Calgarypuck Forums - The Unofficial Calgary Flames Fan Community - View Single Post - Layton/NDP wants Canada to pull out of Afghanistan

Thunderball · 09-05-2006, 11:33 AM

I simply have to say, agree or disagree with the merits of this conflict, its intentions, strategies or lack thereof... what Jack Layton proposes shows a real lack of understanding of international relations and international law.
While I am by no means an expert on either, I have studied it enough to state factually that Mr. Layton is mistaken in his strategy for a few key reasons:

1. Firstly... Canada already has a declining reputation in the international community (yes I know, people love Canadians, that's not the point, the point is, we're increasingly irrelevant in the international stage), especially due to things like Somalia and our cuts in military during the 90s that left us as the second lowest military spender per capita in NATO (aside from city-state Luxembourg with a burgeoning population that is eclipsed by metro Calgary). Tucking tail and running away would only add to the perception that Canada is not to be taken seriously. Not a good thing when you have a few territorial disputes and a ton of fresh water to protect.

2. Secondly, the Taliban are not a state actor. They are essentially, a political party. Political parties are only empowered when they are de jure powers. The Taliban were de facto heads of state and illegitimate as no state actor recognized them. For Canada to recognize this now illegitmate rebel force would be essentially giving them tacit support as a state actor. Very, very careless thing to do. The only groups that can actually negotiate with the Taliban are the Afghan Government, and the United Nations as a non-state actor.

3. Thirdly, progress in these types of conflicts take decades, not years. Look at where UN peacekeeping forces are currently situated, and the conflicts in these places are decades old. While places like Cyprus aren't frequently in the news like Afghanistan is, there are still troops there, and they are there because they are still necessary. Impatience at this critical step is what creates real issues. Insurgencies bank on impatience and attrition, and for real change that is apparenly supported by the democratically elected (though currently hapless) Afghan Government, the United Nations and according to many sources, the Afghan people.

Canada has been getting a bit of a bloody nose lately, but that definitely does not mean its time to run away.

09-05-2006, 11:33 AM	#75
Thunderball Franchise Player Join Date: Aug 2002 Location: Calgary, AB Exp:	I simply have to say, agree or disagree with the merits of this conflict, its intentions, strategies or lack thereof... what Jack Layton proposes shows a real lack of understanding of international relations and international law. While I am by no means an expert on either, I have studied it enough to state factually that Mr. Layton is mistaken in his strategy for a few key reasons: 1. Firstly... Canada already has a declining reputation in the international community (yes I know, people love Canadians, that's not the point, the point is, we're increasingly irrelevant in the international stage), especially due to things like Somalia and our cuts in military during the 90s that left us as the second lowest military spender per capita in NATO (aside from city-state Luxembourg with a burgeoning population that is eclipsed by metro Calgary). Tucking tail and running away would only add to the perception that Canada is not to be taken seriously. Not a good thing when you have a few territorial disputes and a ton of fresh water to protect. 2. Secondly, the Taliban are not a state actor. They are essentially, a political party. Political parties are only empowered when they are de jure powers. The Taliban were de facto heads of state and illegitimate as no state actor recognized them. For Canada to recognize this now illegitmate rebel force would be essentially giving them tacit support as a state actor. Very, very careless thing to do. The only groups that can actually negotiate with the Taliban are the Afghan Government, and the United Nations as a non-state actor. 3. Thirdly, progress in these types of conflicts take decades, not years. Look at where UN peacekeeping forces are currently situated, and the conflicts in these places are decades old. While places like Cyprus aren't frequently in the news like Afghanistan is, there are still troops there, and they are there because they are still necessary. Impatience at this critical step is what creates real issues. Insurgencies bank on impatience and attrition, and for real change that is apparenly supported by the democratically elected (though currently hapless) Afghan Government, the United Nations and according to many sources, the Afghan people. Canada has been getting a bit of a bloody nose lately, but that definitely does not mean its time to run away.