T H I S  O U R  C A N A D A

Why is Canada in Afghanistan?

Politics is always a queer object. Yet Canadian politics these days looks queerer by the day. Is not interesting to note that here no political party wants mid term election and yet everyone is preparing for it. Ignored during the last election battle which threw up a minority government, foreign policy issues are back with a bullet. Though essentially in the backwaters of America, Canada is taking itself to be an important player on the chess board of world power games and is now a bit serious about its foreign policy.

Otherwise how would one explain the New Democratic Party, a combination of the Left of the center voting with the Conservatives last fortnight in the Canadian House of Commons?  Conservatives and New Democrats formed an unlikely alliance to defeat a Liberal motion that wished Canada to withdraw from combat in Afghanistan by 2009.The motion was aimed at guaranteeing the Afghan mission wouldn't be extended beyond the current commitment, which is scheduled to end in February 2009.The Bloc Quebecois supported the Liberals. But Tory and New Democrat MPs came from opposite sides of the debate over Afghanistan to defeat the motion by 150-134 vote.

Stéphane Dion of the Liberals argued that Canadian soldiers could be more profitably deployed in other ways, helping Afghanistan to set up democratic processes, a judicial system, and a functioning economy.” If we focus on the combat mission and we don't try to do the other things, what is being gained?"

Given the controversy over reports that detainees are being tortured after they're handed over to Afghan authorities by Canadian soldiers, Dion wanted the soldiers to put more effort into training Afghans to respect human rights. But Dion said Harper's cavalier attitude has mismanaged everything.

Both Prime Minister Stephan Harper and his beleaguered Defence Minister Gordon O'Connor are happy at the turn of the events as is American president George W. Bush. Yet what image does Canada, once the peacemaker across the continents carry and to what purpose. What  role  Gordon O'Connor wants for his  peaceable  country known since 1950s Korean war  and later the Suez Canal crisis for  peacemaking  and  peacekeeping. 21st century had an odious beginning with death and destruction looming large. This century is off to a shaky start that could get worse before it gets better.

A question that would haunt Canada with increased ferocity is why it is there in Afghanistan? Evidently there is no direct or indirect threat to Canada’s sovereignty and welfare. No Taliban leader including Osama bin Laden has held any threat to Canada. The country is located thousands of miles away. It is only because America wants NATO and Canadian troops to add their strength. The world knows that no Afghan would ever tolerate any foreign presence. The British tried hard during the 19th century to subdue Afghanistan after it had conquered India and miserably failed. The Soviet Union, situated next door pushed 80,000 troops, mined the whole country to subdue and failed. It established schools, hospitals and what not to win back the country and had a strong communist party to support. This was one reason for the collapse of the Soviet Union. Now America, NATO and Pakistan are trying their best with no avail.

Canada is under no threat either directly or indirectly from any extremist organization and is surrounded by friendly countries, yet it has an enormous budget for defence. As one observer wrote, “Canadians have no way of knowing if $650 million for 120 leased and mothballed tanks is money well spent or if O'Connor's grim predictions are a reliable forecast or just a tactical justification for a suspect purchase.” It has already spent three billion dollars in Afghanistan and got only a   bad name for handing over detained Afghans to the local authorities for torture. Spending billions of dollars seems to be new reliable guide to defence planning. If America is not safer after four years of war Iraq and Afghanistan and wasting $ 280 billion of taxpayers money in Iraq, can Canada be safer with its involvement in Afghanistan.

Canadians understand that troops are in Afghanistan for the declared purpose of advancing human rights, democracy and rule of law. Is it happening any way? Most Canadians also understand that the way they treat others is principally about us. Anytime in world history, the military has ushered democracy. Voters and taxpayers need to know where in the world Harper is leading Canada. Is this country retreating to the region where its voice will be a small echo of Washington? Will it retain the military capacity and diplomatic distance to act independently?

Recall a bit of recent history. Lester Pearson in association with Jawaharlal Nehru was behind the Korean armistice in 1953. The two leaders worked closely for peace in the Geneva conference in 1954 on Indo China and Korea.  They also worked to reduce tension during the Suez Canal crisis in 1956 and Pearson was awarded Nobel Peace Prize.

Canada could still be a great peacemaker and should call Taliban, Pakistan, Afghanistan government, India and America besides NATO to establish peace in that war a ravaged country, beaten almost to Stone Age and the world would much safer than it is now.

BACK

Pradeep Dheendsa Sales Representative Cell. (647) 225-7653 For all business setup and real estate needs in Canada contact me

Amandeep Phul M.S. Computers Broker 416-877-8490 Contact for free house evaluations, buying and selling residential properties throughout GTA

Joginder Singh Ahluwalia is the President and CEO of Walia Insurance Agencies Ltd.