 |
| Tony Abbott (Image: Flickr User US Embassy Kabul Afghanistan) |
By Brad Halt
Yes, it is in the nation’s interests to combat the threat of international terrorism.
Last week, Heath Pickering wrote an article arguing that international relations theory does not support Australian intervention in Iraq against the Islamic State, also known as ISIS or ISIL. The crux of Heath’s argument is that the government’s job is to serve the interests of Australian citizens, and that there exists no theoretical justification to adventuring beyond Australia’s borders to partake in what amounts to an internal conflict in Iraq.
Heath asserts that the U.S-led intervention serves the purpose of “directly supporting the Iraqi regime and not Australian interests.” He then implies that, despite bipartisan support between the major Australian political parties, as well as widespread support for the mission amongst the Australian public, “[the] nature of the state permits majority decisions only for issues affecting the interests of citizens, not of non-citizens.” What Heath implies is that Australian support for allied efforts to combat IS in Iraq breaches the Coalition government’s duty to attend to the interests of Australian citizens exclusively.
While Heath does not identify exactly what theory supports this line of reasoning, the more fundamental issue stems from his limited, inward assumptions about Australian interests and his failure to properly contextualize the threat of an IS caliphate in the heart of the Middle East. Heath overlooks some extremely important developments in the conflict, which threaten not just the Iraqi state and the stability of the Middle East, but Australian security interests more broadly.
Read the full story at The Diplomat