A force to be reckoned with
March 10, 2003
FOR a nation of 20 million people, Australia is punching way above its weight on the international stage. With 2000 Australian troops, together with frigates and fighter jets being deployed to the Persian Gulf, Australia is the only country that has so far offered substantial military units to fight alongside Great Britain and the US in the liberation of Iraq.
Prime Minister John Howard's tough position on dealing with Saddam Hussein is reaping dividends in Washington, where there is growing recognition of Canberra's contribution to the coalition of the willing on Iraq, and its significant role in the war on terror.
Comparisons are being drawn between Howard and British Prime Minister Tony Blair. Like Blair, Howard is regarded by senior figures in the Bush administration as a staunch, unswerving ally, and his recent summit meeting with President George W. Bush in Washington was recognition of the growing importance attached to the US-Australian relationship. It is striking that just four world leaders have been invited to talks with Bush on Iraq: Blair, Spanish Prime Minister Jose Maria Aznar, Italian Prime Minister Silvio Berlusconi and Howard.
The Australian PM employs the same fiery rhetoric as his British counterpart. In his op-ed article published last month in all three global editions of The Wall Street Journal ("You Can't 'Contain' Saddam," February 26) one could detect the echo of Blair's voice charged with a dash of Churchillian thunder. Howard warned that the consequences for mankind if the Iraqi dictator unleashed his weapons of mass destruction would be "horrific", and that "the cost of doing nothing is infinitely greater than the cost of acting".
Both leaders have defied strong anti-war sentiment domestically to stand shoulder to shoulder with Bush. Both have survived key parliamentary votes that have questioned their leadership. And both are taking heavy flak from regional powers over their pro-US stances.
The contrast between Australia's position on Iraq and that of Canada, a similar size power internationally, could not be more striking. As one of the world's eight leading economic nations, Canada has played a role in the international debate over Iraq that is both underwhelming and insignificant, reflecting an attitude of nonchalance toward the US drive to build an international coalition. As a consequence, Canadian influence on White House policy is virtually nonexistent. Indeed, many Washington policy makers view Ottawa as a minor irritation, carping from the sidelines. Howard is undoubtedly a far more influential figure in Washington than Canadian Prime Minister Jean Chretien.
Australian forces are likely to not only play a role in any military action against Iraq, but also in a postwar security operation. It is probable that Britain, with its experience in leading peacekeeping operations in Afghanistan, Kosovo, Bosnia and Sierra Leone, will play the lead role in any security operation following the liberation of Iraq. Australian forces, with experience in Cambodia, Papua New Guinea and East Timor, would then be integrated into the US-British command structure.
Strategists in Washington envisage a force of 60,000 troops, including 20,000 British and other non-US forces, will be needed in postwar Iraq. Such a force would be responsible for hunting down weapons of mass destruction, protecting Iraq's energy infrastructure, secur ing its large cities and defending Iraq's borders.
Australian involvement in such a high-profile operation will considerably enhance Canberra's standing on the international stage, and mark it out as a serious player in postwar Iraqi reconstruction. Governments opposed to military action against Iraq, which include France, Germany, Russia and China, could well find themselves frozen out of any role in rebuilding the Iraqi nation post-Hussein.
Australian participation in a postwar security force would also be an important symbol of increasing US-Australian co-operation. There is little doubt that Canberra's unconditional backing for Washington over Iraq will greatly strengthen military as well as economic ties between the two countries.
The US is likely to provide Canberra with full assistance in its plans to create a new anti-terrorism unit, including Special Forces training, equipment provisions and logistics support. The counter-terrorist force is expected to comprise more than 300 commandos and will supplement the existing SAS units. They would be expected to fight terrorism both in Australia and elsewhere. The US and Australia already have a robust intelligence-sharing agreement and, in the wake of the Bali terrorist attack, Howard has articulated a pre-emptive strategy for dealing with terrorists that received strong support from the White House.
The Bush administration will also press ahead with plans to strengthen economic ties with Australia through a free-trade agreement, negotiations for which are expected to begin on March 17.
Howard's determined support for Bush over Iraq, missile defence and the war against terrorism has propelled Australia into the big league of international players. His actions and statements in recent months have mirrored those of Blair, and just as Blair has emerged as the most powerful voice in Europe on the international stage, Howard has positioned himself as the US's most trusted partner in Asia.
Since September 11, Britain has greatly strengthened its position as a global political and military power, while Australia has emerged as a regional force to be reckoned with. Canberra is in a position to move from strength to strength in the 21st century, but will need to maintain and build upon the vision and strategic clarity that Howard has brought to his country.
theaustralian.news.com.au |
