Prev
Next

A call for military accountability

Tory Maguire

by Tory Maguire

28 Oct 07:55pm

Must Reads

The Punch is moving house - this is a caption

The Punch is moving house

385

Will Pope Francis have the vision to tackle this? - this is a caption

Will Pope Francis have the vision to tackle this?

122

Advocating risk management is not “victim blaming” - this is a caption

Advocating risk management is not “victim blaming”

251

Filed under: Afghanistan, Debate, Military, Parliament, Politics

30 comments

A lot of people who questioned the need for a parliamentary debate on Australia’s military commitment in Afghanistan said we’d just end up with a whole heap of MPs agreeing we’re doing the right thing and we’re doing it the right way.

Cartoon: The Daily Telegraph's Warren Brown.

Indeed despite their stylistic differences, Julia Gillard and Tony Abbott’s speeches to open the debate were almost interchangeable in their messages and conclusions - although the Prime Minister did admit for the first time we might be there a lot longer than she’d ever fessed up to before.

But even though there is broad bi-partisan support for our mission in Afghanistan, there has been some dissenters, and also some interesting ideas thrown up during the discussion, like the proposition by Shadow Finance Minister Andrew Robb this afternoon.

Robb backed his leader’s stance that we must stay the course in Afghanistan, but he called on our military leaders to be put under far greater scrutiny.

He outlined the disturbing growth in international terrorism over the past decade and went on to say it was vital our military efforts in Afghanistan be properly resourced:

If the Government is to rely as much as they do on our military leaders’ advice on appropriate levels of resources required to achieve each strategic objective, then these military advisers must be held more accountable for the achievement or non achievement of these outcomes.

Consideration should be given to a forum for our military leaders and parliamentarians, similar to the Congressional hearings of US generals in the United States, which would not only bring greater accountability to our military leaders but, importantly, better inform the parliamentarians who must take greater, and ultimate, responsibility.

Rather than setting a particular withdrawal date for the UN-led forces, the achievement of these outcomes should determine the exit strategy.  Otherwise the insurgents may decide to simply sit out the prescribed exit date.

Politicians in this country are terrified of being seen to be anything less than 100 per cent “supporting the troops”, which has led to a tendency for them to fall back on explanations about our mission seriously lacking in detail.

They think it’s enough to say that the top brass advises progress is being made and we just have to buy it.

But as Robb points out, in other countries, including the US, the military hierarchy is held publicly to account.

It’s an interesting idea that we might know more, rather than less, about what we’ve got our troops into.

Most commented

30 comments

Show oldest | newest first

    • TrueOz says:

      07:25pm | 28/10/10

      Why are our young men being killed up there? Why are our young women being left without husbands, and their children left without fathers?

      My understanding was that our troops went there to support American efforts to capture Osama bin Laden. Somehow, that (unsuccessful) mission has been re-spun into a moral crusade against the Taliban.

      When will any of our “leaders” have the intestinal fortitude to admit that our troops failed in their mission - that just happens sometimes - and bring them back home? Australia has NOTHING to gain by leaving them in that fifth-world shit hole.

      Reply

    • Tarzan says:

      02:14am | 29/10/10

      My brother is there, my son has been there and I’m hoping to go there. They are there because they want to be there. And while it is very sad we have lost good people there, 21 people killed over 10 years in a war zone is pretty good odds. And if you think Australia has nothing to gain by being there, is that the same for the other 48 Nations that have troops there too? Do we just go home and leave a half baked government and security to fend for itself? Can you imagine the chaos, murders, people fleeing seeking asylum? Get the country on it’s feet, and offer long term help for their future generations.

    • TrueOz says:

      07:03am | 29/10/10

      @Tarzan

      If your family members want to be in Afghanistan, that’s fine by me. What’s not fine by me is the fact that my taxes are funding this pointless military adventure. As for the other 48 nations involved - much like the Afghanistan conflict itself - it’s simply none of our business what they are doing.

    • TheRealDave says:

      09:42am | 29/10/10

      @TrueOz - so when IS it time to do something? We all know Afghanistan was a terrorist training ground provided to Al Queda and other terrorist organisations by the in power Taliban. Thats fact. Undisputed.

      What do you think is going to happen if we do not stick around, train the Afghanis and help foster a stable non-fundy regime there? Unlike Fairy La La World were people sit around singing kumbiyah and help little old ladies across the street, the real world is a fairly dangerous place full of plenty of arseholes. At present the Afghan government would not doubt collapse within 2 years if we pulled out tomorrow. The Talibs being a merciless bunch of arseholes would no doubt end up back on top within 3-5 years, after untold thousands are murdered in the maelstrom of civil war. And then we end up back where we were prior to Sept 11 2001 with the Talibs supporting and providing safe-haven to Islamic fundy nutjobs to commit atrocities all over the world - again.

      Is that what you want to see? Sounds like it is to me. Appears to be EVERYONES business to make sure that does not happen don’t you think?

    • Gregg says:

      09:59am | 31/10/10

      @Tazan, ”  My brother is there, my son has been there and I’m hoping to go there. “
      Is there a new Dad’s Army regiment being formed?

    • Gregg says:

      10:14am | 31/10/10

      @ Oh Really Dave!
      What if the Taliban base is the Pashtun peoples, a poorer peoples of the rather inhospitable terrain areas adjoining and the NW Pakistan wild west, the Pashtun comprising some 60%+ of Afghanis.

      Not that it is a military plan our guys need to put up for scrutiny, but should the master plan be to go about progressive genocide? and hope that works?
      Is Iraq fixed?
      Even with NATO/UN forces there in sufficient numbers forever, you will have bloodshed and you only have to look at the past two centuries of Afghani conflict to get a measure of the region.

      Master plan B would be a good transport link constructed in from the Chinese Border and let the place become a new province of the Chinese Republic.
      No resistance to them taking Tibet, so why not kill two birds with one stone, terrorism and China having too many males.

      Julia has an invite and will get on exceedingly well, one athiest to a great red tribe of them, so she could be frontwoman on negotiations, but she doesn’t take to kind of stuff!
      Oh well, she could always assign Mr Mandarinman.

    • Joe says:

      08:52pm | 28/10/10

      If more journalists listened to what politicians actually said in parliament there would be many more reports like this. There have been some great maiden speeches in the past few days calling for things like the abolition of income tax and a royal commission into global warming for example. Some great ideas.

      Reply

    • BobbyDan says:

      09:36pm | 28/10/10

      The weak military minders will only say what the pollies want to hear.
      No good them stuffing up thier nice pension benefits by being truthful and saying just how things realy are at the front

      Reply

    • stephen says:

      10:26pm | 28/10/10

      Our critics of our involvement in Afghanistan point out that we have so many other things at home to do, but I think the opposite ; that we are doing now what we’re best at, and that is realizing our own Idealism by political action.
      We are very good at Democratization, and assisting other countries to self-realization. Australians are action oriented, and sometimes we use force. This is our history. What we’re doing in Afghanistan is what we are good at.
      (Quite apart from the ‘rightness’ of it all).
      We have never been good networkers, (at the UN or anywhere else) and our lives in pineapple-arsed wicker chairs, legs crossed debating Sartre and other nongs in the hot sun over coffee and kumquats…well, leave that to idle and thoughtful.
      For now, trying to justify every nuance of belief is only wasting time.
      It’s right to interfere in crimes against Nature.

      Reply

    • TrueOz says:

      11:32pm | 28/10/10

      @Stephen

      I have to disagree - what goes on in Afghanistan is very simply none of our business.

    • St. Michael says:

      11:49pm | 28/10/10

      “But as Robb points out, in other countries, including the US, the military hierarchy is held publicly to account.”

      Haven’t done much wider reading on the subject, have we, Ms Maguire?  I suggest you start with http://www.johntreed.com and take it from there.

      In the US the situation’s worse, not better.  Where were the sackings of half the chain of command when Pat Tillman was murdered by his own squadmates and the brass lied to his family and then the American people about what happened? (It wasn’t “operational security”, by the way.  Most half-decent reportage on the incident indicates the chain of command in the military instinctively covered up because it Tillman was a high-profile volunteer who was shot either with malicious intent or plain dumb negligence by his own men.  McCrystal wasn’t general at the time; he lied flat out to Congress.  They didn’t fire him; they *promoted* him, and then, insanely, tossed him from Afghanistan after he made some drunken comments to a Rolling Stone reporter.  If there was any crime that deserved tossing from the chain of command, it should’ve been lying to his direct superiors—i.e. Congress and the American people.

      And this isn’t anything new.  Consider the Coroner’s inquiry in Britain back during the first Iraq War; 9 British squaddies were killed because a couple of American pilots were feeling bored and disregarded rules of engagement protocols, thus blowing apart a British tank column clearly marked with air-visible symbols to prevent friendly fire.  Geoffrey Robertson acted for the families of the men on that one.  The US government called it ‘fog of war’, and the British government kowtowed to them.  The US government sent an Air Force colonel along to watch the proceedings, but it refused to even let the two airmen testify or even give their names.  You call that public accountability?

      Don’t cite “oversight” of the US military as a shining example of how we should do things out here.  The US military is a government bureaucracy that routinely lies to its government and its people about its readiness or about its protocols.  It gets young men killed in training exercises and VIP displays for no good reason.  But it hides behind 30-year-old treatment of Vietnam Veterans to avoid being criticised.

      But let’s get back to the point: why can’t you call our reluctance to criticise the military what it really is: Rear Area Guilt and a black-armband view of history insofar as treatment of Vietnam veterans is concerned?

      As I’ve said before: I don’t really give a damn how much red paint got thrown at boys coming back from Vietnam.  I wasn’t one of the throwers.  I do give a damn when the military tries to play on our cringing generational guilt about treatement of the Vets to try and avoid criticism about how they run their business.  Because from one point of view their business is the one in which fewer mistakes can be afforded than any other: the business of sending our young men and women into potentially lethal situations on trust that their superiors are doing the right thing.

      Reply

    • acotrel says:

      07:19am | 29/10/10

      ‘TrueOz says:11:32pm | 28/10/10

      @Stephen

      I have to disagree - what goes on in Afghanistan is very simply none of our business. ‘

      You can take that attitude.  However our importers will buy from the cheapest supplier regardless of his countries record on human rights, industrial safety, democracy, standard of living.  We’re all living on the same planet, if we do it without a conscience we are lesser people.

    • TrueOz says:

      07:40am | 29/10/10

      @Stephen

      What I actually said was…

      I have to disagree - what goes on in Afghanistan is very simply none of our business.

      I think the balance of that last post belongs to acotrel - maybe the Punch has a minor publishing problem?

    • Gregg says:

      12:41am | 29/10/10

      I’ve always thought that Andrew Robb amongst Liberals was theclosest to being a SOB - read Senile Old Bugger
      ” If the Government is to rely as much as they do on our military leaders’ advice on appropriate levels of resources required to achieve each strategic objective, then these military advisers must be held more accountable for the achievement or non achievement of these outcomes. “
      Has the guy ever been anywhere near a military campaign!
      Was a date set for WW1, WW2? or a limit made as to what resources were needed to Win?
      One thing for sure, he ought not be too old to have well remembered what happened in Vietnam, a different type of war to the world wars and did it do any good at all for the US to plan on gradually increasing numbers to about half a million.
      The politicians ought to be reviewing their thoughts to take into account talks with the Taliban and Bags of money gifted by the Iranians.

      Crikey, anybody who reckons in an environment like Afghanistan, that even with something like training where Afghan Army guys might be there one week and gone the next, you can know what outcomes are going to be within a certain timeframe is just plain stupid.
      As for the US Congressional hearings, what a load of BS they go through!

      Reply

    • acotrel says:

      07:53am | 29/10/10

      We need to make allowances for Andrew Robb. The Liberal Party should keep him out of harm’s way.

    • acotrel says:

      08:46am | 29/10/10

      TrueOz, I sometimes cut and paste the part of a post that I’m commenting on.

    • Tarzan says:

      01:48am | 29/10/10

      So many bleeding hearts that have no idea. Do people understand there is currently up to a 1 year waiting list to get into the ADF. People are lining up to join the forces and waiting months and months to get in. If these people were so concerned about going to war zones why would you do that?
      There is no conscription. This is a job people have considered very carefully and trained for. But because of the “social commentators”  our efforts are half baked, so in my opinion the ADF do it harder because of lack of public commitment with resources and extra personnel. If you going to do the job, do it 110% or don’t do it at all.

      Reply

    • TrueOz says:

      07:05am | 29/10/10

      @Tarzan

      Spot on - don’t do it at all.

    • acotrel says:

      08:43am | 29/10/10

      Perhaps there are a lot of people who want 3 square meals a day, good clothing, and a free fitness programme, as well as an education without HECS fees?

    • St. Michael says:

      10:09am | 29/10/10

      @ Tarzan:

      “Do people understand there is currently up to a 1 year waiting list to get into the ADF. People are lining up to join the forces and waiting months and months to get in. If these people were so concerned about going to war zones why would you do that?”

      Short answer: because the ADF’s advertising campaign skates damn close to the line of misleading advertising suggesting it’s a holiday camp more than service in a force where you will be trained to kill large numbers of human beings.

      More generally, the readiness to volunteer is because most of the recruits are in the 18-25 age bracket.  That age bracket—speaking from personal experience—does not fully understand the consequences and risks of signing up in the armed forces.  Most don’t talk to combat veterans.  In particular most don’t talk to crippled combat veterans, or those being treated for PTSD.  Most have not been to a military funeral and watched the family crying its eyes out for the serviceman or woman who has been taken from them at roughly the same age as most car crash victims.  If they did so, or had a real appreciation of the risks inherent in military service, I would venture the waiting list would be a hell of a lot shorter.

      I also have some distaste for the “free education” line of the ADF.  That creates a mercenary army.  On the historical record, most mercenary armies tend to get trounced by draftee armies, back to Napoleon’s time.  But that’s a bigger debate.

    • Marilyn says:

      02:10am | 29/10/10

      Yeah right.  According to one speech we give $20 million in aid to the 500,000 people in Oruzgan where the kids don’t die at the rate of 25% before they reach 5, they die at the rate of 37% instead.

      Indeed the details of what we are doing in Afghanistan were scant indeed, almost no-one mentioned who the Afghan people are and what their lives are like.

      Now for a reality check.

      Seems we are flying murderous warlords to Australia to train them in “a safer environment” while we jail men, women and children who have fled them.

      We spend $370 million a year to jail people on Christmas island, $200 million to rebuild Curtin prison for 680 Afghans, $50 million for Leonora, $50 million for Shergar air base, $170 million for Northam and Woodside - that is about $1 billion per annum while we give the Afghan people just $40 per year per person.

      And if we kill their children we give them $1200.  At least the US give their victims in Iraq $2500 and the same if they blow up their cars.  This is from Senator Anne McEwens’ speech and should shame all of us.

      We have jailed hundreds of Afghan kids here at vast expense but we boast that we have given health checks to 1700 Afghan kids.

      Developmental challenges, particularly in the area where our troops are based. Our development assistance to the Oruzgan province alone is expected to reach almost

      $20 million in 2010-11. The development assistance that we have provided so far is already having an impact in the region, including: providing 1,780 primary school students with basic health and hygiene education; clearing over 132,000 square metres of land contaminated

      by mines, and educating 100 local people in how to do that important task; and improving food security through the distribution of wheat, including

      take-home rations for female students. Australia is working to rebuild capacity within the administration of the province while encouraging stronger links with the central government. Key elements, including supporting

      the reach of the central government programs into Oruzgan, delivering basic services, and supporting the legitimacy of the Afghan government, are the focus of the development assistance in the province.”

      We are not helping any Afghans - 81% don’t go to school, the median age of Afghans is 18, their life expectancy is 44 yet we claim we are doing good.

      It’s depraved and the speeches were shameful.

      Scott Ludlam was one of the few who pointed out that the people who committed the crimes in the US had nothing to do with Afghanistan but lived and trained in Germany and the US, right under the noses of the German Bund and the FBI.

      Reply

    • Theo Racle says:

      05:24am | 29/10/10

      Insurgency, defined as an armed rebellion against established authority leaves little flexibility in Afghanistan,damned if you do, damned if you don,t. There will be eternal insurgency long into the future,so how can an honorable outcome be achieved unless we state specific desired results.A great deal has been achieved in terms of a national politic and a local police and military authority.That is the triple bottom line at this front,get there quickly and leave because it will otherwise be known as the Neverending War.

      Reply

    • Gregg says:

      09:56am | 31/10/10

      Which planet is your experience from Theo?
      Somebody has developed the term insurgency, hoping that it sounds better than taking sides in a civil war.
      A great deal has been achieved!
      Politics - openly described as less than desired on amny fronts, taking bags of money from all who offer it and now at least talking with the
      ” insurgents “
      Local Police/Military!, depends on who is being armed and with whom they end up!

    • pete says:

      06:51am | 29/10/10

      “But as Robb points out, in other countries, including the US, the military hierarchy is held publicly to account”

      Yes, but here a soldier swears allegiance to the queen, not the parliament or government nor the constitution.  They are held to account as far as funding and out comes are concerned, but they even have their own judicial system.

      Apart from that   21 lives prematurely ended may be a low number, but it is an unacceptable number. It is an illegal war perpetrated by the US who are not signatories to the convention under which our soldiers are now being prosecuted.  With friends like that asking you to join in a war where their combatants will never be prosecuted, who needs enemies.  Yes the Taliban are nasty little critters, but so are a lot of the warlords supposedly “on our side”

      Bring them home

      Reply

    • Andrew says:

      11:03am | 29/10/10

      You mean the Defence Force Discipline Act (http://www.austlii.edu.au/au/legis/cth/consol_act/dfda1982188/)? That ‘separate judicial system’ is largely established to deal with military only offences - things like failing to comply with a lawful general order, being absent from a place of duty, that kind of thing.

      In the case that a crime such as manslaughter is committed, the applicable law is in fact the Commonwealth Criminal Code, which applies to everyone - you don’t escape civilian prosecution by virtue of being in a uniform, although other more appropriate forums may be used, if required.

      As for US soldiers never being prosecuted, well, let me google that for you…
      http://lmgtfy.com/?q=US+soldier+crimes+afghanistan

      Holy crap, nearly 4 million results?

      Finally, while I admit there is evidence to suggest the illegality of the invasion, there is also a moral obligation to create a stable government now we have intervened. Unfortunately, it’s difficult to say when this task may be completed, or at least carried out to the point that it may be sustained by local forces. Pulling out tomorrow, or in the immediate future, will almost surely result in a failure to achieve even a modicum of stability.

      And to me,this is the crux of the issue. There is a difference between holding the military to account for crimes committed, such as targetting civilians or harvesting body parts as trophies, and creating the illusion of holding the miiltary to account because progress is not being made as quickly as some might hope. With only a Battlegroup of Australians on the ground (that’s roughly a Battalion’s worth of troops in the old parlance) to do the actual fighting (SOTG notwithstanding), is it little surprise that the Australian commitment is finding it a bit tough?

      But of course, commitment of troops is a political issue, not a military one.

    • Jim says:

      07:12am | 29/10/10

      This is a war against fundamental religous nutters, who without resistance will keep expanding. They have stretched right throughout the middle east, southern Asia, SE Asia, half of Africa…this particular battle just happens to be fought in an area western thinking has demarcated as Afghanistan. Get it - the Taliban, Shebab and other fundamentalist groups do not recognise political borders.
      The loss of 21 professional soldiers over 10 years is sad, but that’s what they do. Remember; we lost 80 innocent Australians in one night to Islamic terrorists.
      On another note - the best armies in the world can be brought down by petty politics ‘back home’...it’s been happening for thousands of years.

      Reply

    • Super D says:

      07:13am | 29/10/10

      In the traditions of the westminister system the public service provides frank and fearless advice and the relevant minister / government as a whole makes the call and takes ultimate responsibility for it. 

      The trend in Australia is for the government to distance themselves from the responsibility of decision making.  Think of the insulation debacle where basically no one was found to be to blame for the whole sorry episode.

      While I don’t agree with the outsourcing of decision making responsibilities I do think its fair that if the public service are going to allow themselves to be used as a shield, the shield they provide should rightly cop some damage.

      Personally I’d love to see the department of climate change actually responsible for delivering a reduction in global temperatures but then I have a bit of a mean streak when it comes to the illogical policies of the progressive side of politics..

      Reply

    • Daniel says:

      08:19am | 29/10/10

      The military in Australia are right wingers and have never had any checks and balances on them. Look at the drama they get away with the abuse of young people that join with these ridiculous initiation and sex sessions that lead these poor young people to suicide. I fear some accountability will never happen in the military in Australia. Thats why i would never join them.

      Reply

    • TheRealDave says:

      09:51am | 29/10/10

      Its OK Dan, we have plenty of young men and women with balls and integrity who do stick up their hand. You go grab another Latte and imagine other ‘hazing’ scenario’s taken from movies and oversensationalized bollocks and tut tut under your breath with your mates.

    • Andrew says:

      11:17am | 29/10/10

      I’m a young person who joined. In nearly 5 years I’ve never once been abused, been subject to a ‘ridiculous initiation’ or even so much as contemplated suicide, least of all because of a ‘sex session’.

      I also resent the broad, sweeping statement that the military are ‘right wingers’ (the implication being that all service personnel are inherently conservative, incapable of compassion or recognising any form os social justice) who ‘have never had any checks or balances’, and consequently ‘get away’ with abuse, sex sessions, drama, et cetera.

      Daniel, I would not seek to pursuade you to join up, but would seek to question the reliability of your convictions, given a lack of first hand experience in the organisation you so readily vilify. While there have been instances where misconduct has occured (I know all about these, because I read the papers too), have you any credible evidence that this is in any way the norm, or is it merely speculation borne from political conviction and heresay evidence on your behalf?

 
Sorry, comments are now closed for this article.

Facebook Recommendations

Read all about it

Punch live

Up to the minute Twitter chatter

See all tweets

Recent posts

The latest and greatest

The Punch is moving house

by The Punch Team

385

The Punch is moving house

Good morning Punchers. After four years of excellent fun and great conversation, this is the final post…

Will Pope Francis have the vision to tackle this?

by Hannah Harborow

122

Will Pope Francis have the vision to tackle this?

I have had some close calls, one that involved what looked to me like an AK47 pointed my way, followed…

Advocating risk management is not “victim blaming”

by Sarrah Le Marquand

251

Advocating risk management is not “victim blaming”

In a world in which there are still people who subscribe to the vile notion that certain victims of sexual…

Nosebleed Section

choice ringside rantings

From: Hasbro, go straight to gaol, do not pass go

Tim says:

They should update other things in the game too. Instead of a get out of jail free card, they should have a Dodgy Lawyer card that not only gets you out of jail straight away but also gives you a fat payout in compensation for daring to arrest you in the first place. Instead of getting a hotel when you… [read more]

From: A guide to summer festivals especially if you wouldn’t go

Kel says:

If you want a festival for older people or for families alike, get amongst the respectable punters at Bluesfest. A truly amazing festival experience to be had of ALL AGES. And all the young "festivalgoers" usually write themselves off on the first night, only to never hear from them again the rest of… [read more]

Light weight

Gentle jabs to the ribs

Superman needs saving

Superman needs saving

Can somebody please save Superman? He seems to be going through a bit of a crisis. Eighteen months ago,… Read more

28 comments

Newsletter

Read all about it

Sign up to the free News.com.au newsletter