Australias Approach to Counter-Terrorism and Counter-Insurgency since 9/11 - Assignment Example

Question 1: Describe and analyse Australia’s approach to counter-terrorism and counter-insurgency since 9/11. Australia’s approach to counter terrorism and counter insurgency since 9/11 is generally classified into four categories namely (1) prevention, (2) preparedness, (3) response and (4) recovery (Burch, 2007 p. 9). Description and analysis of these approaches are shown in the following section. Description of the Counter-Terrorism Approaches of Australia Approaches 1 and 2: Prevention and preparedness. Improved intelligence capacity, increased effective information sharing, better detection capacity, and improved law enforcement coordination (p. 9) are the important specific approaches to counter terrorism and emergency. It will help Australia prevent the occurrence of terrorism and prepare for countering its infiltration into the country. The Australian Security Intelligence Organisation or ASIO it is in charge of domestic intelligence to intercept, thwart or manage threats or incidents of terrorism. It “collects, analyses and distributes information on threats to national security” (Commonwealth of Australia 2005 p. 3:2) to significant agencies in the Australian Government so that they can control such threat and prevent incident of terrorism. Controlling such threat would include criminal prosecution by appropriate agencies. A National Counter-Terrorism Alert System has been set up as part of controlling or preventing the incidents of terrorism. It impacts towards Australia’s states and territories as well as business industry. Low, medium, high, and extreme are the four levels of the counter-terrorism alert system. Low means terrorist attack is not expected. Medium means terrorist attack could possibly occur. High means terrorist attack is likely. Extreme means terrorist attack is imminent or has already occurred. (p. 3:3). This alert system and information gathering on threats from terrorist incident are widely coordinated to ensure safety of Australian borders and transportation infrastructure such as aviation and maritime systems. It will also intercept and manage threats from chemical, biological, radiological and nuclear attacks. Approach # 3: Response. Appropriate and immediate response from the Australian Government is necessary in the event of occurrence of terrorist attack with coordination from States and Territories. Public safety should be the primary concern in any response that would be decided by the government, states and territories. Minimise deaths and prevent further terrorist incidents and recovery of safety of Australian grounds are the primary goals (p.4:2) of the response to be decided by the Australian government. Also, the international impact of the response must also be given weight. “Police and other emergency services” (p.4:2) operate a response towards a suspected terrorist incident and determine it if is truly a terrorist attack. Police then would take control of the situation if the latter was determined and coordinates with States and Territories and the Australian Government for appropriate jurisdictional and national response. Approach #4: Recovery. The recovery approach towards a terrorist incident involves a process of coordination to assist affected communities to reconstruct physical, economic and social infrastructures damaged by the terrorist attack. Services of hospitals, banks, and public works will be deployed to carry out recovery operation based on the following five aspects: (1) community recovery, (2) pyscho0social and health recovery, (3) infrastructure recovery, (4) economic recovery, and (5) environmental recovery. Legal Approaches. Australia implemented or revised existing laws to suit the needs of its National Counter Terrorism Plan which covered the approaches discussed above. It strengthened its border security through amendments of its Border Security Legislation in 2002 security legislation. It enacted several legislations to cover terrorism related offences or strengthen current offences under its current laws. The Security Legislation Amendment on Terrorism Act of 2002 added new offences in the Criminal Code Act of 1995. Consequently, the Criminal Code Amendment Act of 2000 served as an anti-hoax legislation expanded offences related to applying threats of terrorism using postal services. There are other amendments done with the Criminal Code Act that expanded offences related to espionage, terrorism and slaughter of Australians outside Australia. There were other laws that expanded offences of terrorist organisations stipulated in the Security Legislation Amendment Act of 2002 and the Criminal Code Amendment Act of 2004. These two laws also cover legislations allowing the Commonwealth to legislate on matters related to terrorism and enhance the power of ASIO to investigate matters related to terrorism in order to prevent and prepare for terrorist incident. (Ruddock, 2004) Analysis of Australia’s Approach to Counter-Terrorism The Commonwealth of Australia does not have any history of internal threats (Burch 2007) where it can derive lessons to counter insurgency within the country. However, it was able to create a comprehensive National Counter Terrorism Plan (Commonwealth of Australia 2005) that lay down approaches particularly the coordination of agencies across the national government, states and territories in order to prevent, prepare and respond to incidents of terrorism as well as implement a recovery plan in the even of a terrorist incident. Further it was able to complement this plan with either new or improved legislations that will give legal basis to the four approaches it implemented to counter terrorism. Given that Australia does not have any experience yet with terrorism incident, it has also strengthened its coordination with international organisations and nations like the United State of America and United Kingdom in crafting its counter-terrorism plan. It is not a secret that former Prime Minister of the Commonwealth openly and intensively supports the anti-terrorism stance of the USA (Wright-Neville, 2005) after the 9/11 attack. Thus, the crafting of Australia’s own anti-terrorism plan is heavily influenced by that of the USA. In doing so, it directly involved itself in fighting terrorism as a global issue. It manifested this stance when it covered slaughter of Australians outside of Australia as an offence under its amended criminal code. Thus, terrorist incidents affecting Australians abroad is directly a usurpation of the criminal law of the Commonwealth of Australia. With this in mind, Australia has initiated coordination of law enforcement training with other Asian countries (Wright-Neville, 2005) with the goal of enhancing the ability of Asia to counter terrorism. However, such initiative might not be that reliable for some countries given that Australia as a country does not have any direct experience yet with terrorism to become reliable trainers on how to prevent and prepare terrorist incidents. Question 2: There have been claims that Australia’s law enforcement and intelligence agencies have changed substantially in the past decade. Critically evaluate the ways in which they have changed. The passage of the Australian Security Intelligence Organisation or ASIO Legislation Amendment (Terrorism) Act of 2003 increased the power of ASIO to gather intelligence data about activities of terrorist in Australian as well as investigate offences that are covered under the Criminal Code Amendment Act of 2003 (Ruddock, 2004). This amendment in the criminal code benefited the Australian Federal Police of AFP. Neither of these agencies have relevant experience in relation to terrorism prior to 9/11 attacks in the USA. However, both of these agencies have strengthened their roles with the various legislative changes passed by the Commonwealth of Australia. These legislative changes gave both these agencies increased authority on intelligence and detention respectively. The following sections discuss the specific changes or enhancements in the roles of the ASIO and AFP as a result of these legislations to counter terrorism. ASIO’s Enhanced Investigative Power ASIO is Australia’s “domestic intelligence organisation” (Burch, 2007, p. 8) whose charter was expanded to address various threats in the security of the Commonwealth of Australia particularly from terrorism. Under the ASIO Legislation Amendment Act of 2003 gave ASIO the power to detain people for questioning involved in terrorist activity without a warrant which make it more aggressive in gathering information to the point of being accused of obstructing privacy of individuals (Burch, 2007) suspected of having involvement in terrorist activities. ASIO is authorised by the ASIO Legislation Amendment Act of 2003 to detain individuals suspected of terrorist activity for up to seven successive days and 24 hours of questioning. ASIO plays significant role in securing Australia’s borders from terrorism by being involved in border surveillance, determining movement of people as well as investigating the controls of Australian Custom services (Ruddock, 2004). Its role in this area is very important to avoid the manner in which the attacks in 9/11 in the USA replicated in Australia’s borders. Thus, it is not only the AFP that is responsible for looking after the security of the borders of Australia. AFP’s Enhanced Investigatory and Law Enforcement Powers Enhanced investigatory power. The Anti-Terrorism Act of 2004 provided the AFP closer cooperation with international law enforcement agencies in relation to investigation of terrorist incident that involved Australians abroad as casualties. This particular role of the AFP has not been prioritized a decade ago particularly prior to 9/11. It gave the AFP an international perspective as well as direct experience on terrorism incident which it had not experience before the Bali Bombing in October 2002 (Ruddock 2004). Investigations of terrorist incidents are complex in Australia given its equally complex State, Territory and international borders (Ruddock 2004). Furthermore, coordinating with international agencies with different time zones hindered AFP’s international investigations on terrorism particularly in gathering evidence and questioning suspects of terrorism. The Anti Terrorism Act of 2004 addressed these issues in AFP’s investigatory power by extending the period of investigation for “suspected terrorism offences and gives law enforcement agencies extra time to conduct international inquiries” (p. 260) Enhanced law enforcement power. The AFP’s role in terms of law enforcement has been expanded to cover offences related to terrorism which was added in the Criminal Code of 1995 as part of the Security Legislation Amendment Act of 2002. Engaging in terrorist act, provision or receipt of training connected to terrorism, possession of materials related to acts of terrorism, collection or creation of documents that would likely facilitate terrorist acts and performance of acts to prepare for terrorist acts are some of the offences that the AFP must monitor and enforce its police powers. Another set of offences that the AFP have to monitor is the commission of hoax to perpetrate terrorist acts such as the use of postal services, creation of threats, or sending of dangerous articles. Also, it is crucial that the AFP arrest offences related to the use of explosives or devices that are lethal, espionage offences, and murdering Australians abroad. These additional offences as a result of the counter-terrorism efforts of the Commonwealth of Australia increased the burden of law enforcement as well as investigatory responsibilities on the AFP. These offences made it crucial for the AFP to closely coordinate with the ASIO in intercepting these offences and established its relation to terrorism. The National Counter-Terrorism Plan of the Commonwealth of Australia tasked the AFP to coordinate with the national, state and territory governments on the conduct of its investigation of a terrorist incident (Commonwealth of Australia 2005). This responsibility changed the regional or local focused of law enforcement. It is common before that law enforcement in one state or territory does not necessarily coordinate with the national government particularly on local law enforcement issues. However, with the advent of terrorism and the succeeding legislation requiring the AFP to coordinate with these respective domestic governments as part of the National Terrorism Centre strategy wherein all relevant agencies coordinate with each other on matters related to terrorism so that the action of every agency or governments is based on a well shared information thereby making their decisions a matter of national interest. References Burch, J. (June 2007). A Domestic Intelligence Agency for the United States? A Comparative Analysis of Domestic Intelligence Agencies and Their Implications for Homeland Security. Homeland Security Affairs, Vol. 3 No. 2. Available at www.hsaj.org Commonwealth of Australia (September 2005). National Counter-Terrorism Plan, 2nd Edition. Ruddock, P. (2004). Australia’s Legislative Response to the Ongoing Threat of Terrorism. UNSW Law Journal, Vol, 27 No. 2 pp. 254-261 Wright-Neville, D. (December 2005). Fear and Loathing: Australia and Counter-Terrorism. Read More