Jane Prentice (Ryan, Liberal Party) Share this | Hansard source

There is nothing nice about war. In this particular case, there is nothing nice for Afghanistan and nothing nice for Australia. Going to war is never a step taken lightly by any responsible government, but in our imperfect world there are times when that is what nations must do for just and honourable reasons. That is the case in Afghanistan. Through our elected government, we as a nation made a decision in 2001 that we must go to war in Afghanistan. We are still there. Our role has changed but, importantly, it has enjoyed bipartisan support. Now, in this parliament, members and senators have an opportunity and an obligation. They have an opportunity to express a point of view and an obligation to construct a debate that taken together inform and educate Australians as to our role and our objectives and allows them to make an informed judgment on this costly commitment. It is costly financially but, most importantly, it is costly in terms of lives and the injuries—physical and mental—to so many young, serving Australians. Over the years, we have seen success in effectively defeating al-Qaeda in Afghanistan and have moved on to a role of mentoring, training and partnering Afghani troops on operations.

I have listened carefully as this debate has progressed. I do not intend today to repeat many of the arguments that have been put so eloquently by other speakers in this debate. But in order to assess our role we must look at where Afghanistan stands today. As we do so, it becomes clear that there are other nations which exhibit the very problems that we find in Afghanistan—or worse. As we look at the Horn of Africa we can see failed states exhibiting little or no rule of law often used and manipulated by international criminal organisations or used as havens for terrorist training and operations. This raises a question in some minds. If we are not prepared to commit troops on every occasion where these circumstances exist, why should we stay in Afghanistan?

There is a lot to trouble us about today’s Afghanistan—the fact that the government does not control large parts of the country; the clear suggestions of corruption within the Afghan government; the religious extremism of the Taliban, and the acceptance of it by those who work with them; and the sheer scale of opium production and the link between heroin and the Taliban. Each of these matters could on their own encourage some form of intervention—civil or military, as the case may be. But the question of when a nation-state should interfere in the government and politics of a sovereign nation-state and even consider military action is a vexed one and, for the purposes of this debate, may be the wrong question. Why? Because we are already there. This debate serves little purpose if it is merely to be a retrospective or an exercise in comparative decision making. We must not forget that the original commitment to this war enjoyed almost universal support at home and internationally under United Nations mandate with resolution No. 1386.

So where are we today? As the Leader of the Opposition said in his contribution to this debate, our objective is to allow Afghans to choose what they think is right for them. We are doing that through a quite specific role, assisting in developing the Afghan National Army through embedded partnering. As one soldier said to me, ‘That means a combination of training and significantly partnering, going into battle with our Afghan colleagues and learning to trust each other.’ That is quite different from just training or just fighting. In the civil aid sphere there has been an ongoing debate as to the extent to which advisers should just advise or train by example, by working side by side with those they wish to train. I am told that partnering—living, working and fighting side by side, Australians together with the 4th Brigade of the Afghan National Army—is showing results. In the long term, that will result in an Afghani brigade with an Australian ethos. Our legacy to the 4th Brigade will be Australian military culture based on teamwork, courage and a shared version of Australia’s great quality of mateship.

I am told that our troops have a real respect for these Afghan soldiers. They are genuinely fighting for their nation’s survival and their families’ future, notwithstanding the threats and reprisals. We encourage these soldiers to come and train side by side with our dedicated officers and soldiers. We cannot train them without standing side by side with them in training and in battle. By doing this we earn their trust. We cannot abandon them now. So, by our intervention, we have started a process that has encouraged Afghans to take a stand against terrorism and against corruption. The signs are positive but we must stay the course.

The member for Bowman, speaking from his personal experience, spoke movingly of the hope that our presence provides. It is a hope built on a desire for a society where people have a say in how they live their lives, where women might be educated, where peace and security might prevail. This does not mean that we should seek to replicate Australian society in this country. To do so would be the height of arrogance. We are fighting to create the environment to let the Afghan people decide. If that is to happen, our role is to help them gain the capacity to provide security, to help them build the environment that allows people a say, not just the warlords. But that will not be easy. We should never understate that challenge or its difficulty. Equally, a democratically elected government in a safe and secure Afghanistan will often make decisions with which we will strongly disagree. Corruption will exist, but if through our police assistance we can help in that regard, so much the better. However, the acknowledgement by President Karzai of cash payments to his office from Iran raises most serious concerns. We should not ignore it, but our role is to help build the capacity to deal with it. We are doing that through the presence of the Australian Federal Police, with a particular emphasis on Oruzgan. Slowly but surely we can help Afghanistan build a better future.

Finally, I come back to the question of heroin production in Afghanistan. That heroin is a curse on our society is an understatement. According to the United Nations Office on Drugs and Crime, opium production in Afghanistan in 2010 covered some 123,000 hectares. Ninety-six per cent of that production took place in the southern and western regions, including Oruzgan province, where our troops are today. Eradication programs have not worked and there is a clear link between lack of security and opium cultivation. The UN points out that gross income from opium per hectare outstrips wheat by a ratio of six to one—US$4,900 to US$770 per hectare.

As reported in the Australian in an article by Sally Neighbour on 21 May, the US State Department’s narcotics control strategy report, released in March, refers to the symbiotic relationship between the insurgency and narcotics trafficking. This presents a serious challenge, but to simply destroy crops without providing an alternative economic solution has to date been clearly unsuccessful. The provision of support for alternative crops and the provision of microfinance and venture capital will all play a role in eradicating this scourge. It is arguable from the UN report that a secure and stable environment will provide the biggest factor in this process. It is encouraging to note that it also showed that the two major reasons for never cultivating opium or stopping cultivation are that it is banned by government or that it is against Islam.

As I traverse this difficult and troubling debate, I readily acknowledge the difficult nature of the discussion. It is not easy and it will not get easier. More fine, brave Australians will almost inevitably lose their lives. I have seen the anguish and despair on the faces of the families of those who have already lost their lives. Those tears and that pain must never leave our minds as we discuss this issue. But, as so many family members have said, ‘Do not let their sacrifice be in vain.’ So I must clearly state that I support our ongoing commitment to Afghanistan. I do so in the strong view that we must stay the course. But that does not mean that, in deciding to fight on, we should ignore discussion and diplomacy. I noted the comments of the member for Lyne and the member for Bowman and,  indeed, the former Minister for Foreign Affairs, Alexander Downer, about the need to engage the Taliban.

In Europe we see the emergence of the hard fascist and racist right. They stand for election and win seats. They are not banned. That does not mean that their views are correct. In his article, Alexander Downer referred to the Bougainville conflict and the necessity of engaging with the Bougainville Revolutionary Army and including them in the political process. I have met a number of the BRA and rebel government leaders. My husband acted for them in the Bougainville peace process—a working example of, as many have put it, finding peace by peaceful means. So I agree with the former foreign minister. As we hold our course, as we help Afghanistan build its military and civil capacity, as our troops wage war, we should be open to diplomacy and political negotiations—not at any price, not at cost to those Afghanis who share our commitment to democracy—and willing to talk.

As I said in my maiden speech:

Sadly the remoteness of this war and the 15-second-grab nature of television news mean that many Australians do not see that reality, do not see the pain and suffering.

They see war by television, close enough to touch yet far enough away that it is just not seen. Hopefully this debate will shine some light on the hard decisions that must be made in our far from perfect world.

Let me finish as I started. War is a terrible thing. There is nothing nice about it. There is pain and grief on all sides, particularly for the civilian population. So I must again pay tribute to our troops: 6RAR battle group for the work well done and 5RAR battle group for the work they will undertake. Equally I must pay tribute to our Australian Federal Police, DFAT staff and aid workers—all brave Australians who are all too often overlooked as their courageous work is unseen. As a nation we will, we must, stand behind you as you carry the responsibility for our decisions and as you confront the often tragic results of war. To go to this war is not your decision—it is your nation’s, and you go without complaint. You go to war, to this most dangerous place, for your country. I salute you and I thank you.

See this speech in context