Gosh-darn those noble Canucks!

Tim Fernholz at The American Prospect suggests that the strategists behind America’s chronic Afghanistan problem might have something to learn from Canada’s effort in the graveyard of empires:

Now, though, with Americans leery of the troop increases that go along with counterinsurgency, many, including some influential senators like Carl Levin, are considering a more Canadian approach focused on quickly scaling up the Afghan army and police force. With public support for the war falling, policy-makers in Washington are rethinking the fundamental logic of our efforts in Afghanistan and asking whether we need a counterinsurgency mission to fulfill a counterterrorism objective.

Canadian counter-terrorism and policing vs. gung-ho American counterinsurgency. It took 10 winding paragraphs (11 if you count "Boom!") to get to that. Elephant in the room being that few believe Canada’s role is so much different than America’s. (Can you name someone who thinks so?) From today’s Star (one paragraph in):

Counter-insurgency operations will eventually displace the army’s traditional peacekeeping capabilities as it prepares for life after the Afghan mission, says the general in charge of Canada’s land forces [Lt.-Gen. Andrew Leslie].

That’s not for Afghanistan—that’s for the future of all of Canada’s military planning. So much for the "whole-government approach"—the Canadian way, I suppose—mentioned in the TAP article. Those words were, of course, from a consular official.

Published 09.11.15 01:18:07 -0500 GMT | Posted by Andrew Garib on 09.11.15 | |

Also On This Topic:

What Evan Solomon should have asked Dimitri Soudas TAKING UP VALUABLE TWIX SPACE What Would Iggy Do On Afghanistan?

Be the first to comment on “Gosh-darn those noble Canucks!”