Canada now has a decision on the long-term fate of themission in Afghanistan. On the evening of May17, Parliament debated and voted on whether or not toextend that mission to at least February 2009.

Perhaps we now know that the money behind thegovernment has found the profits to be had fromour involvement greater than the political risk orthe value of the lives of the Canadians who willdie there carrying the mission out. To date 16Canadians have died and the intensity ofthe civil war appears to be increasing.

In Iraq theU.S. has lost almost 2,500. WillCanadians tolerate a comparable number ofcasualties or more in Afghanistan as the wardrags on?

Why are we in Afghanistan anyway? Perhaps ashort history of the current U.S.-Afghan War willhelp:

1997 — Project For A New American Century becomes public advocating U.S. world dominationincluding permanent military bases in the MiddleEast/South East Asia area.

1998 — Rumsfeld and others urge PresidentClinton to remove Saddam Hussein from power.

2000 — In a policy paper titled RebuildingAmerica’s Defenses the PNAC puts forward thepoint that they need to more quickly achieve their goals.The paper said “ ….the process of transformation,even if it brings revolutionary change, is likely tobe a long one, absent some catastrophic andcatalyzing event — like a new Pearl Harbor.Domestic politics and industrial policy will shapethe pace and content of transformation as muchas the requirements of current missions.”

2000 — The PNAC crowd take control ofgovernment through voting fraud and theappointment of George W. Bush as President ofthe U.S.

2001 — Al Qaeda provides the catastrophic eventthat the PNAC is looking for to expedite theiragenda.

2001 — The U.S. whips up war fever over the 9-11attacks and uses it to launch an invasion ofAfghanistan and put the country into a war mode.It can be argued that this response is way inexcess in proportion to the threat posed byAfghanistan. Diplomatic avenues of solution areshort circuited and opportunities refused by theU.S.

2001-2003 — The U.S. uses the war fever createdwith the Afghanistan invasion to help prepare thecountry for the invasion of Iraq. Attempts aremade to tie the Iraqi regime to 9-11 and with AQand by extension the Taliban despite the fact thatsecular Iraq is opposed by the radical Islamists.

2003 — As with the case in Afghanistan diplomaticsolutions are short circuited and avoided in thecase of Iraq and the country is invaded based onfalse intelligence despite numerous warnings thatthere is no substance to the reasons being putforward to justify an invasion.

2006 — U.S. forces are in Iraq and Afghanistan aswell as in a number of surrounding countries asper the published objectives of the PNAC. As well,a number of countries have supplied troops to theU.S. in both Iraq and Afghanistan to help the U.S.further its goal of world domination.

So why is Canada involved? Simply to help theU.S. and further the interests of Canada’seconomic élite who have more in common withthe U.S. and international élites than they do withCanadians and the interests of Canada as asovereign state.

Helping Afghans create a better country and lifeare advertising slogans used to build publicsupport and hoodwink the troops that have to paythe personal price of the adventure. Anyprograms purporting to achieve these goals arefaçades to cover up the main reason that Canadais involved.

The real effect of our mission in Afghanistan isthat it may well destroy decades of internationalgoodwill and the image of Canada as a fair andfriendly nation, and make us more susceptible toterrorist attacks on Canadian soil.

Rather than working for American interestsperhaps Canadian values would be better servedif we made more of our forces available to theUnited Nations for service in areas like Darfur,where thousands are being killed, and to theInternational Criminal Court for use in intercedingwhere war crimes are being committed and totrack down and bring war criminals to justice,regardless of what country they are from.

Serving the court would be a fitting task sinceCanada was instrumental in its creation, and aCanadian sits as president of the court. Suchwould be a far more worthy use of our militarythan serving the U.S. in Afghanistan.