Mr. Speaker, I will be sharing my speaking time with the hon. member for Chicoutimi—Le Fjord.
I am pleased to participate in today's debate on the motion introduced by my NDP colleagues concerning the future of the mission in Afghanistan.
The Bloc Québécois' position can be summarized as follows: we oppose this motion because it calls for a hasty withdrawal from Afghanistan. Canada must inform its allies before withdrawing its troops. On the basis of the information available at the moment, the Bloc believes that the mission should end in February 2009. Between now and then, we are calling on the government to reconfigure operations there. Unfortunately, the use of force is necessary, and at this stage, a solely diplomatic and humanitarian solution is bound to fail.
We believe that NATO must be informed now that Canadian troops will not remain in Afghanistan beyond 2009.
That being said, sudden withdrawal from Afghanistan would be irresponsible toward the people and the government of Afghanistan, as well as toward our allies, who are counting on Canada's collaboration until then.
However, it would be just as irresponsible to carry out this international mission without modifying our approach or accepting criticism, as the Prime MInister is doing. We must find a better balance.
The Quebec nation has its own set of values and interests. The Bloc Québécois' role is to express these values and interests internationally and in Parliament. Every time the Bloc has to take a stand, it tries to imagine what a sovereign Quebec government would do, given the same circumstances.
We are not like the other opposition parties. We have won a majority of the seats in Quebec in each of the five elections in which we participated, which means that we represent Quebec in Ottawa.
Quebeckers have everything to gain from advances in international law, multilateralism, and better distribution of wealth among rich and poor countries.
We do not believe that we should respond to terrorism with force, but that when force becomes necessary, it must be grounded in international law and the principles underlying the charter of the United Nations.
Those are the guiding principles we have applied in the case of Afghanistan.
The international community's activities in Afghanistan are a test for the United Nations, for NATO and for the future of multilateral interventions around the world.
The reconstruction efforts are focused on fighting poverty, injustice and corruption, all of which create fertile ground for terrorism and instability.
This is why the Bloc Québécois supported this international intervention from the beginning, and continues to support it.
However, we have no intention of blindly supporting the Canadian government, its policies and its decisions.
This explains our refusal to give the government a blank cheque at the vote in May 2006 on extending Canada's mission.
The Conservative government would like to engage us in a never-ending “war on terror” alongside the American administration.
The Minister of National Defence said that Canada was at war in Afghanistan in retribution for the terrorist attacks of September 11, 2001. He does not realize that we are long past September 11 and have moved on to a new stage.
In the beginning, western countries decided to intervene in Afghanistan to prevent al-Qaeda from carrying out more terrorist attacks under the protection of the Taliban regime. In doing so, we had the opportunity to stop the atrocities being committed against the Afghan people. At the time, the Bloc Québécois supported this international intervention.
Once the Taliban had been removed from power and the terrorists had been scattered, disrupted and driven into hiding, the nature of the intervention had to be drastically altered.
After the departure of the Taliban, the priority was to help Afghans rebuild their country, to not return to how things were before 2002. The United Nations then came into the picture.
At the 2001 Bonn conference and the 2002 Tokyo conference, the international community set the objective of focussing international intervention on reconstruction of the country.
Rebuilding the Afghan state requires ensuring security until the Afghan government can take responsibility for protecting its territory. However, it is unrealistic to believe that security can be provided by military means alone. Defeating the Taliban regime was relatively easy; achieving peace and rebuilding a viable Afghan state is a far more demanding task. The fundamental objective of the international coalition and the United Nations is to reconstruct the economy, the democracy and a viable Afghan state enabling Afghans to take control of their country and their development.
Afghanistan is one of the most impoverished and devastated countries on the planet. Per capita income is less than $1 per day, child mortality is very high and life expectancy is no more than 45 years. We are talking about a country with the youngest population in the world. We must give these young people hope for the future. It was in this context that the London conference was held in early 2006, bringing together the Afghan government and the international community. On that occasion, the participants adopted the Afghanistan compact, and set goals and a five-year timetable to improve three key areas: security and governance; the rule of law and human rights; and economic and social development.
The Canadian government must explain to the people that we are not in Afghanistan to serve American interests or to wage war. The Prime Minister must also clearly recognize that the situation is about to become critical in southern Afghanistan and, that if nothing is done to address it, we run the risk of getting stuck there. He must acknowledge the urgency and the need for real progress in the areas of development and humanitarian aid before the summer and the next Taliban offensive.
The Prime Minister must show leadership on the world stage and convince NATO and our allies in Afghanistan to change the direction of the international intervention quickly and thoroughly, and to do more.
He should also quickly correct the deplorable way he is conducting his foreign policy. The Conservative government has alienated a number of Canada's partners on the world stage. It has done so at the worst possible time, when it should be convincing our allies to contribute more to the reconstruction of Afghanistan. Some changes are essential, and these changes are necessary and urgent. The reason for the urgency is that the situation has deteriorated since 2006, especially in the south and the east.
Between 2002 and 2005 there was some notable progress: free elections were held; the foundation for rule of law was laid; the economy grew; real progress was made in the creation of an Afghan army; there was significant mine clearance; schools and clinics were built; and infrastructure was restored. However, since the beginning of 2006, things have been spiralling out of control. There is still time to change the direction of international intervention, but it is becoming an urgent matter. We will not earn the support of the Afghan people simply by fighting the Taliban with weapons and chasing them into the mountains. I must say that the first major change that needs to happen in Afghanistan is to make clear and tangible development aid a top priority. The objectives of the international community must first and foremost be the development and reconstruction of Afghanistan and its democracy.
Since I am short on time, I will not take this any further, but these are a few of the reasons why we are voting against today's motion.