By Arthur Weinreb
Tuesday, July 17, 2007
This is possibly academic as Stephen Harper is not known for taking a lot of advice, instead relying on the person who is best suited to provide advice – Stephen Harper. The Strategic Counsel prepared a report for the Department of Foreign Affairs on Canadians' attitudes towards Canada's role in the Afghanistan mission. According to the report, only about 40% of those who were the subject of various focus groups support the mission. Quebec, naturally, was the least supportive. This is no surprise as it is the province where protesters openly yell "baby killers" at soldiers. The Strategic Counsel blamed the cynicism about the war on negative media coverage as well as the fact that there have yet been any concrete results from the mission.
None of this is particularly new or earth shattering. It was not even surprising that many people who participated in these focus groups thought that the mission in Afghanistan was led by the United States and that Afghanistan was invaded in the same way as Iraq was. These views are consistent with the dumbed-down society that we now live in where "feelings" are much more important than actually acquiring knowledge about what is going on in the world.
The Strategic Counsel had some advice for the PM. He should stop using phrases such as "fighting terrorism" and "cut-and-run". As well he should avoid all references to September 11, 2001. Harper should only speak about the good (and presumably happy) things that are taking place such as helping the Afghanis rebuild their country and peacekeeping.
No doubt Stephen Harper will have a much easier time getting re-elected if he pretends that what Canadian troops are doing in Afghanistan is some extended Habitat for Humanity weekend and not a war. After all, the voters are more likely to support a political party that tells them what they want to hear rather than the truth.
It will be tempting for Steve to follow this advice. If he does, it will be the best proof yet that he is willing not only to put politics over principle but that he is willing to use the men and women who put their lives on the line for political props. It will show that despite what his enamoured fans think, he is just another politician.
George W. Bush, love him or hate him, and even staunch Republicans are moving into the latter category at least makes major decisions based upon what he thinks is right. The fact that almost everyone else thinks that he's wrong does not detract him. There are some issues that simply cannot be reduced to a political popularity contest and putting young men and women in harm's way surely tops the list.
To say that the purpose of our troops being deployed in Afghanistan is to rebuild the country or keep some imaginary peace is at most, a half-truth. Yes we can pretend that the mission is nothing more than one big construction project. So far, 65 men and one woman have been killed. If the troops are only there to rebuild the country then we should listen to Jack and bring them all home. Can you imagine what would happen if 66 Canadians died while building roads and schools in Canada? Why there would be moratoriums, inquests, public inquiries; the entire gamut. If "worker safety" would not tolerate that number of deaths in Canada, there can be no justification for allowing it half way around the world.
The reason that our troops are in Afghanistan has everything to do with 9/11. Islamic terrorism didn't begin that day; those attacks merely served as a wakeup call to the West. Our troops are fighting terrorists and it does them a great disservice to characterize it in any other way. Let's not pretend that those who died or have been injured at the hands of terrorists were actually the victims of a series of unfortunate "rebuilding" accidents.
Let's hope that Stephen Harper ignores this advice and continues to speak out about terrorism at the hands of the enemy, the Taliban. He owes the troops at least that much.
Pursuant to Title 17 U.S.C. 107, other copyrighted work is provided for educational purposes, research, critical comment, or debate without profit or payment. If you wish to use copyrighted material from this site for your own purposes beyond the 'fair use' exception, you must obtain permission from the copyright owner. Views are those of authors and not necessarily those of Canada Free Press. Content is Copyright 1997-2024 the individual authors. Site Copyright 1997-2024 Canada Free Press.Com Privacy Statement