Yesterday two Swedish soldiers + a local interpreter were killed in Afghanistan. It's horrible, yes, but when a country sends any type of soldiers (including peacekeepers) to a war zone, everyone involved must be aware of the consequences. The big question, however, is what the soldiers (not only the Swedes but the Finns as well) are doing there in the first place?
Aren't peacekeepers supposed to maintain peace? How can peace be maintained in an area suffering from war? Please correct me if I'm wrong, but isn't peace achieved after the war has finished?
And why Afghanistan? How do the Nordic countries justify sending soldiers to a country (in war) that far away? Fighting for NATO? Well, in that case it might be a good idea to join the alliance first (something that, at least in Finland, the majority of the population opposes). Promoting human rights? Somehow it feels that combining human rights and war is a somewhat tricky entreprise. Does anyone remember Iraq? They should not be imposed on unwilling subjects. Democracy cannot be forced upon anyone, it's something that must come from within the population itself. Instead the enlightened western countries could consider supporting local grassroot movements and supporters of democracy. They could also try something called diplomacy.
7 comments:
amen! could have not said it better myself :)
I completely agree with you and with the previous comment.
Excellent.
I think its great that we(sweden) send ppl down to help out. But... mayne we should just look the other way....???
You think that all ppl who isnt from afganistan shouldt be there? that they can solw there problem by them self?
Shouldnt we send help to Haiti to?
Pardon my english, but I feelt like I hade so say what I think about all this.
In Sweden this killed soldiers are heros, who worked for peace.
/Tina
Thank you all for your comments.
Tina: thank you for commenting and your English is very good. It's always nice to hear from people who disagree :D
First of all, war is always a terrible thing, and so are natural disasters.
The reasons I don't like "us" sending soldiers to Afghanistan are the following:
1) This is a war that has been going on for almost a decade, with roots in the war that the Soviet Union started but was unable to win. It's not the first time Afghanistan is "causing problems" for foreign armies. I dare say that no war, be it against foreign enemies or your own people, will be positive for the society in question. It is more likely that these wars have increased suffering among the Afghani people and further worsened the internal situation.
2) Western countries tend to have a strange way of deciding which conflicts they want to participate in. Does Darfur ring a bell? Or Rwanda? In my opinion you either help everyone or nobody. And when you do, you do it properly. It seems quite evident that they pick their fights according to national interests; human suffering has very little to do with it. Do we really know WHY they are there? Hopping along with the war on terrorism will only fuel the hatred that some people feel for the west. Is anyone actually interested in solving the internal conflict in Afghanistan?
3) What I have heard about the Finnish soldiers in the country, their main task is related to peacekeeping (as far as I have understood, the Nordic troops are working together). As I commented in the post, peacekeeping is de facto impossible in the middle of raging war. Peacebuilding might be a better term, but I really cannot see how it would work when other western countries are waging war. How can the Swedes and the Finns be working for peace if they are part of an INVASION of a foreign country?
A natural disaster (Haiti) and the support of a military invasion are two completely different things. In the first case, the aid is aimed to improve the situation in the country and it is quite likely that the situation will indeed be improved, whereas a military invasion of this kind is often based on some dubious economic, geopolitical and maybe also religious motives.
I have never said that we should look the other way, only that there are better ways to do it. I think it's very sad that these men died, but tell me, what did they die for exactly: their country (if so, what will Sweden gain from winning this war?)? US interests? A bright future world? The peace that Afghanistan hasn't seen since 1979? Western ideals that might not fit the Afghan society at all?
Viisautta!!!
Malla: no en tiedä onko se viisautta vai ihan vaan maalaisjärkeä..
THE SOLDIER
God and the Soldier, we adore,
In time of danger, not before.
The danger passed and all things righted,
God is forgotten and the Soldier slighted.
Post a Comment