On rubber stamps

Following up on this post and the comments on it, let's go into a bit more detail about what yesterday's Afghanistan vote means for the Libs (not to mention the Bloc, though I'll focus on the Libs since they were already the party responsible for the Cons' Afghanistan extension).

For all the valid criticisms that exist about the Afghanistan mission and how the Cons have handled it, the Libs have bizarrely chosen to offer their unanimous support to continuing the status quo. While the Libs looked hypocritical enough in criticizing parts of the war which started while they were in power, they'll look even more ridiculous now that they've specifically approved of how the Cons are running it. And that goes doubly since it was the Libs themselves who chose their wording, and can thus be taken to task for what they needlessly included and left out.

For example, there's plenty of need to worry about whether Gordon O'Connor has anywhere near the basic honesty and competence that should be demanded of anyone responsible for the lives of Canadian troops. But the Libs have voted in favour of leaving the mission in his hands - and they've done so unanimously.

There's a genuine need for concern that Canadian troops may bear responsibility for war crimes or torture thanks to the Cons' neglect and/or incompetence. But the Libs have voted in principle to continue the situation which leads to those concerns - and they've done so without any safeguards.

And the Libs have talked for quite some time about the need to rebalance the mission. But they've now voted for two more years without an iota of change on the military side of the ledger - and they've done so of their own motion.

All this is bad enough for the Libs now. But even to the extent they think they've won cheap political points against the NDP in the short term, any gains are virtually certain to be wiped out in the very near future.

After all, does anybody think we'll get through the next two years without another motion going before the House of Commons which corrects everything the Libs ignored in theirs? It's virtually certain that a motion will indeed pass to end the mission (presumably with wording to the effect of "withdrawal no later than February 2009") - while the Libs will be on the hook, without exception, as having voted for whatever Harper does over the next two years.

Which means that every time there's a casualty in Southern Afghanistan, whether among Canadian troops or Afghan civilians...and every time the effect of the Cons' incompetence is to breach international law or make new enemies for Canada...the Libs have offered their endorsement - unanimously, without safeguards, and of their own motion.

And if the Libs really think they're better off ceding all that ground in order to argue over how far down the road to keep allowing the carnage, then there's just one more reason to doubt their judgment on Afghanistan and in general.