The Past Was Once The Future - Canadian Armed Forces in the New Millenium (Part 1)

The recent deaths and injuries to Canadian soldiers in Afghanistan have Canada’s involvement once again in the spotlight. The airwaves and Internet are positively a buzz with talk about it. There have been calls for a Canadian withdrawal. Many have said we need to return to our traditional peacekeeping capacity or we shouldn’t be there until it is safe for our troops.

Through it all, I have noticed much of opinion is based on misunderstanding, confusion and downright ignorance about our military and, more ostensibly, the current role it is filling in Afghanistan. Of course, the Canadian penchant for having a short memory doesn’t help either.

A little history.

Canadians often take pride in Canada’s reputation as peacekeepers. It is a job that our military is well suited for and excels at. Since 1947, we have been involved in over 70 international missions and we have contributed everything from a few people to the thousands involved in the Korean War. The idea of peacekeeping on the world stage is attributed to Prime Minister Lester Pearson and Canada has been recognised for its contributions by the United Nations.

That was the more public face of the military.

During the same period, Canada was also a major player in the North Atlantic Treaty Organisation (NATO). NATO, which was formed in 1949, was intended to defend its members from aggression by other nations. The core of the agreement was Article V, which basically states that an attack upon any of the member nations would be considered an attack upon NATO and would be treated accordingly.

As part of its NATO commitment, Canada stationed troops in Germany in preparation for war. During the time that the idea of peacekeeping was being romanticised by Canadians, the bulk of the Armed Forces had their guns trained towards the Iron Curtain, waiting for a war that, thankfully, never happened.

What is peacekeeping?

Most people do not realise there are certain criteria that must be met in order for a peacekeeping mission to be launched.

First, before the United Nations can even consider sending in a peacekeeping contingent, both sides in the conflict must agree to it. Often, it is United Nations pressure that causes them to ask for help but it may also be a realisation that the conflict must end. This could be due to humanitarian considerations or, just as easily, be because it is costing too much money.

Secondly, the warring parties have to agree to an end to hostilities and be willing to pull back. Again, not an easy task, especially if it has been a long, drawn out conflict which can leave a lasting feeling of animosity towards the other side.

Finally, the soldiers who become part of the peacekeeping contingent are expected to be lightly armed and only use their weapons for personal defence. This means if one side or the other breaks the cease-fire the only thing the peacekeepers can do is keep their heads down unless threatened. They are not allowed to interfere in the internal policies or activities of either side. The peacekeeping contingent is allowed to give humanitarian aid under the auspices of the UN, but mainly they are expected to monitor and report on adherence to the cease-fire agreement only.

The system worked in keeping conflicts from spreading. Although they often caused stalemates that could last decades, Cypress and Korea being prime examples, the threat of a world war was minimised.

Then the Cold War ended.

Canadian Armed Forces in the New Millenium (Intro)