Top Scoops

Book Reviews | Gordon Campbell | Scoop News | Wellington Scoop | Community Scoop | Search

 

Gordon Campbell on latest New Zealand deaths in Afghanistan

Gordon Campbell on the latest New Zealand deaths in Afghanistan

by Gordon Campbell

The killing of three more New Zealand members of our Provincial Reconstruction Team by a roadside bomb in northern Bamiyan would seem to indicate that (a) their vehicles are not armoured adequately to protect them against the level of IEDs now being deployed by the Taliban and (b) that the patrol range of our PRT forces should be restricted until and unless their vehicles can be adequately armoured. Otherwise, our soldiers will continue to be sitting ducks, who are doing little more than trying to survive a totally arbitrary period of deployment.

On the current timetable, our PRT forces are not due to be withdrawn until September 2013. That timeframe lacks any intrinsic sense. There is no reason to believe that between now and then, our PRT presence will make Bamiyan safer for the locals in any sustainable fashion, or that the aid projects with which the PRT has been involved will survive their withdrawal. Nothing that New Zealand will achieve between now and September 2013 can justify the further loss of life that now seems inevitable, should we remain in Bamiyan. Yet we will remain, of course. Because it would be too politically embarrassing for the government to treat the safety of our forces as an over-riding concern, and pull them out.

In the interim, at least we should be clear about the motives at work here. Yes, it is sad that more lives have been lost, and more families bereaved. Yet when Prime Minister John Key wears his sad face and talks gravely about sacrifice, we need to keep in mind that the lives in question have been sacrificed for a political commitment that is meaningless. There is no noble purpose involved here, only the usual grubby business of politicking – that by joining the effort in Afghanistan, New Zealand might gain some political or trade favours from the Americans.

Whenever he is pressed on the purpose of our Afghan deployment, Key usually responds by saying that we’re fighting global terrorism and/or enabling Afghanistan to rebuild. Well, if it ever made any sense, the ‘fighting global terrorism’ rationale ended many years ago, after the destruction of al Qaeda as a functioning global network and the capture and/or killing of its leaders. In 2012, the notion that we are fighting al Qaeda in Bamiyan to prevent its turbaned forces from splashing ashore at Devonport is quite a stretch. Similarly, as for the rebuilding of Afghanistan…the thought that the corrupt Karzai regime (that our troops are giving their lives to defend) will ever be capable of delivering peace and prosperity to Afghanistan looks like an increasingly forlorn hope. In the meantime, changing the patrol ambit and routes of the PRT team to make them less vulnerable, would seem the very least their commanders could do for them.

The Dutch saw the writing on the wall and pulled out their troops two years ago. There is no good reason why we should not do likewise, and get our forces home by Christmas. Because what our troops in Afghanistan are really defending – and dying for – in 2012 is John Key’s reputation, and his welcome mat in Washington.

ENDS

© Scoop Media

 
 
 
Top Scoops Headlines

 

Biden In Tokyo: Killing Strategic Ambiguity
Could it have been just another case of bumbling poor judgment, the mind softened as the mouth opened? A question was put to US President Joe Biden, visiting Tokyo and standing beside Japan’s Prime Minister Fumio Kishida: “You didn’t want to get involved in the Ukraine conflict militarily for obvious reasons. Are you willing to get involved militarily to defend Taiwan if it comes to that?” The answer: “Yes. That’s a commitment we made.”.. More>>

Dunne Speaks: Robertson's Budget Gamble On Treasury
The popular test of the success or failure of Grant Robertson’s fifth Budget will be its impact on the soaring cost of living. In today’s climate little else matters. Because governments come and governments go – about every six to seven years on average since 1945 – getting too focused on their long-term fiscal aspirations is often pointless... More>>

Keith Rankin: Liberal Democracy In The New Neonationalist Era: The Three 'O's
The proposed ‘New Zealand Income Insurance Scheme’ (‘the scheme’) has attracted strong debate among the more left-wing and liberal groupings, within New Zealand-Aotearoa. This debate should be seen as a positive rather than negative tension because of the opportunity to consider and learn from the implications and sharpen advocacy... More>>


Digitl: Infrastructure Commission wants digital strategy
Earlier this month Te Waihanga, New Zealand’s infrastructure commission, tabled its first Infrastructure Strategy: Rautaki Hanganga o Aotearoa. Te Waihanga describes its document as a road map for a thriving New Zealand... More>>


Binoy Kampmark: Leaking For Roe V Wade
The US Supreme Court Chief Justice was furious. For the first time in history, the raw judicial process of one of the most powerful, and opaque arms of government, had been exposed via media – at least in preliminary form. It resembled, in no negligible way, the publication by WikiLeaks of various drafts of the Trans-Pacific Partnership... More>>




The Conversation: Cheaper food comes with other costs – why cutting GST isn't the answer

As New Zealand considers the removal of the goods and services tax (GST) from food to reduce costs for low income households, advocates need to consider the impact cheap food has on the environment and whether there are better options to help struggling families... More>>