| |
Australia's threats anger Asian
allies
By Alan Boyd
SYDNEY -
Renewed threats by Australia to launch preemptive
strikes against terrorists in Southeast Asia have put
Canberra on a predictable collision course with
neighboring governments.
But this may be only
the start of a more aggressive stance toward extremists,
with a state-run strategy group calling for an increased
intelligence activity in the region and greater efforts
to build political stability within the region.
Prime Minister John Howard angered some of
Australia's closest Asian and Pacific allies, including
Indonesia, the Philippines, Thailand and Papua New
Guinea, by vowing on the weekend to respond at source to
any threats against Australian interests.
"It
stands to reason if you believe somebody was going to
launch any attack on your country, either of a
conventional kind or a terrorist kind, and you had the
capacity to stop it and there was no other alternative
than to use that capacity, then of course you would have
to use it," he said in a TV interview.
Howard,
who was a practicing lawyer before entering public
office, added that many believed international law "has
to catch up with that new reality" of global terrorism.
Condemned as "dangerous" by Indonesia and
"unwise" by the Philippines, the comments point to a
sobering reappraisal of the terrorist threat to
Australians since the Bali bombings in October.
Legislators have responded to a public backlash
over the absence of specific warnings to travelers by
pushing through a raft of bills designed to strengthen
the intelligence and security framework.
Federal
and state governments agreed on a A$58 million (US$32
million) package of physical improvements that will
include the stationing of air marshals on international
flights and beefed-up security at overseas embassies.
This was in addition to an allocation of A$128.5 million
in the 2002-03 budget over four years for strengthened
security at airports and an upgraded intelligence
capability that was approved in response to last year's
September 11 attacks in the United States.
However, most attention has focused on changes
to the Security Legislation (Terrorism) Bill that will
empower the leading intelligence agency to probe and act
on perceived threats abroad. Under the amended version
of the bill, the definition of a terrorism threat has
been broadened to cover the activities of persons or
threats to property both within and outside Australia.
Actions that might attract retribution include the
training or support of suspected terrorists, possession
of implements associated with terrorist acts and the
possession of documents "likely to facilitate" a
terrorist act.
Authority to
undertake counter-terrorism operations offshore is granted
under the bill to Australian Security
Intelligence Organization (ASIO), the main domestic security
agency. But intelligence analysts say that ASIO's resources
are over-stretched and that it will probably rely heavily
upon defense sources to secure information and take
follow-up action.
"ASIO gets much of its input
from the Defense Signals Directorate via the Defense
Intelligence Organization and the National Assessments
Office, because - well, to be honest, it is not geared
up to respond to a dispersed and ill-defined threat of
this nature," said the director of a civilian security
company with intelligence links. "One of the great
failings of Australian intelligence, and there are many,
is the inability to bring all the various civil,
military, legal, criminal entities together under one
roof and hammer out a common position, and we will see
this failing causing diplomatic ruptures if Canberra
starts policing in foreign jurisdictions."
Southeast Asian governments have already
rejected an offer, made through diplomatic channels soon
after the Bali bombings, that Australian defense
personnel be given an operational counter-terrorism
function.
But a military intelligence role may
be difficult to avoid, at least until civilian agencies
are overhauled.
ASIO has a listed manpower of
only 550, about 30 percent less than its early-1990s
strength, and a modest funding of A$86 million, which is
0.5 percent of the defense budget. Although its
operational capability was boosted ahead of the 2000
Summer Olympic Games in Sydney, which passed off without
any serious incidents, much of this upgrading was of a
short-term nature.
The Australian Secret
Intelligence Service (ASIS), the agency tasked with
collecting intelligence offshore, is similarly hamstrung
by its small Asian network of operatives, which has
forced the intelligence community to rely increasingly
upon electronics surveillance. In any case, ASIS is
prohibited from acting in a policing role. The agency's
charter also blocks it from "planning for, or
undertaking, paramilitary activities involving violence
against the person or the use of weapons".
One
outcome has been gaps at a policy level, especially
within the Office of National Assessments and Defense
Intelligence Organization, which are the two key
analysis groups. As recently as October, there were
differing opinions on the threat posed by
Indonesian-based Jemaah Islamiyah, which would later be
blamed for the bomb attacks in Bali that killed more
than 180 people. Jemaah Islamiyah was not branded a
terrorist organization by Australia until after the
bombings, despite evidence that it was deeply involved
in a spate of religious murders in Indonesia.
Nevertheless, Canberra appears to have accepted a
recommendation by its leading strategy think tank,
Australian Strategic Policy Institute (ASPI), for an
increased presence in the immediate Asian region.
The ASPI, which is funded by the government but
has an independent mandate, warned in its annual policy
report of the danger of becoming too preoccupied with
the threat posed by unstable regimes such as Iraq.
"We need to prioritize according to one simple
principle: while all aspects of the campaign against
terrorism are important, priority should be given first
to domestic efforts here at home, second to regional
measures, and third to our contribution at the global
level," the report stated.
Howard has drawn upon
the lessons of the Bali bombings to justify his
government's strong backing for a US-led assault on
Iraq, while Washington in turn is solidly behind
Canberra's efforts to beef up regional security efforts.
Australian special forces troops were ordered back from
Afghanistan last month in apparent readiness to play a
supportive role in Iraq.
But some Asian analysts
are convinced that Australia will have limited influence
in predominantly Muslim Southeast Asia as long as it
supports the hardline US posture against Islamic
militancy.
ASPI argued that the threats were
indivisible, though the more immediate danger was from
Australia's own neighborhood, and especially political
instability in Indonesia and Pacific neighbors such as
Papua New Guinea, the Solomon Islands and Vanuatu.
The think-tank called for Canberra to strengthen
the development of democratic government in Indonesia
and take a bigger role in ensuring the survival of
ailing Pacific nations, even at the risk of straining
diplomatic ties.
"Australia can no longer avoid
being drawn too closely into the management of their
internal affairs," the report said of the Pacific
states, which all face intense economic and social
challenges.
"We need to look at a new and more
active role in helping these countries get back on their
feet."
(©2002 Asia Times Online Co, Ltd. All
rights reserved. Please contact content@atimes.com
for information on our sales and syndication policies.)
|
| |
|
|
 |
|
