News

Go back

Should the War Powers be the Captain's pick?

Published 22 Oct 2015

At Glover Cottages on Tuesday 20 October, former diplomat and author Dr Alison Broinowski discussed Australia’s tendency to participate in America’s wars, and how our war powers might be reformed through parliamentary scrutiny. A vice-president of Australians for War Power Reforms and an AIIA member, Dr Broinowski argued that reform of the powers under which Australians are sent to war, often at the sole discretion of the prime minister of the day, is long overdue. Until recently, the issue has received little public attention. Nevertheless, with our deepening engagement in Iraq and now Syria, some members of the media and some scholars are beginning to pay attention. So are an increasing number of parliamentarians. War powers reform may not be a front of mind concern for many, but Australia’s modern experience shows that leaving the decision to deploy troops, in effect, to the prime minister alone, has produced a series of disasters. Every time we wage an illegal war, one that has no clearly articulated objective nor exit strategy, and one in which Australian involvement is dubious, the results degrade Australia’s national interests and inflict unwarranted suffering on distant communities whose opinion of Australia will for generations be shaped by our engagement.

Alison Broinowski crop

Alison presented examples of other democracies’ war powers, among which those with post World War II constitutions strongly favour parliamentary debate and review of military deployments. These do not unfortunately include ‘old Commonwealth’ constitutions (Australia, Canada and New Zealand) which continue anachronistically to give the greatest discretion over such matters to their executives. In the United States, the president has to secure the approval of Congress for military expenditure (which has so far continued to be given to the unending war on ‘terror’), but in the Constitution-less UK, convention has developed that requires parliamentary debate and a vote on deployment of troops. This has led, surprisingly, to the rejection of an invasion of Syria in 2013. Alison envisaged the same happening in Canada under its new prime minister Justin Trudeau. Indeed, the day after Alison’s address, Canada’s new prime minister, Justin Trudeau, announced his decision to withdraw Canadian fighter bombers from Syria. Alison then listed some cogent reasons for changing Australia’s war powers and how to do it, as well as the proposed for not doing so. Well-informed questions from members added other important considerations to the discussion.