# Hastily trained Afghan teens to stand guard for Canadians



## Signalman150 (19 Oct 2006)

Article in yesterday's Edmonton Journal and Montreal Gazette: Shared here in accordance with the "fair dealing" provisions, Section 29, of the Copyright Act -

http://www.canada.com/montrealgazette/news/story.html?id=5787c139-42d3-4082-bbce-d7c24353da42&k=74114

*****

RENATA D'ALIESIO, CanWest News Service
Published: Tuesday, October 17, 2006 

Canadian troops building and guarding a road where six soldiers have died in 16 days will soon receive help in policing the treacherous region: local teenagers armed with AK-47s and only 10 days of training.

The new auxiliary force is being thrown together to aid with security in Kandahar province and other troubled spots in southern Afghanistan. NATO had resisted taking this route, preferring to focus on recruiting and training police officers, Canada's Colonel Gary Stafford said.

But poor recruitment and escalating attacks from insurgents have left them with little choice but to try the government's plan, he said.

"The Afghan government requested that we expedite and get individuals into high-risk areas," said Stafford, NATO's regional police adviser for southern Afghanistan.

(See the link for the rest of the article)

*****

Now, here's the problem.  I read this news article and gathered the following:

1.  These teenagers are NOT being recruited by the CF

2.  They are NOT being trained by the CF

3.  They are NOT wanted by the CF or NATO, and are being pushed into the fray by the Afghan government despite NATO misgivings.

Notwithstanding the above, this is how some "true Canadians" are reacting to this article.

http://plawiuk.blogspot.com/2006/10/children-of-war.html

http://uppercanadian.blogspot.com/2006/10/standing-on-guard-for-thee.html

This just makes me mad, and--short of throat-punching the lot of them--I can't think of a reasoned, measured response.  Yet I'm told throat-punching is considered socially unacceptable, whilst vilifying and slandering Canadian soldiers seems to be not only socially acceptable, but encouraged in Canada.


----------



## COBRA-6 (19 Oct 2006)

I don't like the use of "teens" in the article, it's just trying to stir up controversy and implies the use of child soldiers...

1. The CF employs "teens". 
2. In Afghan culture, people are considered "men" and "women" much sooner than in the west. Drawing a comparison to our standards is misleading.

The concerning issue is their training level...


----------



## Mike Baker (19 Oct 2006)

COBRA-6 said:
			
		

> I don't like the use of "teens" in the article, it's just trying to stir up controversy and implies the use of child soldiers...


Me neither. The Canadian Forces do in fact recruit teens, but as said people are considered men and women much sooner in that part of the world.


----------



## RHFC_piper (19 Oct 2006)

Interesting read.  The only thing I'd be worrying about, after being in that area, is; With the little amount of training, combined with youth, whats the risk of these recruits becoming enemies?   ???


----------



## FormerHorseGuard (19 Oct 2006)

the story makes them sound much younger then I think they  really will be.

but i think you have to remember or there some of the older men of today were teenagers fighting the former Russian Army and home country armies and won.


----------



## KevinB (19 Oct 2006)

This is VERY common in Afghanistan -- In fact I was very surprised that the CF / Cdn Gov't had not gone this route previously.

I'm not going to say its a good idea -- but its the cheapest method...


----------



## Hunter (19 Oct 2006)

COBRA-6 said:
			
		

> 1. The CF employs "teens".



My cousin went down to sign up the day after his 16th birthday, hes a MCpl now.   I would not say the CF employs child soldiers but most recruits certainly seem like kids to me...(sigh)


----------



## kratz (19 Oct 2006)

COBRA-6 said:
			
		

> 1. The CF employs "teens".



Yes a 16 or 17 year old may join the CF, "with parent's consent" into the PRes. Even with this consent there is policy in place that limits where these members may be employed. I do not have the reference at home here, but I know there is a directive which came into effect around 2002, that members under the age of consent (18 years old) shall not be deployed in operations outside of Canada. 

These restrictions appear, in my opinion, that the government is allowing people the choice to join at a reasonably early age and voluntarily receive their training over 1-2 years. This opportunity exposes the member to what is expected of them and hopefully they will chose to CT into the Reg force.


----------



## McG (19 Oct 2006)

There are too many holes in this article to discuss.  What ages are they talking about?  13 year olds?  19 year olds?  Both are teenagers, but there is still a big difference.  Additionally, it seems to me that there is no upper age limit on this auxiliary force.  It is possible that very few teenagers will be apart of this.

I believe the title's suggestion, that this force is being created to guard Canadians, is missleading.  I believe that this auxiliary to the ANP is a stop-gap due to under-manning and the time required to train actual police.  This auxiliary police force is being created to do the tasks that the ANP must but cannot do.  However, because ISAF operates with ANP, ISAF will work with these auxiliaries.  Will this force independently conduct ANP security duties, or will it augment ANP (allowing fewer full ANP on any given task but more tasks to be conducted)?

I also assume the training is being provided by the Afghan government (either through ANA or ANP).  Does NATO have any involvment?  It is implied, but not stated or explained.

I've used too much "I assume" and "I believe."  Clearly, better/more detailed reporting is required.



			
				Signalman150 said:
			
		

> This just makes me mad, and--short of throat-punching the lot of them--I can't think of a reasoned, measured response.


Maybe try posting something intelligent that points to the weakness of the arguments on the blog?  It would not have made much effort to point out that the children pictured at LE REVUE GAUCHE are Palestinian and most certainly not guarding Canadians in Afghanistan.


----------



## medaid (19 Oct 2006)

I agree... a much more indepth article with reagards to this topic is needed. Certainly...I took a double take at my paper the morning when I got them. On the front page was the BIG HUGE LETTERS saying that CF is employing teen soliders or words to that effect. I was very reluctant to take anything they said in the paper as concrete, as I'm sure many of us now have also done.

I agree with Piper...what are the chances that these new 'allies' may defect and join the other side?


----------



## COBRA-6 (19 Oct 2006)

kratz said:
			
		

> Yes a 16 or 17 year old may join the CF, "with parent's consent" into the PRes. Even with this consent there is policy in place that limits where these members may be employed. I do not have the reference at home here, but I know there is a directive which came into effect around 2002, that members under the age of consent (18 years old) shall not be deployed in operations outside of Canada.
> 
> These restrictions appear, in my opinion, that the government is allowing people the choice to join at a reasonably early age and voluntarily receive their training over 1-2 years. This opportunity exposes the member to what is expected of them and hopefully they will chose to CT into the Reg force.



I am well aware of that, but an 18 or 19 year old Canadian soldier on operations is still a "teen". My point was that the term "teen" is vague and misleading, as MCG pointed out are we talking 13 year olds or 19 year olds?


----------



## Kirkhill (19 Oct 2006)

MedTech said:
			
		

> I agree with Piper...what are the chances that these new 'allies' may defect and join the other side?



Contrariwise ..... what are the chances that these new 'allies' have already defected - from the Taliban payrolls?

From what I gather from the CDS's comments the other day the Taliban recruited/coerced locals just like these guys for the Op Medusa "defence".  Part of the reason that they were recruitable is a lack of ready cash.  One way to get them under control is to pay them more than the Taliban, give them all a rifle (I am guessing they have one already) and 30 rounds and tell them to go stand in a field and look useful.  A gun and a bit of money gives them a bit of self-respect, an opportunity to build the local economy by putting money in the family's hands and if you treat them nice they might just stay bought by the time next spring rolls around.  If not - then they only have 30 rounds in any case.


----------



## Armymedic (19 Oct 2006)

this story is BS...

they are not our police, but Afghan...and in Afghanistan a child is considered a man at 16. They are not soldiers, but police auxillary.

Nice anti war spin on this story.
Crap.


----------



## Cloud Cover (19 Oct 2006)

COBRA-6 said:
			
		

> I am well aware of that, but an 18 or 19 year old Canadian soldier on operations is still a "teen". My point was that the term "teen" is vague and misleading, as MCG pointed out are we talking 13 year olds or 19 year olds?



Either way a still a target on the 2 way range, no matter what side they are on. What really bothers me is our teenagers are killing their teenagers and vice versa, and I am quite certain our teenagers know exactly why he/she is over there doing what they are doing,(very well, I might add) while the kid with the flip flops is still trying to figure out why God put him where he is. In any event, they are all to young to die. I'm starting to think wars should be fought by 50-70 year old presidents and prime ministers who really can't figure out why they have started some of this shit before retiring and/or being turfed by their electorate.


----------



## midget-boyd91 (19 Oct 2006)

This is only my opinion.. but I think that the way to go about training the ANA should be to send them to Canada or any willing NATO nation that is willing to train them to the fullest extent before sending them into the middle of it in Afghanistan.. I guess it would be similar to the BCATP during WWII


----------



## Armymedic (19 Oct 2006)

midget-boyd91 said:
			
		

> This is only my opinion.. but I think that the way to go about training the ANA should be to send them to Canada or any willing NATO nation that is willing to train them to the fullest extent before sending them into the middle of it in Afghanistan


Nice try...

Take a group of undereducated illiterate men who never before stepping thru the gates of the Kabul Military training center even seen the 21st century, and bring them to a western G7 country to train before returning them to thier lives.....

Rrrrrrright!?!

Do you want them to ever go back?

I spent 6 months over there helping train the ANA...and dispite thier problems, the Afghans make proud and competant soldiers.


----------



## McG (19 Oct 2006)

*Note to those visiting the linked blogs: Feel free to make intelligent comments but do not troll those sites.  *


----------



## boondocksaint (19 Oct 2006)

Medical Team is right,

Most of the ANA we fought beside were reasonably well trained. Their American ETT were very proffessional and patient. They ( ANA) are very fast learners, eager, and the longer we worked with certain sections the more they tried to emulate us.  The French ETT were also very good at their jobs.


----------



## Colin Parkinson (19 Oct 2006)

Speaking of the French
I hear they are pulling their SF guys out, is it because of the deaths or our they just overstretched and need a break like most SF units?


----------



## McG (19 Oct 2006)

Colin P,
Do a search.  There is a thread on that topic.


----------



## kilekaldar (20 Oct 2006)

Okay, let's dispell some media created misinformation here. 

-The ANP auxiliary was foisted on us by the GoA when we asked for ANSF to secure the roads we're building through the Op Medusa AO.

-The ANP auxiliary is, to my knowledge, in NO WAY recruited, trained or payed by NATO or us.

-The ANP auxiliary have been in place for 2 weeks now and have shown themselves to be completely useless. We are actively trying to replace them with a more competant force. They are not wanted there by anyone on the ground.

-For a good media article on the performance of the ANP Auxiliary see 
"A typical Afghan mess ruins Canadians' day" 
JANE ARMSTRONG 
From Thursday's Globe and Mail

http://www.theglobeandmail.com/servlet/story/RTGAM.20061018.wxafghan19/BNStory/Afghanistan/home 

There's already a thread on this article here http://forums.army.ca/forums/threads/52044.0.html


----------



## 1feral1 (20 Oct 2006)

Using the word 'teen', is just a media ploy to grab readers. Typical pisss weak media tactic.

However, I will say that I would have zero competance in these moblie, portable fleshy HESCOs.

Regards,

Wes


----------



## Teflon (20 Oct 2006)

http://www.blogger.com/publish-comment.do?blogID=9558836&postID=116112227654348886&r=ok

Posted a comment on this one linked above. 

My post below



> Teflon said...
> Having read your piece I just want to rehash the fact that these "teens" (I don't know the ages of them as this activity started after my return to Canada) are hired or enlisted by the Afghan athorities, train by them (possibly with supervision of the NATO pers that are part of the Embedded Training Teams) They are paid and controlled by the Afghan Government or Provincial Goveners. The CF's envolment comes in due to the fact they are being placed in some areas in Canada's area of operation and therefore take it upon themseleves to monitor their doings and with a hope of 1. keeping them alive and 2. Since they are there, improving their performance so that they do assist in the stablization and security of the area.
> 
> Another point I would to bring up as it has been a problem in Canada and the CF for decades - often seen during our "peace keeping" in the former Yugoslavia. We in Canada (and some in the CF) have dificulty looking at an thing with anything but the Canadian perspective, overlaying our cultural values over the scene at hand - in this case "teens enlisted to fight in buffer zone!" well here in Canada you say something to that effect and everyone thinks of pimply-faced 16 years olds running around with guys getting shot up when they should be in school learning something, well in Afghanistan alot of 16 year olds already have a wife maybe a kid or two and either farms his little dirt patch or works for another on his, Manhood is reach at different ages in different cultures. Besides, We (Canada) send teens into battle over there. I had some 19 year olds serving in my platoon over there, hell I trained some of them and others to go over also and because it's what they wanted to do, they did well.
> ...


----------



## Colin Parkinson (20 Oct 2006)

MCG said:
			
		

> Colin P,
> Do a search.  There is a thread on that topic.



My Google fu must be weak a search did not turn up anything


----------



## bilton090 (20 Oct 2006)

Yet I'm told throat-punching is considered socially unacceptable, whilst vilifying and slandering Canadian soldiers seems to be not only socially acceptable, but encouraged in Canada.
         CRAP X 1000 vilifying & slandering Canadian soldiers !
          Eugene Plawiuk is a member of the Edmonton Science Fiction & Comic Arts Society , he must have smoked a big one !, & forgot where he was writing in.

  P.S: The children in the picture are in Palestinian.


----------

