Harper read up on Afghanistan... or so he says.

The best part about watching Fareed Zakaria interview anybody is that you know the following:

1. Zakaria doesn't presume to know the answer to the question he's asking. He lets his guests do the talking after asking direct questions;
2. His big toe can out-think the average politician in under a second;
3. He's done his homework;
4. Because of the above, he makes pure political animals nervous.

This is Zakaria's interview with Stephen Harper. Rather than quote or paraphrase bits of it, it's best if you watch it yourself. If you want to go directly to the Harper interview you'll have to go to about half way through the podcast, though, if you have the time, the whole program is worth watching.



Much is being made on both sides of the political spectrum about the Harper line "We'll never defeat the insurgency in Afghanistan". And, quite rightly, it's being thrown back in the faces of those who smeared anybody and everybody who said exactly the same thing years ago. They were, as usual, wrong.

But, there is a stronger point to be made - maybe more than one.

Harper's admission was qualified with, "Everything I've read on Afghanistan suggests they've had an insurgency in one form or another, probably forever."

Yes. And if Harper had taken the time to do a little research, if he'd been a little more up-front with the population of his own country, we would have heard that from him long ago. The fact that we didn't suggests he didn't understand the chronic condition that is Afghanistan. That is a failure in leadership.

If one is going to make an expenditure of blood and treasure to the degree we have in Afghanistan, one should read the history of the place before making such costly commitments. And if he, up to the time of his admission, ignored the fractured past of Afghanistan, then his qualifying reason is little more than a weak excuse for engaging in an ideological neocon extravagance which is now sticking in the craw of Canadians.

Another point which came out of the interview was the difference with which Harper now apparently views the United States. Gone is the "We're your best and most trusted friend" mantra of the Bush days. There was a time when, if the US president mused over the idea that he needed a nickle, Harper would fall all over himself running around the room taking a collection.

Now, instead of offering anything and everything we pulled out of the dirt to his "bestest buddy" he's talking about resources as "leverage". If the US president were to come to him and ask for an extension in Afghanistan Harper insists he would have to see a plan. An actual plan! When did he ever ask for one of those from Bush?

Fareed Zakaria could have trapped Harper, but it would have served no pupose. When Zakaria brought up the Canadian banking system Harper couldn't say much. It's not something he could take credit for. In fact, if he'd had his way, in the way he would have preferred, the Canadian banking system would have collapsed right along with the rest of the world's financial institutions. The only reason they didn't was because of the regulatory framework built by governments before Harper's time - something he would have dismantled with a majority government.

If Zakaria made one mistake it was this comment leading into a question: "You're an economist."

No. Harper has a degree in economics. He is no economist.

Back to Afghanistan for a moment and the howling over his "We can't defeat the Taliban" line. While many of us already knew that, it triggered a question in my mind which I was going to post. I thought better of it.

I spent a lifetime in uniform in some of the worst places in the world. The kids who came behind me need every chance to believe that, no matter where they're sent, or why, despite the extreme danger, that they will come out of it with their bodies and minds intact. Every single one of them. To ask a question which would only plant a seed of fear in their minds in order to rub Harper's nose in the dirt would be a betrayal of them. They already know what it is anyway; there is no need for me to put it in print.