Winter is even colder in Afghanistan
“I am sorry I am not a prophet, neither am I inspired to know whether at some future time, if I am in trouble, a Liberal or Conservative government will be in power.”
Amir Abd ar-Rahman
19th century leader of Afghanistan
In the mid-19th century, Afghanistan was blessed with a leader who grasped the basic principles of British politics. Abd ar-Rahman thought the British parliamentary system was wonderful because it allowed “for one party or another to put the blame upon when mistakes are made.” The policies of the Brits - then in control of what would later become India, Pakistan, and Afghanistan - changed whenever the government back in England went from Liberal to Conservative. The Brits' lack of an overarching sustainable plan would cause the people of Afghanistan a lot of grief, and the parties would invariably blame one another for the various disasters.
The interesting aspect of this short history lesson is that our own Liberals and Conservatives are operating in the same manner today. It was the Liberal party who placed Canadian soldiers in Afghanistan, then they were defeated in an election, the-oh-so democratic process we love to hold up as a carrot after which Afghanis should be chasing.
Then the Conservatives got into power (approx 20 per cent of people in Canada voted for Cons) and voila, they formed the government; neat trick, that, and acting with the Liberal Ignatieff faction (Iggy was attempting to distinguish himself from leadership rivals at the time), extended Canada's mission in Afghanistan to 2009. That motion was introduced, debated and voted upon in three days. That's a time frame for efficiency that MPs usually reserve for giving themselves a raise.
And now here we are again, with Liberals and Conservatives playing politics with Afghanistan. The latest out of Ottawa, if you can follow the nuances and dig through the bullshit, is that Canadian soldiers will be in Afghanistan until 2011.
The difference in opinion between the two parties is a fine one. The Cons feel that the current mission, with its “combat” aspects, is worthwhile. The Liberals believe Canada has a role in the country, but that the “combat mission” should end. But what's really at risk for both parties is an election in Canada, not a clearly defined and intelligent policy in Afghanistan. For that to happen, both parties would actually have to consult with the people of Afghanistan, not the people of Canada, or their poll numbers. Neither party really wants to have an election “On Afghanistan,” because neither party really cares about Afghanis. If they did, then perhaps both parties would come together to figure out a way to keep Afghanis from freezing to death.
Yes, Canada has lost 78 soldiers since our mission began six years ago. A tragedy, by all accounts, but what about the more than 100 Afghanis who have froze to death since January of ‘08?
I get a little disturbed going from pictures of frost-bitten people, with amputated hands and feet, to photos of our hideously spoiled political class in Ottawa bundled up against the “extreme cold,” hustling from one press conference to another to call damnation upon each other. How about the reports that say 400,000 Afghanis face famine conditions this winter? How often do the Libs and Cons debate Afghani food and shelter? Do Afghanis need us to fight “The Taliban” and establish democracy, or would they rather have us build houses, send blankets and food, or - dear me - money?
Those debates have yet to happen. Instead, what we get are politicians and political parties who are more concerned with polls and posturing in the house of commons, passing the buck, tossing the blame back and forth like a live grenade, hoping the fucking thing goes off in the other guy's face. Then when the inevitable election comes around, whoever has the least scars will have the upper hand in the big public relations battles that have come to symbolize our political process. The debate inevitably boils down to how Afghanistan affects Canada's political parties. Not to mention that the Libs and Cons feel themselves privileged enough to ignore the suggestions of the Bloc and the NDP, who hold almost a third of the seats in the House of Commons. Hell, those MPs don't represent Canadians, do they?
I bet if Amir Abd ar-Rahman were reincarnated today, he'd probably have serious deja-vu. Life in Afghanistan would probably feel quite familiar to him. He wouldn't have to learn the names of any new political parties, or really have to be told what's really wrong with his country. Politicians, apparently, don't read history books. Occasionally, I do think it would be nice if they read the news before they opened their mouths.
Editorial opinions or comments expressed in this online edition of Interrobang newspaper reflect the views of the writer and are not those of the Interrobang or the Fanshawe Student Union. The Interrobang is published weekly by the Fanshawe Student Union at 1001 Fanshawe College Blvd., P.O. Box 7005, London, Ontario, N5Y 5R6 and distributed through the Fanshawe College community. Letters to the editor are welcome. All letters are subject to editing and should be emailed. All letters must be accompanied by contact information. Letters can also be submitted online by clicking here.
Amir Abd ar-Rahman
19th century leader of Afghanistan
In the mid-19th century, Afghanistan was blessed with a leader who grasped the basic principles of British politics. Abd ar-Rahman thought the British parliamentary system was wonderful because it allowed “for one party or another to put the blame upon when mistakes are made.” The policies of the Brits - then in control of what would later become India, Pakistan, and Afghanistan - changed whenever the government back in England went from Liberal to Conservative. The Brits' lack of an overarching sustainable plan would cause the people of Afghanistan a lot of grief, and the parties would invariably blame one another for the various disasters.
The interesting aspect of this short history lesson is that our own Liberals and Conservatives are operating in the same manner today. It was the Liberal party who placed Canadian soldiers in Afghanistan, then they were defeated in an election, the-oh-so democratic process we love to hold up as a carrot after which Afghanis should be chasing.
Then the Conservatives got into power (approx 20 per cent of people in Canada voted for Cons) and voila, they formed the government; neat trick, that, and acting with the Liberal Ignatieff faction (Iggy was attempting to distinguish himself from leadership rivals at the time), extended Canada's mission in Afghanistan to 2009. That motion was introduced, debated and voted upon in three days. That's a time frame for efficiency that MPs usually reserve for giving themselves a raise.
And now here we are again, with Liberals and Conservatives playing politics with Afghanistan. The latest out of Ottawa, if you can follow the nuances and dig through the bullshit, is that Canadian soldiers will be in Afghanistan until 2011.
The difference in opinion between the two parties is a fine one. The Cons feel that the current mission, with its “combat” aspects, is worthwhile. The Liberals believe Canada has a role in the country, but that the “combat mission” should end. But what's really at risk for both parties is an election in Canada, not a clearly defined and intelligent policy in Afghanistan. For that to happen, both parties would actually have to consult with the people of Afghanistan, not the people of Canada, or their poll numbers. Neither party really wants to have an election “On Afghanistan,” because neither party really cares about Afghanis. If they did, then perhaps both parties would come together to figure out a way to keep Afghanis from freezing to death.
Yes, Canada has lost 78 soldiers since our mission began six years ago. A tragedy, by all accounts, but what about the more than 100 Afghanis who have froze to death since January of ‘08?
I get a little disturbed going from pictures of frost-bitten people, with amputated hands and feet, to photos of our hideously spoiled political class in Ottawa bundled up against the “extreme cold,” hustling from one press conference to another to call damnation upon each other. How about the reports that say 400,000 Afghanis face famine conditions this winter? How often do the Libs and Cons debate Afghani food and shelter? Do Afghanis need us to fight “The Taliban” and establish democracy, or would they rather have us build houses, send blankets and food, or - dear me - money?
Those debates have yet to happen. Instead, what we get are politicians and political parties who are more concerned with polls and posturing in the house of commons, passing the buck, tossing the blame back and forth like a live grenade, hoping the fucking thing goes off in the other guy's face. Then when the inevitable election comes around, whoever has the least scars will have the upper hand in the big public relations battles that have come to symbolize our political process. The debate inevitably boils down to how Afghanistan affects Canada's political parties. Not to mention that the Libs and Cons feel themselves privileged enough to ignore the suggestions of the Bloc and the NDP, who hold almost a third of the seats in the House of Commons. Hell, those MPs don't represent Canadians, do they?
I bet if Amir Abd ar-Rahman were reincarnated today, he'd probably have serious deja-vu. Life in Afghanistan would probably feel quite familiar to him. He wouldn't have to learn the names of any new political parties, or really have to be told what's really wrong with his country. Politicians, apparently, don't read history books. Occasionally, I do think it would be nice if they read the news before they opened their mouths.
Editorial opinions or comments expressed in this online edition of Interrobang newspaper reflect the views of the writer and are not those of the Interrobang or the Fanshawe Student Union. The Interrobang is published weekly by the Fanshawe Student Union at 1001 Fanshawe College Blvd., P.O. Box 7005, London, Ontario, N5Y 5R6 and distributed through the Fanshawe College community. Letters to the editor are welcome. All letters are subject to editing and should be emailed. All letters must be accompanied by contact information. Letters can also be submitted online by clicking here.
