Prime Minister Stephen Harper is getting Canada more deeply entangled in a war of political convenience rather than one of strict necessity with his plans to ramp up our military involvement in Iraq and Syria. He no doubt hopes it will help brand his Conservative government as forceful in defending Canada’s interests heading into the coming federal election, and rally his base.

But just how far do Canada’s interests go in this affair? That’s an issue Harper ought to be prepared to address as he seeks Parliament’s blessing to expand and extend the mission. He hasn’t made a persuasive case yet.

While Canadians have been supportive of our limited role so far, public opinion is soft and sharply split on what comes next. That’s clear in the House of Commons where Tom Mulcair’s New Democrats oppose any extension and Justin Trudeau’s Liberals have been biding their time. Harper has flubbed the first test of leadership by failing to marshal a consensus that reaches beyond his own party. There’s no burning desire across the country to up the ante.

Moreover, although U.S. President Barack Obama is keen to draw allies deeper into his coalition, it’s far from clear that more Canadian help is needed. Our warplanes based in Kuwait have carried out 53 airstrikes so far. That’s a tiny fraction of the 5,300 targets the U.S. reports destroyed. And we have fewer than 70 trainers in Iraq. Our support may be welcome but it’s hardly decisive.

As the Star has noted before, Harper sold the public a bill of goods when he assured Parliament that our special forces would have only a “noncombat” role training Iraqi Kurdish fighters far behind the front lines in a “low-risk” operation.

As it turns out our troops have been in real danger, scoping targets on the front lines, calling in warplanes to bomb them and using lasers to paint targets. The risks of mission creep were driven home when Sgt. Andrew Joseph Doiron was killed in a “friendly fire” incident, and three of his comrades were hurt.

Nor will this be a short battle. The Islamic State and its 20,000 fighters won’t easily be dislodged from their grisly “caliphate” of terror, stretching across two hopelessly unstable, conflict-shattered countries. The U.S. military expects a three- to five-year campaign, or longer.

However Harper may frame the matter, Canadians aren’t wild about getting entangled in this mess. And with good reason. People know it is chiefly up to the Syrians and Iraqis themselves to suppress the Islamic State jihadists who are tearing their countries asunder. Airstrikes alone won’t do it. At the same time, getting involved aligns us with uncomfortable bedfellows — Syrian despot Bashar Assad, Iran’s Shiite militias and Kurdish nationalists — in a region of shattered states and endlessly shifting alliances. Little wonder most Canadians doubt this will make us any safer.

Given this reticence, the New Democrats and Liberals have good reason not to endorse a war of expediency that bears little obvious relation to our security. The Tories are on thin ground claiming support for the war reflects any special fitness to govern.

While championing deeper involvement, Harper has yet to answer some basic questions: What exactly does Ottawa hope to accomplish? Are other American allies prepared to shoulder comparable roles and risks, especially on the ground?

What would “defeat” of the Islamic State look like? Is there a credible plan to end Syria’s civil war, to shore up Iraq’s unstable government and to field the tens of thousands of troops needed to overcome the jihadists?

However the debate in Parliament may play out, Harper can force his agenda through. Given that certainty all the opposition can do is ask some pointed questions, brace for the government’s non-answers, and move briskly on. There’s plenty more to focus on.

Loading... Loading... Loading... Loading... Loading... Loading...

A majority of Canadians feel the Harper government has played out its string and it is time for a change. The Tories are under fire for their wildly overreaching Anti-Terrorism Act and for fanning fear and anxiety about Muslims, and for their obsessively punitive crime bills. They are still mired in a Senate corruption scandal. And they are vulnerable on pocketbook issues: job insecurity, tax giveaways that favour the few, rising economic inequity, shaky pensions and unmet child care needs.

Harper’s eagerness to play a token role in a murky war shouldn’t be allowed to blot out the sun. Canadians have bigger bones to pick with this government.

Read more about: