They were hoping to be seen as seekers of peace and global consensus. Instead, the political masters of one of NATO’s key combat forces in Afghanistan have spun themselves into an embarrassing and untenable predicament.
In the process, Canada’s Prime Minister Stephen Harper and his ministers have scripted a classic cautionary tale about the pitfalls of gesture politics.
It began Oct. 2nd in New York, with Harper’s freshman Foreign Minister, Maxime Bernier, striding into the United Nations with a call for a special UN envoy to be sent off to Afghanistan in quest of peace.
Missing from Bernier’s debut tour-de-force were any suggestions as to how the world body’s capabilities might be restored after six years of institutional assault and battery by the Bush administration.
Also missing was a summary of other recent catastrophes that the UN has successfully resolved. Bosnia? Rwanda? Burma? Darfur?
The first awkward moment suffered by the Harper/Bernier scheme came almost immediately - with the response of Afghanistan’s very capable Ambassador to the UN, Zahir Tanin.
The ambassador told a visiting Afghan journalist that the Canadians had a lot of explaining to do. He remained to be convinced that the posting of yet another UN envoy to Kabul would help relieve, rather than worsen, the logjam of agencies, foreign embassies, militias and rapacious private contractors that have thrown reconstruction into reverse.
But that snub was just a mild opener. When Bernier shuttled into Afghanistan this past week, with cabinet colleague Bev Oda at his side, the crackle of a firing squad at work in Pul-i-Charkhi prison prompted another bout of that noxious malady best described as “member state interruptus.”
Why?
Because the UN promptly protested the execution of 15 prisoners, while Canada did not. Tom Koenigs, head of the UN’s mission to Afghanistan, said that the United Nations has been “a staunch supporter” of the moratorium on capital punishment that had been observed by the Karzai regime since 2004. The Netherlands, a UN and NATO member state, called the judicial killings “extremely unwelcome.”
But from member state Canada and Mr. Harper’s government, there was only a muted response, expressing a hope that battlefield prisoners handed over to regime authorities by Canadian troops would not be executed.
It’s not the first time this year that the Harper government has failed to back the UN in Kabul. In April, when President Karzai’s accident-prone Attorney General Sabet ordered police to stage a violent raid on the capital’s leading TV newsroom, the UN immediately issued a statement condemning the act. In Ottawa and at the Canadian Embassy in Kabul, the silence was deafening.
Note to the Hon. M. Bernier and boss: send your own envoys, gentlemen. Deploy seasoned Canadian statesmen, two of them - on missions to exert real pressure.
One to Quetta, Pakistan to shame Gen. Musharraf into putting the squeeze on the Taliban leadership, who are comfortable in their sanctuaries there, while directing attacks on Afghan civilians and Canadian troops just across the border in Kandahar.
And a second to Kabul, where the corruption-ridden Karzai regime constitutes a far greater threat to Afghan stability than Mullah Omar’s crowd of cutthroats could ever hope to achieve - unless your endless posturing allows them to.
My on the sidelines view is Harper cares about power not issues . His latest ploy to be king of the hill and declaw any and all opposition .
"DANIEL LEBLANC
From Friday's Globe and Mail
October 12, 2007 at 12:52 AM EDT
OTTAWA — The Harper government will appoint former Liberal heavyweight John Manley today to a five-person panel to decide on the future of Canada's presence in Afghanistan after the 2009 deadline for the current mission expires, sources said last night "
.
While seen as a stroke of genius by stevie monkeys , who has Manley been reporting to the last couple of years ? Do you know ?
" globefan EH from Canada writes: John Manley, who would have thunk it.
The Independent Task Force on North America was a project organized by the Council on Foreign Relations (U.S.), the Canadian Council of Chief Executives, and the Mexican Council on Foreign Relations. It was chaired by former Canadian politician John Manley and advocates a greater economic and social integration between Canada, Mexico, and the United States.
I admit this is a brilliant play by Stephen Harper, and Mr.Manley will do what is necessary, but do I particularly trust him?
Posted 12/10/07 at 1:11 AM EDT | Alert an Editor | Link to Comment "
Look twice post once ? Maybe a Toronto Globe poster (above) has confirmed my thoughts ?
To me it is unfathomable that any country would attach itself and blindly follow the bush machine, especially my own.
Why are we all so powerful and so full of comments about Afghanistan, who are we to comdemn, to recommend, to cast verbal punishments. Do you live there, have you lived through their wars, were you there when the Soviet Union killed a million or so------I doubt it.
Instead of words, send money to the groups that are in Afghanistan helping, you will be better off.
As far as Canada, so what!!!!!
WHat makes you think posters aren't sending money? Freedom of speech doesn't mean much if you don't use it. We're full of comments becuase its a nominally democratic country and the actions of our 'leaders' has an effect on us. If 'we' are justified in setting off bombs and shooting people in Afghanistan, by definition THEY are justified in doing the same to us if we started it.
The ideal was to create a new Afghanistan, and if policies that are enacted in our name do the reverse, we don't just have an obligation to send money, but to speak out.
Mr. Mikel, lot of money went, but unfortunately came these money back and part of it are used by selected people. I do not know, what do you mean, if 'we' are justified in setting off bombing and shooting people in Afghanistan, by definition...........?, you should be realistic and honest and not talk just from stomach, you have to know, who created and supported religion-school in Pakistan from up to 1984? Who supported Taliban group 1996? If you get knowledge about those points, then you will NOT write and NOT think such things, okay! Afghanistan nation was always appreciated for the USA support against communist, I am sure, it will exist in future too, because we do not see Mr. G. W. Bush and his around as whole nation of USA!
there is some police they are very bad people they