January 10th, 2018
Evaluating Prime Minister Rudd’s National Security Statement – Advantages and disadvantages
Kevin Rudd introduces several ways in the first national security statement that can help to enhance Australia’s national security. For example, he presented a sound case for the use of the NSA to advise the governments’ security strategies. The NSA can provide relevant advice to the Prime Minister on policy matters or security situations the country faces due to his experience.
Kevin provides other ways to identify the advantages of statement such as improving the relationship between Australia and other countries like United States of America (USA), China and New Zealand. This is because those countries can develop Australia’s economy and security level. For example, Australia has very good relationships with china evident in the shared economic interests and diplomatic relations. In 2007, China became Australia’s largest trading partner, exemplifying the benefit of the relationship between two counties.
Australia also focuses on the relationship with New Zealand in the area of security, due to the geographical proximity and historical linkages of the two countries. This relationship has grown through the sharing of intelligence and harmonising security procedures to enhance the security level in both countries. Accordingly, Kevin’s statement focuses on strengthening relationship with regional partners, as a way to improve security in the region.
A relatively new aspect in the statement by Kevin Rudd is the support of e-security. Such support arose from the realization of the critical role technologies play in several government processes in Australia. Accordingly, failure to protect such technologies could expose them to threats such as hackers that would cripple the government’s functioning. On a different perspective, the technologies provide tools for terrorists to communicate and share information and data. For that reason, the Kevin insists in his statement of a need to develop the e-security of the country, by developing the country’s capability to detect and avert threats emanating from the cyber space. Such, he noted, could be enabled by the application of technology to support intelligence work by investing in sophisticated information, intelligence and military technology.
In addition, the statement outlines Australian government’s activities to protect and help other countries to develop their security level. For example, in Iraq, Australian government increased the level of its involvement in aspects such as rebuilding Iraq’s economy and developing their workforce though training. Such activities demonstrate how the Australian government can be an element to promote peace and humanitarian initiatives around the world.
The statement presents several plans to develop and support Australia’s national security objectives and goals, which translates to massive financial costs to the government. For example, Kevin Rudd’s plan will cost the government about 42 billion Australian dollars to support careers, develop the level of education in schools needed for implementation, and create a sustainable security approach for the country. As a result, finding the money to implement the statement could prove challenging.
Unnecessary loss of life
Although Kevin explains in the statement that Australia’s support for the war on terror, in countries such as Iraq and Afghanistan, promotes peace, several Australian families have lost their breadwinners and sons in such combatant wars. For instance, in Afghanistan around 20 Australian casualties have arisen from 2008 to 2010. This indicates that an unconditional support for such war could result into several Australian getting killed in a war to protect other countries. When such happens, the families that lose their fathers and sons become devastated thus reflecting on the adverse implications that such support would bring about.