This year marks the 10th anniversary of the consolidation in Edmonton of much of the army's manpower in the West, and it's no exaggeration to say the relationship between the Alberta capital and its soldiers has become an enduring love affair.
And like all close relationships, there has been heartbreak to go along with the pride Edmonton takes in being home to a large slice of Canada's land forces.
There was a national out pouring of grief in April 2002 for four members of the Princess Patricia's Canadian Light Infantry (PPCLI) killed in a friendly-fire incident in Afghanistan, but nowhere was that grief more profound than in their adopted hometown.
Right now, there's palpable concern across the city for the fate of soldiers badly injured in a roadside bomb attack Jan. 15 on a Canadian Forces' convoy near the army's base in Kandahar, Afghanistan. They were flown home last week to receive treatment at an Edmonton hospital, and their condition is a topic of conversation wherever you go.
Frankly, we'd better get used to it. The army's Operation Archer in Afghanistan is little understood by civilians, but it represents a dramatic shift for Canada's soldiers and one that promises more casualties.
Canada's role as a peacekeeper has become deeply embedded in the national psyche, but in truth we don't do much of that any more. The current operation involves finding and destroying armed militants who oppose the democratization of that country.
It's war, with everything that implies.
The Martin government's reluctant agreement to provide a NATO "Provincial Reconstruction Team" for lawless Kandahar -- first revealed in this column in 2004 -- was never fully explained to Canadians. People were left to assume the operation would be similar to the one in the Afghan capital of Kabul.
After all, a government so opposed to U.S.-led military operations overseas would never agree to a combat mission, would it? Actually, it would -- and label it something else. The Department of Defence website calls it a "peace-support" operation to "improve the security situation in southern Afghanistan."
Sounds innocuous enough, which you suspect is the intent. But since last summer the army has been more forthright in explaining what the 2,000 troops now being deployed to Kandahar will be doing and the risks.
The soldiers of the 1st Mechanized Brigade Group will be helping the locals in and around Kandahar to rebuild. But they will also mounting operations against armed pro-Taliban and pro-al-Qaida groups.
Politically, no one in the Martin government was willing to admit it, but from a military standpoint the Canadians will be doing much the same job as U.S. forces are doing in Iraq -- and very likely paying a similar price.
You have to wonder if Canadians are ready for that. Three times in the last century our parents and grandparents went to war to support democracy in Europe and Asia, but how willing are we to do the same -- albeit on a much smaller scale -- to promote peace and democracy in Afghanistan?
The casualties we're likely to see returning from Afghanistan will provide a severe test for Canadians, and for the new Conservative government in Ottawa.
When it comes to defending our values in a troubled world, we talk the talk -- but can we still walk the walk?
I have no doubts about Canada's soldiers. I've been privileged to see them operate in half a dozen hotspots, but wondered if a country that has so often sold them short deserves their professionalism and commitment.
Do we even understand what we ask of them?
As a nation, we're going to be forced to examine a lot of the holier-than-thou BS that's masqueraded as foreign policy over the past few decades.
We're finally going to have to decide where we stand in the war on terror, and it ought to be with our allies and full-square behind the men and women we're already sending in harm's way.
