From the National Post/CanWest, we have an identified diplomat, Ben Rowswell, Representative of Canada in Kandahar (RoCK), we hear this:
“The [Provincial Reconstruction Team] is part of the international presence and there has been no discussion of the international presence coming to an end in 2011.”
Meanwhile, an anonymous “senior Canadian government official” tells the Canadian Press (CP) this:
“I couldn’t say firmly that we’re going to do training post-2011 …. There’s part of the training that can be in combat. There’s part of the training that’s not in combat.”
The CP placeline is Ottawa, so that suggests where the anonymous “senior Canadian government official” might work (as opposed to a placeline like Kandahar, suggesting someone high up at that end).
Here’s what the PM’s chief spokesperson, Dimitri Soudas, told CBC on or around 10 Oct of this year:
“You can do training in training facilities …. And when I say training, I mean Canadian soldiers will not be doing combat training of Afghan soldiers in harm’s way.“
We’re reading more about trust (or lack thereof) issues between ISAF trainers and their Afghan trainees, especially in the wake of last month’s shooting death of five British trainer/mentors. In light of this, a reminder from one of my previous posts:
I’m certain our troops will do a first-rate job delivering any training, no matter where it’s done, but what will this do to the relationship between the trainee and the trainer? How about the potential for Taliban Info-Machine messaging to the effect of, “they come to help, and send you to die?”
Don’t say I didn’t say so…
Update (1): What the Pentagon has to say about Canada’s future mission.
MILNEWS.ca Blog 