It's Ban Ki-moon's war, part 2

A letter of mine in the Globe and Mail (the title is theirs; mine was the one for this post minus "part 2"):

Pay heed to Mr. UN

By MARK COLLINS

Saturday, January 26, 2008 – Page A22

Ottawa -- I find it curious that you chose to publish United Nations Secretary-General Ban Ki-moon's article Being In Afghanistan Is Dangerous, Not Being In Afghanistan Is More Dangerous (Jan. 24) in the online edition only. Your general readership surely would have been interested in these words of his: "Our collective success depends on the continuing presence of the International Security Assistance Force, commanded by NATO and helping local governments in nearly every province to maintain security and carry out reconstruction projects."

In any event, Canadian politicians such as Jack Layton and Elizabeth May - who advocate having the UN take over the international military presence in Afghanistan - should pay close attention to the words of the UN's own Secretary-General. Though I doubt they will.

It's one of Norman Spector's "Letters of the Day".

I sent this next letter to the National Post, January 24; they've not printed it. Don Martin is a journalist--it's never quite clear whether he's a reporter or a columnist--from Alberta. He likes to play the role of a hard-bitten, cynical, old-school newsman (but with a sharp sense of humour) who just calls them as he sees them and takes no guff from no-one. Unfortunately his vision is rather limited. He's basically all attitude and little cattle, as the letter I think demonstrates:

No wonder Canadians are confused and ill-informed about the situation in Afghanistan. Don Martin, in his column "Canadian troops far from alone" (Jan. 24), purports, among other things, to explain where the troops of various countries participating in NATO's International Security Assistance Force (ISAF) are stationed. Unfortunately he gets quite a few basic facts wrong--all the more remarkable since he was in Afghanistan himself just half a year ago.

Australian troops are not partners with the British in Kandahar province [major goof on my part, Brits of course are in Helmand]; they are partners with the Dutch in Uruzgan. The Dutch themselves have not "locked in their 1,500 soldiers until 2010"; they are reducing their strength to around 1,100. Turkish troops are not in the east with the Americans; they are in Kabul and in addition provide a provincial reconstruction team in Wardak, just to the west of Kabul. The 3,200 Marines being sent to Afghanistan--not 3,500 as Mr Martin writes--are not to be stationed in the east. The 2,200 combat troops will be based in the south (and under the overall command of Canadian Maj.-Gen. J.G.M. Lessard, who becomes head of ISAF Regional Command South in February); the rest of the Marines will mainly train the Afghan National Police, wherever needed. The French are not in the north; they are in Kabul (the French also have six Mirage fighters based at Kandahar). And while there are some Romanians at Kandahar, as Mr Martin notes, the largest Romanian contribution is a battalion fighting with the Americans in the east.

What a lot of misinformation. Dear me.

Mark C.

Posted by markc at January 27, 2008 08:45 PM