NATO Mission in Afghanistan not Peacekeeping

Jersay

House Member
Dec 1, 2005
4,837
2
38
Independent Palestine
Well, now the NATO mission in Afghanistan is not peacekeeping, or at least not peacekeeping in the 'perceived' sense of the word. Now, before anyone states that, oh I must hate the Canadians doing wonderful work in Afghanistan, I don't, I am apart of the Canadian military but I think people should know what is exactly taking place, and not confuse two different situations as the same. Peacekeeping, or war!

Kandahar, Afghanistan — A U.S. commander expressed confidence Friday that NATO-led peacekeeping troops will aggressively keep up the fight against insurgents when they take over control of southern Afghanistan from American troops in the spring.

Maj. Gen. Jason Kamiya, the U.S.-led coalition's operational commander, also called a recent rise in suicide bombings a sign of the insurgency's increasing desperation over Afghanistan's successful parliamentary elections in September and other democratic advances.

“As we approached the elections I think the enemy realized what was at stake,” Gen. Kamiya told reporters at the U.S. base in Kandahar, a southern city that was the former stronghold of the ousted Taliban religious militia.

NATO foreign ministers approved plans earlier this month to send up to 6,000 mostly European and Canadian soldiers into volatile southern Afghanistan, while about 10,000 NATO troops continue to watch over the north and west.

The expansion, which is expected to begin in May, will free U.S. forces to focus on counterinsurgency operations against Taliban and al-Qaida fighters along the country's southern and eastern frontier with Pakistan, where insurgents are most active.

The plans give the NATO peacekeepers a stronger self-defence mandate, guarantee support from U.S. combat troops if they face a serious attack and set rules for handling detainees — all issues concerned some European allies mulling participation in the expanded force.

Gen. Kamiya said NATO troops would be aggressive in the fight against insurgents.

“I feel very, very confident ... that each nation understands what the conditions are here,” Gen. Kamiya said during a visit by Gen. Peter Pace, chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff who is making a six-nation tour to rally U.S. troops during the holidays.

Canadian Col. S.J. Bowes said his nation, which will assume responsibility for Kandahar, was prepared to extend the offensive nature of the operation.

“It's clear that this is not a peacekeeping mission,” he said, although he stressed that he couldn't speak for the British army, which will command the NATO mission in the south.

The British Foreign Office had no comment on the comments by Gen. Kamiya and Col Bowes. However, the Ministry of Defence said several tasks needed to be carried out around the country and the British government recognizes that Taliban remnants are active in southern Afghanistan.

This year has been the deadliest in Afghanistan since a U.S.-led offensive ousted the Taliban regime in late 2001 for harboring Osama bin Laden and al-Qaida training camps. More than 1,500 people have been killed as militants loyal to the Taliban, al-Qaida and other groups have stepped up attacks.

Two suspected Taliban suicide bombers died Thursday when explosives they were strapping to their bodies exploded prematurely in the south, officials said.

The blast followed a string of suicide attacks and came days after a top rebel commander claimed more than 200 insurgents were willing to kill themselves in assaults on U.S. troops and their allies.

Gen. Kamiya dismissed the claim by Mullah Dadullah as propaganda but acknowledged such attacks have been rising.

“Suicide bombers were almost nonexistent when we came here in March. What we did notice though is that the rise in suicide bombings began in June,” he said.

“The enemy began to realize that every time he came at us directly he would always lose great numbers of fighters and insurgents. So this caused him to adapt his tactics.”

Unlike in Iraq, suicide attacks were relatively rare in Afghanistan until September, fuelling fears that rebels could be adopting tactics used in the Middle East.

There have been about a dozen such attacks the past few months, including twin assaults in Kabul on Nov. 14 that targeted NATO-led peacekeepers and killed a German soldier and eight Afghans.

A suicide bomber also set off explosives near a U.S. and Afghan military convoy in Kandahar on Dec. 11, killing himself and wounding three civilians. A week earlier, a suicide bomber killed a civilian and wounded a Canadian soldier.

Secretary of Defence Donald H. Rumsfeld announced earlier this month that the number of U.S. troops in Afghanistan will be cut from 19,000 to about 16,500 by spring, but he cautioned that removing forces too quickly could impede the long-term hunt for terrorists.

That was welcome news to Army Specialist Aaron Krueger, 21, of Mentone, Ind.

“The sooner we get the job done the better,” he said after listening to Pace address troops at Kandahar.
 

Roy

Electoral Member
Nov 23, 2005
218
0
16
Alberta
RE: NATO Mission in Afgha

yea I think most Canadians know that the mission is not strictly peacekeeping.....we are taking on a broader role in Afghanistan which does put us at risk, but hey you can't sit back all the time. I for one am proud of our troops in Afghanistan who are working to make the lives of the natives better.
 

Jersay

House Member
Dec 1, 2005
4,837
2
38
Independent Palestine
Yeah, I am happy that the troops are in Afghanistan, twelve buddies from my unit are over there at this moment.

Using the peacekeeping term is not sensible because it gives the definition of a force between others. Occupation isn't right because the majority of the native population is supportive of its efforts, so I think a phrase like NATO's assistance force to Afghanistan or the reconstruction force of Afghanistan.

Peacekeeping gives the ideal that they will be protected because they are doing peacekeeping work, not exactly what NATO or the forces in the south will be doing, at least from what the article implies.
 

Timetrvlr

Electoral Member
Dec 15, 2005
196
0
16
BC interior
Robert Fisk interview by Justin Podur - 05 December, 2005

Robert Fisk is one of the world's best known journalists. He has been based in the Middle East as the UK Independent's Middle East correspondent for nearly 30 years, during which he has reported on two U.S. wars in Iraq, two Afghan wars, the Israel/Palestine conflict, Israel's invasion of Lebanon, the civil war in the former Yugoslavia.

His new book, The Great War for Civilization (HarperCollins 2005), collects his reporting in a single, 1300-page source. A previous book, the 700 page Pity the Nation (4th edition Nation Books 2002) covered the Lebanese civil war.

Fisk is widely respected as a tireless reporter who strives to get firsthand information and who brings a sense of fairness, knowledge and history to his reporting. His work is based on a moral framework that views war as the “total failure of the human spirit” and journalists as having a duty to report from the perspective of the victims. I caught up with him in Toronto on November 24 to discuss his book and his views on journalism, war and even Canada.

An excerpt from the article:

Fisk: The problem with Canadians in Afghanistan is schizophrenia. ISAF, the Interim Stabilization Force, is seen by Afghans as, if not benevolent, certainly not malevolent. The attitude is that here are these Germans, Turks and Canadians, helping to keep the peace. If they weren't there, there would be widespread robberies. I think they like that there are Germans on patrol at midnight, and so do I. And better the Canadians than the Americans.

But there is also a different side. The Canadians have attached themselves to the U.S. in the south, in Kanadahar, playing an aggressive role, and they are increasingly identified with U.S. military projects in the Middle East.

In this way Canada paints itself white in Kabul, and I believe it should be there, I've got nothing against ISAF, and I wish it was on a bigger scale with same mandate. But if you attach your troops to the Americans, and you have Canadian officers starting to talk like Americans, then you have gone across, and committed yourself as a belligerent in war.

Afterwards you cannot turn around and say “why did they want to hurt us?” I'm not predicting attacks on Canada, but once you engage in this way like Blair has, like Spain did under Aznar, you can denounce any crime against humanity on your soil, and you should, but you can't be surprised.
 

jimmoyer

jimmoyer
Apr 3, 2005
5,101
22
38
68
Winchester Virginia
www.contactcorp.net
Good point Timetrvir, about the problems of
associating with American troops.

But a hard truth remains.

If the Germans and Canadians will not fight terrorist
groups in the mountains, then what honor is there ?

I'm glad they want to stop criminal lawlessness and
robberies. There's certainly a need for that.

And leave the other dirty work to someone else.

But no false righteousness should develop from
the Germans and Canadians over this division of labor.