'
‘Casualties must be taken into account’: Howard warned against sending elite soldiers to Afghanistan
International

‘Casualties must be taken into account’: Howard warned against sending elite soldiers to Afghanistan

author
5 minutes, 27 seconds Read

Former Prime Minister John Howard was warned against deploying Australian Special Forces in combat roles in Afghanistan because of the risks, including potential “casualties” and the treatment of Afghan prisoners of war, according to recently released documents.
Cabinet documents from 2005, released on Thursday, contained secret submissions from the National Security Committee (NSC) outlining options for the role Australian troops could play in the fight against the resurgent Taliban.
NSC documents contain details of national security issues and are often not included alongside Cabinet documents, which are compiled and made public after twenty years.

This year’s 212 documents contain crucial information about Howard’s decision to return 150 elite Australian Special Forces soldiers to Afghanistan, with the personnel originally intended to stay for 12 months until 2021.

What was the cabinet advised?

The Australian Defense Force (ADF) was initially deployed to Afghanistan for the US-led Operation Enduring Freedom following the September 11 attacks in 2001, with the primary objective of destroying Al-Qaeda. The elite Special Air Service (SAS) Task Force was withdrawn in 2002.
In mid-2005, the resurgence of the Taliban put pressure on the Howard government to redeploy special forces, with requests from both the US and the Afghan government.
Five days before Howard’s official announcement, a submission was made by then Defense Secretary Robert Hill and then Foreign Secretary Alexander Downer warning against deploying the elite soldiers in combat roles due to “significant” risks.

These risks include the possibility of casualties and Australian forces becoming responsible for the treatment and detention of Afghan prisoners in custody.

Australian Special Forces soldiers spent years in Afghanistan. Source: MONKEY / Ramage Gary

“We recommend against deploying special forces to Afghanistan in a specific combat role,” the submission said.

“Although a deployment of a special force could serve a number of strategic interests, we believe it does not justify the risk.”

They argued that a dedicated combat role for Australia’s elite soldiers would achieve neither security nor reconstruction objectives.

‘Victims should be expected’

The advisory warned that combat operations would be conducted in potentially high-threat environments against “determined and dangerous adversaries” and that “casualties should be anticipated.”
In addition, the advisory said that a deployment of special forces should be avoided without possible US air support and other protective measures, as the Americans had “commitments” in Iraq.
“There are risks of casualties, some of which can be reduced through appropriate training, equipment and safety procedures, but which cannot be eliminated,” the advisory said.

At the time, an Australian soldier had been killed in the line of duty. Australia would ultimately lose 41 soldiers to the war in Afghanistan – the country’s longest ever war.

Warnings regarding prisoners of war

The ministers’ submission included warnings about the risks to Australia at a policy level of being associated with the actions of other militaries within the coalition.
It also warned of the risk associated with the treatment of Afghan prisoners in custody.
“A combat unit … could take custody of prisoners and become involved in their subsequent treatment,” the advice read.
The treatment of Afghan detainees in custody would later form a key part of the landmark 2020 Brereton Report, which stated that there was credible information about 23 incidents in which one or more non-combatants were unlawfully killed by or at the direction of the Australian Special Forces, and which, if accepted by a jury, could constitute the war crime of murder.
It is contrary to the Geneva Conventions, to which Australia is a party, to commit murder or cruel treatment against detained combatants, or non-combatants such as civilians.
On July 13, 2005, Howard announced that a 150-strong special task force, including SAS troops and elite commandos, would be deployed to Afghanistan.
The elite soldiers were tasked with combat patrols in remote areas and with reconnaissance and surveillance operations in cooperation with coalition forces.
A day before the announcement, the National Security Committee had approved a 12-month deployment, noting that it would be “unlikely” the deployment could be extended “more than” a year without plans to increase the contribution.
“The complexity of the situation in Afghanistan may make it difficult to identify an appropriate endpoint for an Australian contribution, and it may be difficult and costly to withdraw from operations once we have committed,” the ministerial submission said.
Newly released documents show that four months after the July announcement, the NSC agreed to expand the Special Forces unit by providing an aviation element to better enhance protection and mobility.

The SAS would remain for many years in what would eventually become twenty rotations involving 3,000 personnel, while Australia’s mission also grew with a ‘Reconstruction Task Force’ deployed to Uruzgan Province in 2006.

A man in a suit addresses military personnel.

In 2005, then Prime Minister John Howard announced the deployment of 150 special forces to Afghanistan. Credit: MONKEY

However, the entry on the reconstruction team and the information on the decision to deploy them are among the eight files that have been completely closed since this year’s release.

The National Archives of Australia has exempted it from disclosure because the item relates to defense strategy and could potentially affect relations with a foreign government.

Defending Australia’s role in Afghanistan

It also found credible information that young soldiers were ordered by seniors to shoot a prisoner, as part of their first killings, in a practice described as “bleeding”.

It also described a practice known as “throwdowns”, in which weapons and radios were placed next to bodies for cover.

‘Broadest possible context’

Reflecting on the special forces redeployment in 2005, 20 years later, Philip Ruddock – then attorney general – said the decision should be viewed “in the broadest possible context”.

“I think it is important that it is seen that we are playing our role responsibly, and you do that together with allies,” he told SBS News in December.

An older man is speaking.

Former Attorney General Philip Ruddock says deployments to Iraq and Afghanistan must be seen in context. Source: MONKEY

Asked if this was the wrong decision, he defended Australia’s role in Afghanistan.

“I think we have to see that we’re playing our part. And part of our role has been to assist… one of our allies, Japan, in keeping the troops in place and protecting them,” Ruddock said.

“I’ve seen what the Taliban have done, and I don’t think we should turn a blind eye to some of the very significant human rights abuses that occur in a situation like this.”

“The contribution we made, which was originally at the sharp end of the operation, turned into something else, but nonetheless it was very much about securing the anti-Taliban forces in Afghanistan and the Australian forces fought very professionally and very bravely.”
— With additional reporting by Rashida Yosufzai.

#Casualties #account #Howard #warned #sending #elite #soldiers #Afghanistan

Similar Posts

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *