A Renewed Mission Post-2011?

Leaders, pundits and analysts from across the political spectrum seem to be having an accidental meeting of the minds when it comes to a renewed mission for Afghanistan post-2011. Is this really gaining momentum? It certainly seems that way.

First, we have Conservative Senator Hugh Segal:

Segal commended Harper for staying true to the 2008 parliamentary motion that set the 2011 end-date for the military mission. But what’s needed now is “vision and renewed commitment” to the country and the international effort.

This is the time to examine all possible Canadian contributions to the Afghan mission, not to close the door on allies the country has been fighting beside for nearly a decade, Segal said.

“I’m making the case for consideration … that it’s wrong for all Canadians to withdraw, it’s wrong for us to only have a civilian presence, because who’s going to provide security for them?” he said in an interview.

Then, we have federal Liberal leader Michael Ignatieff:

"We have invested massively in Afghanistan," he said in a TV interview this week. "We have left brave men and women behind. We think that there is a justification for some continued mission in Afghanistan after 2011."

And next, we have the Toronto Star editorial board:

These are important questions. They ought not to be decided behind closed doors. Rather, they should be subject to full public debate, with parliamentary hearings, before irrevocable decisions are made.

These are glad tidings after a long and dispiriting silence. The nation appears to be waking up. Just in time, too.