Labelthis…


Anti-War is in Fact Pro-war
February 15, 2008, 7:58 pm
Filed under: Afghanistan, Canada, The Punditariat

At least according to Lauryn Oates ,vice-president of Canadian Women for Women in Afghanistan (CW4WA),and vocal supporters of the NATO led Afghan intervention Ian King & Terry Glavin.

Indeed Lauryn Oates takes direct aim at the NDP over it’s skepticism and contention that NATO military operations in Afghan are in all liklihood doomed to fail.And as such,Cnd troops should stop all counter-insurgency mission and explore other “solutions”.

Solution that might have a chance at success,or at minimum help prepare the ground for the possibility of success.

Oates says that in effect, those who want out of Afghanistan are, in fact, asking for more war – and this is particularly true of the NDP.

“They’re pro-war, which goes against everything I think the left should actually stand for. It’s a betrayal of leftist values that caused me to abandon that party.”

Western troops are no guarantees of success, despite what Terry Glavin,Ian King,& Mrs Oates might think or chose to believe.Only the Afghan people themselves,can do that.

It is not an unreasonable position for the NDP (and others) to doubt the NATO led intervention as it is presently configured and mandated, particularly at this point in time…

When after seven years and billions spent.

“Success” or widespread optimism among the Afghan peoples is very limited,and real change is ephemeral and almost impossible to quantify or articulate.

We live in strange times.When those peoples that base their assessments on recognition of historical realities are dismissed with condescension,and labeled as pro-war pro-taliban,anti-women etc etc.

There is no chance at appealing to those people,that see the situation in Afghanistan in such simplistic terms,or trying to engage with them respectfully .

One will invariable be met with,what can only be defined as over simplified generalizations.Challenge those generalizations as being insufficient to justify the war ,and all the misery that war entails,one is met with paternalistic condescension.

One either supports the NATO mission or one is pro-taliban,anti-women, etc etc…

Indeed one is “pro-war”?

Read more


7 Comments so far
Leave a comment

I wonder what Ms. Oates says about the Karzai government? One that still supports having Sharia law embedded in its constitution?

Pro-war people pretending to be leftists is common in times of war. It’s times like now we really can separate the wheat from the shaft. I’m glad the NDP, for the most part, is still the “wheat.”

Comment by Julian Benson

Dirk:

Re-read the article. Read the rest of what she told me. An immediate withdrawal — which is what the “peace” movement and the NDP demand — would lead to an early-90s scenario and all-out civil war. Compare the situation 15 years ago to now, and kindly tell me that reverting to a civil war is really a reduction in conflict, or how it will improve the humanitarian situation in that country. This isn’t 1984esque “war is peace”. This is “false peace means war — just one where no Canadian troops are involved”.

Let’s be clear: Layton wants an immediate withdrawal, not a reconfiguration of our involvement, not fine-tuning. Withdrawal. Damn the consequences for Afghans, we want out.

Afghans don’t deserve that treatment from us.

You can paraphrase whatever anti-imperialist sloganeering you’ve picked up from the morally depraved leadership of stopwar or that you’ve read on znet. That talk does not hold up outside the SFU campus; there is no way to miracle away the flaws in the Afghan government. Those sentiments are fine for theoretical blather or salons of relatively privileged political fringers who will never need to worry about real-world scenarios.

On the other hand, if all you want is to get out of is any heavy lifting, then you’re a callous bastard.

But by all means, go ahead and ignore those facts. Won’t make you look like any more of a fool.

Benson: It’s “separate the wheat from the chaff”, something that the NDP has done well — with the amount of talent the party has lost in the last decade, chaff is all that’s left. The “shaft” is what they want to give the people of Afghanistan.

Comment by Ian King

Ian I will responded and despite the fact that you obviously think,that you “know” what I am all about and what “motivates” me….
You said…..
…”You can paraphrase whatever anti-imperialist sloganeering you’ve picked up from the morally depraved leadership of stopwar or that you’ve read on znet. That talk does not hold up outside the SFU campus;”…
…”On the other hand, if all you want is to get out of is any heavy lifting, then you’re a callous bastard”….
…”But by all means, go ahead and ignore those facts. Won’t make you look like any more of a fool”….

How do you know what I read,O yeah right you like to assume.
Anyway….
Nothing could be farther from the truth.
I been around just a bit to long to be some blind follower of what ever ideology you think/assume fuels my thought.
But then you would know that if you read a few other of my posts( you know get an idea where I am coming from) before jumping to conclusions.
I have no problem saying that I agree with you and Terry Glavin on many points and issues.
But on this one,I believe the mission is fundamentally flawed and will fail.Therefore all the misery and killing will have been for naught.
The problems in Afghanistan are just to complex and multi-faceted(i.e Tribal divisions,the Durant line,Pakistan).Indeed 6+ years later success,and progress remains as elusive now,as it was in the beginning.
When’s enough enough?
How many more Cnd kids will die how many more billions will be wasted on war and corruption.
These are all legitimate questions and concerns.The mission is was ill defined from day one should we really be surprised that 6 years later things are so messed up.Many many military experts and others,much more knowledgeable than I,have said as much and long before me..
To many mistakes have been made,to many opportunities were lost.Any goodwill remaining seems to be bleeding away with ever passing year.
NATO will leave,and in the end the Afghan people will be forced by necessity to learn to live with one another.
Not because i want NATO to leave so Afghans can kill each other.But because that’s just how these things inevitable work out.Where you see progress,and a solution(in NATO) I just see a cluster fuck prolonging that day,When Afghans will be on their own again,and have to learn to live with each other.
And I agree we can’t just pull out in a matter of days if the decision to pull out was made.We own the Afghan people some very careful thinking and a well thought out plan on how we disengage.
I am not talking about and nor is the NDP talking about leaving over night as if the Afghan people were not even there..
I am sure if there is a will ,a way will be found get it done.Hopefully with more forethought than when NATO went in
Anyway I guess we will have to disagree.

P.S your condescension and assumptions about me take away from your reply.And you call me a fool ??

Comment by Dirk

Hi there,

I have two questions for you Dirk:
1. On what basis have you unequivocally concluded that the Afghan mission will fail?
2. What will happen when the troops withdraw from Southern Afghanistan?
Can you live with those consequences, and with your complicity in calling for them, from an isolationist, anti-interventionist standpoint laden in cultural relativism and shrouded in various silly conspiracy theories? To me, this is not what Canada is supposed to be about: leaving Afghans to fend for themselves after three decades of war and external interference leading to war. We have a responsibility to be there and Afghans will be the first to tell you that. Read the polls coming out of Afghanistan.

As for Benson’s comments: I am not a mouth peice for the Karzai government or for the Canadian government. What I think about sharia law being included in the Afghan Constitution is that that particular article needed elaborate fleshing out as to WHAT interpretation of sharia law is being used. Without that, there is danger of misogynous interpretations; where women, for instance, would prefer space for progressive interpretations, of which there are many (see the work of Women Living Under Muslim Laws for instance: http://www.wluml.org). I have been extremely critical of the misuse of religion in Afghanistan to justify human rights violations against women or against anyone. I have written about this extensively. Google me. Dirk may have neglected to mention that I have been advocating for human rights in Afghanistan and working with women’s organizations there for the better part of the last 12 years.
My position of supporting the presence of an international security force in Afghanistan, based on years of experience watching war and peacebuilding efforts in Afghanistan, should not allow you to make assumptions of my opinions on other matters. Do your homework.

Yours,

Lauryn Oates

p.s. It’s “Ms” not “Mrs”. And it’s the “Duran” line, not “Durant”.

Comment by Lauryn Oates

First Lauryn,thanks for dropping by and stating your case.
I understand your feelings of solidarity with the long suffering Afghan people(particularly the Afghan women).How can any caring human being not care,not be outraged.
More importantly I respect you for getting off your ass and trying to do something positive and meaningful.Indeed I applaud your spirit and commitment.Action speaks loudest.
Just a couple points though,you said or seem to be saying my thoughts/position are based in or start from;
…”an isolationist, anti-interventionist standpoint laden in cultural relativism and shrouded in various silly conspiracy theories?”…
How can you say such a thing ?….I understand that this issue can be very divisive and emotional particularly for one such as yourself,who has been to Afghanistan and has a real connection.
Other then to say you are wrong,in that I am not an isolationist nor do I have any patience for cultural relativism never mind conspiracy theories,I will just ignore that part.

As for why I believe what I believe(on Afghan) well for that I would ask you to check out my past posts on Afghanistan.Particularly this one

And please do not take my comments as a personal attack on you.I was responding to your statement that “troops out means support for war” and your misrepresentation of the NDPs position.I am no party hack nor am I uncritical of the NDP.But the NDP is not pro-war nor do they hate the Afghan women.The same is true of many of those Canadians(of course there are some fringe movements and loony tunes mixed in) that are critical of,or outright opposed to the Afghan intervention.

Like it or not there are many sound and valid reasons for Canadians to be skeptical of war as a solution particularly in Afghanistan.This does not mean nor implies support for the Taliban.
THAT WAS THE BASIC POINT I WAS ATTEMPTING TO MAKE.
In fact I am and was perplexed how you could arrive at such a conclusion.
The fact of the matter is that one day the Afghan people will have to figure things out and learn how to live together,without western forces acting as referees.
And of course we can help indeed we should…..
[On a personal level I'll state up front that I distrust Western governments motivations,one need only pick up a history book to understand why.Western governments just do not do selflessness well,if at all]
…..How,well thats the 64 thousand dollar question.But if I were to hazard a guess. The changes so desperately needed in Afghanistan will not come about because of or be due to the NATO intervention,but rather despite it.Indeed after six+ years,countless dollars,and many deaths the chance of success seem even less.
The warlords have prospered,the foreign contractors have sucked up huge amounts of aid monies and prospered,the Taliban are resurging,but the Afghan people…..
Real meaningful change will occur when the ordinary citizens of Afghanistan come together motivated by the same spirit that gives rise to such groups as RAWA.Ordinary people who risked their very lives to help their fellow citizens,not for money,not for power but for the common good.
Its not going to be decreed from the top nor implemented by a government dominated by corrupt warlords and Northern Alliance types.
On Afghanistan’s internal situation I am inclined to defer to RAWA, and Joya et al.
I believe by virtue of their experiances and decades of activism,that their assessment of the NATO mission and the Afghan government to be the more creditable and realistic.
They are working /fighting for many of the same goals/ideals as your organization.But their assessment of the Western led intervention is not nearly as hopeful.After all,and like many Afghani’s have pointed out, can we really expect much of anything when we are dealing with a government made up of corrupt & brutal warlords.You know that same “progressive bunch” that terrorized the Afghan people under the banner of the Northern Alliance.
In fact here is another assessment of the situation,this one from Fawzia Koofi, deputy speaker of the lower house of Afghanistan’s National Assembly.

Also you said;
…….”My position of supporting the presence of an international security force in Afghanistan, based on years of experience watching war and peacebuilding efforts in Afghanistan, should not allow you to make assumptions of my opinions on other matters. Do your homework”….

I never assumed anything about you…?
Again my post was in direct response to your pro-war statement,which I found to be silly.I was not attacking your commitment,motivations or your solidarity with the Afghan people.
Again you said;

……”Oates says that in effect, those who want out of Afghanistan are, in fact, asking for more war – and this is particularly true of the NDP.

.. …..“They’re pro-war, which goes against everything I think the left should actually stand for. It’s a betrayal of leftist values that caused me to abandon that party.”

Not once have I,nor would I ever,be so arrogant as to dismiss the work or commitment of folks such as yourself.
Its just to bad you feel compelled for what ever reason to dismiss the NDP so flippantly (the NDP’s position is a bit more nuanced,it sure as hell can not be reduced to a simplistic one-liner,again you stated;….“They’re pro-war, which goes against everything I think the left should actually stand for”….).
But then in the next breath you accuse me of making assumptions about you…?

Comment by Dirk

to clarify, my comment “My position of supporting the presence of an international security force in Afghanistan, based on years of experience watching war and peacebuilding efforts in Afghanistan, should not allow you to make assumptions of my opinions on other matters. Do your homework.” was in response to Benson’s, not to yours.

Comment by Lauryn Oates

[...] we all know how good that war is going.On a side note I had very interesting discussion with Lauryn Oates ,vice-president of Canadian Women for Women in Afghanistan on this very question,albeit a  while [...]

Pingback by Heed These May Day Distress Calls | Mediabuzzard.com




Leave a comment
Line and paragraph breaks automatic, e-mail address never displayed, HTML allowed: <a href="" title=""> <abbr title=""> <acronym title=""> <b> <blockquote cite=""> <cite> <code> <pre> <del datetime=""> <em> <i> <q cite=""> <strike> <strong>