Canadians continue to do the job in Afghanistan

It's now, with the future of the Afghan mission hanging in the balance, that Canadian soldiers overseas and their families most need public support.

Will we give it?

A curious thing happened when the federal political debate about the Afghan mission ended last year, with the Liberals endorsing an extended mission to February 2011.

With the Afghan war no longer a political football in question period, it soon moved off the front pages. Both critics and champions faded into the background.

Other factors, as well, contributed to a lower profile. The retirement of Gen. Rick Hillier was one. Hillier's magnetic personality and frank speech alone had kept Afghanistan uppermost in many Canadians'minds.

The recession was another. Suddenly, Canadian news outlets were less able and willing to spend the lavish amounts necessary to keep reporters, photographers and camera operators in the field.

Third, and most recent, has been a hesitation in leadership from the United States. U. S. President Barack Obama's security team was to meet for the sixth time in full conference, to try to hammer out a strategy for the Afghan war.

The senior officer on the ground, Gen. Stanley McCrystal, wants at least 40,000 more troops and he wants them yesterday. He's been told, not so politely, to be patient and keep his mouth shut while doing so.

But time is wearing on.

Here's the thing: Whatever the eventual U. S. strategy, a speedy pullout is not among the options. The United States is committed to staying in Afghanistan and really has no choice but to do so. The country remains highly unstable and the fate of its neighbour, nuclear-armed Pakistan, increasingly hangs in the balance.

This means Canada, as a key U. S. ally and NATO member, is not leaving any time soon either, however, our political leadership may fudge things now.

Our battle group, the combat arms component, may be pulled out. But Canadians will remain.

There has been talk of continuing to man the provincial reconstruction team base in Kandahar City, post-2011. This would make sense, since the team is the leading edge of the humanitarian aspect of the military mission.

Here is the blunt truth about a post-2011 Canadian presence in Kandahar: It will still be dangerous. Indeed, the battle group's departure may make it more so. Our people there, whether soldiers, aid workers or diplomats, will still risk injury and death.

That's because the insurgency does not confine itself to military targets. Indeed from the very beginning its tactics have been aimed primarily at disrupting fledgling efforts to provide modern health care, education and the like.

The 2,700 Canadian soldiers in Kandahar now, and the smaller number likely to remain there post 2011, have as much of a claim to public support as did earlier rotations when the mission was more generally popular.

Indeed, with the Afghan effort increasingly turning into a bitter struggle, with failure a possibility, we all the more need to redouble the personal support we extend to our soldiers and their families.

The Hamid Karzai regime has in many ways failed to measure up to the hope placed in it by its international allies. But that is not the responsibility of Canadian men and women in uniform.

The overwhelming majority of our soldiers have done their jobs with skill, courage and honour, and continue to do so.

They represent the very best that Canada has to offer and deserve our enduring gratitude and respect.
T E-B

Maybe this O mob strategy is actually working.