At Winds Of Change;
"Divide and neutralize. Ensure that the key power brokers in Afghan society are not pushed to coalesce against you. Squeeze the Taliban at every juncture."Which is why the recent moves against the opium growers show the same misunderstanding of Afghanistan's terrain and mission as the morons who think the USA should have "sent more troops" to Afghanistan instead of Iraq, in an imitation of the Soviets' oh-so-successful experience.
Instead, Afghanistan is precisely about keeping a lower profile. Unlike places like Iraq, which have both a lot of infrastructure and a lot of strategic significance, Afghanistan has very little of either. Which means a war that's about patient work in the countryside at times and places of our choosing, supported by rapid reaction strikes from isolated bases, rather than static bases in the middle of the population and heavy patrolling.
That's long work thanks to the Pakistani sanctuary, and so the engagement of European allies in the field via NATO/ISAF is a wise move. Not least of which because it serves as a constant source of encounter and friction with the most reactionary form of Islamofascism on the planet - and a "commando olympics" training ground to boot. It also raises the pressure level on Pakistan, which is good because they're reluctant allies at best.
An thoughtful analysis I strongly recommend you read in its entirety.
The comment about "commando olympics training" is an extremely important point. Operations in Afghanistan are providing battle hardening experience for a Canadian military that is more than a generation removed from those who last engaged in meaningful combat. Should the tensions in the Middle East and elsewhere escalate into wider war, that battle hardening will prove invaluable - for both the soldiers in the field, and for that portion of the Canadian public still deceived by the historic revisionism of the post-Pearson "peacekeeping" left.
The idea that this war will not be won overnight but perhaps decades from now probably has the moonies tickled pink (pun intended).
The fact that the left complain that things are not accomplished immediatly in this instant gratification generation, as in the war on terrorism, Iraq et al, but are willing to defer things forever with negotiations, finding root causes and other gibberish, is perplexing indeed.
Very insightful – is the good news. The bad news is how does Harper explain this to 308 Parliamentarians and get their approval for 10 years? Just as importantly how will Jane “giggles” Taber and the attention deficit disordered MSM be able to digest this?
Also, I know people in the USA, who aren’t utopians, who will say things like:
“Bush was an idiot for starting Iraq before finishing the job in Afghanistan –that was a mistake and now the American people don’t want to resource wars they can’t win in a year or two.”
We’re all suffering from instant gratification syndrome. How do our leaders get us to grasp what Joe Katzman says…
“In fact, if it happens in less than a decade, I'll be shocked. So much must be built from nothing, from national transportation infrastructure, to a strong and experienced army, to effective police, before one could even contemplate a serious move by the central government.
Until then, it's a waiting game.”
TC
I didn't just copy yours - honest .. :>)
Your last point is the most significant in my mind Kate.
I agree with nomdenet and texas - and I really like the metaphor of 'attention deficit syndrome' of the MSM. They all want resolution in TV 'presentation bits'; the answer has to be within ten seconds or the attention is gone.
Rebuilding or rather, building Afghanistan and Iraq will take a least a decade. The entire infrastructure of an industrial economy has to be built, from scratch; the entire infrastructure of a political democracy has to be built, from scratch. Same with the legal, educational etc.
It isn't about 'winning the war in Afghanistan and Iraq, because the War on Terror isn't a war taking place between distinct nations over territory and/or resources - as it was with Nazi Germany. It is a bit, but not completely, similar to the Marxist attempt to set up a cohesive political/social system in various countries.
The similarity is that Islamic fascism is utopian, as was Nazi fascism and as was communism. The similarity is that all utopian systems are 'unnatural', they don't evolve on their own, and must therefore be implanted into a society by totalitarian force. And, all totalitarian and centralized systems will economically fail, for they totally and completely lose all capacities to adapt, change, innovate, invent.
The difference with Islamic fascism is that it is not a coherent ideology, based on an historic agenda, as was Marxism. Instead, it's a RESULT, not of Western actions, but of ME state actions. The ME world has refused to move out of tribalism, which is a political mode that empowers a minority and disempowers the majority, and into democracy. Since its population has increased beyond tribal capacities, the majority have no power and this 'tension' has 'morphed' into rage. To prevent civil war, the ME tribes in power have 'externalized' the focus of attention.
The ME has tried to constrain this tension by introducing Islamic fascism, a fundamentalist, no-change, essentialist ideology, focused on death (the experiences in death are better than the experiences in life). And, introducing the Evil Other, the West, as the focus of the anger of the population.
Dealing with such a psychological syndrome, and a tribal ME empowered by oil, is extremely difficult. The ME has the power to constrain its citizens and prevent democracy emerging in their own countries. They have the power to refocus their population's agenda from their own lives, to a death cult, and the Evil West. Without that oil, the whole system would collapse in a month.
The West has to set up its own propaganda, explaining the issues - but - with the leftist cult of postmodernist relativism, 'thinking' is impossible for these people. They cannot evaluate. They live in a fictional world.
Blogs are important, and I think that reality has to triumph over fiction.
"Dealing with such a psychological syndrome, and a tribal ME empowered by oil, is extremely difficult. The ME has the power to constrain its citizens and prevent democracy emerging in their own countries. They have the power to refocus their population's agenda from their own lives, to a death cult, and the Evil West. Without that oil, the whole system would collapse in a month."
ET - For this reason the west, particularly Canada and US, must eliminate reliance on ME oil, through devlopment of both new sources of oil and alternate technologies. We have to "turn off the tap." Until then, the classic containment & deterrence model with have to do to keep Islamic totalitarianism somewhat in check. Because this is low-level, it is ripe for relativism ("mounting casualties in Afghanistan"). In the meantime as well, we will have to prevent WMD from falling into hands of the fascists. Here in Canada, the Liberal strategy, post new leader, will be to force election over Afghanistan, win on a "bring the boys home" platform, which, of course, they will ignore once elected.
Kate,Texas, Cannuck, Maz2 & ET
Hats off to all the the bloggers who so eloquently voice in the blog world what is really going on. The discussions that are held here sure help me to understand the depth behind what is going on.
Did anyone catch Peter Mansbridge interviewing Peter McKay a couple of nights ago? Here we had a CBC National journalist telling the Minister of International Affairs that our troops should be pulled out of Afghanistan. He is getting way to big for his britches, I thought he was very rude too. I think Peter Mansbridge has woke up to the fact that his entitled senate seat has slipped away. It really shows how biased he is against our government. It just makes me sick.
ET, I think of the 2 wars, the internal war against utopians is the toughest.
While I agree with “It isn't about 'winning the war in Afghanistan and Iraq, because the War on Terror isn't a war taking place between distinct nations.” .. in the next breath we do say we’ve brought democracy to these "nations" and that will help transition them from tribalism. We say this is progress because in a democracy where we’re split between capitalists and utopians. Internally we are trying to win in Parliament the support and resources for our troops and for our homeland security expenditures.
In other words we have a need to talk about progress, particularly us folks on the right, we like action and results. To muddle along for 10 years … I confess I’m not made that way .. I need achievable goals, which can be measured and rewarded or penalized. I’ve heard Rumsfeld muse about the idea that we need metrics on the WOT but I’ve never heard him follow thru with any.
Kate’s post mentioned the by-product of our troops in training who are becoming battle hardened … all of which I think is tremendously important .. but I don’t think the typical Canadian buys into that idea as a “benefit of war” yet. We need a way to quantitatively assess progress.
I've been bitching about Pakistan's duplicity in this war on terror for many months.How do you trust a nation that smiles at you and shakes your hand while reaching around to stab you in the back with the other hand?Where is some international pressure on these 'fake allies'?
Granted,they face a serious risk of civil war if they confront the strong Taliban supporters amongst them....that does not diminish the fact that it is now primarily on their soil that training and safe haven for Afgan' bound terrorists is being supplied.Somehow someway someone must seal that border!
Seems to me Pakistan,if so heavily divided and lacking the cajones to act decisively,is itself inevitably on a collision course with the west.
Also,when will the naive lefties in North America wake up and realize this GLOBAL muslim terror threat is real,far far bigger than their petty partisan aspirations and NO amount of appeasement will end it.Surely,they can't have such raw stupidity to believe that if we just pull out of the ME,all will be fine.That if they can just get Bush out of the Whitehouse,extreme muslims will suddenly back down and apologize for their actions and just go away.Hell,maybe we'll have a worldwide tea party and all hold hands.
When will these arrogantly stupid leftists realize that they are someone's HATED ENEMY and the fact they don't want to be is absolutely irrelevant.This war is not about land,oil or nationhood,it is about our very culture and freedoms we hold so dear.Maybe they will finally'get it'in those last few seconds before the axe falls on their neck.
Finally,how do you respect anyone who refuses to act for the safety of their very own family?Actually,these lefties are actively undermining and endangering the very citizens who are sacrificing their lives to protect all our families.All(get this now!)for nothing more noble than some perceived political advantage at home.
What a sickening bunch of ****!(I'll let you come up with the explitive,none seem apt enough for me!)
Canadian Observer, your post doesn’t help me with my instant gratification syndrome.
Pakistan has 160 million people – 3x’s bigger that Afghanistan and Iraq combined, twice as big as Iran.
It has a nuke!!
It is held together by a lesser of evils type dictator who could get snuffed out any day and be replaced by a Saddam nutcase.
Pakistan is a complete miserable failure -- for reasons that ET talks about all the time – tribalism that can’t sustain a large population in a globally connected economy.
Pakistan is where the recent arrests in Mississauga and London have been linked to.
Yawn … just waiting here, trying to be patient like everyone says we have to be … yawn
But the Star says we've lost:
Force can't beat Taliban: Minister
Sep. 8, 2006. 07:27 AM; BILL SCHILLER AND BRUCE CAMPION-SMITH IN TORONTO AND OTTAWA
With Canadian soldiers in Afghanistan locked down in one of this country's biggest battles in modern times, Ottawa's top military officials conceded yesterday the Taliban cannot be eliminated by force.
The revelations — first by Defence Minister Gordon O'Connor in an interview from Australia, and later confirmed by Chief of the Defence Staff Gen. Rick Hillier in Ottawa — are certain to stun Canadians who are increasingly concerned about the rising number of Canadian casualties in Afghanistan. [... my edit ...]
"We cannot eliminate the Taliban," O'Connor told a Reuters reporter in Australia, "not militarily anyway. We've got to get them back to some sort of acceptable level ..."
[Their ellipses. There are no more (self-censored) direct quotes or paraphrasing of O'Connor's Australian interview in the online version or, I believe, from memory, from the front-page, banner-headlined story in the print version. But for a slightly more accurate, fuller quote, without the ellipses, there’s this from the CBC:]
Taliban can't be entirely defeated: O'Connor
O'Connor has warned that NATO would not be able to defeat the Taliban completely, although it might be able to contain the insurgency in the south.
"There's a flow of Taliban back and forth into Pakistan. And so, we will eliminate pockets of the Taliban, and they will withdraw into Pakistan and they will come back again," the defence minister told CBC News on Thursday.
"Unless we have international co-operation, where Afghanistan and Pakistan work together and the allies work together to reduce and eventually eliminate the Taliban, we can't do it the way it's going now."
O'Connor said the Taliban had suffered many casualties in Operation Medusa and predicted the militants would not win against NATO forces.
[Does anyone know if O'Connor's full comments in Australia are available online anywhere so we can see exactly what he said altogether instead of getting dowdified versions from the MSM?]
It's particularly pleasing to me to note that although the CF hadn't had any significant amount of combat experience in close to fifty years prior to Afghanistan (barring some nasty but isolated incidents in the former Yugoslavia), when the bugle called, our guys were able to answer that call.
Like it or not, that's testimony to the professionalism and competence of the peacetime CF that recruited, trained, and passed the torch to the current generation. We should take our hats off to the veterans who never heard a shot fired in anger, but prepared those who fight for us today.
nomdenet - I think 'benchmark' measurements of progress in a country can be found in the CIA descriptions of a country. Factors such as:
.percentage of population who are literate, both genders
. GDP statistics in all forms
. Number of paved highways, cell phones, electrical connections, etc etc, ie all the trappings of a modern industrial nation
. public transportation systems
. housing
. statistics on health, deaths per birth, lifespan
.governing system - nature of democracy, inicameral, bicameral, number of appointments versus elected positions, nature of judiciary, nature of constitution
- economic self-sufficiency, number of countries for exports (as you know, Canada has one of the lowest ratios for exports, primarily exporting only to the US)...
- education - number of universities, highest degrees awarded, number of science graduates per year, number of patents awarded per year, number of research laboratories, affiliations with other research laboratories, etc, etc
. etc, etc.
You can't measure ideology; it's irrelevant to measure proportion of population who believe in X versus Y. I think you can only measure, quantitatively, the factors that are conducive to an industrial economy
ET, that’s a great way to measure progress, so that means we’re “nation” building doesn’t it?
Our difficulty is that we’re into something new by fighting a global movement or an ideology but we still have to measure our progress against it in the old fashioned context of a nation-state.
Therefore we need to put out stats more often, e.g., children attending schools have increased in Afghanistan from 1 million to 5 including half being girls for the first time. Maybe we need a monthly news conference by Peter McKay with these metrics. If we’re going to be there 10 years we need metrics to counter the powerful arguments from the utopian MSM who simply show a body bag. In short, we need a method to keep replacing political and human capital spent on this.
Canadian Observer, just in case I wasn’t clear with my sarcasm (a low form of wit) I was in fact totally agreeing with you about how scary Pakistan is.
When the Mullahs look at how our Christian Ministers and Priests have been relegated to inconsequence by an increasingly secular society..you can bet they see themselves going down that path.
No suprprise that they promote violent resistance to "westernization" as they call it. They want the world to become a dependent sespool of ignorance that will allow them to sustain their positions of influence. They will die or at least send thousands of their followers to die to protect their own status. Evil Incarnate!
Question for us is how much shit are we willing to take from these religious zealots before we recognize them as the enemies of civilization that they truly are? And just what do we need to do put a stop to them?
Well the answer is that what has been done in Afghanistan will have to be repeated over and over again. That is unless the rest of the civilized world ( other than our fragile "Coalition of the Willing" ) will step up and declare the Islamofascist mullahs,imams and their followers to be criminally seditious and deal with them accordingly.
Is there a way of accomplishing the destruction of the Islamic death cult in two years or less?
Of course not. Can we put an end to the incessant whining of the left? Maybe.
We have been letting the children call the tune for far too long and it's well past time for the adults to assert the authority that is necessary to deal with the hostile situation that these nitwits on left have allowed to develop.
Is it worth the effort? Unless you want to live in a society based on theocratic repression and run by demagogs of the very worst sort...hell yes!
Idealism and perfectionism is a sure-fire recipe for failure (or, I suppose, stagnation, as evidenced by our Canadian health care system) when dealing with complex social issues. The key, I believe, is to make sure the basic premise is correct, start down the appropriate path, and avoid the impatience of both the idealistic political right and politically correct left.
If Stephen Harper would just announce the sale of CBCpravda to the Asper family we would get some simple solutions. first we would just have to get through a month of bemoaning the loss of a great institution, mostly by all the halfbacked second rate artists and authors that populate the network. then by PEI politicians whose province makes up half the landscapes in their crap dramas. and then we could watch all of the PeterPanbridges, Kneel McDonalds and other leftist pukes resign on air.Kneel could where a wrap of TNT
tell us how you really feel Cal2
If Stephen Harper would just announce the sale of CBCpravda to the Asper family we would get some simple solutions. first we would just have to get through a month of bemoaning the loss of a great institution, mostly by all the halfbacked second rate artists and authors that populate the network. then by PEI politicians whose province makes up half the landscapes in their crap dramas. and then we could watch all of the PeterPanbridges, Kneel McDonalds and other leftist pukes resign on air.Kneel could wear a wrap of TNT and stand beside anyone one of their commiespondants.
tell us how you really feel Cal2
"The fact that the left complain that things are not accomplished immediatly in this instant gratification generation, as in the war on terrorism, Iraq et al, but are willing to defer things forever with negotiations, finding root causes and other gibberish, is perplexing indeed."
I think you misunderstand. Our objection isn't that "it's taking too long". We don't share your aims in the first place. But then again you probably didn't mean "the left" but, rather, people who disagree with you slightly (sometimes referred to as "liberals"). I agree that they are incoherant.
Well, OK, so I took a look at this "thoughtful" article in Winds of Change, and came away a little stunned. I had once before reviewed that blog and came to a personal opinion that it was not much more than a telephone pole for posting Israeli press releases. Now, it is much worse. To me , quite a bit of it, sounds like it was composed at a desk in a cubicle in an office building in Langley Virginia.
This fellow Katzman writes, it says, from an Ontario base, but he speaks of Afganistan as "our" war and he does not sound like a Canadian at all. There is quite a bit of quasi military jargon such as Americans like to use ( the Pakistan sanctuary, special forces as active in Pakistan, a hedged ally, rapid reaction strikes from isolated bases, patient work in the countryside, and....believe it or not..."broader logic in theater.."). Then, if that rather broad arrogance were not enough he floats some very high level policy as to accepting that Pakistan will not go along with the US: "...unless we decide that we're willing to risk or wage a nuclear conflict to settle the issue....". Can you imagine a Canadian, even one residing in Calgary. to be dumb enough to talk like that? And who is this "we" the guy from Ontario is thinking of? Does anyone think the US will "consult" Canada before using the Atomic bomb?
It is not so confusing when you scout about a little. This guy may have started in Canada but he is now gone to become an American and take employment in California with a firm called Defence Industry Daily. It is concerned with military procurement. I am going to become an American, he wrote over a year ago, and some posters wrote to say "Welcome Home" to him.
Since he had previously reviled NGO s that he called parasites, contested against those who reasoned there was too much war-war and not enough road building in the US approach to Afganistan and now, doubtless deeply engaged in sellling war-war goods, dismisses opium promotion and the apparent flourishing of war lords as "not our problem" I have to conclude his reincarnation is complete. He is right in there with Bill O'Reilly and Rush Limbaugh.
But does his viewpoint help us in Canada with respect to what we should do about Afganistan? A fairly weighty European think tank, apparently respected by many important people, has produced a major study arguing in its conclusion that military policies to date have resulted in the rebirth of the Taliban and now they effectively control half the country. You can read their report if you type: senliscouncil.net in google.
It appears the fact is war-war has been as to reconstruction over 9:1, a number of informed persons, some military, speak of the present policies as "failed". It sure does not sound like bribing warlords, throwing a billion into poppy farm destruction with no alternative for destitute farmers to work with, and lecturing desperate populations up against horrific poverty on democracy, how they should speak to women, how their culture and religion are all wrong on this or that point, will work very well. Asking them to inform on the Taliban, then leveling their villages when they do sounds pretty dumb also.
Present policy, whatever its origin does not seem to work at all. If the present Federal government is determined to go on pretending that it does, for a while, it should at least make plans for getting Canadian troops out of there very quickly when the times comes. In the past, foreign troops who tried to walk or drive out of that place did not do well.
As for Katzman, let us all hope he does famously selling things to kill people. He is defilnitely ready, ideologically.