When it comes to relations with America, Australia has stood out in two special ways.
Whatever the US military adventure — or misadventure — Australia has reliably deployed its troops in support, fighting in wars from Korea to Vietnam to Iraq.
Just as reliably, whatever the conflict, the events have been covered by a battalion of muckraking Aussie journalists with a tenacity that has been a point of national pride since the days of Rupert Murdoch’s father.
These two qualities have collided in spectacular fashion through a scandal that has shaken Australia’s view of itself.
The bombshell moment came in a civil case brought by Ben Roberts-Smith, Australia’s most decorated living soldier, a giant former Special Air Services corporal often pictured meeting the late Queen Elizabeth.
Roberts-Smith had sued The Age, The Sydney Morning Herald and the Canberra Times over a series of 2018 articles that alleged he had committed war crimes in Afghanistan.
His 110-day long “trial of the century” culminated on Thursday with a judgment that some of the allegations made in the newspaper reports, and corroborated by witnesses appearing at the trial, were true.
Anthony Besanko, the presiding judge, found the newspapers had substantially proven that Roberts-Smith was involved in the unlawful killing of unarmed Afghan civilians, including a man with a prosthetic leg and a farmer whom he kicked off a 10m cliff.
The ruling opened a new front in the public debate surrounding the actions of Australian soldiers in Afghanistan. It follows the 2020 publication of the Brereton Report, a four-year war crimes investigation that alleged that 39 civilians had been murdered.
The trial of Roberts-Smith, who was also working in the media industry, has divided public opinion. The billionaire media magnate Kerry Stokes paid his legal fees and was among those quick to defend the disgraced war hero’s actions in the heat of battle.
The scandal could have had more severe consequences for the region. General Angus Campbell, Australia’s military chief, indicated last week how the war crimes allegations were already affecting relations with Australia’s key security partner.
He told a senate hearing that the US government had warned the Australian military after the publication of the Brereton Report that it might not be able to work with Australia’s elite forces. That was because of the “Leahy Laws” that prohibit America’s defence department from supporting any overseas forces implicated in violations of human rights.
While no restrictions were put on co-operation, the revelation of the warning issued in March 2021 showed that the tempest was no passing squall.
The headlines on Friday morning left no quarter for Roberts-Smith who had taken a huge risk by bringing the defamation case. He did not immediately respond to the judgment but the journalists at the centre of the stories expressed relief at their vindication and justice for the victims.
Nick McKenzie, a journalist for The Age, compared the case to another prominent star who launched an undeserved libel claim before being found out. “Someone described Ben Roberts-Smith to me as the Lance Armstrong of the Australian military. I think we must now take that as truth.”
It was the second big win for the Australian media in recent months after Lachlan Murdoch dropped his defamation case against Crikey, a news website that had alleged that Fox News and the Murdoch family were “unindicted co-conspirators” in the US Capitol riots.
Yet the timing of the judgment proved awkward for a country refashioning its military standing in the region.
In April, Australia announced its biggest strategic shift in military posture since the second world war to counter China’s military build-up. The Aukus security deal to acquire nuclear-powered submarines is just one part of a broader push to project a greater influence in the region.
Marcus Hellyer, head of research at the Strategic Analysis Australia, said that “bad taste memes” from China regarding the actions of the SAS had circulated in the past and would probably resurface in the wake of the court ruling.
He said that it was unlikely that the Roberts-Smith judgment would damage Australia’s international security ties but that the reputational damage — and potential criminal action in the future — would hasten the need for a continued “reckoning” in the military over Afghanistan.
“We do need to have that deeper reckoning,” Hellyer said. “We are not perfect but it shows the messy functioning of a democracy in action. These things can’t be swept under the rug.”
Read the full article here
