Jamie Briggs (Mayo, Liberal Party, Chairman of the Scrutiny of Government Waste Committee) Share this | Hansard source

I am very pleased to rise to speak on the motion to take note as well, and very pleased to follow the member for Melbourne Ports, for whom I have a deal of respect when it comes to these matters—although not everything he commented on in his contribution this afternoon.

I will begin by commending the parliament for the manner in which this debate has taken place in the past week. In the main I think it has shown how we can perform at our best and do what the Australian people expect us to do in this place. While I have not always agreed with the propositions outlined by some members, and the positions put by some members, I think we do those who serve us a great honour by debating this issue in our parliament. In that respect I acknowledge the Prime Minister’s contribution, but in particular I acknowledge the contribution of the Leader of the Opposition, who outlined his position in a thoughtful and considered manner.

To debate our ongoing contribution to Afghanistan we need to return to the original purpose of the mission. It was of course a decision taken in the light of the burning wreck of the Twin Towers, the Pentagon and a blackened field in Pennsylvania. It was to some extent the defining event of our generation. I very well remember sitting at home watching the late news on channel 10 when Sandra Sully, in a somewhat unforgettable way, crossed to the unfolding events in New York in the United States of America. What came next will never leave me, and nor it should—that was the vision of the second plane hitting the second tower.

Australia at that time, under the leadership and the prime ministership of John Howard, took the right decision to immediately indicate to our closest ally that we would stand together. By dint of fortune our Prime Minister was in Washington on that day when these events were occurring around him. He said at a hastily prepared press conference on that day:

… on behalf of all of the Australians here is to say to our American friends, who we love and admire so much, we really feel for you. It is a terrible day. It is a day that recalls the words used by President Roosevelt in 1941—it is a day of infamy that an act of this kind can be made in such an indiscriminate fashion—not upon military assets as was the case in Pearl Harbor but upon innocent civilians; men, women an children going about their daily lives. As I say, words aren’t very adequate but they are a sign that we feel for our American friends. We will stand by them, we will help them, and we will support actions they take to properly retaliate in relation to those acts of bastardry against their citizens and against what they stand for.

What the Prime Minister at that point would not have known was that there were Australians also in those towers who were caught up in the events on that disastrous day.

It is now a matter of history that in the days and weeks that followed the attacks on the United States it became very obvious that those responsible for planning the attacks were based in large part in Afghanistan. The United Nations sanctioned a force that proceeded to invade Afghanistan to rid that country of the masterminds of the attack on the United States, al-Qaeda. The United States rightly demanded that those who harboured Islamic extremist groups like al-Qaeda either turn them over or face the consequences of that action. Al-Qaeda, like other Islamic extremist organisations, exists to do us harm. As the member for Melbourne Ports so rightly outlined, they are not our friends.

A point often forgotten by some in this debate is that Islamic extremists do not attack us because of our friends and because of our alliances; they attack us because of our values. Again history tells us that the original mission, the original purpose of the UN sanctioned force, was difficult but it succeeded in a remarkably short amount of time. The Taliban was quickly overthrown and al-Qaeda’s operational homeland was effectively removed. While this disrupted the substantial terror network, our people unfortunately have still been subjected to the violence and terror practised by these Islamic extremists. We should never forget what happened to Australians in Bali on two occasions and to our embassy in Indonesia and, as the member for Melbourne Ports outlined, to those who suffered in India recently in Mumbai. This is why we fight in this ongoing war on terror.

That brings me to today and the reasons for our ongoing commitment to Afghanistan. The member for Melbourne Ports said, and he is right, that the opposition and the government have a bipartisan commitment, and so we should. The Australian public, and importantly those we ask to serve on our behalf, should be fully informed of what our mission is, especially after nine years of this conflict. I have to say the best description I have read on our mission and its purpose in recent times was from Major-General John Cantwell in an interview conducted by Paul Toohey on 13 October 2010 and reprinted on the Punch website. Major-General Cantwell says, ‘Our mission is very clear: train the Afghans to manage security around the key population areas of Oruzgan.’ The major-general in this very same interview makes the very valid point that the mission has not been well enough explained by either military or political leaders in recent times and therefore we are, as the Leader of the Opposition identified so rightly in his contribution, at real risk of losing the PR war at the very same time as we are making significant steps to winning the real war. This in my view is a significant failure and it does not honour the sacrifice of the 21 brave men who have died in this commitment. If nothing else, this debate should ensure that we do not put these commitments to the recesses of our minds forever and that we constantly reflect on the troops we have committed, the reasons that they are there and what we can do to ensure that they can achieve their mission.

Given this history and given the need for us to ensure that Afghanistan is never again used to harbour and train Islamic extremists, the original purpose of the mission, who seek to do us harm and do our friends harm, what is our plan? I believe we have four distinct options to move forward. The first is a complete and immediate withdrawal from Afghanistan, as suggested by some in this debate and some outside this place. I believe this would be a historic mistake. It would give strength to those that we battle. It would strengthen the arm of the Islamic extremists who we continue to fight alongside those with whom we share values. It would be a mistake of historic proportions. Option 2 is for an unending commitment, taking away effective control of Afghanistan from the people of Afghanistan and for us to manage their country. Option 3 is to continue with the status quo.

Option 4, the final one we are left with and I think the most considered option, is to work harder, quicker and more effectively to ensure that we have a sustainable Afghanistan which can protect itself, and ensure that it is never returned to a safe haven for Islamic extremists like al-Qaeda and for the Taliban. I believe our alliance with the United States is the most important alliance that we have. The United States of America is a force for good in the world and it continues to be today, even though it has significant pressures domestically and internationally. It is in our absolute national interest that our alliance with the United States remains strong and that the US remains a force in our region in the coming decades.

To those who suggest, and they have in this debate, that to respect the American alliance is to slavishly follow the Americans’ foreign interest ahead of our own, to suggest that we do not have our own independent foreign policy or our own independent foreign thought, I say that I fundamentally disagree with that assessment. Our national interest drives our foreign policy interest. It always has and it always should. It is in our national interest to stand with our like-minded allies, to stand with those who share our values. The United States is foremost amongst those. That is why we should, together with our coalition allies, increase the pressure on the Afghanistan government to take more responsibility for their own future. They have, as the member for Melbourne Ports identified, thus far been subjected to a great deal of bribery. They have hardly been what you would describe as a model of effective government or one that we can place a great deal of confidence in. However, that must change, and I think the President of the United States, in the recently released book by Bob Woodward, identifies the necessary improvement that needs to occur in Kabul if it is to be possible for us to achieve what we set out to achieve in the first place, which we must remember was to ensure that Afghanistan never becomes a safe haven for those Islamic extremists who have done us so much harm.

As the Leader of the Opposition said, so correctly, in his contribution to the parliament:

Our objective is to allow Afghans to choose what they think is right for them. The Taliban’s objective is to impose what it regards as the one right system. We are prepared to accept choices by the Afghan people that we don’t like. Our key stipulation is merely that Afghanistan should never again become a base for international terrorism.

This is absolutely correct. As flawed as this government in Kabul may be, it is our last best hope.

Our job in Afghanistan is not to defeat the Taliban in the field of conflict. People have rightly pointed out in recent days that that is a mission that is too hard to achieve. Our job is the security of Afghanis and to ensure that they are trained to look after themselves. In recent weeks, leading into this debate, there has been comment made by the editor of the Spectator magazine, Mr Tom Switzer, who suggested last week that we should withdraw. There has been comment made by Mr Greg Sheridan of the Weekend Australian, someone I have a great deal of respect for, that we need to reconsider our objectives in Afghanistan and we need to be looking at the ways that we can more quickly move our forces from that area.

As much as I despise what the Taliban stand for, I accept that political moves are now as important as military moves in trying to end the violence. It is a logical and necessary step forward. There has been much commentary and comment on my predecessor’s article in the Spectator magazine a week ago, where he laid out the reasons these political discussions should occur. In fact, the member for Melbourne Ports also made some comments in his contribution about them. But I do suspect that not everybody had read the full article before making comment on what Alexander Downer was suggesting. Far from suggesting that our forces cut and run, he was suggesting that we ensure that our strategy works to ensure that the original purpose of the mission is successful. His argument is best summed up in this paragraph:

Put simply, the initial military aims in Afghanistan have been achieved. Now is the time for diplomacy and political negotiations. President Karzai has a strong hand. He has the support of the US and its allies and there will be no military withdrawal until the Taliban is prepared to settle for a political solution.

The 21 fine Australians who gave their lives in this conflict should never be forgotten. Lest we forget. I believe we would be dishonouring them by abandoning our mission now. But we would also dishonour them if we continued to accept the status quo.

Many contributors in this place have honoured our troops, their skills, their loyalty and their commitment, and I join with all of those who have done so. I stand by our troops and I support their mission. I undertake to them that I will continue to keep their commitment at the front of my mind and ensure that they are not committed a moment longer than necessary. Our commitment is important and our goals in Afghanistan are important. Our fight against Islamic extremism remains our greatest security challenge and our greatest security threat. Australia must continue to stand with our like minded friends to ensure we win this fight. September 11, Bali and all those who have died around the world at the hands of these fanatics demand we do so.

See this speech in context