The recent combat death of Canadian corporal Anthony Boneca in Afghanistan has prompted a minor controversy in the Canadian press about soldiers' morale.
This has been confirmed by his aunt, but contradicted by his father. At present, it seems that the safest conclusion to reach is that although the late soldier didn't enjoy his time in the army he was willing enough to serve. The fact that the Canadian military is deployed in Afghanistan is cause for concern mainly because of the dubious nature of Afghanistan's government.
I'm well aware that the process of denazification in both West and East Germany was compromised by the fact that many Nazis possessed skills and connections which made them vital elements of the post-war German regimes. To the best of my knowledge, though, these people stopped being practising Nazis. Isn't it insulting to the people of Afghanistan to expect less of their leadership?
Yes, yes, I'm quite aware that Afghanistan is different, that unlike Germany it has never been a particularly functional or prosperous state, that the very idea of being a citizen of Afghanistan is so compromised by other loyalties as to be meaningless, that the sort of rigid and bigoted social conservatism reigning in Afghanistan is something discarded piecemeal in the West barely more than a century ago. Even so, was it completely impossible to have strived for something better, like (say) a regime worth dying for?
Since Cpl. Boneca's death, questions have arisen about the fallen soldier's feelings about Canada's mission in Afghanistan.
The father of the soldier's girlfriend has suggested that Cpl. Boneca was terrified of his mission and ill-equipped for its demands.
“They weren't prepared for what they ended up with over there, that's the big thing,” Larry DeCorte said in an interview in Tuesday's edition of The Globe and Mail.
Cpl. Boneca was on his second tour in Afghanistan when he was killed. However, Mr. DeCorte said the latest mission was different, with the young soldier being sent to Kandahar to rout the Taliban.
“When they went over there, they didn't think they were going to have that kind of combat,” Mr. DeCorte said. “They thought it was going to be the same kind of things, going on patrols and stuff like that, not hand-to-hand combat like he ended up in. Also, they aren't mentally prepared for it. He wanted out in the worst way.”
This has been confirmed by his aunt, but contradicted by his father. At present, it seems that the safest conclusion to reach is that although the late soldier didn't enjoy his time in the army he was willing enough to serve. The fact that the Canadian military is deployed in Afghanistan is cause for concern mainly because of the dubious nature of Afghanistan's government.
Trumpeted as "the first democratically elected Parliament in over thirty years," [the serving parliament of Afghanistan] was planned at the December 2001 Bonn conference that followed the fall of the Taliban, and was brought into being at fabulous expense by an army of some 130,000 internationally paid election workers. The United States' inexplicable pressure to invite those mujahedeen commanders to Bonn plays out now in a Parliament where every other member is a former jihadi, and nearly half are affiliated with fundamentalist or traditionalist Islamist parties, including the Taliban.
The presence of so many of the country's notorious bad guys is certainly the most peculiar feature of this "democratic" Parliament (another is the new Parliament building itself, which has plenty of room for prayer mats but no office space). One international analyst reports that among the 249 members of the Wolesi Jirga (lower house) are forty commanders (warlords) of armed militias, twenty-four members of criminal gangs, seventeen drug traffickers and nineteen men facing serious allegations of war crimes and human rights violations. The deputy chairman of the Afghan Independent Human Rights Commission charges that "more than 80 percent of winning candidates in provinces and more than 60 percent in the capital, Kabul, have links to armed groups." Plenty of parliamentarians parade around town in armored cars packed with bodyguards flourishing automatic weapons. "How can I stand up to that?" asked one woman delegate. "I am only one small lady arriving on the bus."
I'm well aware that the process of denazification in both West and East Germany was compromised by the fact that many Nazis possessed skills and connections which made them vital elements of the post-war German regimes. To the best of my knowledge, though, these people stopped being practising Nazis. Isn't it insulting to the people of Afghanistan to expect less of their leadership?
Yes, yes, I'm quite aware that Afghanistan is different, that unlike Germany it has never been a particularly functional or prosperous state, that the very idea of being a citizen of Afghanistan is so compromised by other loyalties as to be meaningless, that the sort of rigid and bigoted social conservatism reigning in Afghanistan is something discarded piecemeal in the West barely more than a century ago. Even so, was it completely impossible to have strived for something better, like (say) a regime worth dying for?