Like prime ministers before him, Tony Abbott
believes the first responsibility of government is national security –
protecting the citizenry from those who would do us harm.
Being a remote island nation,
historically regarded as a strategic advantage in itself, counts for little
when the most immediate threat to public security now comes from a
self-precipitating enemy within.
Yet judged against
this criterion, it is arguable his government is failing.
Australians approach
the end of 2014 feeling markedly less secure than they began it. More than a
feeling, this is a fact conceded by no less an authority than the government
itself. Acting on the advice of its defence and security experts, the official
"National Terrorism Public Alert System" currently ranks the domestic
threat as "high" – meaning a terrorist attack is regarded as
"likely". It was changed from "medium" in September
where it had been set for years – since September 2001, in fact.
An extra $630 million
for counter-terrorism measures this year, and a solid raft of new powers aimed
at gathering new information on the private dealings of people, have yet to
turn this around.
Nor too has
committing hundreds of Australian Defence Force personnel and sophisticated
warplanes to another ambitious and open-ended Middle-East war. Quite the
opposite.
Being a remote island nation, historically regarded as a
strategic advantage in itself, counts for little when the most immediate threat
to public security now comes from a self-precipitating enemy within.
Notwithstanding the debate about whether Monday's appalling
events in Martin Place constituted terrorism – it was certainly claimed as
politically motivated violence – there will be calls for even tougher
counter-terrorism laws. Stronger surveillance powers, more security personnel,
effective preventative powers, and stiffer penalties.
While a review of the current arrangements is required, the
first order of business must be a targeted examination of what failed in this
case. The questions go to three main areas: failures of intelligence; failures
of the criminal justice system; and the decisions of police on Monday and into
Tuesday morning at the siege site.
Why, when we have been specifically warned by ASIO and the
Australian Federal Police against so-called "lone-wolf" attacks, was
Man Haron Monis, a self-declared Islamic extremist with a horrendous record of
violence and attention-seeking behaviour, not on their active watch list? Why,
given the graveness of the criminal charges against him in the murder of his
former wife, and a slew of quite separate sexual assault charges, was he out on
bail?
Why was the PM advised by the AFP – if that is the case –
that Monis had held a gun licence?
With such obvious systemic failure, nothing less than a
full independent inquiry is needed.
Abbott's instincts in this case have been broadly in tune
with public sentiment. In the hours and days since, he has voiced many of the
primary concerns of Australians regarding a judicial system that let a violent
extremist psychopath walk free.
And he has tacitly acknowledged shortcomings in the
management of the siege by ordering an urgent inquiry to be conducted jointly
by the head of the Prime Minister and the head of the New South Wales Premier's
Department.
Reporters in Canberra noted the look in Abbott's eye when
he was asked if proper consideration had gone into shooting Monis dead.
"Look, I was constantly asking the appropriate
officials whether all was being done," he said, hinting at private views
on which he would not be drawn.
Yet he and NSW Premier Mike Baird were also quick to join
what may turn out to be a premature chorus of acclamation for the NSW police
who had 'control' of the siege.
Self-evidently, if the object of NSW Police was a peaceful
end to the siege via negotiation, that strategy failed. A primary tool in that
plan is time – being prepared to wait it out and hope that the fatigue factor
eventually persuades the hostage taker to give up. Yet time introduces its own
new variables to a situation which is already extremely dangerous and
inherently unpredictable.
Security experts say police had to factor in fatigue not
just in respect of the perpetrator, but the increasing possibility with each
passing hour that things could spin out of control due to the actions of one or
more of the hostages.
Prima facie, there is already some evidence of this
including the view that Monis first used his gun in fury over the successful
escape of some hostages.
In the immediate aftermath of the siege, security experts
contacted by this column, including a former commando trained to respond in
hostage situations, questioned the decision not to shoot Monis when he was in
the view of police snipers.
There were many things to consider including the
possibility of an explosive device. But according to one, an excess of caution
stemmed from a "policing mindset" stuck on the idea of getting
everyone out alive including Monis rather than a focus on getting all of the
hostages out alive even if that necessitated killing the perpetrator.
Another security expert wondered why highly trained special
forces commandos located at Holsworthy who had trained specifically for hostage
situations ahead of the G20 just weeks before, were not brought in.
Any examination of the circumstances leading up to this
crisis must of necessity consider the particularities of the siege itself. A
flurry of self-congratulation that so many survived was at the very least
insensitive given that most escaped of their own accord, and that two innocent
people died.
The Abbott government has shown no reluctance to embark on
Royal Commissions for political purposes – think home insulation and the unions
commissions. Arguably both have turned up some useful public policy lessons.
Cost has proved no barrier. The home insulation inquiry came after whole series
of previous coronial and other inquiries.
With the stakes involved in national security, not to
mention the vast sums of public money being committed, only the most
thoroughgoing, and fully independent inquiry will suffice. The proposed
six-week time frame is too short.
Public confidence demands it. And the families of the
deceased deserve at least that too.
Mistakes were made. Assumptions were wrong. People died.
These things should now be squarely acknowledged in the hope of saving lives in
future.
Mark Kenny is Fairfax
Media's Chief Political Correspondent.
No comments:
Post a Comment