Embassy Newspaper, Editorial
January 16.2008

Is This How the Dion Liberals Will Make Decisions and Policy?

With former deputy prime minister John Manley's so-called Independent Panel on Canada's future role in Afghanistan wrapping up work, the Liberal Party decided last week to get its demands on the record.

The crux of the party's submission held no surprises, repeating the same position it has held for more than a year: Notify NATO that Canada's military mission in Kandahar will end in 2009, stop counter-insurgency operations, and shift the mission's focus to development, diplomacy and the training of Afghan national security forces.

Days later, Liberal leader Stéphane Dion made his very first trip to Afghanistan, which was long overdue considering he has been the leader of the Official Opposition for more than a year. Fortunately, the party's deputy leader, Michael Ignatieff, who was on his third trip to the country, was along to hold Mr. Dion's hand.

After meetings with Afghan President Hamid Karzai, Canadian soldiers and others, the two Liberal heavy-weights emerged to say that they had been right all along: the current mission is doing more harm than good, and the plan they submitted to the Manley panel was the way to go.

Yet one must question why Messrs. Dion and Ignatieff didn't make their trip (i.e. do their research) before the party made its submission to the Manley panel.

The charitable would say that the party formulated its opinion based on the best information available at the time. As mentioned, Mr. Ignatieff has been to Afghanistan three times now, while Liberal Defence critic Denis Coderre was there just before Christmas. As well, there are plenty of people around Ottawa who have visited and worked in the country and are willing to share their experiences.

Yet the opposition has long said the government isn't coming clean on the real situation in Afghanistan, and the Liberals' own submission to the panel demands more mission accountability and transparency. Clearly, the Liberals aren't happy with the information they have.

Is this how the Liberal Party under Mr. Dion will make decisions and policy? Throw something out there and then gather the facts? One would pray that no government would formulate policy for such an important issue–or any policy, really–without doing its proper homework.

Of course, the Bloc Québécois is in the same boat. Bloc leader Gilles Duceppe has ever visited Afghanistan, yet his party has well-established positions on the mission.

On the flip side, NDP leader Jack Layton has reportedly made numerous requests to visit Afghanistan. According to his office, the request has been outstanding through two governments. This is unacceptable of the government.

To say that political parties are using Afghanistan to score political points during a time of minority Canadian governments and in the face of a possible spring election is far from news breaking. But the lack of a proper and informed debate in Parliament, or active attempts by MPs to find out what's really going on, is shameful.

Perhaps the Canadian mission is too focussed on anti-insurgency operations and combat, and not enough on reconstruction, development and trying to create a functioning state that can stand on its own two feet.

But Mr. Dion should have visited Afghanistan within months of taking over as Liberal Party leader and before deciding on a possible course of action for Canada. Mr. Duceppe should have done the same even before that. And the government should be encouraging and facilitating such trips, even if the request is being made by the NDP, not blocking them and trying to force everyone to wear rose-coloured glasses.

Analyzing and criticizing the current mission is an important part of the democratic process. And yet, the Liberals showed this week they don't really want to find out what's happening on the ground, and the Conservatives are clearly not interested in showing us the full truth.

Perhaps Prime Minister Stephen Harper was right in appointing a panel to conduct a thorough investigation of Canada's options and the consequences for each. Clearly no one else can see past their own interests.