This is from an Iranian website. I have not seen too much coverage in Canada but perhaps I just missed it. Of course it is still a long time before 2011 and the Conservative government if it is still in power could change its mind. If Ignatieff happens to be leading the country then NATO (read the U.S.) could be in luck. Ignatieff is a great supporter of the US empire lite!
Canada rejects NATO call on Afghanistan
Fri, 07 Aug 2009 07:34:10 GMT
Foreign Minister Lawrence Cannon
Canadian Foreign Minister Lawrence Cannon has dismissed NATO calls for extending his country's deployment in Afghanistan after 2011.
"Our government is abiding by the motion passed in parliament in 2008 - that is that our combat forces will leave by 2011," he told CBC on Thursday.
Cannon's remarks came after NATO Secretary General Anders Fogh Rasmussen said that he would like to see Canada stay beyond 2011.
The Canadian parliament in 2008 voted to withdraw the country's forces no later than 2011.
The minister also praised Canada's military personnel for their important role in the war-torn country.
"I would like to take this opportunity to express my strong appreciation of the significant Canadian contribution to our mission in Afghanistan," he said.
Ottawa has currently some 2,800 troops based in Kandahar, in southern Afghanistan, as part of the NATO-led International Security Assistance Force (ISAF).
Nearly 130 Canadians have been killed in Afghanistan since the US-led invasion of the country seven and half years ago.
Showing posts with label NATO. Show all posts
Showing posts with label NATO. Show all posts
Saturday, August 8, 2009
Monday, February 11, 2008
Europeans see what America (and Canadians) cannot.
This is from the Toronto Sun. I notice that no one ever even questions why NATO of all organisations should be involved in Afghanistan. Usually no one ties our involvement in Afghanistan in with US foreign policy. Margolis is one of the few hard hitting analysts who can think outside the box and see through the rhetorical murk.
February 10, 2008
Europeans see what America cannot
By ERIC MARGOLIS, TORONTO SUN
fctAdTag("bigbox",MyGenericTagVar,1);
At this week's NATO conference in Vilnius, Lithuania, an angry U.S. Secretary of Defence Robert Gates accused some Europeans of not being prepared to "fight and die" in Afghanistan in the battle against the Taliban.
The undiplomatic Gates is quite right. Most Europeans regard the Afghan conflict as a. wrong and immoral; b. America's war; c. all about oil; or d. probably lost.
To many Europeans, the NATO alliance was created to deter the real threat of Soviet aggression, not to supply foot soldiers for George Bush's wars in the Muslim world.
While Gates and the Harper government were pleading for more troops, the commander of the 40,000 NATO troops in Afghanistan, U.S. Gen. Dan McNeill, landed a bombshell. If proper U.S. military counter-insurgency doctrine were followed, McNeill admitted, the U.S. and NATO would need 400,000 troops to defeat Pashtun tribal resistance in Afghanistan.
When the Soviets occupied Afghanistan, they deployed 160,000 troops and about 200,000 Afghan Communist troops -- yet failed to crush the mostly Pashtun resistance. Now, the U.S. and NATO are trying the same mission with only 66,000 troops, backed by local mercenaries grandly styled the Afghan National Army.
Canada's calls for 1,000 more NATO troops, and the U.S. decision to send 3,200 marines, will not alter the course of this war, which is turning increasingly against the western occupiers. In fact, the war is spreading into neighbouring Pakistan, a nation of 165 million, stretching U.S. and NATO forces ever thinner.
A primary reason for Gates' recent call for U.S. troops to begin attacking pro-Taliban Pashtun tribesmen inside Pakistan is due to their growing attacks on allied supply lines to Afghanistan.
As this column has reported, over 70% of U.S./NATO supplies come in by truck through Pakistan's tribal belt known as FATA, including all of their oil and gas. Attacks by pro-Taliban tribesmen against these vulnerable supply lines are jeopardizing western military operations inside Afghanistan.
HUNTERS NOW HUNTED
The hunters are becoming the hunted. Cutting off invaders' supply lines is a time-honoured Pashtun military tactic. They used it against Alexander the Great, the British, and Soviets, and are at it again.
What angry Sec. Gates fails to see is that by pushing NATO into a distant Asian war without political purpose or seeming end, he is endangering the very alliance that is the bedrock of U.S. power in Europe.
Europeans increasingly ask why they need the U.S.-dominated military alliance, a Cold War relic, in which they continue to play foot soldiers to America's atomic knights, to paraphrase the late German statesman, Franz Josef Strauss.
Why does the rich, powerful European Union even need NATO any more? The Soviet threat is gone -- at least for now. Nuclear-armed France and Britain are quite capable of defending Europe against outside threats. Why can't the new European Defence Force take over NATO's role of defending Europe and protecting EU interests?
In short, most Europeans see no benefit in playing junior members in an alliance whose historic time has passed and that serves primarily as an instrument of U.S. power. Washington's sharpest geopolitical thinker, Zbigniew Brzezinski, calls NATO a "stepping stone" the U.S. uses to project power into Europe.
By pushing NATO towards a bridge too far, the Bush administration may end up fatally undermining the alliance and encouraging anti-American forces in Europe.
In fact, it's becoming evident that the cash-strapped U.S. needs the EU more than the EU needs the U.S.
CONSCRIPTION
Final point. If impassioned claims by U.S. and Canadian politicians that the little Afghanistan war must by won at all costs, then why don't they stop orating, impose conscription, and send 400,000 soldiers, including their own sons, to fight in Afghanistan?
Of course they won't. They prefer to waste their own soldiers, and grind up Afghanistan, rather than admit this war against 40 million Pashtun tribesmen was a terrible mistake that will only get worse.
February 10, 2008
Europeans see what America cannot
By ERIC MARGOLIS, TORONTO SUN
fctAdTag("bigbox",MyGenericTagVar,1);
At this week's NATO conference in Vilnius, Lithuania, an angry U.S. Secretary of Defence Robert Gates accused some Europeans of not being prepared to "fight and die" in Afghanistan in the battle against the Taliban.
The undiplomatic Gates is quite right. Most Europeans regard the Afghan conflict as a. wrong and immoral; b. America's war; c. all about oil; or d. probably lost.
To many Europeans, the NATO alliance was created to deter the real threat of Soviet aggression, not to supply foot soldiers for George Bush's wars in the Muslim world.
While Gates and the Harper government were pleading for more troops, the commander of the 40,000 NATO troops in Afghanistan, U.S. Gen. Dan McNeill, landed a bombshell. If proper U.S. military counter-insurgency doctrine were followed, McNeill admitted, the U.S. and NATO would need 400,000 troops to defeat Pashtun tribal resistance in Afghanistan.
When the Soviets occupied Afghanistan, they deployed 160,000 troops and about 200,000 Afghan Communist troops -- yet failed to crush the mostly Pashtun resistance. Now, the U.S. and NATO are trying the same mission with only 66,000 troops, backed by local mercenaries grandly styled the Afghan National Army.
Canada's calls for 1,000 more NATO troops, and the U.S. decision to send 3,200 marines, will not alter the course of this war, which is turning increasingly against the western occupiers. In fact, the war is spreading into neighbouring Pakistan, a nation of 165 million, stretching U.S. and NATO forces ever thinner.
A primary reason for Gates' recent call for U.S. troops to begin attacking pro-Taliban Pashtun tribesmen inside Pakistan is due to their growing attacks on allied supply lines to Afghanistan.
As this column has reported, over 70% of U.S./NATO supplies come in by truck through Pakistan's tribal belt known as FATA, including all of their oil and gas. Attacks by pro-Taliban tribesmen against these vulnerable supply lines are jeopardizing western military operations inside Afghanistan.
HUNTERS NOW HUNTED
The hunters are becoming the hunted. Cutting off invaders' supply lines is a time-honoured Pashtun military tactic. They used it against Alexander the Great, the British, and Soviets, and are at it again.
What angry Sec. Gates fails to see is that by pushing NATO into a distant Asian war without political purpose or seeming end, he is endangering the very alliance that is the bedrock of U.S. power in Europe.
Europeans increasingly ask why they need the U.S.-dominated military alliance, a Cold War relic, in which they continue to play foot soldiers to America's atomic knights, to paraphrase the late German statesman, Franz Josef Strauss.
Why does the rich, powerful European Union even need NATO any more? The Soviet threat is gone -- at least for now. Nuclear-armed France and Britain are quite capable of defending Europe against outside threats. Why can't the new European Defence Force take over NATO's role of defending Europe and protecting EU interests?
In short, most Europeans see no benefit in playing junior members in an alliance whose historic time has passed and that serves primarily as an instrument of U.S. power. Washington's sharpest geopolitical thinker, Zbigniew Brzezinski, calls NATO a "stepping stone" the U.S. uses to project power into Europe.
By pushing NATO towards a bridge too far, the Bush administration may end up fatally undermining the alliance and encouraging anti-American forces in Europe.
In fact, it's becoming evident that the cash-strapped U.S. needs the EU more than the EU needs the U.S.
CONSCRIPTION
Final point. If impassioned claims by U.S. and Canadian politicians that the little Afghanistan war must by won at all costs, then why don't they stop orating, impose conscription, and send 400,000 soldiers, including their own sons, to fight in Afghanistan?
Of course they won't. They prefer to waste their own soldiers, and grind up Afghanistan, rather than admit this war against 40 million Pashtun tribesmen was a terrible mistake that will only get worse.
Wednesday, January 30, 2008
U.S. at odds with NATO over troops for Afghanistan
This is from Reuters. The U.S. is in a rather difficult position. They used NATO to spread out the pain of trying to build a compliant Afghanistan subject to US plans--albeit shared by junior partners Britain, Canada, etc. Karzai is not always an obedient puppet although he realizes his dependency on the U.S. and NATO. Karzai wan't co-operative warlords rather than those who will be gung ho for the war against the Taliban. The UK in particular has attempted to make deals independently of the government.
Harper can say that the new troops the U.S. is already committing to the south consitute over a thousand and they will have the necessary extra helicopters as well. Surely the Canadian taxpayer can foot the bill for some new equipment etc. to help out our buddy Bush. The conditions for staying in Kandahar for a longer period can be easily met even without further NATO troops beyond those sent by the U.S.
U.S. at odds with NATO over troops for Afghanistan
Tue Jan 29, 2008 6:12pm ESTBy Kristin RobertsWASHINGTON, Jan 29 (Reuters) - The United States will press its European NATO allies to send more troops to Afghanistan's violent south in response to Canada's call for reinforcements, but the Pentagon said it will not commit any more of its own forces there.More than six years after the U.S.-led invasion, the issue of security in Afghanistan came to a head this week when Prime Minister Stephen Harper threatened to pull out Canada's 2,500 troops early next year unless NATO sent in more soldiers.NATO said on Tuesday it shared Canada's view of the need to bolster its peace operation but dismissed charges that allies were dragging their feet, noting a huge expansion since 2003.The Taliban rulers were toppled by the invasion in late 2001 but the Islamist militants and their al Qaeda allies have made an explosive comeback in the last two years, slowing Afghanistan's economic growth and reconstruction.U.S. defense officials have also regularly complained about the unwillingness of European allies to dedicate more combat troops and equipment to Afghanistan."We've got a number of allies with us there," said Pentagon press secretary Geoff Morrell. "Hopefully they can see to it to dig deeper and find additional forces."The resurgence of the militants comes despite the presence of 50,000 foreign troops under the command of NATO and the U.S. military, backed by partially Western-trained and equipped Afghan security forces now numbering more than 120,000.The United States has 29,000 troops in Afghanistan and earlier this month ordered another 3,200 Marines to be deployed there. Morrell said 2,200 of those would be sent to the restive south, which includes Kandahar."That's as much and as deep as we're going at this point," Morrell said, adding that the Pentagon was not considering an additional deployment following Canada's call.STRUGGLE TO COORDINATEIn Brussels, a NATO spokesman said the organization had a long-standing request for more troops in the south."We share the assessment that Afghanistan needs long-term support, including military support," he said.But he pointed out that the NATO-led International Security Assistance Force had quadrupled to more than 40,000 troops and "is now close to what our military believe is our full requirement."The Afghan defense minister, Abdul Rahim Wardak, said Kabul expected its allies to help expand the quality and size of the nation's security forces so they can take the lead against the militants and cut the burden on the international community."We are all in full agreement that the only sustainable way to secure this country in an enduring way is to enable the Afghans themselves to be able to defend this country against all external and internal threats," Wardak said.Overshadowed by concern over the conflict in Iraq, the Afghan reconstruction effort has suffered from underfunding, turf battles between rival agencies, corruption among officials and the resurgence of Taliban-led violence.An international drive to better coordinate civilian operations with the NATO-led military campaign suffered a setback this week when British politician Paddy Ashdown pulled out of the running to be the United Nations' "super envoy."The position seemed to be custom-made for Ashdown, the former international representative for Bosnia, skilled in post-war reconstruction.But President Hamid Karzai's move to veto him, ostensibly for fear he would wield too much power, sent Western officials back to the drawing board with no obvious alternative."Ashdown was the name," said a Western diplomat in Brussels who works on Afghanistan. "The requirement for coordination is undiminished and yet the whole issue has become politicized. We still have this gaping hole."U.S. Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice said this week Ashdown would have done a "superb job" and reaffirmed American backing for a central coordinator in Afghanistan. (Additional reporting by Sue Pleming in Washington, Sayed Salahuddin in Kabul, Mark John in Brussels and Luke Baker in London; Writing by John O'Callaghan; Editing by Chris Wilson)
© Reuters 2007.
Harper can say that the new troops the U.S. is already committing to the south consitute over a thousand and they will have the necessary extra helicopters as well. Surely the Canadian taxpayer can foot the bill for some new equipment etc. to help out our buddy Bush. The conditions for staying in Kandahar for a longer period can be easily met even without further NATO troops beyond those sent by the U.S.
U.S. at odds with NATO over troops for Afghanistan
Tue Jan 29, 2008 6:12pm ESTBy Kristin RobertsWASHINGTON, Jan 29 (Reuters) - The United States will press its European NATO allies to send more troops to Afghanistan's violent south in response to Canada's call for reinforcements, but the Pentagon said it will not commit any more of its own forces there.More than six years after the U.S.-led invasion, the issue of security in Afghanistan came to a head this week when Prime Minister Stephen Harper threatened to pull out Canada's 2,500 troops early next year unless NATO sent in more soldiers.NATO said on Tuesday it shared Canada's view of the need to bolster its peace operation but dismissed charges that allies were dragging their feet, noting a huge expansion since 2003.The Taliban rulers were toppled by the invasion in late 2001 but the Islamist militants and their al Qaeda allies have made an explosive comeback in the last two years, slowing Afghanistan's economic growth and reconstruction.U.S. defense officials have also regularly complained about the unwillingness of European allies to dedicate more combat troops and equipment to Afghanistan."We've got a number of allies with us there," said Pentagon press secretary Geoff Morrell. "Hopefully they can see to it to dig deeper and find additional forces."The resurgence of the militants comes despite the presence of 50,000 foreign troops under the command of NATO and the U.S. military, backed by partially Western-trained and equipped Afghan security forces now numbering more than 120,000.The United States has 29,000 troops in Afghanistan and earlier this month ordered another 3,200 Marines to be deployed there. Morrell said 2,200 of those would be sent to the restive south, which includes Kandahar."That's as much and as deep as we're going at this point," Morrell said, adding that the Pentagon was not considering an additional deployment following Canada's call.STRUGGLE TO COORDINATEIn Brussels, a NATO spokesman said the organization had a long-standing request for more troops in the south."We share the assessment that Afghanistan needs long-term support, including military support," he said.But he pointed out that the NATO-led International Security Assistance Force had quadrupled to more than 40,000 troops and "is now close to what our military believe is our full requirement."The Afghan defense minister, Abdul Rahim Wardak, said Kabul expected its allies to help expand the quality and size of the nation's security forces so they can take the lead against the militants and cut the burden on the international community."We are all in full agreement that the only sustainable way to secure this country in an enduring way is to enable the Afghans themselves to be able to defend this country against all external and internal threats," Wardak said.Overshadowed by concern over the conflict in Iraq, the Afghan reconstruction effort has suffered from underfunding, turf battles between rival agencies, corruption among officials and the resurgence of Taliban-led violence.An international drive to better coordinate civilian operations with the NATO-led military campaign suffered a setback this week when British politician Paddy Ashdown pulled out of the running to be the United Nations' "super envoy."The position seemed to be custom-made for Ashdown, the former international representative for Bosnia, skilled in post-war reconstruction.But President Hamid Karzai's move to veto him, ostensibly for fear he would wield too much power, sent Western officials back to the drawing board with no obvious alternative."Ashdown was the name," said a Western diplomat in Brussels who works on Afghanistan. "The requirement for coordination is undiminished and yet the whole issue has become politicized. We still have this gaping hole."U.S. Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice said this week Ashdown would have done a "superb job" and reaffirmed American backing for a central coordinator in Afghanistan. (Additional reporting by Sue Pleming in Washington, Sayed Salahuddin in Kabul, Mark John in Brussels and Luke Baker in London; Writing by John O'Callaghan; Editing by Chris Wilson)
© Reuters 2007.
Sunday, September 9, 2007
Protesters Accuse NATO generals of war crimes
There follow two articles on the Anti-Nato protests in Victoria. The first article notes there were protests about the types of weapons used. I am not sure of any details about that. One would think that the bombing policy itself led by Bomber McNeil in Afghanistan would be protested. The second article has a quite different tone. The protest point mentioned in it has to do with the relevance of NATO. You would think its relevance is obvious. It is a helpmate to US and other nations foreign policy objectives in particular when the US won't do thing for them.
There is no question that NATO was involved in war crimes in the attacks against Serbia. Journalists were deliberately attacked, infrastructure upon which civilians depended was similarly attacked.
Protesters accuse NATO generals of war crimes
Louise Dickson
CanWest News Service
Sunday, September 09, 2007
VICTORIA -- About 200 noisy protesters delivered a symbolic summons Saturday to North Atlantic Treaty Organization generals as the officials discussed military strategy behind police fences at a downtown Victoria hotel.
The group accused NATO's military committee of genocide, crimes against humanity and war crimes.
Lt.-Col. Tony White, public information officer for NATO's military committee, said he had received and read the protesters' document and would pass it to NATO's legal team in Brussels, when he returns in a few days.
"It will be not ignored," said White.
Organizers had warned police they would fight back if officers tried to clear them from the Grand Pacific Hotel where the high level meetings are being held by generals from the international military alliance, but a noon rally was peaceful.
The coalition of local peace groups chanted "NATO killers" as they marched, followed by calls of "Bring Down the Generals."
Although a few military men looked on from their waterfront balconies, no one came down to address the crowd.
Jodi Wood joined the rally to protest Canada's involvement in NATO.
"We're a democratic nation and I think we should have a right as a civilian society to make the decision to pull Canada out of what is basically world terrorism," said Wood.
Marla Renn, an education student at Simon Fraser University, came to protest what she called the atrocities being committed by NATO in Afghanistan.
"There's an untold amount of civilian deaths and brutality for women over there. We're making things harder and worse over there," said Renn.
Many protesters accused NATO of using prohibited weapons such as cluster bombs, white phosphorous and depleted uranium to kill and maim innocent civilians.
Raging Granny Fran Thoburn found pictures online of babies deformed by depleted uranium and had them laminated on posters.
"We need to get our heads out of the sand and realize we are killing and maiming total populations," Thoburn said.
Members of the military committee were surprised by the protest's focus on illegal weapons, said White.
After consulting with senior officers, White told the media NATO is not using cluster munitions or depleted uranium in Afghanistan.
"Depleted uranium was an issue in Kosovo and Bosnia several years ago. Some nations were using it, but there was no proof it harmed people," said White.
He also addressed the question of whether or not NATO is still relevant after existing for almost 60 years.
"I think it's relevant, because the United Nations, which represents the international community, is the one asking us to go to Afghanistan and Darfur," said White. "We're not imposing ourselves on other countries."
In the past five years, the demands on NATO have been increasing, said White.
"The international community sees NATO as a very responsible and professional force that is highly successful," said White.
"You have to go to Afghanistan to see the progress. The (gross domestic product ) is up 14 per cent. Young girls are in school. Afghanistan is much better off than it was two years ago. If they listen to our soldiers, they'll know we're doing a lot more good than bad."
The protest included a nude male cyclist towing two Scottish terriers in a yellow trailer. The man made it on to the lawn of the provincial legislature before being dressed in a pair of bright blue boxer shorts and placed in the back of the police car.
Victoria Times Colonist
Victoria anti-NATO demo ends peacefully
Last Updated: Saturday, September 8, 2007 | 4:58 PM PT
CBC News
NATO military leaders met in Victoria on Saturday afternoon as a small but vocal crowd of protesters denounced the organization.
The protest, dubbed a No to NATO rally, attracted about 300 people. They objected to the military leaders meeting in "my backyard," to Canada's role in Afghanistan and to NATO's change from a defensive alliance, its original purpose.
A Victoria police officer threads heavy wire through a temporary fence in front of the Hotel Grand Pacific Friday before the NATO meetings.
(Deddeda Stemler/Canadian Press) "We're saying it no longer has any rationale for its existence, the way it's being used these days," said Phil Lyons, a spokesman for a coalition of peace groups.
Police patrolled the peaceful protest, which started under sunny skies at about 1 p.m. PT. It ended several hours later with a party-like atmosphere, CBC reporter Chris Brown said.
The NATO meeting brought together 26 generals to discuss the organization's current and future operations.
The Victoria military meeting is taking place in the midst of a growing tension over the increasing violence in Afghanistan. It's on the agenda, but it's not the main item, with the focus this weekend being larger than any single war zone, spokesman Lt.-Col. Tony White said.
Talks about NATO's 'future operations'
"The discussions are going to be very strategic. It's going to be about how does NATO prepare itself and have the right capabilities for today, but more importantly, for future operations."
Gen. Ray Henault, chairman of NATO's military committee and former chief of Canada's defence staff, said the alliance has not received formal notice from the federal government that it intends to end its combat commitment in Afghanistan.
Opposition leaders have demanded Prime Minister Stephen Harper formally announce Canada will end its combat mission in the country in February 2009.
Henault said the alliance anticipates there will be changes but has not begun the formal process of scouting out replacement nations.
There is no question that NATO was involved in war crimes in the attacks against Serbia. Journalists were deliberately attacked, infrastructure upon which civilians depended was similarly attacked.
Protesters accuse NATO generals of war crimes
Louise Dickson
CanWest News Service
Sunday, September 09, 2007
VICTORIA -- About 200 noisy protesters delivered a symbolic summons Saturday to North Atlantic Treaty Organization generals as the officials discussed military strategy behind police fences at a downtown Victoria hotel.
The group accused NATO's military committee of genocide, crimes against humanity and war crimes.
Lt.-Col. Tony White, public information officer for NATO's military committee, said he had received and read the protesters' document and would pass it to NATO's legal team in Brussels, when he returns in a few days.
"It will be not ignored," said White.
Organizers had warned police they would fight back if officers tried to clear them from the Grand Pacific Hotel where the high level meetings are being held by generals from the international military alliance, but a noon rally was peaceful.
The coalition of local peace groups chanted "NATO killers" as they marched, followed by calls of "Bring Down the Generals."
Although a few military men looked on from their waterfront balconies, no one came down to address the crowd.
Jodi Wood joined the rally to protest Canada's involvement in NATO.
"We're a democratic nation and I think we should have a right as a civilian society to make the decision to pull Canada out of what is basically world terrorism," said Wood.
Marla Renn, an education student at Simon Fraser University, came to protest what she called the atrocities being committed by NATO in Afghanistan.
"There's an untold amount of civilian deaths and brutality for women over there. We're making things harder and worse over there," said Renn.
Many protesters accused NATO of using prohibited weapons such as cluster bombs, white phosphorous and depleted uranium to kill and maim innocent civilians.
Raging Granny Fran Thoburn found pictures online of babies deformed by depleted uranium and had them laminated on posters.
"We need to get our heads out of the sand and realize we are killing and maiming total populations," Thoburn said.
Members of the military committee were surprised by the protest's focus on illegal weapons, said White.
After consulting with senior officers, White told the media NATO is not using cluster munitions or depleted uranium in Afghanistan.
"Depleted uranium was an issue in Kosovo and Bosnia several years ago. Some nations were using it, but there was no proof it harmed people," said White.
He also addressed the question of whether or not NATO is still relevant after existing for almost 60 years.
"I think it's relevant, because the United Nations, which represents the international community, is the one asking us to go to Afghanistan and Darfur," said White. "We're not imposing ourselves on other countries."
In the past five years, the demands on NATO have been increasing, said White.
"The international community sees NATO as a very responsible and professional force that is highly successful," said White.
"You have to go to Afghanistan to see the progress. The (gross domestic product ) is up 14 per cent. Young girls are in school. Afghanistan is much better off than it was two years ago. If they listen to our soldiers, they'll know we're doing a lot more good than bad."
The protest included a nude male cyclist towing two Scottish terriers in a yellow trailer. The man made it on to the lawn of the provincial legislature before being dressed in a pair of bright blue boxer shorts and placed in the back of the police car.
Victoria Times Colonist
Victoria anti-NATO demo ends peacefully
Last Updated: Saturday, September 8, 2007 | 4:58 PM PT
CBC News
NATO military leaders met in Victoria on Saturday afternoon as a small but vocal crowd of protesters denounced the organization.
The protest, dubbed a No to NATO rally, attracted about 300 people. They objected to the military leaders meeting in "my backyard," to Canada's role in Afghanistan and to NATO's change from a defensive alliance, its original purpose.
A Victoria police officer threads heavy wire through a temporary fence in front of the Hotel Grand Pacific Friday before the NATO meetings.
(Deddeda Stemler/Canadian Press) "We're saying it no longer has any rationale for its existence, the way it's being used these days," said Phil Lyons, a spokesman for a coalition of peace groups.
Police patrolled the peaceful protest, which started under sunny skies at about 1 p.m. PT. It ended several hours later with a party-like atmosphere, CBC reporter Chris Brown said.
The NATO meeting brought together 26 generals to discuss the organization's current and future operations.
The Victoria military meeting is taking place in the midst of a growing tension over the increasing violence in Afghanistan. It's on the agenda, but it's not the main item, with the focus this weekend being larger than any single war zone, spokesman Lt.-Col. Tony White said.
Talks about NATO's 'future operations'
"The discussions are going to be very strategic. It's going to be about how does NATO prepare itself and have the right capabilities for today, but more importantly, for future operations."
Gen. Ray Henault, chairman of NATO's military committee and former chief of Canada's defence staff, said the alliance has not received formal notice from the federal government that it intends to end its combat commitment in Afghanistan.
Opposition leaders have demanded Prime Minister Stephen Harper formally announce Canada will end its combat mission in the country in February 2009.
Henault said the alliance anticipates there will be changes but has not begun the formal process of scouting out replacement nations.
Saturday, June 23, 2007
Scheffer claims Canada fighting to preserve universal values in Afghanistan.
The entire article is at the Globe and Mail.
NATO Secretary-General Jaap de Hoop Scheffer, standing before the Vandoos's red-coated honour guard in Quebec City's historic Citadel, told the soldiers they were fighting to preserve universal values.
Scheffer does not say what the universal values are. In Afghanistan we are preserving the war lords, the religious police, the death penalty for converting from Islam to any other religion etc.etc. Perhaps one of the universal values is US global hegemony.
NATO Secretary-General Jaap de Hoop Scheffer, standing before the Vandoos's red-coated honour guard in Quebec City's historic Citadel, told the soldiers they were fighting to preserve universal values.
Scheffer does not say what the universal values are. In Afghanistan we are preserving the war lords, the religious police, the death penalty for converting from Islam to any other religion etc.etc. Perhaps one of the universal values is US global hegemony.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)