Harper, Dion in tug of war over mission's end date

Prime Minister Stephen Harper says he understands clear timelines are essential in getting Canada out of Afghanistan but won't accept the Liberal proposal to stop all combat by the Feb. 2009 end date.

Responding to demands from the Liberals to determine clear deadlines for the mission, Harper said Thursday he is unwilling to take control away from the military leaders on the ground, saying they best understand the reality of working in the dangerous Kandahar province.

"It isn't the role of politicians to dictate their mission," he said to jeers from the opposing side of the House of Commons.

Liberal Leader Stephane Dion replied:"It is up to politicians to establish clearly what the mission is."

Despite a refusal to cooperate with Liberal demands to move to a support and training role next year and set a firm 2011 end date for the mission, Harper continued to remind Parliament that the option being proposed by the Conservatives wasn't really that different.

"This government has indicated a wish to put an end to the mission in 2011," said Harper, although making no firm commitment to a withdrawal at that time.

"I realize the Liberal Party has said something that is different but more or less the same. We are seeking common ground. The Liberals and Conservatives.... must work together here."

As the clock ticks toward a series of confidence votes that could bring down the government in March, the Conservatives seemed increasingly interested in showing themselves as willing to cooperate.

Barring deals on the extension of the Afghanistan mission, the federal budget and an extensive Tory crime bill, the opposition parties could bring the government down, taking the country to the polls as soon as mid-April.

However, the Liberals recently said they would support the extension of the Afghan mission until 2011 if Ottawa will notify NATO that it is pulling out at that time.

Harper has said leaving in 2011 would be the ideal situation but he's not sure it's a realistic goal at this time.

Comments are now closed for this story

Jim McB
said

The Liberal position in this matter is pathetic. They seem to have no grasp of geopolitics but prefer to focus on petty deviations of battlefield procedures. When someone does that, it is usually an indication that the problem they are trying to solve is too large for them to comprehend.

I believe this to be the case with Dion. He is mixing up the partisan politics he uses to gain popularity with the left with a combat and reconstruction mission. One gets you elected but if the second is not attended to, many victims will get dead. Most will be unarmed.

The NDP and the BLOC seem to have ignored the deaths their positions of withdrawal would cause. Do they think that if you abandon your duty it doesn't count. If we withdrew all the credit we have gained in the conflicts where we were present would be spent for nothing.

Afghanistan will go the way the PM wants it to. Dion and his caucus collectively don't have enough backbone to build a single skeleton.

allan
said

It doesnt take a rocket scientist to realize that Afghanistan is a combat zone, period. To send soldiers into an ill-defined war setting, as was done in past "policing actions", is condemning them to harm. They are soldiers, they fight, they fight for us! Let them do their duty.

Balgonie Bob
said

Nobody seems to talk about the big picture. If Afghanistan falls into the hands of the Taliban and Al-Qaeda, Pakistan and Iran will become considerably less stable and dangerous. This will have a domino effect making the job in Iraq more difficult and the Indian/Pakistan problem much worse. This in turn will spill insanity over into Indonesia and in the opposite direction, the rest of the Middle East. Afghanistan is key for many reasons. We must win at all costs. End dates are a domestic joke and all world leaders in NATO and the UN know this. This is a global issue.

Moe
said

"J.F. (Ottawa)"
Oh J.F. I love guys like you....NOT! Is there no worthy cause enough for you? This is nothing like Vietnam at all. Hitler, Stalin and Hirohito made a living from guys like you.

Jim
said

To Bernard Romanycia

You do know that this mission is a UN/Nato sanctioned mission, right? Do you also know that it was the Liberals that committed our troops to Kandahar? Maybe check your facts before you assign blame as to who screwed up.

And to Calgary Dan

There is one party who clearly does not know the situation in Afghanistan and it ain't the Conservatives. Maybe the Liberals are the solution...then we can invade Pakistan.

Yep, obviously the Libs have their finger on the pulse of the region.

Sarcasm off...

Martin
said

Look at all you armchair critics, it must be nice to sit at home in peace and quiet thinking your doing anyone a favour. This war will never end per se' cause even if Afghanistan can be self contained. Where will the next batch of terrorism come from. Fact is I will listen to the ones willing to volunteer to this task and put their lives on the line, than anyone here. The only ones that can show Canada is not a weakling is the Military, and I thank them for their courage. For it is them telling the world Canada won't back down from a fight or walk away. If some people on here were in charge we would be bullied all the time.

Calgary Dan
said

I am a conservative, but feel betrayed by my own government. They don't seem to be intouch with what is going on in Afgahistan. Maybe the Liberals are the solution!

Bernard Romanycia
said

We shouldn't be in this war. The sooner we get out the better. What happened to Canada being a leader for peace? The Tories have screwed things up royally.

Mark
said

I voted Liberal last election but will not this time around. Hoe can you put an exact timeline on reconstructing a country? How long were we in Bosnia? 2009 rolled around and the pull out date had to be changed to 2011. No kidding. Too much work to be completed. Combat runs hand in hand with reconstruction. The Taliban must be put back on their heels and that means actively engaging them while reconstruction programs are running. The Liberal position is all over the place.

Jim
said

It is simple, the Liberals just do not understand any situation that involves the military...they never have. And with Hezbullah supporters like Coderre helping to draft policy, I doubt they will ever get it right.

The Afghan compact ends in 2011. That is the end of the NATO/UN mandate. We are committed til then and we will continue to do the reconstruction work that we have been doing all along, but to reconstruct an area it needs to be secure first. Security involves pursuit and destruction of the enemy from that area...end of story.

larry
said

This political debate is shedding a lot of light on just how confused the Liberals are and how quickly they are ready to abondon those unfortunates in Afganistan. The Liberals like to trumpet about protecting those less able to, but the sounds they make never seem to translate on the ground into anything resembling moral conviction or otherwise.. 'guts'.

Scott M.
said

The Liberal position is nuanced, which, unfortunately is labelled as vague by people who like everything in black and white.

After 2009:

They have clearly said that they would not lead in search-and-destroy counter-insurgency missions.

They have clearly said that they will have the army focus on training Afghan army (including going on Afghan-led missions) and reconstruction efforts.

They have clearly said they would fire back if fired upon.

They have said that NATO should plan on rotating a new country in as of February 2011 and that the last soldier should leave as of July 2011.

--

Yes, it's more nuanced and complex then the Conservative position of just "continuing what we're doing today" and "leaving it up to the generals on the ground". Unfortunately in today's media world, people expect 1-sentance explanations and throw up their hands in confusion when presented with more.

That being said, there is one important note that the Liberals have not made clear: Canada has not been involved in major counter-insurgency missions for a while now... our casualties come from various IEDs and bombs that lay in wait for passing vehicles. In other words, the Liberal position won't necessarily dramatically lessen our casualty count from 2009 to 2011 if we continue doing what we're doing today.

That slight-of-hand doesn't negate the validity of the Liberal position, it just underscores the fact that politicans of all stripes tend to focus on those things that make their argument sound the most appealing.

alberta view
said

Unless Nato is willing to control all border entry points from Pakistan and the ex-russian territories there is no chance of winning. A recent U.S. report indicated 400 thousand troops would be needed to pacify the taliban. Our Canadian troops are simply pawns.

tired of the spin
said

In light of the Taliban's statement that they are merely fighting off the foreign invaders.. I feel that we should just leave. Democracy is the belief that we are all created equally and we must let the people in power accept that. There are 31 million people in Afghanistan.. and "a handful" of Taliban insurgents. Let the will of the people take over. No one came to help us get rid of the Northwest Rebellion.. or the Red River Rebellion for that matter. Democracy can only happen when the people want it. If the Afghans don't want it. Why are we giving it to them?
The US wants it for them. Another installed government for them to control remotely from 1600 Penn.
The best friends of the US in the war on Terror are not democratic... Saudi Arabia.. is NOT a democracy... nor is Pakistan.
They want a democracy so long as it suits their purpose. I am embarrassed to be Canadian.

jeffw
said

Dustin & others who support 2011 deadline:

what happens when 2011 strikes midnight and the problems in Afgan are far from over? should we keep our promise and pull out anyway? do we then say to the world "sorry, but it's no longer our problem"? how would we then look in the eyes of the civilized world, no matter who is governing our country?

this is a very real scenerio and it is why the current gov't does not believe we can accurately commit ourselves to a specific date. i also believe that ALL of the parties, both ruling and opposing, know of this reality. yet that doesnt stop them from their own partisan politics.

it is the job of the opposition to "oppose" but at the same time, while our country is being ruled by a minority gov't, all parties SHOULD work together on common sence issues and save the politics for less crucial (non-global) positions.

Shawn
said

2011 is just the new 2009.

What's stopping 2013 from being the new 2011 once we get there?

A few dozen Canadian lives later, a few thousand Afghan civilian lives later, $100 billion later, little to no progress, a new generation of insurgents against the occupying forces...

And somehow the right wing will again manage to accuse everyone else of being "unpatriotic" and "abandoning" the Afghan people...

And we will do it. All. Over. Again.

Dan Dan
said

Over by 2009, if not sooner. Period.

freedom lover
said

If you can't fix a date because the situation is fluid, then 2011 is not worth considering.

Only a fool would think the Afghanistan situation will be any different in 2011 than it is now.

This is all just a stall by weakling politicians whose primary loyalty is to their US masters, not to Canadian values and interests.

A soldier
said

We extended to 2009, now Harper says "about" 2011. This thing is turning into a never ending mission.
S Dion stick to your guns. We must have a firm date.

DCR:Were you as worried about A-stan when it was being pounded by the russians in the 80's?

J-F (Ottawa)
said

Harper & the entire Conservative party and it's supporters anger me to the core!

The longer they are in power, the more I will feel like an American rather then a Canadian citizen.

The bully tactics constantly used by the Conservatives, makes me wonder why they don't just call themselves "Republicans"?

How can any Canadian be against bringing our troops home?

Are they fighting a worthy cause? YES.

Are too many soldiers dying?
Yes.

Which is more important to you?

You have to set a date, otherwise Afghanistan will become the next "Vietnam".

Go Liberals! Bring our troops home to their families.

John
said

As long as there are private contractors operating contrary to the mission which should be controlled entirly by the military, this mission will not succeed. Period. When you have these companies involved in exporting drugs with their logistics capability it will fundamentally erode any possibility for peace there. Pull the contractors and give these people a real chance at establishing a solid society, otherwise pull out. No sense in attacking drug lords aka Taliban if they are doing deals with US contractors. Why bother?

Truthful Joe
said

Wouldn't it be nice if Harper and his boys could actually keep their word? First they said the troops would be out in 2009; then they said they'd abide by the Manley Report; yesterday they "appeared" to like what the Liberals presented..but once again, it's Stevie's way or the Highway!!

Robert Yates
said

Canada used to have a tradition of shouldering the heavy but necessary burdens of war and staying with it until they were won. This penchant to assign arbitrary dates is beyond foolish. What would Canada have looked like had it imposed deadlines for taking Vimy Ridge, or clearing the Scheldt of Nazis. This is ridiculous politics and reflects a complete lack of understanding of military strategy.

Martin
said

So regardless of the situation on the ground, regardless of the Afghan's ability to protect, strengthen and defend THEIR democracy the Liberals want to set an arbitrary end date. Thank god that these people weren't in charge in WW1 or WW2 or we might have quit in 1917 or 1937.

David Dunlop
said

The Liberals committed to stay until Feb 2009 not the Conservatives, a withdrawl date has never been on the books by either the Conservatives or the Liberals. Wars on the other side of the planet don't work on Canadian parliamentry timelines set merely for partisan political reasons. We went there, sent by the Liberals, to get a job done and it was the right thing to do. Completely in step with Canadian values of standing up for those that can't stand up for themselves if you look at our history.
Give the soldiers the support and tools they need and let them do the job without interference from politicians.

Dave H
said

Somebody please tell Dion that he is NOT the Prime Minister. Harper is just cleaning up the mess that the Liberals got us into in the first place. Perhaps if Dion would stop grandstanding for political points and actually come uip with something constructive, he might be taken a little more seriously.

Troy
said

The current Liberal position amounts to 'Don't shoot unless shot at' ROE for Canadian soldiers on the ground. A recipe for a lot of dead Canadian soldiers and even more dead Afghan's. What a disgrace; they've lost my vote if they stick to this.

Boggy
said

I am also a Concerned Canadian. The Conservatives or Liberals DID NOT agree to withdraw in Feb. 29. The mission was extended by both parties, and to be revisited and looked at again. More left propaganda! Dion should do what's right and support this mission. Even Australia has troops there, and they aren't even in NATO. Helping a people that cannot help themselves. I wouldn't want to be the one to make the order to leave those people to die. Would you???? Time lines are ridiculous. People who say that, have NO IDEA how much that helps who we are fighting. Just 'cause it makes you feel good and sounds good, doesn't make the enemy go away.

hk
said

News flash. The Liberal party has just put in a call to Dr. Phill. Their party leader requires some serious help as he has totally lost. He won�t take any good advice from very well and knowledgeable party members. The only thing he finally is starting to get right is not listening to Bob Rae. While they are talking to Dr. Phill they might want to see if he can also get Iggy on his show. Poor Iggy has been around crap so long that he is now starting to look and smell like crap himself.
When you listen to the spin they have put on Afghanistan mission you really wonder if they think that Canadian people are really stupid. They are now starting to attack the mentality of the people who elected them. To think that they can get people to believe that they did not do a complete turn around on Afghanistan issue is just mind boggling. Most people do have a memory span of more then 2 days. It�s a good thing that Dion is not in the military. This country could not afford all the bullets he�s been firing in his own foot.
I do not like the Liberals but did respect Iggy who was one of the shining lights in their party. He just blew out that light by his �we said, they said� remarks in question period on Feb. 13. To think that people would miss the little tidbit of �2009 being replaced by 2011� and �ending combat but we will let the military decide what is best� is totally apprehensible. The people of Canada deserve and expect better leadership then this by a party leader and deputy leader. How pathetic they are.

DCR
said

A once proud and righteous party (liberals), are now stooping to the NDP style of leftism. When I was younger I thought that Canada had two great partys to choose from. Now I see only one. Conservative. They stand by their own principles and do what is right for the country and, indeed the world. I wish Dion could go look into the eyes of those children in Afghanistan when Canada pulls out. And say what? "well we held them back for a few years, but the taliban is coming back to stop you from being free again". He actually wants to build and make roads and do what is supposed to be done, but does not realize that to do that, we must fight to keep the enemy back from what we are doing. I have family and friends there, and they see what is being done to help. For us to tell the Taliban when we are leaving is so stupid. They will just sit back and watch, until we leave..then walk right back in. Do what is right Mr. Dion. Maybe you will actually gain mine and others respect!!!

Kanatian
said

Dion says one thing, Rae says something else and Liberal Defence Critic Coderre contradicts both of them.

Tommorrow, each of the three will be saying something entirely different, once again.

What does it matter what Liberals say, since they change their minds every day?

John
said

I really don't understand how any reasonable person can accept the Liberal position: you can't set a fixed, static date to such a fluid and rapidly changing situation. It's simple people!

Mike - Liberal
said

I am a liberal but simply do not understand the Liberal policy on Afghanistan. How do you put a timeline on the combat mission while doing reconstruction? Can't reconstruct when you are getting shot at. I am mystified?

cantuc
said

It seems to be very hard to keep track of what the liberals want . It depends on what day it is and which liberal you ask .

Dustin
said

The Best idea is the liberal approach altogether. We need to set a timeline to the end of our role by 2011. Canada has contributed a lot of brave men and women who need to come home.

We still need to stay in the role of fighting. Split half the soldiers on the training and defensive, the other half could still do dangerous missions but only when needed. We need NATO's full support if we want to bring peace to Afghan mission.

Concerned_Canadian
said

The conservatives originally committed to a Feb 2009 withdrawl date when the mission was extended. They have ignored that prior commitment and are now suggesting a 2011 withdrawl date without actually saying they will withdraw. That sucking sound you hear is your tax dollars being flushed down the black hole of Afghanistan by Harper and company. It's a shame the lives of our brave men and women are being used in such a calous way by this PM.

CTV News

Canada in Afghanistan

The latest news, photos and interactives from Canada's mission in Afghanistan.

Invisible Wounds

Angela Mulholland: Scope of injury toll in Afghanistan largely a mystery

Blast-Induced Injuries

Brain injuries among soldiers serving in Afghanistan are often overlooked.

Medical Advances

Soldiers survived injuries that, even 10 years ago, would have been fatal.

Soldiers Overcome Injuries

Wounded soldiers use sports to overcome injuries, adjust to their new reality.

Kandahar Journal

Janis Mackey Frayer recounts sombre process of notifying next of kin.

Interactive

Lessons Learned

A number of the medical innovations that we now take for granted were conceived and tested during wartime.

Bios and Pictures

Canadian Casualties

We remember those who lost their lives in Afghanistan since the mission began in 2002.

In Pictures

Concluding Combat

50 Pictures: Canadian troops conclude Afghan combat tour after a decade.

Transfer Ceremony

In Pictures: Canada transfers control of Kandahar region to the U.S

Harper in Afghanistan

25 Pictures: Stephen Harper meets with soldiers on his fourth Afghan trip.

Canada in Kandahar

30 Pictures: New tasks tackled as combat mission nears its end.

Operation Topak Shkar

Canadian troops take on the Taliban in Operation Topak Shkar.

Most Viewed News Stories

View More News Stories

Most Talked about Stories

This short piece illustrates perfectly the problem with the adversarial legal system, where the idea of actual guilt is irrelevant to all participants in the pantomime. I support the vigorous defence of a person's rights, but also grasp why lawyers come across slimy. It's hard to look crystal clear and clean when you provide your services on a foundation of one set of acceptable lies against another.

Frank Buchan

Skurka's Spin: Lawyer's job is to act as client's advocate

Got something to say? Share on CTV News

Pick your location

Top Stories -

News Sections

News Programs

Features

Browse: