No time for weakness
- Andrew Bolt From: Herald Sun August 26, 2010
Defence Minister John Faulkner. Source: Herald Sun
THIS is no way to wage a war, with such tears and sighs even from our Defence Minister.
And not with such ambivalence from President Barack Obama, either - a deadlier sign of weakness.
I mean no disrespect to Senator John Faulkner. No, I admire the Defence Minister's obvious compassion.
But after watching the press conference called on Wednesday to announce the latest death of a Digger in Afghanistan I must ask: is this wise?
Faulkner appeared with Prime Minister Julia Gillard and the chief of the defence force, Air Chief Marshal Angus Houston, all looking grim.
Houston spoke soberly of the sacrifice Lance Corporal Jared MacKinney had made for his country.
Gillard went further, though, talking of "this dreadful news": "Of course it's a shock, it's a tragedy."
But a shock? A soldier's death in war?
Surely we must expect that when we send our soldiers to fight, some will die?
Then spoke Faulkner, face contorted in pain and voice halting.
"Coming so soon after the deaths of Private Tomas Dale and Private Grant Kirby late last week this tragic news is another very heavy blow for the defence community and of course a devastating one for the soldier's family," he said in a voice from the sepulchre.
"We've lost a fine and dedicated soldier, but he was also, and more importantly, a much loved young man whose death is going to leave a terrible, terrible gap in the lives of those around him.
"Much too often I've had to stand here and announce bad news and offer condolences to grieving defence families."
Every word heartfelt. Every sympathy honourable. I'd hope every Australian also reflected on the sense of duty that drove this soldier to serve, and on the price now paid by not only him, but his wife, daughter and unborn son.
But I repeat my question, as we now see TV footage from the Sydney funeral of SAS Trooper Jason Brown, attended by the Prime Minister and Opposition Leader Tony Abbott.
Was this intensity of public grieving - broadcast on every big-city television station - wise?
Both Labor and the Coalition are convinced the war in Afghanistan must be won. That country, once used as a safe haven by the masterminds of the September 11 attacks, must not be allowed to return to the savage control of the Taliban and its al-Qaida allies.
Jihadists everywhere would only take fresh heart, and find a new refuge. Many more civilians would die at their hands, should we fail.
Most of our soldiers in Afghanistan seem as sure as our politicians that their mission must not be abandoned.
But it's also clear the public is growing bored with Afghanistan, nine years after we first sent troops there. Many people now wonder whether the price, especially in lives, is worth the seemingly meagre gains.
After all, the Afghan government remains corrupt and largely ineffectual. Half the Afghan troops we train just go home.
Meanwhile, more coalition soldiers are dying there this year than in any before, and while we're sending young Australian men to help protect Afghanistan's fledgling democracy, we're seeing young Afghan men coming the other way in boats, leaving the work to us.
What gains we make there are almost never discussed. And there are gains.
When I last visited, for example, I saw young women, unveiled, working as journalists for a free media.
Under the Taliban, those women would be back in burqas, back at home, and back to hearing only the news the mullahs permitted to be reported.
But about the setbacks we suffer we hear plenty. The media feeds on them. The Greens, the party of the perpetually irresponsible, gleefully exploits them.
And now we see our leaders crumple as they announce death by death, even though we've lost only 21 soldiers in nine years of fighting.
What a change this is from 60 years ago, when we could lose 32 in a single battle in Kapyong valley and not flinch from the fight in Korea. More bloodied, but less bowed.
I DO not for an instant believe we should not publicly mourn the death of each Digger who dies in Afghanistan. I do not want us to play down the loss suffered by those who loved them.
But which Australian, on hearing Faulkner's sigh that "much too often" he's had to "stand here and announce bad news", would not question why we still fight in Afghanistan?
Which would know why we do?
Then there's this danger. The Taliban and their jihadist allies know they can never defeat our soldiers, but they can defeat our will to send them. Victory for them will come not on the battlefield, but in Western homes.
Why else the propaganda videos they release to cow the West? Why else the message sent the US by Osama bin Laden a year ago, jeering that "Obama is a weakened man. He will not be able to stop the war"?
The sighs of a Faulkner, easily found on the internet, could only convince our watchful enemy the West is too weak to fight for much longer.
In fact, the Taliban is counting on it already, thanks to the disastrous vacillating of Obama, whose troops comprise most of the coalition forces in Afghanistan.
This week the head of the US Marine Corps, James Conway, warned that the arbitrary deadline set by Obama for a pullout of US troops - July next year - was "giving our enemy sustenance".
"In fact we've intercepted communications that say, 'Hey, we only have to hold out for so long'," Gen Conway told a Pentagon news conference this week.
In truth, it would take "a few years before conditions on the ground are such that turnover (to Afghan forces) will be possible for us".
Conway excused Obama by damning him, saying the President - threatening war to a resurgent Taliban but promising withdrawal to impatient Americans - was "talking to several audiences at the same time".
Trouble is, this wired-up world no longer allows leaders to send different messages to different audiences.
We see both faces now. Even a Faulkner cannot show a firm jaw to the Taliban, but red eyes to Australians.
This is a war in which our leaders must instead show all the resolve they say they feel - if they truly mean to win. They are being watched, you see.
No comments:
Post a Comment