Guy Barnett (Tasmania, Liberal Party) Share this | Hansard source

I stand here today to support the government from the opposition’s position with respect to the importance of our involvement in the war in Afghanistan. Australia’s involvement in Afghanistan is a direct response to the worldwide threat of terrorism, which reared its ugly head most devastatingly on 11 September 2001. Most of us here—and I think most in Australia—remember where we were at that time. I was at home in Hobart and was shocked, saddened and incredibly upset, as were my family and colleagues at work. One of the responses we had as we saw that shocking incident in New York and subsequently in Washington, DC, where I worked in the mid-1980s, was to call my local pastor to come to the office to share, to comfort those around us and to try to make reason of this shocking incident.

On that day, al-Qaeda murdered more than 3,000 people—thousands of citizens of our ally, the United States, and people from many other countries, including Australia. Millions of people around the world began to live in fear that the same could happen to them. I remember speaking to friends and colleagues in the United States to check on their health and wellbeing and their whereabouts, and the sense of insecurity and concern was significant indeed. The terror did not end on September 11, and since 2001 more than 100 Australians have been killed in extremist attacks overseas, among them 88 Australians killed in the Bali bombing in 2002. Four Australians were killed in the second Bali bombings in 2005, and our embassy in Jakarta in Indonesia was bombed.

I had the honour of being in Jakarta in June this year with the Senate Standing Committee on Legal and Constitutional Affairs delegation. We were looking at the antiterrorism laws in that country as well as in Singapore. We visited the bomb site at the Jakarta embassy, paid our respects and shared a special memory of those who were killed. In each case the terrorist groups involved had links to Afghanistan. A highlight—or, perhaps, even a lowlight—of my parliamentary career was being involved in attending the memorial service for those who died at the Bali bombings in 2002. It was one of the most moving and significant experiences of my parliamentary career and it brought home to me just how terrorism affects people’s lives all over the world, including here in Australia.

But the reach of terrorism goes beyond just these examples. It goes beyond state borders. It threatens beneath the radar and it does not play by the rules of war. With these things in mind and in response to this threat, there are two primary reasons why Australia is involved in the war in Afghanistan. Firstly, it is to make sure that Afghanistan never again becomes a safe haven for terrorists, a place where attacks on us and our allies begin. Secondly, it is to stand firm behind our alliance commitment to the United States, which was formally invoked following the attacks on New York and Washington in 2001. Having worked in Washington, DC myself some years ago, I very much appreciate Australia’s relationship with the US and support the importance of that alliance. I am steadfast in my support for it. They have stood by us in time of need, and it is only right and proper for us to do the same and to be committed to finishing the job in Afghanistan in this instance.

I have many good friends and colleagues still living in the USA. The bond of friendship and the relationship are deep. The Australia-US alliance should not be underrated, including our involvement with them during the Second World War. I had the privilege of being in Kokoda and walking the Kokoda Track in 2008 and learning about the sacrifice, endurance, mateship and courage demonstrated by Australian diggers together with the US veterans. It was fantastic, something I will never forget.

In response to the barbarism of the 11 September attacks, the US launched Operation Enduring Freedom in Afghanistan citing article 51 of the UN charter and invoking article 5 of the NATO treaty as legal justification. Australia invoked the ANZUS treaty and the International Security Assistance Force was soon after established by the United Nations Security Council, on 20 December 2001, by resolution 1386 and reaffirmed each year with NATO taking a lead role. As part of ISAF, Australia has participated in the war in Afghanistan as part of a global coalition. Our continued involvement has been the subject of ongoing review and the international legal basis for this war is indeed an important issue.

To remain involved in such a critical life-and-death battle, Australia as a nation must be clear in its own mind why it is involved in the war. The first objective of Australia’s national security is freedom: freedom from attack or the threat of attack—that is, the capacity to protect our citizens and interests at home and abroad. Australia has lost 111 citizens to terrorist attacks abroad with all of these attacks linked in some way back to the freedom of action that terrorist forces enjoyed in Afghanistan. We must remove safe havens for extreme Islamic terror groups capable of extending their influence into Australia’s region and thereby further impacting on our national interests.

One of the principles of Australia’s national security is to support the UN to promote a rules based international order. Australian forces are under ISAF command under a UN mandate. If our alliance with the United States remains the key strategic partnership and the central pillar of Australian national security policy, then we have a responsibility to join with the US and its partners, under the auspices and sanctions of the UN, to continue to achieve the mission in Afghanistan. The maintenance of a strong ANZUS alliance is critical to Australia’s regional security. US hegemony within our region is fundamental to regional stability, given an increasingly engaged China that is focused on territorial strength particularly over ocean sovereignty and regional influence.

Moving to shrink our relationship with the US, as some have argued, including the Greens, would be counterproductive to our own security and to wider regional stability. Australia’s involvement in Afghanistan serves at least in part to reaffirm the strength of the ANZUS alliance and indeed the value of the ANZUS treaty. Having worked in Washington DC for some years, I very much appreciate Australia’s relationship with the US and support the importance of that alliance.

The welfare of Afghan citizens who have been barbarically brutalised and repressed under extreme Islamic law is also vitally important. Australia is committed to doing what it can towards the creation and maintenance of stability within the Middle East more generally, particularly in Pakistan, a nuclear state—and I will speak more about that shortly. I observe that the Greens’ position to withdraw would cause havoc and chaos and do untold damage to the people of Afghanistan, particularly to the women and children of Afghanistan. That was rightly noted and well espoused by Senator Ronaldson a few moments ago.

International coalition forces in Afghanistan now number around 140, 000, comprising 120,000 ISAF troops from 47 nations and an additional 20,000 US troops under Operation Enduring Freedom. Australia’s military contribution to ISAF is deployed under Operation Slipper. Of the 1,550 ADF personnel deployed within Afghanistan, 1,241 are deployed in Oruzgan province and around 300 in Kabul, Kandahar and elsewhere in Afghanistan. These numbers vary depending on operational requirements and shifting seasonal conditions. A further 830 personnel provide support from locations within the broader Middle East area of operations, including our maritime commitment.

Compared to the US’s 80,000 troops, Britain’s 10,000 and even Canada’s 2,800, Australia’s military commitment is relatively modest, but still our 1,550 soldiers have the lion’s share of security responsibility in a province that has long been Taliban heartland. Twenty-one combat deaths, including 10 since June, and 152 combat injuries so far make this our most serious fight since Vietnam. Afghanistan has become a central front in the most important struggle for civilisation in our time. I understand outside of NATO our contribution is the largest.

The coalition supports the US objective that, in partnership with our allies, we seek the strategic denial of Afghanistan as a training ground and operating base for global terrorist organisations—and that is what it was. The overall progress of the war has been a long road already but not without some success. Al-Qaeda has been dealt a severe blow in Afghanistan and it is no longer a safe haven for training camps in the country, but there is still a long way to go, and that has been noted by General Petraeus and others. President Karzai earlier this year committed to improving governance, pursuing electoral reform, taking effective anticorruption and antinarcotics measures and creating social and economic opportunities for all Afghan people, including women and girls.

There are many inputs that are vital to success in war and the importance of high-quality, responsive military procurement and supply to our troops can never be underestimated. In recent times there have been concerns raised on the frontline about lack of support. It is timely to note and be reminded of the importance of ensuring our troops are properly provided for.

I just want to note that three Australian soldiers have been charged by the military Director of Public Prosecutions as a result of an operation conducted by special forces in February 2009. In that raid, six Afghan people were killed. These events certainly highlight the complexity of war in a harsh environment where it is not always readily apparent who the enemy is. We should be very slow to judge our forces in cases such as this. I would urge the government to use every available resource within its power to ensure that a proper defence and adequate resources and support are given to those who have been charged. I question why there is a need for that in the first place. But, without being an expert and without all the information available, I cannot add anything further at this time other than to say that I think our troops should be given as much support as possible. This is a war zone.

I want to comment on Australian development aid in Afghanistan, apart from our direct military involvement. There will need to be a transition to education, health and infrastructure support in the years ahead as we move from military support through to development aid. In my view, the delivery of development assistance is a vital element in helping Afghanistan to become a nation with the capacity in and of itself to stand up to the threat of terrorism. I note that Afghanistan is the fourth biggest recipient of aid from the Australian nation. That is something to be proud of.

Progress in Afghanistan’s development over the last nine years includes a dramatic increase in school enrolments, from around one million in 2001 to six million today, one-third of whom are girls. That is great news. There has been a significant increase in the availability of basic health services, which were available to less than 10 per cent of the population under the former Taliban regime but are now extended to around 85 per cent of the people. There has been the identification and management of over 39,000 community based infrastructure projects, such as wells, clinics and roads. That is good news. We have seen the rehabilitation of almost 10,000 kilometres of rural roads. The telecommunications industry has created about 100,000 jobs since 2001. Ten million Afghans today have access to telecommunications, compared to about 20,000 in 2001.

There have been two elections for the lower house of parliament since 2001. Around 27 per cent of the seats in the lower house and one-sixth of the seats in the upper house are reserved for female members. That is a good initiative, for sure. The lower house has significant powers, including the right to reject or approve draft laws, to hold votes of no confidence in government ministers and to reject cabinet nominees. So there is a move towards democracy.

The Taliban suppressed free speech. That needs to be noted and remembered. Afghan people now have access to over 400 print media publications and radio and television outlets. These give Afghans an outlet to discuss publicly their views.

Development assistance through AusAID has grown from $26.5 million in 2001-02 to $106 million in 2010-11. Australia’s development assistance focuses on improving the capacity to deliver core services, such as health and education, and supporting agriculture. Around 50 per cent of that aid to Afghanistan is delivered through Afghan government systems. It is a figure well in advance of that of many other donors, and that is good news. Australia’s main military and civilian effort is focused, as I indicated, on Oruzgan province. Oruzgan ranks as one of the least developed provinces in Afghanistan. The literacy rate for females is zero and only 10 per cent for males, compared to national figures of 12.6 and 43 per cent respectively. So it is having some impact.

Our aid program is only just beginning to increase, but already Australia has supported basic health and hygiene education, enabled community de-mining and mine risk education and improved food security through the distribution of wheat and other food items. Australia is working to build capacity within the provincial administration and encourage stronger links with the central government. That is certainly worth while and a positive development.

The Millennium Development Goals have bipartisan support in the Australian government, which is excellent. It should be noted that this aid should be granted consistent with our aim to meet the Millennium Development Goals. The Giving Australia report notes that Australians are the most generous in the world. That is something to be proud of. This was particularly noted vis-a-vis the disaster in Pakistan very recently. All of this should be seen as part of the bigger picture and in the broader context of international peace and security.

I want to talk about the merit of having key performance indicators and benchmarks and reporting progress. On this issue I would like to refer to the Canadian approach. The Canadian parliament recently produced a report entitled Canada’s engagement in Afghanistan: quarterly report to parliament for the period of 1 April to 30 June, 2010. Canada provides quarterly reports, with benchmarks, key performance indicators and progress to date in reaching the targets. That is a great way to go. I commend it to the government for consideration. We should have at least six-monthly reports on targets, benchmarks and KPIs so that we as a nation know exactly where we stand and can understand the progress in Afghanistan.

Terrorism should be seen in the context of the Middle East—and Israel and Iran in particular. The war in Afghanistan is part of the broader fight against terrorism throughout the world, and particularly as part of our Middle East Area of Operations, to which a further 800 troops are committed, in addition to the 1,550 committed to Afghanistan. The Middle East plays a unique role in the peace and stability of our fragile world, and at the heart of those issues is the nation of Israel. In recent times, the activities of, and comments made by, the nation of Iran have been prominent and have been destabilising the Middle East. Israel has a right to exist. That is something that needs to be noted and strongly supported. When nation states such as Iran do not acknowledge that and terrorist organisations, whether they be Hamas or otherwise, do not acknowledge that, it destabilises the region. I was pleased to be part of the Australia Israel Leadership Forum last year and will be again this year. It plans to meet in Israel in December. I commend the leadership of that forum and the instigators of it. They do a great job.

I indicated earlier that I had been to Indonesia in June this year. I am very concerned about the possibility of terrorist activity in Indonesia. I just ask the question: is there an adequate commitment—a comprehensive political commitment with political will and resources across the board—to deal with terrorist activity close to our shores? I am not convinced that there is. I call on all those decision-makers in Indonesia to redouble their efforts to stamp out terrorism wherever possible. We have seen the activities of Jemaah Islamiah—we had the Bali bombings of course; and I note the Indonesians have acted in response to that. But Abu Bakar Bashir still holds views which are prominent in Indonesia. So there is still more to do. I am totally committed to our support for Afghanistan and for making a difference. I do see the merit of having a parliamentary inquiry into this matter. (Time expired)