Right: Some of the hundreds of British soldiers killed in Afghanistan are brought home to England. Britain has announced that its troops will no longer be in Afghanistan after 2015.
Arguments in support of Australia engaging in a war in Afghanistan
1. The war is a response to the September 11 terrorist attack
The war against Afghanistan has been justified as an act taken by the United States in response to the terrorist attack against it on September 11. The terrorist attacks were believed to have been orchestrated by an extremist Islamic group, Al Qaeda, led by Osama bin Laden. The Taliban-led Afghan government is claimed to have refused to hand over bin Laden.
On Sunday October 7, 2001, American and British forces began an aerial bombing campaign against Afghanistan, targeting Taliban forces and Al-Qaeda. The operation was originally called 'Operation Infinite Justice'. It has since been renamed 'Operation Enduring Freedom'.
The United States and Britain have operated in conjunction with the Northern Alliance, an Afghan group opposed to the Taliban, a militarized religious group which had taken control of Afghanistan in 1996 in the chaos which followed the Soviet withdrawal from their country.
At least 48 other nations, including Australia, have become involved with the United States in the conflict in Afghanistan.
Australian military forces were committed to coalition military operations against the Taliban government of Afghanistan in October 2001 as part of what became Operation Enduring Freedom. Australian Defence Force activities in Afghanistan since that date have been known as Operation Slipper
The then Prime Minister of Australia, John Howard, was visiting the United States when the September 11 attack occurred. He has repeatedly stated that the international response to terrorism, including the involvement of Australia, was triggered by September 11.
On September 11, 2006, five years after the initial terrorist attack on the United States, John Howard gave an interview on the ABC's current affairs program Four Corners. During that interview he stated, 'The world has changed since the 11th of September. I mean this was an unprovoked terrorist attack on civilians in the heart of New York and in the heart of Washington. There was no justification of any kind, there was no proximate act of the United States that in any way justified this attack and that's why I say that was the starting point of our consideration.'
2. The war is intended to reduce the threat of terrorism around the world
One of the key continuing justifications offered for Australia sending troops to fight in Afghanistan is that by so doing this country is helping to reduce the spread of global terrorism and so is making the world safer for all people, including Australians.
Central to this argument is the belief that Afghanistan is an important training depot for terrorists and that be removing it, the United States and its allies would strike a significant blow against the spread of terrorism world-wide.
Former Australian Minister for Defence, Senator John Faulkner, put this position in June, 2010, when he stated, 'It is absolutely critical for the safety and security of Australians and Australia to help prevent Afghanistan from again becoming a training ground and operation base for international terrorists.'
Australian Prime Minister, Julie Gillard, stated during the Afghanistan debate in federal Parliament on October 19, 2010, 'If the insurgency in Afghanistan were to succeed, if the international community were to withdraw, then Afghanistan could once again become a safe haven for terrorists. Al Qaeda's ability to recruit, indoctrinate, train, plan, finance and conspire to kill would be far greater than it is today, and the propaganda victory for terrorists worldwide would be enormous.'
Prime Minister Gillard went on to explain, 'The war has put pressure on Al-Qaeda's core leadership, killed some, captured others, forced many into hiding, forced them all on the defensive. Al-Qaeda has been dealt a severe blow.'
The leader of the Opposition, Tony Abbott, though stating that Al-Qaeda terrorists are more likely to be based in Pakistan or the horn of Africa, has gone on to argue, 'Even so, the return of Taliban government would swiftly restore that country to its former position as terror central.'
The current Minister for Defence, Stephen Smith, stated during an interview on the ABC's 7.30 Report, 'We are in Afghanistan because it is in our national interests to be there... we're there because Afghanistan at the time was a breeding ground for international terrorists, a shelterer of al Qaeda...'
A similar point of view has been put by former Australian Prime Minister John Howard, who has argued that were Australian troops to be removed from Afghanistan it would increase the likelihood of neighbouring Pakistan falling under terrorist control.
In an interview given on October 26, 2010, Mr Howard stated, '...contemplate ... the impact on the stability of Pakistan if the West is seen to have been defeated in Afghanistan...
Pakistan is a nuclear-armed state and if Pakistan through any combination of circumstances were to fall under greater terrorist influence or control just think for a moment. And I ask people who criticise our presence in Afghanistan to think for a moment of the consequences of that.'
3. Australia is involved in support of its ally, the United States
Australia has a long-standing strategic commitment of mutual support with the United States. The two countries are each members of the Australia, New Zealand, United States Security Treaty (ANZUS or ANZUS Treaty). This is the military alliance which binds Australia and New Zealand and, separately, Australia and the United States to cooperate on defence matters in the Pacific Ocean area, though today the treaty is understood to relate to attacks in any area.
America supported Australia when under attack by the Japanese in World War II and since then the military power of the United States has become central to Australia's defence strategies. As part of this reliance, Australian governments generally appear to believe that it is necessary that Australian forces must support the United States in major conflicts in which the United States is involved.
A 2006 parliamentary inquiry into Australia's defence relations with the United States stated, 'Evidence to the inquiry was overwhelming in its support for the value and relevance of the alliance, and the contribution that it makes to Australia's national security. It was suggested that the alliance remains as relevant if not more relevant than when it was first conceived to offset the insecurities that arose following World War II. Defence stated:
...the invocation of it on September 11 is testimony to the fact that it is relevant. In its first few years, of course, it was not called upon at all-it just existed. I think it is becoming more relevant as time goes on and is more relevant to us now as issues like the global war on terror and proliferation security and the range of things in which we cooperate with the United States on a global basis actually grow.'
In a speech given in the Australian federal Parliament on October 19, 2010, Prime Minister Julia Gillard stated, 'Australia will stand firm in our commitment to our alliance with the United States, the international community understands this, our friends and allies understand this, our enemies understand this too.'
It has also been noted that there are strong ties of sentiment and shared culture between Australia and the United States, which predispose each to come to the aid of the other. This point was made in a speech given by then Prime Minister John Howard to the National Press Club on September 11, 2002.
Mr Howard stated, 'To an Australian, an attack on New York or Washington is not an attack on a distant, unfamiliar place - and I don't say that unkindly or disrespectfully of any other city in the world - I simply state the reality that because of the commonality of so many features of our culture, an attack on New York and Washington was bound to be felt more deeply and bound to be linked more immediately to the Australian psyche, than attacks on just about any other cities in the world. Not only have many Australians been to both cities, some have lived there for lengthy periods of time. But of course on top of that, we almost nightly see images of both places.'
4. An oppressive theocracy has been removed in Afghanistan
A theocracy is a governing group that centres on religious belief. The Taliban were a theocracy. The Taliban is an Islamist political group that governed Afghanistan from 1996 until it was overthrown in late 2001.
The Taliban, though they gave relative political stability to Afghanistan, were oppressive and denied personal freedoms to many groups within the country.
The United States Department of State makes the following remarks in relation to the Taliban, 'Afghanistan under the Taliban had one of the worst human rights records in the world. The regime systematically repressed all sectors of the population and denied even the most basic individual rights. Yet the Taliban's war against women was particularly appalling...
The Taliban first became prominent in 1994 and took over the Afghan capital, Kabul, in 1996. The takeover followed over 20 years of civil war and political instability. Initially, some hoped that the Taliban would provide stability to the country. However, it soon imposed a strict and oppressive order based on its misinterpretation of Islamic law.'
Then United States President George W. Bush during his remarks to the Warsaw Conference on Combating Terrorism, on November 6, 2001, stated, 'Women are imprisoned in their homes, and are denied access to basic health care and education. Food sent to help starving people is stolen by their leaders. The religious monuments of other faiths are destroyed. Children are forbidden to fly kites, or sing songs... A girl of seven is beaten for wearing white shoes.'
The Taliban were removed from power as part of Operation Enduring Freedom in 2001. As a result of the Talibans' removal it has been claimed that the civil rights of many Afghan people, especially women, have been better observed.
In a speech given in the Australian federal Parliament on October 19, 2010, Prime Minister Julia Gillard stated, 'In primary education, enrolments have increased from 1 million in 2001 to approximately 6 million today. Some 2 million of these enrolments are girls. There were none in 2001. Nothing better symbolises the fall of the Taliban than these two million Afghan girls learning to read.'
5. An elected government has been put in place
In interim government was put in place by Operation Enduring Freedom. In November 2001, after the Taliban government was toppled a new Afghan government under Hamid Karzai was installed and in December 2001 the International Security Assistance Force (ISAF) was established by the UN Security Council to help assist the Karzai administration and provide basic security to the Afghan people.
In 2004 there was an Afghan presidential election which went relatively smoothly and saw Hamid Karzai win in the first round with 55.4% of the votes. The 2009 presidential election was marked by a lack of security, low voter turnout and widespread electoral fraud. The vote, along with elections for 420 provincial council seats, took place in August 2009, but remained unresolved during a lengthy period of vote counting and fraud investigation.
It has been claimed that accusations about electoral fraud are need to be put in context, as although such fraud doubtless occurred, it is only to be expected in as young a democracy as Afghanistan, where there are no democratic traditions and where the country is impoverished and has been devastated by war for generations.
An Independent Electoral Commission (IEC) spokesman, Noor Mohammad Noor, has noted that press outlets and some international observer groups 'have been quick to imply the electoral process is unsuccessful based on allegations of fraud and misconduct.'
Noor Mohammad Noor admitted such cases 'are inevitable in the current security climate' but that their impact was being reduced through the Electoral Complaints Commission process, in which serious examples of fraud are investigated and corrected.
An editorial published in The Washington Times on September 21, 2010, stated, 'Regardless of the results of the 2010 election, the fact it was carried off with less violence, a respectable turnout and more accountability shows that Afghanistan continues to make progress along the path to sustainable democracy.'
A similar position was put by the Australian Prime Minister Julia Gillard in a speech to the federal Parliament given on October 19, 2010. Ms Gillard stated, 'Although we know democracy remains rudimentary and fragile, Afghanistan has a free press and a functioning parliament.
Last month parliamentary elections took place - elections with real and widely publicised problems - but elections did take place.'
6. Australian troops are not in Afghanistan to win a war but to hand over to Afghan forces
It has been argued that neither Australia nor the other foreign forces fighting in Afghanistan should have a simplistic view of what victory in Afghanistan would constitute.
It has been claimed that Afghanistan should be preparing for a transition to political and military independence, where the foreign forces will leave and Afghanistan will maintain its own security.
For this to happen the Afghan military and national police have to be trained to take on the role of independently protecting their country. This role of supplying military training in Afghanistan and helping to stabilize the new Afghan administration is a key element of the Australian mission.
In a speech given in the Australian federal Parliament on October 19, 2010, Prime Minister Julia Gillard stated, 'Our AFP contingent has trained almost seven hundred Afghan National Police at the police training centre for the province. It has also contributed to the successful targeting of corrupt officials and the tackling of major crimes. We are helping build local services.'
The Prime Minister went on to say, 'That is the beginning of transition...with the assistance of Afghan and Australian forces...
Gizab now has a local police force and a new district governor, and the provincial government is beginning to make its presence felt. Again, a place where progress is painstaking and incremental, where there will be new setbacks and where consolidation is needed. Again though, a place where the seeds of transition are being sewn...
There is a new international strategy in place - focused on counter-insurgency, designed to enable transition. Australia's commitment to Afghanistan is not open-ended.'