Canadian high risk war games

Canadian soldiers expressed bewilderment, surprise and anger that people back home would question their role in Afghanistan. Brandon Sun, Canada

There is a very fundamental clash of cultures happening in Canada right now. Not an ethnic divide, but a lack of understanding between the wider public, political leaders and the military.
No doubt the latter two are happily in step for their own reasons, but the wider public find it hard to accept that the ‘peace keeper’ nation should suddenly morph into a front line fighting nation.
Like Australia, Canada has a long and proud history as a peace keeping force. The military and police from both countries have often stood side by side defusing dangerous situations.
In trouble spots, such as Cyprus, these two forces have stuck to the often thankless task, finally winning high praise from all quarters. Peace keeping is a dedicated business.
Unlike Canada, Australian forces are always ready to take up arms, which is a constant source of social tension downunder.
It does lead to a quite different view of military roles in Australia. Ironically, for a political leadership happy to send the troops off, it took massive community opinion to get the Australian government to take military action to gain independence for East Timor. So the community there is not adverse to a stoush, just selective.

That is the public perspective, for the soldiers it is often quite different. Both countries have voluntary military forces. Some join up for educational or other opportunities. Many join the military to see action; they are highly trained in aggressive fighting techniques.
The question is; can you, fairly, train a dog to bark and then deny it the right to bark? Australia seems to have solved that problem to some degree, developing a highly specialised assault force, the SAS.
The SAS were, it has been reported, deep in Iraq days before the last war was actually declared. These people are trained for stealth and aggression, they are trained killers. The real problem with that kind of force is finding some fulfilling role in between times.
The same must be true, if to a lesser degree, of all fighting forces. There is only so much marching up and down before boredom sets in, and with boredom there is the potential for strife.
No doubt Canada’s military elite are keen to test themselves in real action and were more than ready to convince a new and sympathetic government of the need of their fighting services.

As to the government’s perspective, we were warned well in advance, despite his denials, that Stephen Harper would promote the military into fighting zones. The election was not fought on that issue and there was no real announcement of the scope of the role of Canadian troops in Afghanistan.
An unwitting public simply assumed this was another of the proud peacekeeping roles, not a front line fighting role. As news began leaking through of casualties in Kandahar the wider public started to understand the ramifications of this deployment.
Harper has not misjudged the national psyche on this issue; he understands it all too well. His dramatic trip to visit the troops in Afghanistan and the language of his statements issued from that tour say as much.
They are littered with vague, unsubstantiated comments about security threats to Canada. Canadians have not been accustomed to these kinds of threats in the past and can probably only see them being the result of a more aggressive military stance.
Harper can well afford the risk of military adventures this early in his incumbency.
It is a gamble, but does mark him as different to a string of leaders before him. I don’t see the nation becoming comfortable with the position, but that, in the end is something he will have to answer to.

No doubt the ordinary Canadian soldiers in Afghanistan are perplexed by the attitude of their fellow citizens back home. It is a perplexity born out of a totally different cultural perspective.
I guess, in a sense and given the intensity of front line action any criticism will be taken to heart. It shouldn’t be.
I have heard no criticism or bad feeling aimed at those soldiers in the front line. The only references to the soldiers have been concern for safety rather than attacks on them.
Canada was not prepared for this eventuality, it was delivered by stealth. There has been no debate, either during the recent election campaign or since. The dawning realisation of the situation took most people by surprise.
The debate is slowly gaining momentum now, after the fact, and is odds on to become an angry one. Perhaps Harper didn’t foresee this from the usually placid Canadian populace.
The only shame is that the soldiers, doing what soldiers do, will be caught in the crossfire, and nobody really wants that.