So I got thinking more and more about Khadr and his case. What I have read on the websites around the scary world wide web is astonishing. It amazes me that people do not take to time to truly educate themselves about something before speaking about it. If a financial question was to arise regarding the whole housing mortgage situation I dare not speak on this. I haven't a clue about finances nor do I pretend to understand anything about why the crisis is happening. I don't care really to be honest. It doesn't affect me as I live in China now and I don't have to pay for my housing costs thanks to my company. Maybe it might affect me when I go to purchase property in the Philippines but alas that's in the far future.However, since being back in Canada for a much needed break I can't help but find myself getting reacquainted with issues that I hold near and dear to my heart. As most of my readers know they are ones that pertain particularly to youth and youth related issues. I've written on youth issues in Canada as well as youth issues on the international scale. As of late, with three weeks until Khadr comes to trial, I've been bothered by the lack of understanding and lack of educated people on this case or the case of a child solider. So I thought it best of me to take this opportunity to state the case of a child solider. In hopes that at least one person understands and changes their mind. I figure with one person it can create that whole spiral thing. Maybe I'm just writing into thin air. Nonetheless I need to put it out there~with only hope!
First I would like to educate people about what a Child Solider constitutes under international law:
According to UNICEF:"A 'child soldier' is defined as any child - boy or
girl - under 18 years of age, who is part of any kind of regular or
irregular armed force or armed group in any capacity, including, but not limited
to: cooks, porters, messengers, and anyone accompanying such groups other than
family members. It includes girls and boys recruited for sexual purposes and/or
forced marriage. The definition, therefore, does not only refer to a child who
is carrying, or has carried weapons" (Cape Town Principals, 1997).
Now some would argue that part about "anyone accompanying such groups other than family members" as proof that Khadr should and could be tried as a soldier of war. However, the case is a little more complex than that. His story is very unique to child soldiers born into families who are fighting for their cause. Khadr may have spent his first 9-10 years in a Canadian school and community however family obligation and indoctrination led the family to leave Canada because the father--from a very patriarchal family--insisted. Therefore placing his children in the hands of people who would mould his hatred for America and American things.
Some would argue that at 9 years old you should know better and the difference between right and wrong. Some of higher intellect would argue that the very definition of right and wrong is up for discussion based on cultural practices. Lets say for arguments sake that taking a life is high on the list of agreed upon wrongs. Unfortunately, the world is never this black and white. Some would argue that a woman who murders her husband after years of systematic and ritualistic abuse is good, or a parent who kills the person who rapes their child is a godsend, or a person defending their home during an attempted robbery accidentally kills the perpetrator is well within his/her right. During the time of war it was perfectly acceptable for allies and combatants to kill on another without fear of prosecution--it is a war after all. However, these same people would condemn a child soldier for his alleged killing of an American Soldier in time of conflict because his last name is Khadr and because his father is a known financier and backer of Al-Queda. It's shameful actually.
Now back to the 9 years of age. One could argue that his first 9 years were spent in Canada and therefore should have inherited the "Canadian Identity" with their "values" and "morals" of the culture. Let's examine this a little closer. These Canadian values and morals we talk about are usually learned in either a public or catholic school board where it is mandated by the government with qualified teachers. These Canadian values are usually taught from many generations of Canadians who have successfully integrated into the psyche that is Canada. These Canadian values are usually influenced by peers, parents, teachers and other community leaders. This is the accepted norm. However, what if you were raised in a community that encourages rules that are outside the accepted norm? You may not agree with these norms however if your raised in these norms and if everyone around you follows these norms than you are more likely to follow these norms. Everyone wants to be accepted. Especially a child who is developing.
Which brings me to my point. Khadr has had various types of teaching from an early age on. He attended a madrassah in Peshawar, Pakistan. These are questionable institutions. Some madrassahs--which literally translated is school--are where a lot of poor children attend and are moulded into killing machines. This is the case the further you go into rural Pakistan and other nations. Greg Mortensen talks about this in his book Three Cups of Tea. Khadr also attended a school that was half regulated by the Ontario Government. It followed the Ontario curriculum and did the standard testing, however it lacked qualified teachers. Then he was moved to Afghanistan in 1996. If anyone knows the history of this country--which even the most ill educated would know--the Taliban was in full effect and propagating the hatred of everything Western. Despite being his mother's favorite child, he was still educated at a time--9 years is impressionable--when it was an accepted norm to hate everything he had previously learned in Canada.
I don't know about you but at 9 years old I was still living in my rural town of Bright, I was chasing boys around the town and I was not burdened with the terror of Taliban rule. I had it pretty easy, but even I can understand that the need for acceptance and the need to please is very high at that stage of development. I see it now with my 10 year old when I have conversations with her. She is very black and white in her thinking and she is a 'moralist' as I like to put it. Just the other day she was talking about her best friends school. I send her to a French Immersion program but her best friend attends a local public school. She was comparing her school to her friends school. She said that her friends school was a bad school because "the kids didn't even follow the school's code of conduct." I asked for clarification, she said that "the girls wear spaghetti straps instead of three finger straps, and that is just wrong." Hence my little 10 year old moralists has her belief that her school is better because the kids follow the school rules with regard to dress code.
Now, put yourself in her mind and find this amusing. Now step out of that mind and put it in Khadr's 9 year old mind. Everything you thought you knew to be correct at 9 years old had to be reprogrammed; 10 year old girls would definitely not be allowed to wear spaghetti straps. As a matter of fact, a 10 year old is close to marriageable age. Your families values are the correct views because everyone else in the community has the same values. Your teachers are your parents, your parents friends and friends of your parents friends. They do not have the 'balanced' approach of our certified teachers. You father was not around a lot because he was off doing business dealings therefore you were raised by your mother but made to wear a burka because he enjoyed helping his mother bead--this was to avoid scrutiny by the community--and after this 'embarrassing' situation asked to move to be with the men in the village. His father agreed and left him in the care of Taliban leaders hence beginning his indoctrination into Taliban thinking.
Therefore, by all definitions, Khadr is a child solider. This makes him eligible for special protection under international law. In a country that holds democracy as our solid foundation we lacked the judgement to intervene on his behalf. It's utterly shameful.
How is this child solider any different than Khadr?
or this child?
or this child?There is absolutely no difference in definition. The difference is the definition of the war. While these children may have been in civil conflicts, Khadr was involved in a 'war on terror'. Unfortunately his war was with the US instead of with some rebel group. Unfortunately he is alleged to have killed an American soldier instead of some lonely civil combatant. For this he has earned the inaction of our incompetent Government.
That's all I have to say on this matter. For now that is ;)
