 The Afghan war is a distant reality for most Canadians. It is a conflict that we only encounter in brief news bulletins listing new casualties or announcing new offensives. Accordingly, late morning in a University of Toronto Tim Hortons is not usually the time or place that one expects to be confronted with Canada’s war in Afghanistan. The reason is simple: there is precious little in the heart of the sprawling city in which UofT sits that is even a little reminiscent of the war battered and destitute country. That would have remained the case for me except that on this particular morning, a woman came to sit next to me wanting to talk about her son stationed with Canadian forces in Afghanistan. Her worry was plain. She explained to me that he is serving with an infantry regiment- troop that has suffered particularly high casualties. The woman also explained to me that her son is in his early twenties- only a couple of years older than I am. She had not heard from him in some months and she, understandably, only wished for him to come home safe. But her experience is unique amongst Canadians. Unlike previous wars, the Canadian public’s participation in the Afghan mission is very limited. The reason is that since just after WWII, personnel numbers for the Canadian Forces have been in steady decline. In 1946 the number of total personnel was 212692. In 2003, that number was 57863. As a result, fewer Canadians have direct experiences with the military or the current war, whether by involvement in combat or by relation to those in combat. Consequently, most of the public’s awareness of Canada’s role in the Afghan war is from secondary sources. But this woman had an intimate knowledge of the war and its effect on families. Given the detachment of the general public to the military, such intimate knowledge is not something one expects to encounter in daily life. Especially amongst youth, it seems that there is a particular ignorance and detachment to Canada‘s role in the conflict. Knowledge of the war seems to be restricted to tidbits that are beneficial to building an opposition argument to the war.  A Canadian casualty in Afghanistan. Photo credit: Associated Press And there is much to oppose. According to the United Nations, Afghan civilian deaths increased by 39% in 2008 and there are already 1 013 civilians dead in the first six months of this year. The number of internally displaced persons is estimated by the UN to be 200 000. In addition to that, the Taliban are mounting an ongoing resurgence campaign that is pushing those numbers up, not down. And given the dubious nature of Afghan democracy, it seems that the US-NATO force, of which Canada is a member, has failed to achieve any real political progress in its eight year long mission. Now even the much-lauded triumph of ‘democracy’ for the common Afghan seems to be rotting away. On October 19, one third of President Hamid Karzai’s votes were invalidated by a UN panel due to fraud. Even though many Afghans don’t relish the return of the Taliban, the dire statistics mentioned above make the NATO presence not very appealing either. Similarly, for many Canadian Muslims, those sober statistics also have a direct negative effect on their view of the mission. The numbers, coupled with the emotional response of many Muslims to having foreign troops stationed and fighting in majority-Muslim lands has resulted in protest from the Canadian Muslim community against the military’s operations in Afghanistan. The concern among Muslims for the civilian carnage that this war has caused is misinterpreted and used by Islamaphobes as proof of Muslims being anti-Canadian. In fact, according to a 2008 CBC-Environ poll, 56% of Canadians disapprove of the war. It is a large percentage, but it still leaves a significant 41%, according to the poll, in approval of the war. Despite differing individual feelings about Canada’s role in the conflict, there is still common ground. Most, I would think, can agree that there are raw feelings associated with this issue. The families that have to see their young men and women off -to a war in a place they know little about- have to deal with not only that stress and anxiety but a seemingly indifferent public. And many Afghan immigrants have to watch as their government sends soldiers funded by tax revenue on a mission that is resulting in masses of dead civilians. I am not trying to equate the very deep but somewhat abstract solidarity of Muslims with the daily pain of those that have a close relative in combat. However, I am trying to point out that in terms of emotional capital; these two groups have the most invested in this mission. The families, like the Afghans, did not ask for this conflict. Therefore, just as we Muslims may try to push the agenda of Afghan civilians and draw attention to their plight in whatever way we can, we must also try to listen to the families of soldiers stationed overseas. Yes, there have been prisoner abuse scandals, yes there are cases of disregard for civilian life and yes, the mission seems insensitive to the real needs of the people it claims to want to liberate. However, the majority of soldiers do not abuse prisoners or shoot randomly at civilians. And the bureaucratic callousness of the mission objective is not the fault of the soldiers or their families. There is a real opportunity here to build an effective dialogue that has the potential not only to bring increased publicity to the struggle of military families, but to begin an honest dialogue that could correct the trend towards Islamophobia in this country. The brief encounter with a worried mother caused me to reflect on how similar the two worries are. Away from the manipulative discourse of the Politicians on Parliament Hill and the general apathy of the public, there are average Canadians that are watching this war with intimate interest but are kept apart by the assumption of difference. If these two groups could come together and have a dialogue about the implications of the conflict for both, the effects could be profound. The discourse on the Afghan war on the ground level- the public level- might even lead to a more honest approach by Parliament Hill politicians in addressing the flaws of the mission. That in turn may result in tangible positive change for both Canadian military families and the civilians of Afghanistan battered by war.  Commentsreader Mon, 02 Nov 2009 8:40:12 am This is an amazing article - you're so right about the fact that even though we're Muslims, we're Canadians too. One life and group shouldn't be valued more than another. These kinds of divisions only make life harder. reader Mon, 02 Nov 2009 8:41:58 am I totally understand that you're not making any judgments about whether the war is right or wrong; you're just talking about the after effects. But do you think the war was a good idea? Yes, it's been conducted disastrously. But when NATO first made the decision to go in - did you back it? Mon, 02 Nov 2009 1:44:08 pm "the mission seems insensitive to the real needs of the people it claims to want to liberate" Fareedah Mon, 02 Nov 2009 7:29:27 pm - Your right reader. The article is mainly about our common humanity, whether we're in uniform or not. That commonality should be emphasized, because we all bleed the same, uniformed or not. Mon, 16 Nov 2009 1:57:44 pm I think your a bit confused...do you not realize the the "occupiers" in this war are in fact NATO troops which include Canadian solders. I'm sorry I don't see any Afghans coming to America to rescue their health care problems or to Canada to "rescue" us from our various social problems. Fareedah Thu, 26 Nov 2009 10:09:39 pm No one is denying that NATO is an occupying force. Leave a Reply | CategoriesAll ArchivesAugust 2010 About Us
|
RSS Feed