Editorial One
Prime Minister John Key’s decision to commit 143 of our defense personnel to support the troops fighting the jihadists of the Islamic State of Iraq and the Levant (ISIL) has enlisted divided opinion.
While about 49% of New Zealanders have said ‘Yes’ to the proposal, many have opposed the move while some have simply said, ‘Don’t Know.’ It is the last category that may tilt the majority opinion, since such proposals are unlikely to garner more support later.
Those who have supported the Prime Minister can easily be accused of being partisan without considering the real issues that are inherent in the decision. The same can be mentioned of those opposing the movement of our troops into Iraq – that they are against it because they have to demonstrate their opposition to the government.
Opposing ideologies
The argument for or against sending troops anytime to any part of the world in trouble will always be wrought with opposing ideologies. There can never be an agreement on these issues unless one’s own country itself is under attack.
India has had a way out of these tricky situations. It clings to the principle of ‘Non-Alignment,’ stating that what happens inside a country is not its concern, with of course some possible exceptions that may arise from time to time- like the exception in 1971 for creation of Bangladesh in East Pakistan.
Mr Key has made a call as the Captain of a ship or a team. In announcing his decision, he said that New Zealand would be sending a non-combat training mission with Australia to Taji Camp, north of Baghdad to help Iraqi troops fighting ISIL. Up to 143 New Zealand personnel will be sent in May 2015, although the deployment will not be a badged mission. It will be reviewed after nine months and last no more than two years.
Difficult option
Mr Key knew that he faced a peculiar situation of being ‘damned if he did, and damned if he did not.’ This sort of Hobson’s choice does no leader any good. As Prime Minister, he had to decide on a move that will retain and enhance the country’s image as an international citizen discharging an important duty.
It is more than six months since American President Barack Obama gathered about 60 countries into a coalition to ‘degrade and ultimately destroy ISIL’. Since the first air strike in Iraq on August 8, 2014, the campaign has extended into Syria and widened to include arming and training allies such as Syrian and Iraqi Kurds, and Iraqi government forces.
The US Central Command claims that about 6000 ISIL fighters have been killed, including up to half the group’s ‘top commanders.’ Some reckon it has 30,000 fighters in fray. At the end of January 2015, Kurdish fighters in Kobane, a Syrian town on the border with Turkey, said that they had expelled ISIL after four months of grim fighting with help from coalition bombers.
There is however a consensus that progress has been slow and the coalition would be in the region for a long time to come.
Containing ISIL
However, these should not deter New Zealand from addressing the problem at hand, which is to contain ISIL. We are committed, as a signatory to several bilateral and multilateral agreements (not necessarily those of the United Nations) to join the Coalition Forces in combating terrorism, keeping in check the excursions of terrorists and protecting our own land and people.
But as the Coalition closes in on Iraq, their leaders must give credence to the fact that the needs in long run would not just be guns and planes but also a comprehensive strategy and the patient waging of a battle of ideas.
