Well the report from the Manley Panel is set to come out today, now forgetting for the moment that there were accusations that this panel had from the outset been biased in favouring to remain in Afghanistan, the National Post reports:
After touring NATO headquarters, Afghanistan and receiving hundreds of submissions, the independent commission created by Prime Minister Stephen Harper to advise his government on the way forward is not expected to recommend any significant scaling back of Canada's commitment of 2,500 soldiers in the Kandahar region, or any profound change in their current marching orders.So the Panel isn't offering anything really new, infact offering just more of the same. I guess because what we're doing is working so well. Because we've been there for 6 years now and there's no end in sight, so we must be doing a good job.
While it is expected Mr. Manley will emphasize the need for Canada to continue contributing to the training of Afghan national army and police personnel, the panel's findings, to be released as early as Tuesday, will not recommend a significant shift in the mission that Canada is currently conducting there with its 25 NATO allies and 11 other partner countries.
Now as one continues to read about this possible outcome of the Manley Panel, this comes to attention:
Many people who have contributed submissions to the panel say they came away with the impression that Mr. Manley and his fellow members are essentially in favour of staying the course in Afghanistan. That is, continuing combat operations while simultaneously training Afghan security forces towards the mutually agreed NATO endgame of withdrawal at a later, undetermined date.Besides the fact that this non-partisan committee is composed of John Manley, who was always for the mission in Afghanistan; Pamela Wallin, a broadcaster who supported the US Missile-Shield; and three Conservatives; this suggestion by the National Post that this Panel had already been leaning or possibly already reached its conclusions prior to its hearings of Canadians, is a strong indictment against the validity of the Panel's report.
"I basically said we should stay and continue our role," said Canadian military historian and author Jack Granatstein, summarizing his submission to the panel last month.
"Their questions seemed to be of a kind that when people ask you questions you get a sense of what way they're leaning," he added. "I had the sense listening to them and watching their body language they agreed with what I was saying."