistan beyond then and that 10 years of war is enough.

"You have to put an end date on these things," Harper told reporters during a breakfast briefing. "We intend to end it."

Click Here to read the entire story by Rob Gillies 

 

Comments   

 
# TomInVan 2008-09-10 23:42
How about, "Canadian PM vows to achieve reasonable stability in Kandahar in 2 years"?

"Throw in the towel" is a rather harsh and perhaps knee-jerk characterizatio n of a plan whose details have not been illustrated or announced and probably won't be for at least a year-and-a-half .

Also note that the "10 years of war is enough" statement in the article is the reporter's editorializing, it is not something that Harper said. A somewhat better version of the story can be found here: http://www.nationalpost.com/news/story.html?id=782446

I wouldn't be surprised to see Harper announce a major surge (by Canadian standards anyway) after he is re-elected to achieve the Coalition's goals in Kandahar by 2011. Also, given his government's large investment in and restructuring of Canada's special forces (Special Operations Forces Command), it wouldn't be surprising to see a significant contribution by Canadian SF in Kandahar and elsewhere in Afghanistan post 2011, perhaps in a bit of a role-reversal with Australia.

Keep in mind that Harper orchestrated some brilliant domestic political maneuvering to extend the Canadian mission from 2009 to 2011 in the first place. He has a history of promising little and delivering much.
Reply | Report to administrator
 
 
# Paul S. 2008-09-11 07:59
Time...the gift our enemies wish most from us.
Reply | Report to administrator
 
 
# Brian H 2008-09-11 08:25
It occurs to me that this might be an attempt to put the Fear of Dog into the Euros who have been so mushy in their A-stan deployments for the whole decade. He had previously challenged them and demanded more participation and risk-sharing, and got nada.
Reply | Report to administrator
 
 
# Freedom Now 2008-09-11 09:28
I'd prefer that our allies stay, but they have done a great job so I wish them all the best.

They made a reasonable committment and thats all we can ask for.

I hope that when the time comes we replace them with Iraqi troops.
Reply | Report to administrator
 
 
# Viking 2008-09-11 14:34
Being a long-time reading of this website, I'm disappointed in the choice of headline. As pointed by TomInVan, PM Harper worked hard to get the mission extended to 2011, when the opposition was pressing hard for a 2009 deadline. So saying that he is ready to 'throw in the towel' seems grossly unfair, and frankly points towards a hasty conclusion without an understanding of the background.
Reply | Report to administrator
 
 
# Kelly C 2008-09-12 17:47
With a quote like "you have to put and end date on these things," how are people not supposed to infer that they are giving up? It sounds like "we'll give you maybe 2 more years and then if there isn't victory I'm going home". Here, on this 7th anniversary of the 9/11 attacks, I am reminded that the WTC was originally attacked 8 years before. So, it would seem that the enemies of democracy and decency have much more patience than we do...
Reply | Report to administrator
 
 
# Kelly C 2008-09-12 17:54
But I didn't get as much encouragement as you have from the article you linked.
Reply | Report to administrator
 
 
# TomInVan 2008-09-12 19:44
...but it makes sense to look beyond the headlines.

Canada is in the midst of an election campaign with one right-of-centre party (Harper's) up against three left-of-centre parties. By putting an "end-date" on the current mission in Afghanistan, Harper has effectively taken the issue off the table. He can dismiss accusations of "warmongering" for the duration of the campaign. It would be highly difficult for Harper to win a majority government otherwise, and could potentially even result in a Liberal government, which would surely end Canada's mission in Afghanistan.

About the "end date" issue: does anybody seriously believe that coalition generals don't have mission goals that are time-specific? I'm sure the enemy is very well aware of changes-of-comm and, troop rotations, etc. Harper is merely announcing the obvious in terms of Canada's infantry deployment. Keep in mind that proportionate to population levels, Canada has suffered 2x as many casualties as Americans in Afghanistan and around 3-4x as many casualties in terms of boots on the ground. That's some pretty heavy lifting all things considered and it makes sense that they may want to alter their contribution periodically (a luxury the "lesser powers" have).

So let's speculate on what the "altered contribution" might be (Harper and his defence minister both mentioned "technical" contributions post 2011 in recent days):

To date, Canada's primary contribution to the Kandahar mission has been infantry and associated engineering (route clearing, etc.) and artillery + a couple squadrons of Leopard 1 and 2 tanks. Also, some JTF2 (special forces).

Because Canadian/coalit ion troops sorely lack tactical airlift in Kandahar (thanks for nothing, Europe), Canada is in the midst of purchasing 16 new Chinooks intended specifically for the Afghan mission. They're not about to park them. They've also been outfitting and testing some Griffon helicopters for escort/reconnai ssance duties (similar to USMC Hueys).

I wouldn't be surprised to see a couple of squadrons of Chinook and Griffon escort helicopters deploy to Kandahar in 2010 and beyond, with perhaps a squadron or two of (recently modernized) F-18s rotating in and out Kandahar.

Also, expect significantly more special forces contributions (as I mentioned earlier, a new special forces regiment has been formed and trained and is likely ready to contribute.

Sorry for the long post.
Reply | Report to administrator
 
 
# Freedom Now 2008-09-15 17:37
The enemies of democracy and decency have much more patience than we do because they have to.

We have a choice. Some choose complacency or defeatism. Thatƒ??s their prerogative.

Just like in Iraq our enemies will lose because of their inhumane tactics. It will take time, but such brutality cannot win the war without the kind of overwhelming force that barbaric fascists like Stalin or Genghis Khan had.
Reply | Report to administrator
 

Add comment

Due to the large amount of spam, all comments will be moderated before publication. Please be patient if you do not see your comment right away. Registered users who login first will have their comments posted immediately.


Security code
Refresh

Reader support is crucial to this mission. Weekly or monthly recurring ‘subscription’ based support is the best, though all are greatly appreciated.  Recurring and one-time gifts are available through PayPal or Authorize.net.

supp

supp

subscribe

My BitCoin QR Code

This is for use with BitCoin apps:

189

You can now help support the next dispatch with bitcoins:

Donate Bitcoins