"We've got to see a state where the Afghan government can handle its own day-to-day security"
About this Quote
A sentence like this is the politician's version of a clean exit strategy: it sounds modest, technical, almost managerial, while carrying the freight of an entire war. Harper frames the goal as "day-to-day security" not victory, not democracy, not justice - a deliberately narrowed benchmark that lowers the rhetorical bar and raises the odds of declaring progress. It's less a promise of transformation than a standard for withdrawal that can be measured in briefings and talking points.
The intent is diplomatic realism with a domestic audience in mind. Canada, like other NATO partners, needed a rationale for staying engaged in Afghanistan without signing up for endless nation-building. "We've got to see a state" is cautious and conditional, the language of someone avoiding a hard deadline while still signaling urgency. It creates the impression of firmness ("got to") without committing to how long "see" will take or what happens if the benchmark never arrives.
The subtext is burden-shifting. By centering Afghan capacity, Harper moves responsibility - and eventual blame - onto the Afghan government: if things collapse later, the story becomes failure to "handle" rather than failure to design a workable mission. In the post-9/11 era, this was the coalition's favorite moral compromise: help, train, support, then insist sovereignty requires stepping back.
Context matters: Afghanistan had become a proving ground for Western credibility and a sinkhole of public patience. This line tries to reconcile both. It sells a future where leaving is not abandonment but graduation, even if everyone suspects the diploma might be printed early.
The intent is diplomatic realism with a domestic audience in mind. Canada, like other NATO partners, needed a rationale for staying engaged in Afghanistan without signing up for endless nation-building. "We've got to see a state" is cautious and conditional, the language of someone avoiding a hard deadline while still signaling urgency. It creates the impression of firmness ("got to") without committing to how long "see" will take or what happens if the benchmark never arrives.
The subtext is burden-shifting. By centering Afghan capacity, Harper moves responsibility - and eventual blame - onto the Afghan government: if things collapse later, the story becomes failure to "handle" rather than failure to design a workable mission. In the post-9/11 era, this was the coalition's favorite moral compromise: help, train, support, then insist sovereignty requires stepping back.
Context matters: Afghanistan had become a proving ground for Western credibility and a sinkhole of public patience. This line tries to reconcile both. It sells a future where leaving is not abandonment but graduation, even if everyone suspects the diploma might be printed early.
Quote Details
| Topic | War |
|---|
More Quotes by Stephen
Add to List
