PR Nightmare on the Home Front

At nine o'clock yesterday morning, every newscast across Canada was riveted on the tragedy in Afghanistan, where a dozen of our soldiers had been killed and wounded in one of the worst military blunders of this war.

Meantime, on American TV, CNN was broadcasting a feel-good story about American Marines returning home to reunite with their loved ones. It didn't bother to mention the Canadians, killed by friendly fire from a U.S. pilot.

Thanks, guys. We're your allies. Aren't we?

George Bush didn't think to bring it up until Canadian reporters stormed him at an afternoon photo op – his fourth public appearance of the day. He explained that, after all, he'd already phoned the PM the night before.

It was a really bad day for him to forget about Canada again.

Here on the home front, the incident has flared into a PR nightmare for the government. The symbolism, for those who think we have no business being in Afghanistan, is too rich to miss. We went to help out the Americans with their war – and they used us for target practice.

"A high price to pay for American incompetence," wrote one angry citizen to the CBC, which is posting people's reactions on its Web site. "It's maddening when some stupid, trigger-happy Yankee can murder, yes murder our soldiers," wrote another. "It's time our government got our soldiers out of there and let the Americans do their own thing."

But even those who support the war effort can smell a monumental snafu.

Our troops were on a routine training exercise. They were bombed by a pilot who was convinced he was taking fire from the enemy. What was he doing there? How come no one back in air control told him they were good guys? Who failed to pass along the information? How could there be such a fatal breakdown in communications?

"Someone in the chain of command failed the troops miserably and four of Canada's finest paid for that neglect with their lives," said a Pats corporal from Vancouver.

At the very least, the "tragic misidentification," as some official called it yesterday, raises basic questions about the integration of operations (or lack of it) between the Canadians and the Americans. No wonder that the accident became an instant lightning rod for every critic of the war effort and everyone who thinks Canadian troops should not be subordinate to U.S. command. "We as Canadians need to regain control over our military to ensure the effectiveness and safety of our own," said another outraged citizen.

As everyone is reminding us, fatal accidents happen all the time in combat zones. War is complicated and dangerous. "We play with stuff that kills people," said the U.S. military spokesman yesterday.

But Canadian reactions would have been far less heated if our soldiers had been killed trying to defuse unexploded rockets (as four Americans were a few days ago) or caught in the crossfire of battle (as many friendly Afghan troops have been). Those accidents are easy to understand. This one is not.

Will we ever get the answers? Not in time to satisfy the critics. Not soon enough, either, to ease the pain of the loved ones and the comrades of the men who died. It's hard enough to come to terms with the inevitable casualties of war; very hard indeed to come to terms with the unnecessary ones, the ones that are a consequence of human error or organizational stupidity. These tragedies are inevitable too. But they hurt like hell.

Yet in all the fog of war, one thing at least is very clear. These men, Private Nathan Smith, Private Richard Green, Sergeant Marc Leger and Corporal Ainsworth Dyer, died with honour in the line of duty. Every Canadian soldier in Afghanistan knows that she or he may be required to pay the ultimate price, and these four did. We are indebted to them all for that. We owe them and their families our thanks, and our gratitude.