The president was taken into custody after soldiers attacked the presidential palace in Niamey, the capital of the former French colony. His whereabouts are unknown.

The deposed leader had rolled back democratic gains and tried to extend his own power. Deutsche Welle reports.

A man injured by Port-au-Prince’s earthquake observes the Haitian government’s taxation building, reduced to a heap of rubble. Photo: UNPhoto

Visits to Haiti by American television cameras and images of suffering — juxtaposed with dramatic music and fancy logos or sad looks on the faces of U.S. politicians as they extend condolences — are not enough.

Sympathy is not enough.

Response to the earthquake in Haiti must be at a level the world has not seen. It is not clear that the message is getting through. Nor is it clear that Haiti will get what it deserves and needs: a new start and the equivalent of a Marshall Plan, war reparations that create a new reality in Haiti.

Already chaos makes small steps impossible. Correspondents in Port-au-Prince report despair, looting and fear of gangs.

Before the quake, the Haitian government functioned, but only thanks to occasional handouts and loans. But the poverty and squalor before last week was shattering and horrible. Now, the Haitian government is virtually obliterated. Survival for millions is at stake.

Words are not enough. Images are not enough.

The challenge for the world is to respond adequately. Neglectful and far from innocent in the progressive
erosion of institutions in Haiti, will the U.S., France and other countries step up now and bring real change?

The work of nonprofits and our individual contributions — crucial though they are — are not enough. We need to build infrastructure, empowering Haitians who are willing and able to act selflessly for the future of their country. And we need vast quantities of money and builders and planners and teachers and doctors.

Any recovery means starting from the beginning — international police and military units on the streets right away, probably led by the United States, to avoid the spread of violence. Next, infrastructure to rescue and treat people to avoid a crisis in which many more people die of injuries or lack of food and water.

Stability for Haiti will take time and endurance. Everything must now change.

- Peter Eisner

For more Worldfocus coverage of Haiti, visit our extended coverage page: Haiti’s Poor.

Asian markets droppped sharply on news of Dubai World’s restructuring.

SOUTH KOREA: A report by Moody’s investor service predicted the South Korean economy would grow around 6 percent next year, adding to growing optimism about its recovery from the global economic downturn.

PHILIPPINES: Philippine’s President Gloria Macapagal-Arroyo has authorized the suspension of government, military, and police officials in the Autonomous Region in Muslim Mindanao (ARMM) following the mass murder of at least 57 people in Maguindanao.

NAMIBIA: On Friday voting for general elections began in the southern African nation of Namibia. The ruling party, the South West Africa People’s Organization, is expected to return to power.

SUDAN: The mother of a 16-year old South Sudanese girl who was lashed 40 times for wearing what a judge deemed an indecent skirt is planning to sue both the police and the presiding judge. Silva Kashif’s mother said that not only is her daughter underage but she is also a Christian.

NIGERIA: On Thursday the Nigerian president’s doctor released a statement saying President Yar’Adua is suffering from a heart condition.

GERMANY: Germany’s former defense minister resigned from his post Friday, becoming the third German official to step down following allegations of a military cover-up regarding civilian deaths in a September air strike in Afghanistan.

IRELAND: A 720-page report commissioned by the Irish government found that at least 3 archbishops ignored complaints of child abuse dating as far back as the 1940s, choosing instead to protect priests.

BRAZIL: Brazilian President Lula said that Western nations should help pay to keep the Amazon rainforest from being deforested, saying that “gringos” have cause much more destruction in the region than small-scale farmers who cut down trees for farmland.

CUBA: Cuba prepared for what it called a possible invasion by the U.S. with its first military exercises in five years.

CHILE: More details on the murder of a popular Chilean pop singer during the early days of the country’s military dictatorship in 1973 have surfaced this week.

Muslims around the world are celebrating the start of the Islamic holiday of Eid al-Adha or the ‘Festival of Sacrifice’.

Dubai skyscapers. Photo: flickr user H4NUM4N

DUBAI: A government official in Dubai says that its intervention in the government-owned investment company Dubai World was “carefully planned.”

IRAN: The International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA) on Friday passed a new resolution against Iran. That country’s envoy to the U.N. nuclear watchdog agency warned it would cause tension.

SAUDI ARABIA: The death toll from flash floods in the city of Jeddah has risen to 83.  The city is a gateway for Muslim pilgrims headed to Mecca.

ISRAEL: Israeli newspaper Haaretz, citing Fox News,  is reporting that a deal could be reached soon between Israel and Hamas on prisoner release.

Susumu Awanohara, an expert on U.S.-Japan relations with Medley Global Advisors, joins Daljit Dhaliwal to discuss the challenges Japan’s new leadership faces and the evolving relationship between Japan and the U.S.

Read more about his experience overseas in his blog, Embedded in Afghanistan.

The wait continues for the president’s decision on General McChrystal’s recommendation. The unfortunate aspect of all of this business is that the debate is taking place in the public eye. While having a public debate on the efficacy of sending more troops certainly satisfies the exigencies of American politics, it’s most certainly not beneficial to the war effort as a whole. I say this because if the decision is made to not send more troops, or even not send as many as asked for the by the general, we will be perceived by the Afghan government, people, and security forces as abandoning them and losing our will to fight the insurgents. I can confirm that the ANA leaders I habitually talked with were always worried about our ability to stick things out and did not want to see us go anywhere until the country had progressed significantly.

Perception is an incredibly important part of any counter-insurgency, as winning the support of the people should ultimately lead to victory. I can confirm that many of the people of Afghanistan don’t really care who wins this war, just so long as someone wins it, and they can live a semblance of a normal life…i.e. the people will support the side that appears to be on the path to victory.

For these reasons, any action leading to the perception of weakness or lack of commitment on our part needs to be scrupulously avoided. It would have been better to avoid all of this public debate on the issue…unless the request is granted of course, in which case we may take some small benefit from all of this publicizing of our intentions on the matter.

The views expressed by contributing bloggers do not reflect the views of Worldfocus or its partners.

Kay Shimizu, a visiting assistant professor at Harvard University, joins Daljit Dhaliwal to discuss why the presence of 47,000 U.S. troops in Okinawa is causing controversy and why the new Japanese government may pull out its naval support of the war in Afghanistan.

SOUTH KOREA: U.S. Defense Secretary Robert Gates maintained a tough stand Wednesday against North Korea, calling its nuclear threat more lethal than ever. He said, “We do not today - nor will we ever - accept a North Korea with nuclear weapons.”

CHINA: The admiral in charge of the U.S. Pacific Command said Wednesday that U.S. intelligence estimates have underestimated China’s military abilities annually over the past decade. “They’ve grown at an unprecedented rate,” he said.

A UN investigator presented a report to the UN General Assembly on Tuesday outlining some of the worst prisons in the world. It included the West African nations of Nigeria and Togo, cited for gross human rights violations.

SOMALIA: The Somali militant group Al-Shabaab has silenced two independent radio stations in the town of Baidoa. There was no reason given for the decision.

On Thursday, the United States, along with the other permanent members of the United Nations Security Council and Germany, will meet with Iranian officials in Switzerland hoping to convince Iran to come clean about its nuclear ambitions.

They may be fighting an uphill battle. On Wednesday, Iranian President Mamhoud Ahmadinejad said that it’s the West that needs to change its ways.

Israel will be following the progress of the negotiations closely. There has been talk that the Israelis will take military action against Iran, if the talks don’t succeed.

Anthony Cordesman of the Center for Strategic and International Studies joins Martin Savidge to discuss whether an Israeli air strike against Iran’s facilities would even be effective. Read his opinion piece in The Wall Street Journal.

If the talks in Switzerland fail, would Israel be justified in attacking Iran’s nuclear facilities?

Tell us what you think in the comments section below. Please remember to be respectful and on-point in your comments. Malicious or offensive comments will be deleted and repeat offenders will be banned.

Worldfocus special correspondent Martin Himel reports from Israel.

For more:

• Read Martin Himel’s blog: Heroes, Hollywood and making it through the day
• Read commentary from a Jerusalem film scholar: Israeli cinema: Growing up

Conakry residents load a minibus. Flickr photo: martapiqs under a Creative Commons license.

Almost one year after a bloodless coup in December 2008 — during which Captain Moussa Dadis Camara took power several hours after the death of Guinea’s 24-year leader — violence has begun to rock the West African nation’s capital city of Conakry.

The regime’s forces stormed a political rally held on Monday at a football stadium and dispersed the crowd of some 50,000 using tear gas and gunshots. Human rights groups have called for security forces to halt its violent crackdown on political dissidents.

The authoritarian military ruler had pledged to restore civilian rule 60 days after seizing power, but elections have been delayed until 2010.

Protesters are demonstrating against Captain Camara’s presumed candidacy in the elections. A recent announcement proclaimed that the current ruling military council also intends to run.

Human Rights Watch quotes one witness describing the actions of security personnel:

I saw the Red Berets [an elite unit within the military] catch some of the women who were trying to flee, rip off their clothes, and stick their hands in their private parts. Others beat the women, including on their genitals. It was pathetic –- the women were crying out.

Blogger Konngol Afirik (translated here from the original French) also blames the elite Red Beret units for the violence:

Though the junta banned all demonstrations, the “Forces Vives” decided to have it anyway…The Red Berets are known for blind cruelty. Most of the dead and wounded fell at the hands of this elite unit better equipped and paid than the regular army…

Two of the main opposition leaders, Cellou Dalein Diallo and Sydia Toure, are among the wounded. Once again, the African Union and CEDEAO and their international partners are revealed as ineffective against this putsch leader, who is ready to walk on corpses to remain in power.

Worldfocus contributing blogger Ethan Zuckerman writes in his blog, My heart’s in Accra, that the African Union, which refuses to recognize military governments, should encourage Guinea to hold elections as soon as possible:

What’s been interesting for me, in the short term, is watching the few comments mentioning #Guinea on Twitter are focusing on media coverage. Nasser Weddady, outreach director for HAMSA [Hands Across the Mideast Support Alliance], offered this tweet a couple of hours ago: “In plain English: screw #Polanski, I am more interested in what’s happening in #Guinea than that fugitive pervert.” It’s been retweeted several times, reflecting either a frustration at media coverage, or simply that lack of any other news out of Guinea at this point…

How Guinea could have emerged as a major power based on its (bauxite) mineral wealth is a sad, familiar, important and insufficiently understood story.

- Ben Piven

They discuss the U.S. offensive in Afghanistan, the American pullback in Iraq and unrest in Honduras following a military coup.

Ousted Honduran President José Manuel Zelaya.

What’s your take on democracy? Time to think about it a bit after reading this front-page headline in the New York Times today:

Honduran Army Ousts President Allied to Chavez

The elected president of Honduras, José Manuel Zelaya, was deposed on Sunday by that country’s armed forces, one of the first military coups in Latin America in more than a decade.

Part of the answer lies in our own prejudices and subliminal responses to the words. If Zelaya is an ally of Venezuelan President Hugo Chavez, should we be happy, unhappy or neutral? And in terms of democratic principles, should the United States be supporting the deposed president or pleased that his absolutist policies have been derailed?

Zelaya won the Honduran presidency in a tight — but fair — election more than three years ago, and, like Chavez, was trying to tinker with rules that bar presidents from serving more than one term. Chavez, who was also elected by a popular majority, has progressively gathered up power, weakening his country’s legislative and judicial branches. Using various populist techniques and the bully pulpit of the presidents, Chavez has won approval for his actions through national referendums.

For his part, Zelaya was trundled off to the airport on Sunday, and declared from Costa Rica, still in his pajamas, that his ouster was illegal: “I am the president of Honduras.”

The United States, governments throughout the hemisphere and Europe have condemned the coup and say they support Zelaya’s return to office. That hasn’t stopped Chavez from decrying “oligarchs” who should be opposed by force.

One last question: Has U.S. policy been steadfast in supporting election results? Answer: No. Consider the case of Guatemala in 1954, when the CIA engineered the overthrow of a democratically-elected government deemed to be leaning the wrong direction; Chile in 1973, when the United States applied economic sanctions, and U.S. officials supported and aided a coup against the democratically elected president, Salvador Allende, a Socialist. Or further afield, but more recently, when Hamas won democratic elections in Palestine in 2006, the United States sided with Israel and imposed economic sanctions.

Are there limits to supporting the will of the people? Or is the pragmatic solution in dealing with foreign policy questions more complicated than a knee-jerk ideological response? Consider this, then, a vote for critical thinking.

- Peter Eisner

Photo courtesy of Flickr user Presidencia de la República del Ecuador under a Creative Commons license.

British and Canadian soldiers meet with their Afghan counterparts.

The marine brushing his teeth at the basin next to me was carrying his M-16 cross chest on his back. The gun stared right at my limbs. I rinsed my face and as I looked up, another soldier appeared to my right. He raised his arm to brush his teeth and his revolver peeked out of the case under his arm. I thought to myself, Where else in the world could I be rinsing my face in the presence of two no-bulls**t guys armed with weapons, and still be able to get out alive?

Call me stupid, but I might very well be on the safest place on earth right now.

At the base, it’s easy to witness a life far from the war. Sure, there are faces overrun by emotions — some who’ve lost their friends, some who’d just landed in a bizarre desert so far from home and some who’d seen it all and were ready to face it all. But these same fingers that are ready to pull the trigger are also seen scrolling their iPods, playing fussball, holding a non-alcoholic Beck’s or even swinging away their guitars.

Like any other profession, the soldiers here make it clear that to produce results, you have to stay sane. If anything is different, it’s how they choose to absorb that sanity.

My personal favorites are the bathroom doors. It almost seems like the first person updates their Facebook status and a serpent of comments follow it. The one that immediately comes to mind is from this morning. Someone started, “Chuck Norris is a coward.” Here is what followed:

[...]When Chuck does a push up, he doesn’t push himself up, he pushes the world down.

When the soldiers are not chatting about Chuck Norris in the “ablution room,” they go to one of the refreshment houses — and most member countries have one of these club-like lounges for their troops, where you can get everything from a haircut to a non-alcoholic beer to a ping pong table. The other lively place is known as the “Board Walk,” a mini version of a stadium, built with wooden planks. Inside, local Afghanis set up shops to sell paintings, arts and crafts.

But the best entertainment for some of these soldiers is us, the journalists. I could hardly claim a good sense of humor, but some of the Canadian journalists down here are hilarious. Immediately after finishing a briefing today, where we were told that the Afghan National Army and the Security Forces had a successful operation in Salavat, a fellow journalist offered a tactic to lure the Taliban next time around.

“Call the pizza place and tell them to deliver it to the Talibans,” he said. “We could call them Pie-EDs.”

- Anup Kaphle

Photo courtesy of Flickr user lafrancevi under a Creative Commons license.

Russia’s military is undergoing reform.

Russian President Vladimir Medvedev has begun a massive reform of the country’s military, with plans to cut Russia’s officer corps from 355,000 to 150,000, including some 36,000 cuts this year. Several top officials were let go in the past month, including the chief of Russia’s military intelligence unit.

The changes have been met with resistance from top military officers who say Russia is not fulfilling its promises, including pledges to provide housing for retirees. While some say reforms will strengthen the military, critics say they will hasten its decline. 

The global economic crisis willy likely make life difficult for those officers who are discharged, and may additionally put a damper on Russia’s $200 billion rearmament program.

The “Kings of War” blog praises the reforms: 

In this case, the significant point is that Russia may finally be addressing its core dysfunction which is its maladapted, top-heavy, corrupt and brutal personnel system. If this is the case then it is the most significant development in Russian military reform since 1991.

[...]I am glad to see these developments. The world is a much safer place with the Russian military not being just an overstuffed army of underpaid and unrespected officers and beaten-up low-quality conscripts haunted by the shadow if its past glory.

A blogger at “Venik” argues that the government has not adequately taken the economic crisis into account: 

Regardless of the specifics behind the military reform plans, it is extremely shortsighted of the Kremlin to push on with this project without making any adjustments to the schedule in light of the financial crisis. All previous attempts in the past twenty years to reform Russia’s military lasted long enough to disrupt and dismantle, at which point they ran out of funding. There is a real possibility that this latest reform will follow the same dynamic.

The “Pragmatic Euphony” blog agrees, writing that reforms would have been more successful years ago: 

The Russian economy is slackening and while that is perhaps a good reason for Moscow to downsize the Soviet-era armed forces, it also makes the transition even more painful for those left rendered homeless and jobless by this restructuring. In hindsight, it can be safely said that if a similar exercise had been undertaken a couple of years back — when the oil-fuelled Russian economy was booming — it would have caused lesser heartburn. And the adverse social and political fallouts could have been contained in a more peaceful manner.

The “Vineyard of the Saker” blog criticizes Russia for heavy cuts of the GRU intelligence unit: 

This is a potential disaster for Russia. The fact is that if a military is reduced in size or substantially reorganized, its intelligence component must be *strengthened* and not weakened. Simply put, the need for a high quality military intelligence service is inversely proportional to the capabilities of the armed forces: the weaker these forces are, the stronger the military intelligence must be.

While the wars in Chechnya and in Georgia have shown that while the Russian military can prevail - brilliantly in the case of Georgia - there still a dire need to reform these forces before the existing cracks in organization, training, command and control, etc. become insurmountable. The Air Force, for example, is now in truly urgent need of new aircraft and the Ground Forces need a major upgrade of its aging command and control infrastructure. 

If the Kremlin is serious about reforming the military then it simply cannot do that while allowing the GRU and the forces subordinated to the GRU to become the victim of a purge. 

Photo courtesy of Flickr user Javier D. under a Creative Commons license.

The Georgian government initially blamed the mutiny on Russia, saying they are trying to disrupt NATO exercises in Georgia set to begin on Wednesday. 

Lincoln Mitchell, a professor at Columbia University’s School of International and Public Afairs, joins Martin Savidge to discuss the significance of the events to Georgian and international politics and how they may relate to NATO exercises.

Ecuadorian President Rafael Correa decided not to renew an agreement allowing the U.S. to use an air base in Manta.

After Ecuadorian President Rafael Correa decided not to renew an agreement allowing the U.S. to use an air base in Manta – the only U.S. base in South America for anti-drug flights – speculation has swirled as to where in the region the U.S. will move.

The U.S. is reportedly considering moving its operations from Ecuador to Colombia.

Anastasia Moloney is a British freelance journalist based in the Colombian capital, Bogotá. She writes at “World Politics Review“ about the mixed reactions in Colombia.

U.S. Air Base Thorny Issue for Colombia

With a U.S military air base in the Ecuadorian coastal city of Manta scheduled to be shut down later this year, it looks increasingly likely that Colombia will step in as a new host for U.S. military assets in the region.

Newly re-elected Ecuadorian President Rafael Correa has refused to renew Washington’s decade-long lease when it expires in November, arguing that the presence of U.S troops undermines the country’s sovereignty.

With Washington looking for a new hub for its counternarcotics operations in Latin America, speculation has been rife in recent months about Colombia’s possible role once the Manta base is closed. In addition to its strategic location, Colombia is a staunch U.S ally and the largest recipient of U.S aid in Latin America, making it the obvious choice for the U.S’s most important air base in the region.

But the potential move has raised controversy in Bogotá, and threatens to strain already fraught relations with Colombia’s neighbors, Venezuela and Ecuador.

As a result, the Colombian government’s stance on the relocation of the Manta base to Colombian soil has been unclear and contradictory. Last year, Colombian President Álvaro Uribe appeared to leave the door open for the possibility of a new U.S. military base in the Andean nation. “All that we [Colombia] can do to strengthen the help of the U.S. so that we can defeat drug trafficking, we’ll keep on doing,” he said.

Several months later, though, Colombian Foreign Minister Jaime Bermúdez said that while Colombia wants to “strengthen cooperation with the U.S. in the fight against drug trafficking,” there would be no new U.S. military bases in Colombia.

Colombia’s top military chief, Gen. Freddy Padilla, further clarified the nature of that “cooperation” earlier this month, when he revealed that discussions between the two countries were underway that could allow the U.S. military to use certain Colombian airports and existing military bases for logistical support, maintenance and technical needs.

This was recently reiterated by Colombia’s defense minister, Juan Manuel Santos, who said that facilities in some of the country’s military bases could be “extended” for U.S. military use.

Meanwhile, earlier this month, the U.S. ambassador to Colombia, William Broomfield, said that collaboration between the two nations in battling drugs “requires access to installations between the two countries.” Broomfield added that access regulations “should be adjusted,” but reiterated that the Colombians would remain in charge of their bases, which would continue to fly the Colombian flag.

All this suggests that the U.S. is seeking a deal that would give Washington privileged access to several Colombian bases across the country, and that Bogotá is likely to acquiesce. Washington will almost certainly be eyeing the large and well-equipped Palanquero air base, some 125 miles north of Bogotá, as a launchpad for its counternarcotics operations.

But if the Colombian government is adamant that transferring U.S. military hardware from Manta does not constitute establishing a U.S. military base in Colombia, others argue that shipping the U.S. fleet of E-3 AWACS and P-3 spy planes from Manta to Colombia would in practice convert Colombian military bases into de facto U.S. military bases.

To read more, see the original post.

Photo courtesy of Flickr user Presidencia de la República del Ecuador under a Creative Commons license.

Russian flexed its military muscles with Georgia in 2008. Photo: Onnik Krikorian under a Creative Commons license.

Russia announced a broad plan to rearm and modernize its army and navy on Tuesday.

While Russia and the U.S. have been taking some first steps toward improving relations under President Obama, the prospects of an expanding NATO and a possible U.S. missile defense system have the Russians on edge.

Russian President Dmitry Medvedev said his country would improve the combat readiness of its forces beginning two years from now — first and foremost its long-range nuclear weapons — adding that despite the economic crisis, Russia has the resources to modernize its military.

The “Proliferation Press” blog points to several varying media reactions to the announcment, concluding that the meaning of Russia’s decision will become more clear but that the U.S. should tread carefully:

The NYTimes portrays it as a mix of diplomatic posturing for Medvedev’s meeting with Obama and the response to Russian military weaknesses shown in the recent Georgia-Russian war. The Guardian heralds the new arms race, putting blame squarely on America’s maximalist foreign policy. And Canda.com views the announcement as geared more towards the Russian public.

In short, the move is not welcome news—but it’s not entirely unexpected. And its meaning will take form over this year. Medvedev has drawn various lines in the sand: moves towards having airbases in Cuba, setting up bases in South Ossetia and Abkhazia, helping rid of an American base in Kyrgyzstan, and now a rearmament announcement. Keep in mind, Russia has for years protested expansion of NATO in Eastern Europe–and drew a bloodly red line in Georgia.

And let’s not ignore another possible cause of this announcement: the economic crisis. Russia may be signaling that current economic woes will not change their strategic objectives.

But one thing is clear: The US-Russian relationship is entering a critical phase, and the Obama administration must tread carefully.

Welsh blogger Alan Davies argues that the move will provoke a response from the West and lead to further conflict:

This is in response to what is seen as NATO expansionism and also to a poor ground force performance in Georgia. Whatever the reason, it is potentially destabilising as there will no doubt be a counter response from the West. Then instead of focusing the power of East and West on addressing fundamentalism we will face a new arms race which will fail to address the greatest threat to the globe at the moment.

The “Totalitarianism Today” blog downplays the level of threat, giving several reasons why Russia might have made the decision to rearm:

Russian rearmament needn’t be perceived solely with the Cold War interpretive lens. In fact, there are many possible reasons for Russian rearmament which should be entertained in the current multipolar world, as Russia’s perception of security threats has expanded to include more than “capitalist encirclement”. A few considerations which might also have played into the decision to rearm:

> Rearmament has been traditionally used to deal with economic slumps by governments who subscribe to supply-side theories of economics. The US under Reagan and Bush is a classic example.

> A generalized declaration of rearmament provides Russia with leverage vis-a-vis the United States and other allies on smaller matters, like the question of Viktor Bout’s extradition and the issue of the Nabucco oil plans which challenge Russia’s own South Steam plans.

> Russia is working on establishing a career military which will make national service appealing and honorable to its citizens. Increasing military spending could be associated with such an endeavor, especially given the Russian forthrightness about modernizing its military.

> The Russian government seems to be attempting to forge a more cohesive, powerful national history narrative which minimizes the negative effects of historically powerful leaders like Stalin. Such an attempt is consistent with an effort to increase national identity and solidarity in a multipolar world.

> The EU’s recent actions undermine a Russian bid for great power status, so the Russian government feels the need to continuously reassert its relevance vis-a-vis European states and its neighbors.

> The Russian government is aware of American desire to build a stronger relationship, so it can afford to rearm without immediate economic or military consequences. The fear of a “slide into hostility” animates the Obama administration’s Russia policy.

The next few weeks will provide a richer context in which to understand the Russian decisions to rearm. In the meantime, everyone should sit back, take a few deep breaths.

Soldiers gather for a briefing in Estonia’s snowy woods. Photo: Sally Garner

Producer Sally Garner is reporting from Estonia and writes from a military base about the newly-independent country’s contribution to the war in Afghanistan.

This newly-independent former Soviet Republic takes its freedom very seriously. Proud of its membership in NATO and its friendship with the United States, Estonia is among the most committed of all the countries willing to send soldiers to Iraq and Afghanistan.

In 2002, Estonia — a country with fewer than 1.5 million people — sent its first soldiers to stand alongside the United States in the war on al-Qaeda and the Taliban. In 2003, Estonia signed on as one of the original members of the so-called “coalition of the willing” to fight the war in Iraq.

That may not sound newsworthy until you realize that this tiny country had no army until 1994 when Soviet troops finally left. As one army officer said, “We started from scratch.”

We saw this first generation of Estonian troops training for international missions on what used to be a Soviet military base not far from the town of Paldiski, about 50 miles from the capital city of Tallinn. Thirty young soldiers got their briefing in the snowy woods before tackling a tough lesson on searching for suspected Taliban fighters and weapons.

A soldier trains in Estonia’s fierce winter weather. Photo: Sally Garner

After scoping out possible approaches, they drove their armored personnel carriers up to abandoned Soviet barracks, a perfect training ground for soldiers learning how to maneuver in Afghan villages and towns. Perfect — except for the weather which is the complete opposite of the heat and dust they’ll experience during their upcoming summer tour of duty.

It’s an amazing sight to see. And what makes this a story that producer and cameraman Ara Ayer and I won’t forget is the discovery that many of these soldiers’ fathers were forced to serve in the Soviet Army during its long and disastrous invasion of Afghanistan in the 1980s.

But these Estonian troops aren’t really interested in history. They’re focused on their country’s future and value their international service for the combat experience they can’t get in their very young country. As one lieutenant told us, “We always need to be ready for any enemy who wants to take our freedom away.”

- Sally Garner

Watch for Worldfocus’ upcoming series exploring the Baltics in the coming weeks.

Three more Canadian soldiers were killed in Kandahar bringing the number of dead Canadian soldiers to 111 — a relatively high casualty rate given the size of Canada’s troop presence in Afghanistan.

Canadian troops have served alongside Americans and others in Afghanistan, with 2,700 currently posted primarily in Kandahar. See our Timeline: Canada in Afghanistan’s war zone (below).

But while some in the U.S. have labeled the war in Afghanistan “the right war,” the conflict has been a source of strong debate in Canada, amid concerns that Canada has abandoned a more traditional peacekeeping role. The combat in Afghanistan represents some of the most intense fighting Canadian forces have seen in decades, since the country fought in Korea.

Canada is scheduled to withdraw from Afghanistan by 2011, and about 65 percent of Canadians support the planned withdrawal.

Worldfocus.org’s weekly radio show explored Canada’s role in Afghanistan and the debate over Canada’s role in peacemaking versus peacekeeping.

Worldfocus anchor Martin Savidge hosted a panel of guests:

Nipa Banerjee worked for the Canadian International Development Agency for 33 years, heading aid efforts in Afghanistan from 2003 to 2006 and working in a number of other countries. Her research interests include reconstruction, development and aid effectiveness in post-conflict countries, with a special focus on Afghanistan, where she travels frequently. She is currently a professor at the University of Ottawa.

Terry Glavin is a freelance journalist, who recently spent a month reporting in Afghanistan. He is a co-founder of the Canada-Afghanistan Solidarity Committee, a multi-partisan group of Canadians dedicated to solidarity with the Afghan people. He is the editor of Transmontanus Books in Vancouver, and is an adjunct professor of creative writing at the University of British Columbia.

Ron Hoffmann is Canada’s Ambassador to Afghanistan. Prior to his appointment as ambassador in Sept. 2008, he was deputy head of mission at the Embassy of Canada in Kabul. He has also served abroad in The Hague, Johannesburg, Beijing and London.

Below, explore a timeline of Canada’s involvement in Afghanistan by scrolling or pressing the play button. Also, click on the “video” icons to view scenes from on the ground.

Credits:
Host: Martin Savidge
Producers: Lisa Biagiotti, Katie Combs and Stephen Puschel

Canadian troops have served alongside Americans and others in Afghanistan for years, with 2,700 currently posted primarily in Kandahar.

The combat Afghanistan represents the most intense fighting Canadian forces have seen in decades, since the country fought in Korea. Since 2001, 111 Canadian soldiers have lost their lives in Afghanistan — a higher casualty rate than other international forces given the size of Canada’s force.

Canada is scheduled to withdraw its combat troops by 2011, a plan supported by about 65 percent of Canadians. The government estimates that the Afghanistan mission could cost $18.1 billion by 2011, or $1500 per Canadian household.

Below, explore a timeline of Canada’s involvement in Afghanistan by scrolling or pressing the play button. Also, click on the “video” icons to view scenes from on the ground.

Photos courtesy of Flickr users under a Creative Commons license. Footage courtesy of Canadian Forces Combat Camera.