Afghanistan 2.0

President Obama was in Ottawa this week for a very short visit. He met with the Governor General, Prime Minister Harper and the leader of the opposition, Michael Ignatieff. The question on everyone’s mind (okay, maybe just mine) is: what did they say about Afghanistan?

Canada is expected to draw down its mission in Afghanistan by 2011, which means that the actual end of operations will likely be much sooner, given the amount of equipment that will need to be out of the country to meet the Government’s stated close of business deadline.

However, the U.S. is getting ready to launch a surge of soldiers into Afghanistan – and Canada is getting ready to leave. Personally, I don’t think that’s actually going to happen. I think we can expect a new commitment from Canada to stay in Afghanistan past 2011, and it will likely come after the next election, which by my clock is due sometime between June and September.

Operational Stress Disorder and the Canadian Forces

The Canadian mission in Afghanistan has raised some rather serious and disturbing questions about whether or not Canadian soldiers are getting the appropriate mental health care upon return from combat duty. Operational stress injuries can include anxiety disorder, disordered sleeping, substance abuse, post-traumatic stress disorder, and depression, to name just a few. This is a poorly understood field, and one that receives significantly less attention that other forms of combat injury. The office of the Ombudsman recommended in 2002 a variety of measures to be taken, the status of which remain unknown. In the US, incidents of operational stress injury have been linked to domestic violence and murder.

As a former member of the Canadian Forces, it was my experience that mental health issues were not tackled adequately. Where physical injuries received exceptional support (within the confines of the Canadian medical system), mental health issues were marginalized, downplayed, or outright ignored. Significant work needs to be done to give soldiers access to mental health resources, and to de-stigmatize mental health issues within the Canadian Forces.

However, without significant research into this area, there will be little traditional mental health care workers will be able to do. Mental health is a much neglected and marginalized field of study, and combine it with military operations, and it becomes a serious subspecialty. As more Canadian soldiers return from active combat, I sincerely hope that we don’t see an increase in domestic violence and other manifestations of operational stress injury, but I suspect that will, in fact, be the case. Is Canada prepared to deal with it?

27 June 2009 Update: It looks like the Globe and Mail has picked up on this, and that the CF will at least pretend to do something about it.

How times change….

You know the economic crisis is getting pretty weird when Fidel Castro criticizes Barak Obama’s trade policies, calling them protectionist. Like that’s a bad thing. Weird, right?

Here’s the link to the column in Spanish.

So the question is: if the embargo were lifted tomorrow, what kind of trade model would Cuba embrace?

Short-term fixes for long-term pain

The bill passed in the HoR bans the purchase of most foreign steel and iron used in infrastructure projects. The US will be investing in major infrastructure projects once the next phase of the stimulus package is released. What will this mean for the US and for its trading partners, and for the international economy?

For the US, it will mean an increase in US steel and iron purchased, but it won’t be in a competitive market. As a result, US iron & steel companies will have a significant market advantage. For many economists, this means that those companies will become structurally uncompetitive, as they won’t have to undergo the same rigorous competition as others. When the US eventually opens its market again (as it most likely will), those companies will be seriously disadvantaged, even if they’ve survived in the short-to-medium term, something many other companies will not have. (US infrastructure projects may also become more expensive, since the projects won’t be paying competitive, market-rates for their raw goods.)

In terms of international prices for steel and iron, we can expect them to decrease, making other countries’ infrastructure projects more affordable. While many companies will suffer because of the lack access to the US market, many will survive. These companies will be efficient, having weathered a very tough time, and very competitive.

In the long run, preferential treatment to US companies will create inefficiencies in the system, and delay the US’ transition to the new economy.