|Home > Opinion > Article|
But for a country the size of Australia, with a need for a big brother, there is real reason to ensure that we are not only able to contribute to UN or US-led coalitions, but that such a contribution guarantees political impact above its fighting weight. Whether we like it or not, the reality is that the most significant contribution in most cases is seen to be "boots in the sand".
Special forces are always a good option for this because they are high profile and usually have an impact on the conflict out of all proportion to their numbers. However, in a conflict on the scale of the Iraq war, it is unlikely that special forces have been significant enough to achieve the desired political impact, even when considered with our RAAF and RAN contributions.
Overseas media have carried little of Australian involvement in the war, despite our status as the third largest contributor to the coalition. To be seen as significant, given our relative size, our contribution should have been in the order of 7000 servicemen and women. At the same time it would have needed to provide the sort of media opportunities that our air, naval or special forces were unable to achieve because of the nature of their operations.
The obvious choice would have been to send, in addition, the army's 1st Brigade, its mechanised brigade of around 3500. This level and size of force is necessary because anything less than a brigade of conventional troops could be placed in a position where a foreign commander might direct them in action without Australian oversight. A brigade, however, could be kept on relatively independent tasks, better ensuring Australian control over its employment.
Based in Darwin and our first line of land defence, this force has borne the brunt of defence-policy neglect over the last 20 years. With the notable exception of the 2nd Cavalry Regiment, equipped relatively recently with light armoured vehicles, its equipment has been allowed to fall tragically out of date. Understandable when Professor Dibb often declared that he saw no reason for tanks in the Australian Army.
However, if we are to take on the lessons of the Iraq war as "diplomacy by other means", we need to seriously upgrade the 1st Brigade to ensure that it becomes an option for governments that do not wish to risk a commitment to war without knowing that their political objectives will be achieved.
Brigadier Jim Wallace (rtd) is a former commander of SAS, the special forces and the army's 1st Brigade.
Printer friendly version Email to a friend
Also in Opinion
Real weapons of mass destruction already destroyed
US and its allies confront dangerous options in dealing with a belligerent North Korea
The modern Labor tragedy
Fly in ointment is not feminism
A new campaign by Hypocrites R Us
Never heard of me? I can't believe it
As Beazley and Crean spar, Liberals delight
How to stop the stacking of the ABC board
Swallow the bitterness about the baby
Iraq needs long-term Anglo-American control
How the press gallery fails us
A road map for a more prosperous Australia
Is this the end of the liberal party?
Costello is about to cook the books again
Spam made me the man I am
Has feminism let us down?
How SARS slowed China's march into the free world
An American dissents, respectfully
Multiple reasons why the earth doesn't move
UN must step into the breach
One man's voice helped pierce the fog of war
We're a reluctant combatant in the war against world poverty
NZ remains part of Anzac, but the link is fading
Neo-cons get a powerful voice
How CNN hid the truth about Saddam and betrayed the world
The drive to turn Melbourne into Los Angeles
I can send a photo from my phone to my fridge. But why?
A leader on notice
Please, Labor, can we have real politics again?
Iraq lesson can help correct defence policy
|text | handheld (how to)||
Copyright © 2003 The Age Company Ltd
|advertise | contact us|