Canadian brigadier-general says progress in Afghanistan will be slow
Published Saturday November 7th, 2009
FREDERICTON - A high - ranking Canadian soldier who is assuming a key role in Afghanistan says Canadians need to temper their expectations ahead of a planned pullout in 2011.
Brig.-Gen. Steve Bowes, who has begun a one-year deployment as the International Security Assistance Force's deputy chief of plans and projects, said the public shouldn't have delusions about quick success in the war-torn country.
"Afghanistan does not have the capacity to become what we would like it to be," Bowes said in a recent interview.
"Despite the best of intentions, we must guard against viewing the problem through western eyes only."
Bowes, who left CFB Gagetown in New Brunswick last month, will spend the next year based in Kabul to help implement policies, plans and procedures dictated by the commanding general.
He said the process of establishing peace in Afghanistan would be arduous, but not impossible.
"It takes decades and centuries for societies to develop," he said.
An observer of the conflict said he worries the public won't understand Canada's real success story in Afghanistan, even if troops are withdrawn in 2011.
Lee Windsor of the University of New Brunswick said real success should be measured in the number of Afghans employed in a legitimate and functional farm economy.
"The more people who are employed in this legitimate farm economy, the fewer people going to be growing opium for the drug rings or being directly employed by the Taliban," said Windsor, the deputy director of the university's Gregg Centre for the Study of War and Society.
"The Afghans themselves, in Kandahar, have rebuilt the farm co-op system to buy a regenerated cash crop system of nuts, dried fruit, apricots, grapes, pomegranates and the things Kandahar has been noted for as an exporter traditionally."
Windsor said Canadian troops have been instrumental in the reconstruction of roads, culverts and canals that are helping to improve the Afghan economy.
"I think soldiers who go there - especially soldiers like Steve Bowes who was there at the beginning, and will now be there close to the end of the full-scale deployment - will see the difference," Windsor said.
Both men admit that problems with the command structure in Afghanistan have been an issue when it comes to achieving success in the region.
Bowes said that's why the ISAF command is splitting, and creating the new headquarters that he'll be part of.
"Creating a headquarters that focuses on the day-to-day operations and works with the regional command structure in Afghanistan ... I think that's a significant step in the right direction," he said.
Windsor said unifying the international effort will continue to be a major challenge with 60 different countries involved in Afghanistan.
But he said the public needs to know the Canadian efforts to rebuild the agri-business sector has given Afghans legitimate employment and reduced the number of Taliban recruits.
"It is a success indicator that we lose sight of, and arguably it is a decisive one," Windsor said.
More News
Search Articles
More CE Network Sites & Partners:
Comments (1)
All comments are subject to the site Terms of Use. For a full commenting tutorial click here.
Our editorial team relies on filtering technology and our visitor community to identify inappropriate comments. In the event that a site user has submitted offensive content that has evaded our filter, please select the option to Flag As Inappropriate presented within the comment. Thank you for helping to keep this site clean.
In fact the historical record shows quite clearly the U.S. ousted the Taliban in Afganistan after 9/11 because the Taliban refused to hand over Osama Bin Laden and was permitting Al-Qiada to maintain training camps there.
Nato was asked to aid the U.S. effort by developing the NATO ISAF force and provide the nessecary security in Afganistan after the Taliban where attacked and removedt by the U.S.. At the time U.S. forces where now heavily committed in Iraq. Lack of foresight on the part of the U.S. created a security void in both these countries in the aftermath of removing their leadership.
Canadas involvement in Afganistan has never been clearly defined and as a result has morphed and re-evolved into a morass of reasons allowing all of which supported allowing Al-Qaida to fall off the radar. Why have we not being going after Al-qaida?