Our allies will pay with their blood
Maryam Monsef, one of the more disappointing of Justin Trudeau’s cabinet appointments — and that’s saying a lot — draped herself in further glory on Wednesday, when, in an appeal to the Taliban for restraint during the ongoing evacuation flights from Kabul, she referred to them as “brothers.”
“I want to take this opportunity to speak with our brothers, the Taliban. We call on you to ensure the safe and secure passage of any individual in Afghanistan out of the country. We call on you to immediately stop the violence, the genocide, the femicide, the destruction of infrastructure, including heritage buildings.”
Well, that oughta take care of that.
A statement, in English, from a junior minister in a minority government from a marginally competent (at best) middle-power can’t help but be heard in the corridors of power around the world and especially in Kabul, where the Taliban is now consolidating its rule. Monsef’s remarks are Canadian soft power at its finest. Are we back or what?!
Monsef’s comments were swiftly attacked for calling the Taliban “brothers,” as you can imagine, given Canada’s history with the group and the current horrifying events unfolding across the world. She quickly noted that they reflected no shift in the government’s position and that the Taliban is a terror group. She explained further that “brothers” is just a cultural reference, meaning it’s how we could approachably appeal to them. (In English, again.) Monsef, born to Afghan-refugee parents in Iran, certainly knows the cultural norms of that country better than the vast majority of Canadians. The question, in this case, was whether she, in her role as a federal minister, could have perhaps chosen a better term in line with Canadian cultural references. After all, it won’t be the Taliban vote that helps her hold onto her seat in beautiful Peterborough.
The whole thing is, of course, something of a sideshow. It immediately brought to mind an amusing anecdote from Winston Churchill’s book on his experience leading the United Kingdom during the Second World War. He recounted how he’d been criticized for the polite — florid, really — language in his telegram to the Japanese ambassador, informing him that the United Kingdom now considered itself at war with Japan. Of the backlash, Churchill said, “Some people did not like this ceremonial style. But after all when you have to kill a man it costs nothing to be polite.”
Fair enough. If Monsef thinks getting the Taliban to play nice will be made easier by calling them brothers, well, knock yourself out, minister. That seems only marginally less useful than most of what we’ve heard from her colleagues thus far during this crisis. Further, the National Post’s Chris Nardi quickly reported on Twitter that this wasn’t even the first time she’d deployed this particular cultural reference; in similar comments appealing for good behaviour from Afghanistan’s new rulers, she used “brothers” to describe the Taliban several days ago. She might be surprised when that rubs some of her constituents the wrong way, but she can just reassure them it’s a cultural thing and that’ll probably be the end of that, right?
Frankly, this is as likely a trap by Monsef and the Liberals as it is a flub or cultural reference. The Liberals have spent the last few days trotting out all their old campaign favourites to hurl at the surprisingly high-polling Tories: guns, two-tier health care, abortion ... all the greatest hits. As plausible as Monsef stumbling into a gaffe is — and gosh, it’s really plausible — it’s equally possible that the Liberal war room is hoping to spark some of that barbaric cultural hotline spirit in the hearts of their Conservative friends. After Monsef’s remarks went viral on Wednesday, one senior Tory told me, in genuine good cheer, “Oh, come on, like we’re gonna walk into that.” You could hear the eyes rolling in their sockets. So whatever Monsef was doing, the Conservative campaign is erring on the side of assuming it’s bait, and likely to their benefit.
While Monsef was waging her charm offensive against the Taliban and the Tories, for now, avoided doing anything stupid, on the ground, actual military forces, including some Canadians, continue to work in Kabul, and it’s clear the effort is not equal to the challenge. The NATO forces could probably hold the airport, even if the Taliban wanted to take it, but it would make the airport unusable for evacuations — it’s hard to load civilians onto planes and get the planes airborne in the middle of a shooting war. A few surface-to-air missiles or even the odd shoulder-fired RPG lobbed onto the runways at the departing planes would essentially ground the operation, leaving the Western forces confined to a tiny piece of real estate, with civilians in any direction they might wish to shoot.
The American government seems hell-bent on sticking to its withdrawal date of Aug. 31, which means that the civilian evacuation will actually end several days before that — the last flights out will be taken up by retreating troops and their equipment. There are unknown thousands of people still in Afghanistan who have earned the right to a safer life in Canada who’ll be left behind when the last allied flight takes off in the next few days — this is a bitter pill to swallow, but it’s no longer in doubt. They’ll be standing there on the tarmac with nowhere left to go but back to Taliban-controlled Afghanistan. One wonders if the Taliban will even let them back in or simply begin the killings at the terminal gates.
Either way, Canada and its allies won’t do a thing to stop what’s coming. Abandoned by us, our friends will be at the mercy of the Taliban, and we’ll be left with awfully hard questions about what more we as a country could have done for them. Getting them all out may have been practically impossible, but if, as seems certain, bureaucratic inertia and typically placid Canadian government crisis management slowed down our efforts, there should be hell to pay for that here.
That’s the real issue. And Monsef’s words, be they bait or just bizarre for a Canadian minister in the middle of a tight election race, should be viewed in that context. We haven’t learned much about her that wasn’t already plain to see, but we’ve learned a lot about our government and what it can (and cannot) do. Our friends will pay in blood for our lack of urgency and competency. And there’s no term of endearment we can lather on the Taliban that’ll be of much use once the killing starts.