It’ll be a long warm stretch of weather here in the great city of Toronto. If you’re like me this isn’t a hangover post because of the mid-week festivities - so I hope I can capture your attention for at least a few paragraphs.

Nobody asked me - but when did blame become a major part of the Canadian tactic in foreign policy?

You know what Canada is beginning to remind me of - George Foreman after his loss to Ali in the Rumble In The Jungle.

(Stay with me it’s early…)

After Foreman, who had an 80’s Mike Tyson-esque invincibility about him lost to Muhammad who regained the Heavyweight title for the 2nd time, a long string of excuses occurred. He’s still giving every excuse save the fact that he was beaten by one of the greatest fighters ever.

The ring was too big, too small
His corner gave bad advice.
His water was tainted.
His shoe laces were too tight.

Now the Canadian politicians trying to explain our extended role in Afghanistan:

The war on terror.
Fighting them there so we don’t have to fight them here.
Bringing democracy to the region.
More assistance required from NATO allies.
Everything is Pakistan’s fault.
And Peter Mackay’s most recent finger pointing after his trip to Afghanistan with media darling CDS Rick Hillier:

It’s Iran.

If you follow the States’ talking points for it’s military occupations overseas you’ll notice a very similar string of reasons (save for WMD’s and the Taliban-Saddam tag-team).

While it can’t be dismissed that the US is our ally and that when America sneezes Canada will catch a cold - on foreign policy I remember a time when we did at least sometimes march to the beat of our own drum.

How does Mackay know that we should look to Iran? Canada doesn’t have it’s own intelligence agency like the CIA or MI6.

When blame fell to Pakistan it was ignored that they lost ten times as many soldiers hunting Taliban supporters in the North West of the country.

When blame fell to NATO allies it was ignored that Germany and France had larger contingents in Afghanistan than Canada.

Now, instead of looking eastward at the Pakistani border, MacKay is telling us the enemy is coming from the west - and bringing weapons. We need to stop this flow of military hardware if we are to be successful in Kandahar, runs MacKay’s logic.

The problem with this naively simple theory is that there is no need to bring munitions into Afghanistan. After three decades of continual warfare, wherein bordering states and global superpowers poured weaponry into their factional proxies, there remains an almost limitless supply of hidden munitions caches.

Iran provides a great deal of support to the Afghan economy and a war with them would cause many of those refugees from Afghan in Iran to return. The hardship and economical strain on an already weak Afghan infrastructure would further prolong any progress in the country.

It only makes sense that Karzai would advise against an action to its neighbor.

From a strategic point of view does Canada want to start picking fights with another country?

Both nation’s have strained military forces already. Majority of the western (and mostly stabilized) Herat province is ethnic Persian. Do we really need to be in a conflict in another portion of the country when the south is not yet secure?

Here’s a consideration via Scott Taylor:

To be fair to MacKay, foreign fighters operating in Afghanistan are a major obstacle to NATO’s potential success and eventual withdrawal. However, these are not the idealistic Muslim jihadists, but the roughly 20,000 Western mercenaries employed as private security contractors. Unlicensed and unregistered, these yabobs operate completely outside both Afghan law and coalition forces’ military discipline. Any violence committed by these Rambo wannabes negatively impacts the reputation of legitimate coalition special forces and combat troops.

Local Afghans do not differentiate between private security, U.S. coalition or NATO forces, they simply lump the responsibility for the killers of their families at the hands of the “foreigners.”

If MacKay is serious about plotting a new course for our mission he would be wise to quit reiterating American-generated “blame Iran” rhetoric and start challenging the uncontrolled use of so-called private security mercenaries in Afghanistan.

If we start by eliminating the “foreign fighters” under our own control, maybe we can break the circle of violence.

Amen.

Who/what do you blame for the extended ops overseas?

Who do I blame for the troubles and delayed operation in Afghanistan?

I’m gonna go with GM of the Toronto Maple Leafs, John Ferguson.

Prove me wrong Peter. Because much like a team with a horrible losing record but a proud history, changing strategy seems to be the last thing on anyone’s mind.

As Marcellus tells Butch in Pulp Fiction:

“The night of the fight, you may feel a slight sting. That’s pride fucking with you. Fuck pride. Pride only hurts, it never helps. “

Rumble Young Country Rumble.

Lastly my thoughts and prayers to the family and friends of Canada’s most recent loss overseas: GUNNER Jonathan Dion of 5ieme RALC, Valcartier Quebec.

The Army has lost a lot of Artillery soldiers in this conflict, 2 officers from my old Regiment, 1 RCHA. Some of my infantry buds used to tease the gunners for being distanced from the front line and therefore safe from danger.

This conflict proves that conventional rules don’t apply.

Have a great weekend, wherever you are, enjoy it.

Now Playing:
itunes: Natural Beauty Neil Young
Movie:The Kite Runner/No Country For Old Men
DVD: The Office Season 3