Afghanistan 2009

How will army rebuild after war?
Posted By PETER WORTHINGTON
Posted 2 hours ago

Although there are two years to go before Canadian combat troops are scheduled to be withdrawn from Afghanistan, there are signs the government is cooling on its commitment to expand funding and improve the military.

In the National Post, military historian Jack Granatstein noted Department of National Defence budget projections for 2010 and 2011 show a slight decrease from the current $20.993 billion budget.

Last spring, Prime Minister Stephen Harper and Defence Minister Peter MacKay were more gung-ho, promising to raise our regular forces to 75,000 from the present 55,000 effective, and to spend $30 billion on new aircraft, ships, combat vehicles.

DND's projected budget in 2030 was $30 billion to $35 billion. Some figure this would represent roughly 2% of our gross domestic product going to Defence -- up from the present 1% to 1.5% of GDP.

Granatstein, a military realist, is uneasy that DND's present budget "will likely seem to be ripe for the plucking" when the Treasury Board looks for ways to reduce government spending.

"There is little sympathy for the Canadian Forces in the Privy Council Office," Granatstein says. He's right. Never has been in that section of the government.

Traditionally, 40% of the DND budget goes to personnel, whose projected numbers keep getting downscaled (now down to 66,000 regulars).

Granatstein also notes that the capital equipment program is not aimed at acquiring new fighter aircraft or warships, but at modernizing and upgrading existing long-range patrol aircraft, Leopard II tanks, armoured personnel carriers (APCs) and such.

Sound familiar? It's what we've always done -- keeping equipment, vehicles, aircraft and ships long past their "use before" date. Our equipment is older than most soldiers.

There's also a fishhook embedded in pulling out of Afghanistan.

Put bluntly, it's likely every Canadian fighting vehicle isn't worth bringing home because of the wear and tear of what will be close to nine years in action. Afghanistan is hard on mechanized vehicles of any sort.

Continued After Advertisement Below

Advertisement

One only has to think back to Canada's peacekeeping days when roughly 50% of our Leopard tanks were out of commission and being repaired at any one time. And they were only used for training in pretend war games.

Our APCs were originally used by the Americans in the Vietnam War -- and discarded as being too vulnerable. In the Balkans, we reinforced them with metal siding and sandbags on the floor. Still, their casualty rate soared.

The Iltus was to be a replacement for the jeep -- and was essentially useless. At the Canadian base in Kabul, there was a graveyard of Iltuses stacked in rows. Troops recall we offered them to the Afghan army, which refused unless they were guaranteed a year's supply of gasoline.

Citing security reasons, DND won't reveal the casualty rate in Leopard II tanks in Afghanistan, or the casualty rate in vehicles. The Canadian American Strategic Review (CASR) has assessed incidents where casualties have occurred in roadside bombs, on the assumption if someone is wounded or killed in a blast, the vehicle is likely irreparably damaged.

Up to February 2008, there were 22 LAV III incidents, resulting in 69 wounded or injured and 20 fatalities, 10 incidents with the G-wagon (22 casualties), eight with Bison armoured vehicles (22 casualties), seven involving Nyala armoured personnel vehicles (27 casualties), four Coyote incidents (10 casualties) and assorted other explosions and accidents, including three Leopard tanks down.

And these are mostly battle casualties -- not counting wear-and-tear casualties.

When our mission in Afghanistan is done, the army may need every vehicle replaced if, indeed, it is to maintain its hard-earned reputation as one of the world's small but most competent armies.

One hopes Prime Minister Harper is paying attention.

No sheet!

II

Good news.

April 28, 2009
Karzai backs down over ‘abhorrent’ marital rape law
Tom Coghlan in Kabul

President Karzai bowed to international pressure yesterday by promising to amend a new law condoning marital rape and child marriage that provoked violent clashes in the Afghan capital.

The Shia Family Law, signed by the Afghan President last month, appeared to reintroduce the draconian policies of the Taleban era, such as a ban on married women leaving their homes without their husbands’ permission. The law applies to the 15 per cent of Afghans who are Shia Muslims.

At a press conference in Kabul yesterday, Mr Karzai said: “The law is under review and amendments will take place. I assure you that the laws of Afghanistan will be in complete harmony with the constitution of Afghanistan, and the human rights that we have adhered to in international treaties.”

His statement appeared to rebut widespread speculation that by signing the law he was pandering to conservatives before this summer’s delayed presidential election. Mr Karzai confirmed that he would stand in the elections, where he will be the front-runner.

Afghanistan’s constitution guarantees equality of the sexes and the country is also a signatory to the Universal Declaration on Human Rights. However, hardline theologians argue that all other provisions are overridden by Article Three of the Constitution, which guarantees that nothing contrary to the “beliefs and provisions of Islam” is permissible in Afghan law.

Mr Karzai’s climbdown came a day after he said that he had been unaware of its content when he signed it. He made the claim when he met a group of women activists who organised a protest against the new law in Kabul last week. The protesters were attacked by a mob of male supporters of the law.

The controversial provisions were buried in the 239-page document, much of it written in dense theological jargon. Mr Karzai said that his aides had not briefed him properly about the details. Many opponents of the law have said that it did not pass through the normal channels, that would have included discussion of all the articles, because MPs were advised to let the Shia community determine the details of their own laws – a right granted by the constitution.

One article stipulates that the wife “is bound to preen for her husband as and when he desires”. Another passage sanctions marital rape. “As long as the husband is not travelling he has the right to have sexual intercourse with his wife every fourth night . . . Unless the wife is ill or has any kind of illness that intercourse could aggravate, the wife is bound to give a positive response to the sexual desires of her husband.”

Article 133 reintroduces the Taleban restrictions on women’s movements outside their homes, stating: “A wife cannot leave the house without the permission of the husband” unless in a medical or other emergency.

Article 27 endorses child marriage, with girls legally able to marry once they begin to menstruate. The law also withholds from the woman the right to inherit her husband’s wealth.

When its contents were made public it was condemned widely by Western governments, with President Obama describing the new law as abhorrent.

The Afghan Government had insisted that criticism of the law was misplaced. “We understand the concerns of our allies,” Mr Karzai said on television earlier this month. “Those concerns may be out of inappropriate or not-so-good translation of the law or a misinterpretation of it.”

- A suspected poison attack on a girls’ school north of Kabul made 45 pupils and staff sick. Officials said that the teachers and pupils fell ill with severe headaches during a ceremony at the school in Sadiqi District of Parwan Province, north of the capital. “It seems to be airborne poisoning,” Dr Abdullah Fahim, a spokesman for the Public Health Ministry, said.