Look, I don’t want to be mean about Scott Morrison but he said something really stupid yesterday and it was all about freedom and the past 20 years in Afghanistan which now appear to have come to nought with Afghans fleeing for their lives.
“Freedom’s always worth it, fighting for it, whatever the outcome,” the prime minister said.
Freedom? Freedom from what?
It is precisely the rationale the Taliban use — in their case the freedom to live in an Islamic state rid of the yoke of the US invader and rid of the great stalking horse of the infidel: democracy. Turns out some people equate freedom with living in a theocracy.
But again, without being mean, what do you expect from a bloke from the shire and the sum of whose experience was state director of the Liberal Party when the Afghanistan invasion kicked off 20 years ago?
It’s disconcerting that Morrison evokes freedom after all we know of how the past 20 years have worked out not only in Afghanistan but in the Middle East. It was the language of president George W Bush and then US secretary of state Condoleezza Rice.
Freedom. Freedom and democracy. Freedom through democracy. The code is clear to any Islamist: it in fact is all about taking away the power of the men of God and and replacing it with the power — and the fallibility — of the people.
It made a kind of sense to anyone in the West who woke up on September 12, 2001, to find that the world had changed in a depressing and thoroughly disorienting way. New York’s Twin Towers, the very symbols of capitalism’s power and prestige, had been felled.
It changed everything, and it was a moment you cannot forget — ever.
It was easy to sell the line that Osama bin Laden started this. And that we are going to end it.
The language experts went into overdrive. The US would attack its Islamic world enemies as a defensive act. Perversely we were sold the dishonest idea that Iraq was the problem and that fixing it — invading it and killing Saddam Hussein — would be a lesson to the wider Middle East.
Abu Ghraib. Renditions. Secret SAS operations. Guantanamo Bay. Hamas terrorists. The war on Islamic extremism was taking casualties at home in terms of transparency, the rule of law and — perhaps most perverse of all — our freedoms.
In the way of the US marketing of war we came to know the names of hitherto obscure individuals. There was Mullah Mohammed Omar, the leader of the Taliban who founded the first Islamic emirate of Afghanistan in 1996 and who was the elusive target of US drone strikes.
And of course there was bin Laden, the leader of al-Qaeda. He was the son of a wealthy Saudi family, holed up in a cave somewhere in Afghanistan. His particular gift to the world was to hit Western targets in the West, a change from the approach of other Islamic organisations such as the Muslim Brotherhood who attacked Western targets in Islamic countries.
Naming the baddies worked as a kind of Hollywood storyline for the clash of civilisations. Getting bin Laden was an end in itself.
Yesterday Morrison, unfortunately, seized on the bin Laden mission, along with “freedom”, as the reason for the war in Afghanistan: “But importantly the reason we went there was to track down Osama bin Laden and to ensure that we denied al-Qaeda a base of operations out of Afghanistan.”
But wiser heads always warned that there was something else called bin Ladenism, and that killing the figurehead would not mean an end to the movement.
So was it worth it?
Invading Afghanistan did have the effect of halting attacks on US soil, which was an immediate post-9/11 goal. Beyond that, though, there is a wider story of doomed US-led efforts to build civil capacity in Afghanistan and the wider Middle East.
Egypt stands out as a prime example. The US attempted to enforce “free and fair” elections when dictator Hosni Mubarak was in power. That too was almost 20 years ago and Egypt, too, has returned to where it was: an oppressive government run on perpetual emergency rule. Egypt has been the standout lesson that democracy — and its companion, freedom — is more than what happens at the ballot box.
In that context it is hardly a surprise that decades of Western-led capacity and democracy building crashed and burned in a virtual instant in Afghanistan this week, giving way to the religious ideologues of the Taliban. Twenty years, after all, is barely a blip for a religious movement that is thinking in arcs of centuries.
The big question now is: will we see a rerun of the past with Islamic terrorism again exported overseas and an emboldened Sunni Islamic extremism in Egypt and the wider Middle East — and the attendant government suppression?
Let the cycle begin again.
Lazy Scott has one thing in common with the Taliban.
Religious mania.
Scummo also said…“No Australian who has ever fallen in our uniform has ever died in vain – ever.”
I guess he’s not heard about Gallipoli. I mean, seriously?
“Freedom” from the lips of the PM that gave us Robodebts I & II : and “JobKeeper to businesses that don’t have to pay their unqualified “debt” back”?
…. Be thankful he didn’t quote Bobby McGee.
The Taliban are slightly more violent than the GOP and Republicans when it comes to hatred of women and others.
The whole US establishment is slightly more violent than the Taliban (1 million deaths in Afghanistan, 2-4 million in Iraq since 1990, 3-5 million in Indo-China, etc).
Not a bad article, David, but why did the deaths of 3,000 Americans on their home soil ‘change the world’ when since 1945 the US has caused the deaths of tens of millions of people on their home soil in something like 50 countries?
It’s the old calculus.
Those were real people not foreigners.
Yes, our PM is a bit of a dill when it comes to freedom. The problem is that freedom is not a single thing. There are many freedoms great and small. For the small and insignificant, my freedom to drive down my street might be taken away with roadworks. That loss might be for a day, week or a month but not forever. Greater freedoms are more significant, such as freedom of thought and expression, within which is freedom of religion. The Taliban has won the freedom to practice its religion, and that is a plus for them. Its religion, though, denies others the freedom to practice their religion. It denies girls and women any other major freedom in life than to grow up to be there to satisfy some man’s sexual appetite, bear as many children as he wants, to honour and obey him and to keep house for him and his family. The Taliban denies freedom of thought and expression inconsistent with its religious beliefs, including those social customs that it believes that its religion supports. It’s society, Saudi Arabia and Iran will provide the nearest things to totalitarian societies that we can find in today’s world, including the somewhat less totalitarian society of China.
Our major freedoms of bodily security, choice of one’s good, thought and expression, association, abode, and movement are all important but some ways of gaining any of them can involve sacrificing others. Reasonable major freedoms are those that most allow other major freedoms to coexist with them. The reality is that Morrison expects us to belief that freedom itself just consists of those freedoms that he supports. In that sense, he is no better than the Taliban, although the freedoms he supports involve less oppression of others than the Takiban’s freedom to practice its religion.
Well said Ian. Theocracies are poison, especially for women. However, Communist states aren’t much fun either. Would you like to be a citizen of China, North Korea, Cuba or Vietnam?
All those countries invaded and impoverished by imperialist powers. Authoritarianism is perhaps freedom from belligerent democracies? The US likes to install sham democracy so that they can control countries. Much easier for regime change if they don’t align with American interests. Many Chinese are very happy living in China from what they tell me.
Very true in the case of China. The vast majority of PRC Citizens support not only their Government but the political system in place. They value safety, peace and ever improving living standards and don’t consider that voting every few years is a valid way to run a country. The Chinese Government is solely focused on China’s National Interest and the people themselves. The upshot is that their Government is doing a far better job than the West is doing.
China wouldn’t bother me at all. Not much different to here in actual reality except they have a competent Government.