The Reminder is making its archives back to 2003 available on our website. Please note that, due to technical limitations, archive articles are presented without the usual formatting.
Forget about Afghanistan becoming a Òthriving, prosperous democracyÓ by the time CanadaÕs military mission in Kandahar winds down in 2011. WeÕll be happy if it becomes a Òviable stateÓ by then. ThereÕs candour in those comments by Prime Minister Stephen HarperÕs point man on Afghanistan: Trade Minister David Emerson, who heads up the new cabinet committee co-ordinating CanadaÕs $7 billion military effort and our $1.3 billion aid effort. He clearly wants to tamp down expectations of what we can accomplish by 2011. ThatÕs not unreasonable, given AfghanistanÕs daunting challenges. But as the Emerson panel prepares to draw up ÒrealisticÓ benchmarks on what Ottawa intends to deliver by way of security in Kandahar, development and good governance, it must not make the mistake of aiming too low. Building a few schools or digging a few wells wonÕt justify the cost to taxpayers or the risks for our troops. What Canadians want to hear are answers to these questions: What can we reasonably expect from President Hamid KarzaiÕs government in terms of improved governance in Kandahar? How many combat-ready troops will Karzai deploy in Kandahar? What additional parts of the unsettled region will they take ownership of so that development and aid can proceed? How will Karzai deal with the hundreds of illegal armed bands that roam the countryside? What are his plans for providing the schooling, health care and services people need? And what are OttawaÕs specific goals? How many Afghan troops do we intend to train? Will they be equipped with transport, armour and firepower? Will they play a role fighting insurgents or sealing the border with Pakistan? Finally, what exactly are CanadaÕs development goals? What will CanadaÕs Òsignature projectÓ be? And what are our plans for meeting Òurgent needs,Ó as John ManleyÕs panel urged, and for creating jobs? Any ÒrealisticÓ set of Canadian benchmarks and timelines will address these issues. And Parliament should give it careful scrutiny.
