Harper goes beyond Kandahar base

[sanctus]

By James Mccarten And Alexander Panetta
KANDAHAR, Afghanistan (CP) - Decked out in protective gear, a helmet under his arm, Stephen Harper gave a thumbs up as he boarded a Black Hawk helicopter Wednesday to become one of the only serving prime ministers to venture perilously close to the front lines of war.
Harper's trip took him beyond the safety of the heavily guarded Kandahar Airfield to the forward operating base at Ma'sum Ghar, a rocky, mountainous patch of Afghanistan hard between the Panjwaii District Bazaar and the Arghandab River that's steeped in the blood of Canadian soldiers.
But thanks to a controversial decision by the Prime Minister's Office to cancel a military convoy of journalists who were supposed to accompany him, the event - billed as historical by the deputy commander of Canadian forces - went largely unwitnessed by the media, save for a handful of photographers.
"I have a doctorate in history," Col. Mike Cessford told a news conference in advance of Harper's departure.
"No sitting prime minister, in my opinion, has been closer to combat operations than this prime minister today."
Pooled videotape showed a helmeted Harper in a khaki-coloured flak jacket, hands on his hips as he surveyed the landscape from one of the base's lookout points. Soldiers, rifles at the ready, flanked him on either side.
The base at Ma'sum Ghar sits on the very patch of rock where Pte. Mark Anthony Graham was killed and 30 other Canadian soldiers were injured when they were mistakenly strafed by a pair of U.S. A-10 Thunderbolts in the middle of a major combat operation.
It's also at the heart of a tract of territory hard-won from the Taliban with Canadian sweat and blood, but a part of the country that remains far from safe, as evidenced by a rocket attack on the base last week that killed a Canadian-hired interpreter and injured another.
"It's a pale shadow of what it once was," Cessford said of the fighting in the region. "But it cannot reasonably be described as a benign environment."
Asked whether Harper's visit would have been possible a year ago, Cessford said: "Absolutely not."
Harper began the second day of his two-day visit with a speech to soldiers gathered at Kandahar Airfield's maple leaf-festooned ball-hockey rink, where he dropped the ball at a ceremonial face-off and hinted strongly that troops won't be leaving Afghanistan anytime soon.
"You know that your work is not complete," he told about 300 soldiers, many of whom had been asked by military officials to attend the morning's event.
"You know that we can't just put down our weapons and hope for peace. You know that we can't set arbitrary deadlines and simply wish for the best."
The Liberals want Canada to withdraw its troops when the current mission expires in 2009, while the NDP wants to pull them out immediately. Finding a soldier on the ground in Afghanistan who wants Canadians to pull out in two years is a nearly impossible task.
"February 2009, I don't see this being done, and nobody wants to leave with this mission half-done," said Master Cpl. Mark Caverson, 36, from the Joint Signals Regiment based in Kingston, Ont..
"We've got a fairly good name now, we've spent a lot of time and blood building that name, so let's get this done and get this country back on its feet."
But in Ottawa, Liberal defence critic MP Denis Coderre, issued a statement saying he was "deeply troubled that Mr. Harper continues to support an open-ended counter-insurgency mission in Kandahar."
He complained that in the House of Commons the prime minister and Defence Minister Gordon O'Connor "keep repeating the stock line that Canada is only committed until 2009."
"Outside of the House, Mr. Harper and Mr. O'Connor keep hinting that our soldiers will stay longer. . . .
Why are the Conservatives opposed to handing over the reins of combat needs in Kandahar to another NATO country when Canada's current mission has ended? Why is he against such a standard and fair rotation?"
Brig.-Gen. Tim Grant, the senior Canadian military commander in Afghanistan, said there are contingency plans in place that extend beyond the current pullout date.
"The work will not be done here in February 2009, so we want to make sure we do as much as we possibly can between now and then," Grant said. "But at the same time, it would be irresponsible of us not to plan past that point, for the good of the country."
At Ma'sum Ghar, Harper shook hands and posed for pictures with members of A Squadron from the Lord Strathcona's Horse (Royal Canadians) armour regiment, who stood before several of Canada's Leopard tanks - aging sweatboxes that the Conservative government has already promised to replace with a fleet of cooler, more efficient models.
But no one with a notebook was on hand to interview the troops or Harper as he made his way around the base.
The PMO provided the media with only three seats aboard one of two helicopters that made the trip. They were filled by two photographers and a TV cameraman, all three of whom were part of the media contingent that travelled with Harper to Afghanistan.
The PMO's decision countermanded the military's plan to shuttle reporters, many of whom are embedded with troops, to the site in an armoured convoy.
Dimitri Soudas, Harper's deputy press secretary, said the convoy was cancelled because it wasn't part of the prime minister's scheduled agenda.
"I stick to the plan and to the schedule that we decided upon prior to departure," Soudas said. "There's more than one angle to moving the prime minister around Afghanistan, and I'm not in a position to make any changes at the last minute."
Military officials said the PMO complained that the Canadian Forces "didn't have the authority to plan anything on their behalf."
One senior military source said the convoy was cancelled, at least in part, because it didn't fit with the PMO's "cookie-cutter approach" to media relations. Others have spoken in the past about senior government officials being strongly opposed to the Canadian Forces embed program.
Harper began the final day of his two-day visit to Afghanistan by having breakfast with soldiers in the mess hall, delivering a speech lauding the troops and offering a gift of hockey sticks and balls.
"Each of you stands among the greatest of your generation," Harper told the soldiers.
"You are Canada's sons and daughters. And your country - as much as this country - owes you a debt of gratitude and its unwavering support."
But there were visible signs his audience, which crowded around the podium and sat atop armoured vehicles parked behind Harper for the benefit of the cameras, was decidedly non-partisan.
Scores of soldiers began filing out the moment the prime minister finished speaking. An officer stopped them and said: "The prime minister is still here - so that means we're still here. Get back inside."


Copyright © 2007 Canadian Press

 

[TomG]

Well, the PM becomes the latest of his ministers to go drag and parade around with great pretenses in helmets and flak jackets. The PM an economist turned to politician, a fake warrior. His chief warrior, a fake economist: What was it the good gen said several days ago: Something to the effect that the Mission was going to save us from the trade irritants between us and US such as softwood lumber etc. Huh? Helmets are for soldiers not visiting economists, and mortarboards are for economists not for generals. Generals should stick to their mortars.

So, it looks like it’s sell sell sell. Sell the mission, sell the Party. Get a majority so the party goes on. Do anything, say anything, use anything, but just get those approval ratings up. The Col, a PhD of history, wraps the PM in gowns of glory: ‘In my opinion, no sitting PM has been closer to combat.’ PM’s usually are in combat most of the time. A PM’s combat is with the media, and this PM is never close to combat--a real risk avoider. The national media was cleverly left behind, as it always is with this guy in his helmet and flak jacket. You just can’t take him out unless you dress him up. He did get a hair cut and a style consultant though.

Government of the people by Hollywood: The wide wild world where horrible things and also wonderful things really happen spontaneously. The wild world becomes a back-lot set. Reality, a dolly zoom shot. The PM remains front and centre, larger than life, while we have our perspectives distorted. The PM tells yet again of the heroes of our generation. Soldiers can and often are heroic, but in their own rights, not as actors in a re-election campaign commercial.

The story looks like an active military theater was used to stage a self-serving publicity stunt. It also looks like some troops and senior staff might have been a bit irritated. I wonder why? Could be that the troops spent all the time since this stunt was laid pulling extra duty and inspections to ensure the optics were right. Chances are that they pulled extra duty doing sweeps, or whatever they’re called, to pacify the area and ensure the real danger to the PM was carefully controlled and managed. The troops likely patrolled the area intensively to ensure nobody would really shoot at the PM or nothing really would go boom during the parade.

When you go on patrol, you’re the one that is really exposed to things that go boom. When you order extra patrols as a professional soldier, the resources are detracted from other operations--operations that may be part of the real operations plan. Seems like the plan might have been compromised a bit to accommodate the PM’s shooting. The PM, as soldier, heroic at the risk of others: Wonder if anybody was injured in preparing this set for a sitting PM’s heroic pretense?

Wonder why some people seem irritated? Wonder if the troops liked their breakfast and were tickled with their hockey sticks and balls? At least Bob Hope was real Hollywood; told jokes and brought people who sang and danced. Hope probably never said hero once. Our PM says hero all the time, and he sure does sing and dance. Well, maybe our heroes will really remain unsung unless somebody else sings.

 

[Colpy]

Well, I would have to agree that Harper and the CPC (of which I am a dues-paying member) have flip-flopped on a number of issues, and have simply failed to come through on some promises.

BUT on Afghanistan, Harper has been as constant as the Rock of Gibralter. There has been no shift, no turning away from the mission, despite the obvious fact his single-mindedness is costing him dearly in Quebec, where he most needs votes.

This simply shows that his stance is solidly based on principle, and it could easily cost him the next election.

 

[BitWhys]

David Koresh acted on principle.

 

[Colpy]

David Koresh acted on principle.

I understand your point, but would argue the specifics..........David Koresh was a religious fanatic, a power-mad leader who would brook no dissent, a man willing to go to any lengths to achieve his evil goals, while Stephen Harper...........

Never mind.



Just kidding. I actually like Harper.