Download - Royal Australian Navy

140 australian maritime issues 2009: spc-a annual
nation sought to maintain the influence of a more powerful and influential Western ally
in the region. In 1955, Australian troops joined with Britain and New Zealand to form a
brigade under the Australia, New Zealand and Malayan Area (ANZAM) pact. In the same
year, Australia additionally joined with the US, Britain, France, New Zealand, Pakistan,
Thailand and the Philippines to form SEATO. This pact provided for defence against
communist aggression directed at any member state, and was later expanded to include
the democracy in South Vietnam. 16
Yet, the trade off for securing such treaties with larger and more powerful friends invariably
meant an expeditionary commitment, all of which yielded little for Australia’s national
interests. Australia’s decade long expeditionary commitment to the Vietnam War resulted in
an ignominious withdrawal of western support for South Vietnam in the mid 1970s. 17 None
of the foreign armies involved could achieve success despite a massive and continually
increasing commitment of soldiers and firepower; millions of young Vietnamese combatants
and non-combatants, and American and Australian troops were killed; untold destruction
was inflicted on Vietnam; and enormous damage was done to Western standing. Indeed, as
academic Alan Stephens indicates, in the conduct of such endeavours one man’s ‘expedition’
is another man’s ‘invasion’. 18 Further, Australia’s scorecard for such operations reads as
follows: one disaster (Vietnam), one fiasco (Iraq), one disaster-in-waiting (Afghanistan), and
a few blunders (East Timor, the Solomons). 19 Such sentiments indicate the core weaknesses
of expeditionary campaigns at all levels of operations.
At the coalface, the claim is regularly made that boots on the ground are the answer
to defeating insurgents and guerrillas. 20 There is a perception that these are the only
combatants whom Australian troops are currently facing. Yet the empirical results of
Australia’s military commitments overseas indicate no truth in this notion. Indeed, the
major challenge for Australian troops on contemporary operations offshore today lies in the
very environment, cultural and physical, in which they serve. More than ever before, the
work of deployed personnel requires a certain intellectual breadth outside that associated
with a traditional military role; this invariably including humanitarian, diplomatic and
governance building duties. Sailors, soldiers and airmen at all levels must be educated on
the environments into which they deploy, and, more importantly, they must be tolerant
and well versed. They must possess knowledge and understanding of the context of events,
geography, and how different the political and moral standards of other societies may be
from Australia. 21 Failure to impart such fundamental education builds an inherent weakness
into a contemporary expeditionary operation before it even commences. George Lucas is
succinct in his appreciation for educating this understanding. Indeed, it:
Might be understood as a new moral requirement of just war doctrine
… the moral responsibility for preparing present and future warriors
... for the moral challenges and ethical responsibilities incumbent upon
them in combat. 22