Two Afghan women walk past a graveyard on the outskirts of Kabul
DUSHANBE – An article in the Globe and Mail today reports that Canada’s military has paid up to $9,000 to families of local Afghans killed in “friendly fire” incidents without, the headling stresses, admitting liability. Online trolls who pass their time commenting on newspaper stories have once again largely lived up to their reputation for brain damage by decrying the payments for all sorts of imaginary reasons.
Fact is, paying families when you’ve accidentally killed a loved one is exactly the right thing to do, for numerous reasons.
It’s culturally sensitive. This is a normal practice in Afghanistan where, after someone is killed, the family may choose to a) seek vengeance from the transgressor or b) accept the transgressor’s expression of remorse and offer forgiveness. When the death was unintentional, the wise transgressor will express his grief and offer his remorse — demonstrated by an appropriate offer of payment.
Afghanistan is not Canada. As obvious as that statement sounds, it amazes me how it completely escapes so many “people who preach” — whether online underwear opinionists, professional politicians or media pundits. Few Afghans have life insurance. When someone dies, the family suffers not only the horrific emotional loss that accompanies every death, but also a very real economic blow. They lose a lifetime of income and support. By offering payment as part of an expression of remorse, Afghans recognize the very real burden that death imposes on the family — and, they offer to share some of that burden which they, albeit inadvertently, helped create.
When Canadian soldiers express remorse at the loss of innocent life and offer compensatory payment, they are adhering to Afghan culture and respecting the local population. “Liability” may be, I think, a purely western concept — that one must avoid saying anything that may be used in court to hold one “liable” for the death. There are no courts involved in Afghanistan, there are (yet) no real lawsuits. That the payments are offered “without admission of liability” is meaningless there. Whether you are right or wrong, whether you intended to do so or not, if your actions brought about the death of a family member, you must (and should) express remorse, or expect vengeance.
It’s smart. In Afghanistan, there are two choices if your family is aggrieved: vengeance or forgiveness. It’s better for us (and for everyone) if the family chooses forgiveness. By respecting local customs, we can help them feel comfortable in doing so. Otherwise, we have added more fuel to the fire of an insurgency.
It’s the right thing to do. The Afghan people have suffered enormously, at many and varied hands, for a long, long time. The average income is paltry. In fact, a document I recently saw listed the per capita net income of Afghanistan this way: “0 — yes 0.” The “yes 0″, no doubt, just in case we thought it was a typo. When family members die, families suffer. No matter the circumstances, it is right for us to regret the deaths of innocent bystanders or friendly forces. It is right for us to try to do something to mitigate the loss. It is right for us to respect the culture.
These payments are puny in Canada, but they are huge in Afghanistan. Once again, our soldiers have demonstrated they have far better moral compasses than the armchair pundits at home. They continue to choose “the right thing.”