Calgarypuck Forums - The Unofficial Calgary Flames Fan Community - View Single Post

icarus · 04-23-2006, 12:54 AM

Bush really has little to do with the Canadian mission in Afghanistan.

We, along with other NATO nations, are there at the invitation of the democratically elected Afghani government and with Security Council approval to help implement the ISAF in fulfillment of the 2001 Bonn Agreement. We are there to rehabilitate a failed state (the cause of that failure is irrelevant). What's past is prologue. After speaking with the Afghani ambassador to Canada a couple months ago, I have little question that an international force is wanted there, should be there, and is there for the right reasons.

Personally, I lament the cause-and-effect approach to reconstruction that many tend to take. I believe that whether from use of force by a sovereign state, civil war, natural disaster, or otherwise, the reconstruction of any country is a concern to all and an obligation erga omnes. I agree with Romeo Dallaire, whose take is that we shouldn't have acted in Iraq (and we didn't) but we should take a role in helping it to rebuild. The fact that Canada did support the ousting of the Taliban may add a moral rationale to the current ISAF mission, but even without that consideration it is noble if not dutiful to be there in promotion of rule of law and regional stability.

It is shame the international community doesn't do more reconstruction and even if there are willing nations, there aren't enough of them to be deployed everywhere they are needed. Hopefully the new UN Peacebuilding Commission will help with this.

04-23-2006, 12:54 AM	#17
icarus Franchise Player Join Date: Oct 2001 Location: Singapore Exp:	Bush really has little to do with the Canadian mission in Afghanistan. We, along with other NATO nations, are there at the invitation of the democratically elected Afghani government and with Security Council approval to help implement the ISAF in fulfillment of the 2001 Bonn Agreement. We are there to rehabilitate a failed state (the cause of that failure is irrelevant). What's past is prologue. After speaking with the Afghani ambassador to Canada a couple months ago, I have little question that an international force is wanted there, should be there, and is there for the right reasons. Personally, I lament the cause-and-effect approach to reconstruction that many tend to take. I believe that whether from use of force by a sovereign state, civil war, natural disaster, or otherwise, the reconstruction of any country is a concern to all and an obligation erga omnes. I agree with Romeo Dallaire, whose take is that we shouldn't have acted in Iraq (and we didn't) but we should take a role in helping it to rebuild. The fact that Canada did support the ousting of the Taliban may add a moral rationale to the current ISAF mission, but even without that consideration it is noble if not dutiful to be there in promotion of rule of law and regional stability. It is shame the international community doesn't do more reconstruction and even if there are willing nations, there aren't enough of them to be deployed everywhere they are needed. Hopefully the new UN Peacebuilding Commission will help with this. __________________ Shot down in Flames!