Canada in Afghanistan -   

1
NATO Prime Minister Stephen Harper speaks to reporters during a news conference in Santiago, Chile on Wednesday, July 18, 2007. (CP / Ryan Remiorz )

NATO must pull together in Afghanistan: Harper

Viewer

CTV News Video

CTV News: Robert Fife covers Harper's call for help
10p_harper
CTV Newsnet: Harper speaks from Santiago, Chile
KW18_afghanistan

A A |  Email ThisEmail  | PrintComments (15)Add Comments Facebook   

Date: Wed. Jul. 18 2007 7:17 PM ET

Prime Minister Stephen Harper said Wednesday that only a united NATO military presence in Afghanistan will keep the country from returning to its state before the Taliban was ousted from power.

The comments came amid a report to the British parliament that suggested NATO's military work in Afghanistan is being undermined by a lack of troop support from other NATO countries.

"The level of troop commitments of NATO today are not sufficient to achieve the long-run objectives that the international community and NATO have set for themselves," Harper said in Santiago, Chile.

He added: "Canadians are more than aware that we are carrying more than a disproportionate burden in Afghanistan."

Canada, the U.S., U.K. and the Netherlands have been doing most of the heavy lifting in Afghanistan, while NATO countries Spain, Italy, Germany and France have refused to boost their troop numbers in Afghanistan.

Others have put caveats on their troops, banning them from working in volatile areas.

Harper reiterated his position that Canada's future role in Afghanistan will be decided by Parliament, but defended Canada's decision to go to Afghanistan in the first place.

Before the U.S.-led invasion, Harper said, Afghanistan was a failed state responsible for the Sept. 11 terrorist attacks that killed close to 3,000 people, including two dozen Canadians.

Harper and his ministers have repeatedly called for NATO countries to step up their involvement in Afghanistan and help share the load. He repeated that position at the end of his Latin American trip, warning Afghanistan will once again be a threat to world security if other countries don't chip in to battle the Taliban and al Qaeda insurgents.

"I don't think it's an option for Canada or anybody else to close our eyes and pretend there aren't severe problems in other parts of the world,'' he said.

Unless Western nations like Canada "take our international responsibilities seriously, these problems will come back to haunt us,'' he added.

Canada's military commitment to Afghanistan is scheduled to end in February 2009, and Harper repeated on Wednesday that date will only be extended if Parliament reaches a consensus to do so.

Harper said the goal of stabilizing can still be achieved in Afghanistan, but only if all NATO nations pulls together.

"Afghanistan is a daunting challenge but if the international community really works together, we can make progress in that country to the point where it becomes a functioning nation, one that will not slip back into the status of being a failed state that represents a threat to the security of the planet," he said.

The British report also slammed slow progress in battling the opium industry in Afghanistan and said few success stories are reaching ordinary Afghans -- the result of poor communications by the alliance.

With a report from CTV's Robert Fife in Santiago

1

Add New Comment ( )

Tom
said
0 0

Canada's role should be humanitarian ONLY. It's time to bring our guns and our troops home.

People with clean drinking water, education, and a full belly do NOT turn to terrorism. 'Collateral damage' as George Bush calls it (or the murder of innocent civilians by NATO troops) is what makes people hate the west.

Time to do the right thing: bring our troops home, and start concentrating on the root of the problem.


Will
said
0 0

Its no secret that Canada is one of the four countries doing the actual soldiering in Afghanistan. Where are our supposed allies? Isnt the entire basis of NATO about backing your friends up? If they arent willing assist in the effort that so many brave men and woman have died for than their presence in NATO is somewhat questionable. Especially since NATO's inception was based on protecting them from the Soviet Union. The reluctance of the other countries to step up to the plate will be a victory for the Taliban. Iraq is lost but in Afghanistan we have a chance, its too bad these Liberals and Socialists cant see past their ignorance.
Support our Troops and so their sacrifices wont be in vain.


eastcoastrob
said
0 0

I think many NATO governments are timid to take the political risk of supporting the mission in Afghanistan. Many people confuse Afghanistan and Iraq.


Bob
said
0 0

I think it is time for Mr. Layton and a few of his lackeys, to get on a plane and go to the war zone.
Yes Mr. Layton it is a war zone. You could go outside the wire and see what are troops are doing to save and help the people, women and children from the taliban. Because without us they are the ones that will suffer.
Should you survive maybe then you will start to support our men.
The least you could do is keep your treasonous comments to yourself.


Ali
said
0 0

Do Canadians actually think that by a few thousand military men a deep-rooted civilization such as Afghanistan can be changed in a few years? Canadians need to realize that all Canada is doing right now is cleaning up the mess left by the USA, which they started.
Canada should keep its reputation as a peacekeeping country and help build infrastructure and the lives of the people rather than indulge in violence and make matters worse.


Jon
said
0 0

The Taliban are really nothing more than hypocritical drug lords, they don't care about the Muslim religion but rather about getting money from all the opium and drugs they push around for funding themselves and al Qaeda. Religion is an excuse to push people around and be dominant. They brutally murder thousands and use religion as an excuse, really they are just bullies spreading fear, the Middle East for all it's Muslim religious values is very hypocritical, I can say it I've been there and seen it myself. Sure we can leave and abandon Afghanistan but the same people screaming for us to leave now will then say, "Why are we not helping Afghanistan"?

As for Spain, Italy, France, and Germany these are the countries have always been wishy washy towards "western countries" throughout history. France has run away from it's liberators once they were done helping them and as for Italy and Spain whose side were they on in WWII? The Germans now of course have repented for their evil sins of two world wars and their citizens are afraid to see them fight.

Then of course when the USA had everyone on side after 9/11 they had to invade Iraq and turn everyone against them.

Now we have a huge mess that likely won't go away for decades and is a long shot from over and will likely get worse before it gets better.

No one has the right answer on what to do in Afghanistan and I don't think you will find one soon.



T. Seeley
said
0 0

Regarding the comment on "secondary objectives", the issue in Afghanistan is complex and multi-faceted. The drug issue is an important piece of the puzzle, one can't ignore it and expect to fix the failed state. The amount of development and capacity-building going on by Britain, the USA and Canada should not be overlooked. Talk of secondary objectives and conspiracy theories does nothing to improving the reality of the situation.


Aaron
said
0 0

It is true, other NATO countries, France, Germany, Itlay, and Spain to name a few, have been slow to step up to the plate in Afghanistan and share the burden of the mission. However, does this mean we should abandon the government and people of this failed-state just because some of our allies have a case of pacifism. When has Canada been afraid and unwilling to take on the hard, daunting challanges that lie before the free world. Not in Korea. Not at Juno. And Definately not at Vimy. Sure our allies in mainland Europe need to contribute more, but that shouldn't be a requirement of our continuous presence.


Kevin Maloney
said
0 0

The fact that the British put an emphasis on the drug issues is not Canada's problem. As a matter of fact it should not be the raison d'etre for the British presence.

Maybe if the British and other NATO forces put aside these secondary objectives and get on with stabilizing and rebuilding the country we would have more support with the fighting.

Britain's domestic drug problem is NOT our concern. Our concern is fighting the insurgency and terrorism.



Jeff
said
0 0

Perhaps the NATO countries who don't want their troops involved in the dangerous areas of Afghanistan are too caught up in the left-wing conspiracy theories and anti-Americanism to see the necessity and seriousness of the mission. Either way, it's pretty cowardly to leave the dangerous work to Canada, the U.K. and the USA while they lay back in the safe regions of the country.


Ken Sanders
said
0 0

It is interesting, that after the thirty plus years of the Cold War, in which NATO complained about our lack of troops to defend the NATO nations, we are in a position where NATO is not as supportive of the Canadian effort in Afghanistan as the Canadian government would like.


Tom
said
0 0

It's all good and well that some Canadians are demonstrating a desire to have our troops pulled out of Afghanistan. It is not however, rational to do so without ensuring that Afghanistan is first secure and safe. It's time for partisan politics to stop, for politicians to get on board and get a backbone, and for the general public to realize that we can't leave a friendly nation in desperate need without first fixing the problem.

J. Edward Cook
said
0 0

Why not tell NATO that we're pulling out of Europe altogether and that we need our troops elsewhere.

We could also pull our troops - if we have any still left in Cyprus - and tell NATO that Cyprus is a part of Europe and that it's a European problem - therefore they will have to deal with it.

We could also tell them that the locals will miss our contribution to their local economies around the bases and that the next time they have a European problem (Armed Conflict) that they can do it all by themselves.

Lastly and more to the point - if we fail in Afghanistan it could lead to a more unstoppable form of Islamic Extremism that will spread west - just like Ghengis Khan and then they can say good-bye not only to us but to all the personal rights that they are currently enjoying.


Brian
said
0 0

Do the bleeding hearts that want our boys home not realize that if the Taliban are not defeated completely that the fight will end up on our own soil with our own citizens being murdered here? Wake up, these people play for keeps!

Mark Lundy
said
0 0

Canada is doing more than it's fair share in Afghanistan and it is time for our other NATO allies in Europe to step up and begin to carry some of the burden. I believe this will help our success in Afghanistan in stabilizing that country and defeating the Taliban.


Share with your social Network:

Facebook DIGG Newsvine Delicious Twitter StumbeUpon Reddit Yahoo! Buzz

 

Advertisement

Contest

Today's Top Stories

Luka Rocco Magnotta, the subject of a Canada-wide search warrant, is shown during an audition for the reality TV show 'Cover Guy' in 2007.

Murder suspect auditioned for reality TV show

More   48 Comments 48    20 Video(s) 20

Gabriel Nadeau Dubois of the CLASSE, centre right, responds to reporters questions after negotiations came to a dead-end with Quebec's minister of education at the legislature in Quebec City on Thursday, May 31, 2012. (Jacques Boissinot / THE CANADIAN PRESS)

Talks between Quebec gov't, students collapse

More  4 Video(s) 4