Australia's 'gun boat diplomacy'

Australia's 'gun boat diplomacy'

Amando Doronila, Philippine Daily Inquirer, Asia News Network,
Manila

In reaction to the car bombing of the Australian embassy in
Jakarta two weeks ago, Australia's Prime Minister John Howard
threatened to deploy Australian anti-terror "flying squads" to
carry out preemptive strikes on terrorist groups in Southeast
Asia to protect Australian lives and establishments in the
region.

Howard's proposal has kicked up a fresh round of irritation in
Australia's relations with its Southeast Asian neighbors already
frayed by Canberra's insolent and patronizing statements over
their capacity to curb terrorist activities and their commitment
to the U.S.-led coalition in the war on international terrorism.
Malaysia and the Philippines, the countries likely to be asked to
host the Australian "flying squads," promptly rejected Howard's
plan.

The proposal has rankled Southeast Asian sensitivity over
their national sovereignty. Malaysian Deputy Prime Minister Najib
Tun Razak said, "We won't allow any preemptive strike when it
comes to our national territory."

The Philippine government rebuffed Howard's project, in the
wake of Malaysia's rejection. "Any intrusion of flying squads
into Philippine territory is out of the question," said a
statement from Manila. Indonesia, where two terrorist attacks
have been made in two years on Australians-one in Bali and the
other on the Australian Embassy-has not reacted as it awaits the
assumption of the presidency of General Susilo Bambang Yudhoyono.

Indonesia is no less prickly over its sovereignty and meddling
in its internal affairs than the Philippines and Malaysia. It is
therefore unlikely that Jakarta would welcome the presence of
foreign troops -- no matter if they are disguised as "flying
squads" -- to ensure the security and safety of foreign interests
in Indonesia. This is not to say that the safety and security of
foreigners in another country are unimportant. National
sovereignty and pride dictate that such security measures be left
in the hands of local authorities. To send flying squads into
their territories is offensive to their pride and reveals the
insensitivity of Australia to Asians' sense of nationalism.

The image conjured up in Southeast Asia by the Howard threat
is that it is a pale imitation of U.S. President George W. Bush's
preemptive policy on terrorism exemplified by the U.S.-led
invasion of Iraq. The plan reminds Asians -- not only Filipinos,
Indonesians and Malaysians but also Chinese -- of American gun
boat diplomacy being resuscitated by Australia.

Through its steadfast commitment to Bush's "coalition of the
willing" on Iraq and through its deployment of 800 troops in the
occupation of Iraq, Australia has etched a strong perception in
Southeast Asia that it is playing the role of regional sheriff in
the counter-terrorism war in the Asia Pacific as a surrogate of
the global gendarme -- the United States -- whose preemptive
strike policy is failing as an effective instrument to fight
terrorism, in the light of the escalating attacks by Iraqi
militants on U.S. troops in Iraq and the execution and hostage-
taking of individuals associated with American interests.

Howard's plan rubs salt on still fresh wounds in the
Philippines which, only recently was condemned by the Howard
government of being a "marshmallow" after the Philippine
government bowed to Iraqi militants' demand to withdraw the tiny
Philippine contingent in Iraq in exchange for the life of a
Filipino truck driver they had taken hostage.

Even in Australia itself, the Howard project has come under
fire from the opposition Labor Party as the general elections
near. It has driven a cleavage between Howard and Foreign
Minister Alexander Downer. Howard's stance has made more
difficult Downer's job of patching up recent irritants between
Australia and key countries in Southeast Asia.

The bombing of the Australian Embassy handed Howard an
opportunity to project a tough antiterrorist stance, and
highlight security from direct terrorist attack as an electoral
issue. But Labor Party leader Mark Latham said that the
preemption stance was "a foolhardy and dangerous foreign policy"
and Labor's shadow defense policy spokesperson, Kim Beazly, has
branded the Howard plan as damaging to closer cooperation between
Canberra and Southeast Asian governments in efforts to combat
regional terrorist groups. Latham seized on the Howard-Downer
differences saying Downer had junked Howard's "dangerous" policy
of preemptive strikes.

The rift emerged after Howard, when asked, if preemptive
strikes included countries of Southeast Asia, said: "Of course,
it does." Contradicting this, Downer said he had previously told
Asian neighbors that Australia would not deploy troops on their
soil and that the government's statements were purely
"hypothetical." Downer added that preemption would not be needed
in Southeast Asia, as governments there "would be able to thwart
terrorist attacks."

In other interviews, some government ministers said preemption
did not foreshadow strikes on suspected Jamaah Islamiyah (JI)
terrorist training camps in Mindanao. Howard and Downer have said
JI camps would not be attacked because there was no evidence it
would attack Australia directly. Any deployment of Australian
teams would require negotiations with host countries on the modus
of their operation and cooperation with local authorities.

Any Australian deployment in Mindanao would be superfluous and
would run into complications with the anti-terror operations
already under way. Joint military exercises are taking place
between Philippine and American troops in connection with their
joint campaign against the Abu Sayyaf, the terrorist group linked
to the international terrorist network al-Qaeda.