FROLITICKS

Satirical commentary on Canadian and American current political issues

Mar 26

Canada’s Expansion of Iraq Mission to Syria is a Huge Mistake

by bcurry

No matter what the reasons that the Canadian government gives, the proposed expansion of the current Iraq mission to Syria has all kinds of serious consequences.  Simply stating that Canada is following the American lead provides little in the way of justification.  Syria is a bigger mess than even Iraq.  Let’s recap for a moment.  The Syrian uprising, part of the so-called Arab Spring, originally involved opposition groups to the current Syrian government under its dictator Bashar al-Assad.  The Americans didn’t step into this internal war, preferring to wait and see.  However, things didn’t go well for Assad, making him commit even more atrocities against his own people, including the use of chemical weapons.  Still, the Americans didn’t step in.  Then along came ISIL or ISIS, a major radical group who began to make territorial gains in Syria and eventually into Iraq.  So now, the Americans, no longer knowing who to support militarily in Syria, decide to go after the most radical group — ISIL.

Subsequently, the Iraqi government and security forces couldn’t stop ISIL’s advances inside Iraq, threatening to bring down Iraq’s American-supported and primarily Shia-backed government.  ISIL found support among the Sunni population in Iraq who felt persecuted by the Shia regime, and have faced atrocities by Shia security forces and local militia.  Enter Iran, whose military guard began to support the Shia militias in Iraq, who in turn appeared better able to defend against ISIL than Iraq’s government forces.  Let’s not forget about the Kurdish forces fighting ISIL in northern Iraq, and who would still like to have more independence from Baghdad.  At this point, Prime Minister Haider al-Abadi called on the U.S. to provide military support in the form of air strikes against ISIL and military advisors to Iraqi forces on the ground.

Six months ago, Canada entered the American-led campaign along with some other European and Arab countries.  Remember, this is not a NATO endorsed campaign.  Canada’s token contribution deployed several dozen special forces troops to northern Iraq, six fighter jets, two surveillance aircraft, a refuelling plane and around 600 support personnel based in Kuwait.  So far, Canada has had one casualty and three injured by Kurdish friendly fire.  Have air strikes really accomplished much?  ISIL’s advancements have to date been slowed, but most military experts believe that the war against ISIL can only be won on the ground.  In the case of the Syrian campaign, the results of air strikes are even less convincing.

Yes, ISIL has made some vague propaganda threats against Canadians, has committed atrocities, and a few Canadians have even gone to join ISIL in Syria, along with other foreign combatants.  However, is there really a serious threat to the homeland from ISIL?  Or is this just political maneuvering on the part of the Canadian and American governments to justify their military actions in the region?  What are the governments’ exit strategies?  Indications are that the Iraqis and Syrians could be at war for years.  Neither the current Iraqi nor the Syrian regime appears to be able to deal with this mess.  Do the Canadian and American governments really believe that they can resolve the disputes without further bloodshed and atrocities?  These are real questions and consequences that need to be further explored before both countries begin to witness ever-growing “mission creep”.  Unfortunately, the majority of Canadians and Americans don’t really understand the complexities of the situation to adequately address these questions.  Sorry, but it’s the truth.

Iraq Iraq and ISIS Syria and ISIL

Leave a comment »
Nov 10

Why Should Canada’s Small Air Force Help Bomb ISIS in Iraq?

by bcurry

In case you weren’t aware, the Canadian government under Prime Minister Stephen Harper has sent half a dozen CF-18s to help bomb targets in Iraq held by the so-called Islamic State in Iraq and Syria (ISIS or ISEL). As Liberal Leader Justin Trudeau noted, the government whipped out our CF-18s to show them how big they are. He rightfully asked why Canadians aren’t talking more about the kind of humanitarian aid that Canada can and must be engaged in. Besides thousands of civilian deaths, the previous Iraq war also created hundreds of thousands of refugees fleeing that country’s on-going civil war. With the onset of ISIS, thousands more Iraqis have fled to neighbouring countries and safe havens within Iraq. They are desperate for food, shelter, clothing, medical supplies and other essentials to survive the coming winter conditions.

Let’s take a step back to clarify Canada’s historical position vis-a-vis the first American incursion into Iraq to dispose of Saddam Hussein. The Iraq War began with the 2003 invasion of Iraq. The government of Canada did not at any time formally declare war against Iraq. The then Prime Minister Jean Chrétien said in 2002 that Canada would, in fact, be part of a military coalition to invade Iraq if it were sanctioned by the United Nations. However, when the United States and the United Kingdom subsequently withdrew their diplomatic efforts to gain that UN sanction, Jean Chrétien announced in March 2003 that Canada would not participate in the pending invasion. As it turned out, this was one of the best decisions that Prime Minister Chrétien ever made during his government’s term of office.

Recently, former Prime Minister Jean Chrétien defended Justin Trudeau’s controversial decision to oppose Canada’s air combat mission in Iraq. He believes that the fighter planes deployed by the Harper government are a “very marginal” response to the crisis caused by ISIS militants. He concluded that the best ‎contribution Canada can make is by engaging in massive, not token, humanitarian assistance. The leader of the official opposition, Thomas Mulcair of the New Democrats, has also stated that Canada’s first contribution should be to use every diplomatic, humanitarian, and financial resource at our disposal to respond to the overwhelming human tragedy unfolding on the ground. We should also help to strengthen political institutions in both Iraq and Syria.

Let’s face it, the U.S. has been in this conflict for well over 10 years and has been fighting ISIS under one name or another. While ISIS has renamed itself several times since 2004—al Qaeda in Iraq, the Mujahideen Shura Council and the Islamic State of Iraq and al-Sham in Syria—it is literally the same insurgent group that U.S. forces have been battling for over a decade. The Americans propped up a corrupt Iraqi regime under Maliki, which favoured the Shiite population at the expense of the Kurds and Sunni. With the evident inability of the Iraqi security forces to fend off ISIS militants, the Americans once again have had to step in militarily to defend the Iraqi government through air strikes and provision of thousands of military advisors.

President Obama has already warned that American military and financial support will be needed for a long time in this new campaign. The Canadian contribution is but a mere token of some sort of support. The danger is always that such policies can go quickly from mission creep to mission leap. As in the case of Canada’s contribution to the Afghan mission which started out with only a few dozen soldiers and ended up with many casualties, when will this mission end? Canada’s international credibility as a country with an extensive history of humanitarian achievements is in jeopardy. Unfortunately, ISIS is not going away anytime soon. In a year’s time, there is little doubt that the Canadian government will have to seriously rethink its policies!

Iraq Iraq and ISIS Iraq Today

Leave a comment »
Oct 1

Iraq – America’s Biggest Blunder Could Become Canada’s

by bcurry

Well, why don’t they just bomb Iraq once again! The U.S. is flying armed missions across Iraq, only this time bombing sites occupied by the so-called Islamic State in Iraq and Syria (ISIS). All under the pretext that somehow ISIS represents a direct threat to the West. However, as far as we know, ISIS has no weapons of mass destruction (like Saddam Hussein), but only tactics of mass terrorism. Once again, the U.S. has assembled a “coalition of the willing”, including Canada this time, to fight the perceived menace of some estimated 3,000 ISIS fighters in Iraq. A menace that the heavily armed Iraqi government security forces couldn’t stop, but instead fled from battle. Only the Kurds appear willing to stand up to this foe with appeals for heavier weapons from the West and further humanitarian aid.

President Obama has promised that no American boots will be on the ground in this latest struggle. A new Iraqi government has replaced Maliki’s corrupt Shiite-backed government which had carried out its own form of terrorism against the Sunni population. Otherwise, we continue to have one big political mess in Iraq, creating instability and insecurity. The Americans overestimated the capabilities of Iraqi security forces and underestimated the resolve of ISIS. Thus, conditions ripe for the effective entry of a terrorist bunch like ISIS.

All the so-called Middle Eastern experts forecast that defeating the likes of ISIS is no short-term deal, air strikes or no air strikes. The battles can only be won through winning the hearts and minds of all Iraqis, and by Iraqi successes on the ground. Otherwise, you just have another stalemate and one more human disaster, in terms of Iraqi refugees and civilian casualties.

So why is the Canadian government even contemplating providing fighter jets to participate in a decade-old war that it had never been involved with from the outset? Does this small bunch of fanatics represent a real threat to Canadians, or is the Government’s hype just a ploy to gain support for more military action? Just as the senior Bush had warned his son, there’s appears to be no clear cut exit plan for this Iraqi campaign.  Canada is not in a position to fight in another long-term war after a decade of fighting in Afghanistan at tremendous costs in both human and monetary terms.  ISIS is largely a result of disastrous long-standing U.S. involvement in the Middle East, Iraq being the worst case scenario. Needless-to-say, Prime Minister Harper will have to shoulder full accountability for any further Canadian military involvement in Iraq.

Foreign Policy Iraq Today

Leave a comment »
Sep 9

Something Went Very Wrong Happened in Iraq!

by bcurry

Over a year ago, I begged the question as to why the American media had almost completely abandoned its coverage of Iraq after the withdrawal of U.S. troops. Most coverage was focused on events in Syria and Afghanistan. At the time, fighting among insurgent groups had increased in Iraq and the Iraqi government and security forces appeared unable to contain their activities. As the army faltered, Shiite militias were playing a growing role in the conflict, nudged toward the fight by the corrupt government of Mr. Maliki. As the militiamen faced radical Sunni jihadists, the threat of a wider sectarian conflagration grew. Then entered the so-called Islamic State in Iraq and Syria (ISIS). Too radical even for Al Qaeda, ISIS proceeded to take over numerous key towns and infrastructure in Iraq as Iraqi security forces abandoned their positions and American-supplied equipment. 

All of a sudden, Iraq once again has become the main center of attention, notably in the fight against the brand of Islamic terrorism practiced by ISIS. Without the opposition of such groups as the Kurds and the use of American air power to target ISIS initiatives, Maliki’s government would probably have floundered even more. Even with a new more inclusive government in place, there is no assurance that Iraq’s situation will improve anytime soon. A longer-term internal political solution is definitely required. The West can’t provide this. 

In the meantime, the U.S. has invited its allies to provide military assistance to the Iraqi forces. Low and behold, Stephen Harper, the Canadian Prime Minister, has agreed to send a hundred or so “military advisors” to Iraq. Now, for a brief historical note. Canada did not join the original U.S.-led coalition of willing countries when Iraq was first invaded to oust then dictator Saddam Hussein — under the pretense of destroying his non-existent “weapons of mass destruction”. Subsequently, Canada had very little to do with the resulting Iraq governments and American military actions over the following ten-year period against the insurgents. So why now? What about finishing what we did to help the Afghans? What can military advisors do without becoming involved in actual military actions? Remember, Vietnam was never declared by Congress as a war, but was done through executive action by the U.S. President. Originally, Americans were only supposed to be military advisors to the South Vietnamese armed forces. Over 70,000 young Americans were killed in that tragic war, and for what? Yet, President Obama reiterated that there will be “no boots on the ground” in Iraq. 

I’m not saying that Iraq could turn out to be another Vietnam. Obviously the circumstances are different. Yet, history should have taught us something by now. External interventions into the internal affairs of other countries can lead not to political solutions and stability, but can have serious consequences for both the interveners and the affected countries. After all is said and done, something very wrong happened in Iraq. Let’s not pursue never-ending bandage solutions!

Iraq Today

Leave a comment »
Apr 15

Why Has The US Media Forgotten About Iraq?

by bcurry

It’s April 15, 2013, and Forbes is reporting that bombs hit several cities across Iraq, killing at least 20 people. In a recent survey (Washington Post, March 18, 2013), Iraqis said they felt better about their security but worse about economic and political stability since the U.S. military left in late 2011. The Iraq decade-long war is reported to have cost the U.S. the loss of 4,400 U.S. service personnel and 32,000 wounded, as well as a couple of trillion dollars of taxpayers money. Not to mention the deaths of an estimated 120,000 Iraqi civilians over the same period. Today, religious and ethic divisions continue to pervade much of Iraq, threatening to set the country back again. Current Shi’ite Prime Minister Nuri al-Maliki’s political muscle will be severely tested against Shi’ite and Sunni rivals in a scheduled parliamentary election in 2014. While the U.S. continues to pour millions into the strengthening of security forces and the restoration of the country’s infrastructure, the mainstream American media have for the most part chosen to virtually ignore recent developments in Iraq. Perhaps this is because all the attention is being given to Syria and the rise of terrorists’ factions in Africa. Indeed, the Iraqi government very likely prefers it this way. Whatever the reason, one can only hope that more media attention will be paid to the seriousness of the Iraqi situation — even though some Americans may rather choose to forget the unfortunate history and outcomes surrounding this decade-old conflict.

Iraq Today US

Leave a comment »
Newer Entries »
Blog at WordPress.com.