Canada's New Look Afghan Mission

In 2012, Canada will look to redefine its military commitment in Afghanistan in hopes of lowering casualties. But will the government's hopes translate into reality?

As 2011 starts its perilous voyage towards 2012, the question of Afghanistan’s future is a key priority for Canada which hopes to end its combat role in that country.

Prime Minister Stephen Harper and his Sancho Panza, Defence Minister, Peter Mackay, insist that cutting our military commitment from 3,000 to around 1,000 to help train police and army, will mean more order and fewer Canadian casualties.

This adjustment to earlier total withdrawal statements has the approval of the Liberals, with both Michael Ignatieff and Bob Rae recognizing that Canada can’t quit cold turkey.

But will it work? Can theoretical hopes be translated into hard reality?

The PM and those who advise him should listen to the RCMP Superintendent John Brewer, until recently senior adviser to the Border Police in Afghanistan for nine months.

An extensive article in the Globe and Mail about Brewer spells out the difficulties of adequately training Afghan soldiers and police. But more significantly, Brewer points out that Afghanis need hands-on training and that giving tactical lessons in classrooms, and in protected bases away from the action, will not work.

Exactly. Canadians who have always worked with the incipient Afghan National Army (ANC), know that there are limitations as to what illiterate soldiers can learn, and that personal example is a key to leadership.

Every combat soldier knows there’s no substitute for leading by example. So if Canadians are in a mentoring role to Afghan soldiers, they’re going to have to go into the field with their mentees if they hope to bring them to an acceptable level of trust and competence. Brewer notes in his interview that he had to be in the field in order to guide the Border Police and deter corruption and smuggling, and that it can’t be done through phone calls from Kabul. The same, or more so, with soldiers. So, if sometime deeper into 2011 Canada’s combat units are replaced by Afghan units trained by Canadians, odds are that Canadian mentors will be on operations with their Afghan wards. If so, casualties are inevitable. Our soldiers know this. And accept it. It’s what they do, for heaven’s sake, and there is no such thing as absolute security and safety within the military. Or police. The 154 Canadians killed in Afghanistan since 2002, and perhaps 1,000 wounded – some horrendously and life-alteringly – are a concern, but should be viewed in perspective. The casualty rate is not huge by past-war standards, and what should concern Canadians most is that those seriously injured on behalf of their country, never have cause to regret their service, or have reason to think their country has abandoned them. And that isn’t so much the duty of political leaders, as the duty of Canadian people to watchdog their leaders and ensure that they don’t betray those who served. As an aside, real horror is to watch what goes on in Mexico along the U.S. border, where some 30,000 have been massacred with apparent immunity by criminal elements. And yet border crossings teem with activity and tourism. By comparison, Afghanistan is relatively civilized. Our soldiers are entering a new phase and judging by past experience, they will excel at it – but not without risk and casualties. Tweet