Centre for Policy Development's Blog, page 35

New US Secretary of Defence James Mattis and the lessons of history

When president-elect Donald Trump announced former general James Mattis as his pick for defence secretary, he described Mattis as “the closest thing” the US had to general George Patton.

Patton led US forces in World War II, including as part of the Allied offensive across Europe after the Normandy invasion.

Mattis may remind Trump of Patton, but he can’t conduct the US military like Patton did. Mattis knows this, even if Trump’s early foreign policy forays show scant regard for history or statecraft and a dangerous propensity to extemporise.

Now he’s been confirmed, here’s a piece I wrote about new Def Sec James Mattis in December https://t.co/TIwP4Ny0TF @australian #Inauguration

— Travers McLeod (@TraversMcLeod) January 21, 2017

In November 2008, I travelled to Norfolk, Virginia, to interview Mattis, then commander of US Joint Forces Command and supreme allied commander for NATO.

I was researching the impact of law on US counter-insurgency operations in Iraq and Afghanistan. Three years earlier, the US had been described by Oxford academic Nico Krisch as a “lawless hegemon”. Not long afterwards, Mattis and general David Petraeus spearheaded a new approach through their counter-insurgency doctrine.

David Kilcullen, an Australian who advised Petraeus, called Mattis and Petraeus “an insurgency within the bureaucracy” that kept “pushing for change in the face of outright opposition”.

Any apprehension I felt about interviewing a general with a call-sign “Mad Dog” subsided once we met. Here was a genial man, softly spoken, who took each question on its merits and answered thoughtfully.

Mattis is a student of history, famous for giving soldiers thousands of pages of reading material before they deployed.

Counter-insurgency in Iraq, Mattis said, was only new “if we don’t read our own history”. But that didn’t mean they could “dust off” Cold War practices.

One historical text Mattis will know well is Carl von Clausewitz’s On War. The Prussian general and military theorist told us war has always been shaped by the “spirit of the age”.

This takes us back to Patton, and to Normandy. Mattis used that example to illustrate the changing character of war, especially the need for force to be used proportionately.

“When you look at the number of French people that our air and naval bombardment killed in Normandy to get those landing forces ashore, we just took the French villages of Sainte-Mere-Eglise and others, it was just the way of war. When you look at what we did to Dresden, we could never do something like that in today’s world,” said Mattis.

Mattis said the consequence of the “information age” for his soldiers was the need for them “to be able to explain what we are doing”.

Their ability to give a “compelling persuasive argument” that their values are the right values depends on being fluent in the laws of war, particularly where civilian casualties are involved.

For Mattis, “if the strategy is not sound, not ethically based, then the operation is going to have a challenge”.

One might be “doing the right thing on the battlefield” but “because of the immaculate conception of war that our laws bring with them”, unless civilian casualties can be explained in those terms there are real costs.

During operations in Afghanistan there was often a marginal delay, in one case just 17 seconds, between an incident occurring and it appearing on YouTube.

The approach championed by Mattis and Petraeus had no time for torture — a clear departure from the “fog of law” that existed in the early years of the Iraq and Afghanistan campaigns. Unlawful detention or interrogation practices were anathema to “living your values”. For Mattis, it was simple: “If you study history you recognise the reality of supremacy of an ethical approach.”

Words like that hardly marry with Trump’s campaign rhetoric, when he spoke about bringing back waterboarding and other forms of torture. When Trump met Mattis after the election, Mattis told him it wasn’t useful — he’d prefer using “a pack of cigarettes and a couple of beers”.

Unlike Trump, Mattis defended NATO during the campaign and knows the alliance intimately. He is suspicious of Iran but doesn’t support revoking the nuclear deal agreed by President Barack Obama.

As US allies work diligently to predict US actions, and reactions, after Trump’s inauguration, they are likely to be reassured by the figure set to head the Pentagon across the Potomac.

In Mattis, they can count on someone who will know their history, and the history of their alliance with the US. This assumes Mattis can successfully switch from being a general executing civilian orders to a civilian with control over the military.

This may be the most significant year in international relations since 1989.

Obviously, 2001 was a watershed because of 9/11 but reactions largely reinforced the existing international order.

This year is unmistakably different: the two countries most responsible for shaping the rules of the international system since World War II — the US and Britain — have voted to retreat from it. The timing, method and scale of their retreat is still unknown. That makes the situation only more precarious.

The last shift of this magnitude was probably in 1989, when the Berlin Wall fell and the Cold War came to an end.

Mattis will be conscious that the election of his commander in chief, not long after the Brexit vote, has few, if any, historical antecedents. But he will also be acutely aware that unlawful or disproportionate use of force by a great power has many, including in Iraq and Afghanistan barely a decade ago.

History is not on their side.

Mattis has made some hawkish statements, but is the right choice for an ahistorical president. With Petraeus, he changed the mindset of the US military.

Let’s hope that if duty and ethics call, Mattis can change the president’s mind, too.

This piece first appeared in The Australian on 5 December 2016 under the title Donald Trump’s ‘Patton’ has history in his corner. 

The post New US Secretary of Defence James Mattis and the lessons of history appeared first on CPD.

Asia Dialogue on Forced Migration – December update

The Secretariat and members of the Asia Dialogue on Forced Migration (ADFM) have been busy since meeting in Kuala Lumpur in September 2016.

After the New York Refugee Summits in September, the ADFM Secretariat released a statement and wrote an article about progress in the region on forced migration. We argued the Asia-Pacific may be where sustained, constructive action on forced migration is found over the next two years.

ADFM statement: Asia-Pacific region can galvanise the globe on migrants, refugees after New York Summit – 21 September  2016

How the Asia-Pacific can lead the way on migrants and refugees, September 21 2016.

The Secretariat then prepared the ADFM submission to the Review of the Region’s Response to the Andaman Sea Situation. The Review was authorised by Bali Process Ministers in March 2016, following a recommendation from the ADFM.

Senior officials and representatives of member states and organisations of the Bali Process considered the Review findings at their Ad Hoc Group Senior Officials’ Meeting in Colombo on 16 November 2016.

We are pleased to report that the ADFM’s recommendations were accepted and senior officials have agreed to critical improvements to the way the region responds to mass displacement of migrants. You can read a statement from the ADFM conveners about the outcomes in Colombo here:

ADFM statement: Bali Process countries signal preparedness for constructive action on forced migration – 20 December 2016

The Colombo meeting agreed the administrative arrangements and modalities of the Bali Process Consultation Mechanism. Senior officials encouraged countries to develop necessary operational systems, including for search, rescue, disembarkation, and registration, in order to manage mass displacement events, as well as to develop post-disembarkation assistance provisions. They have established a Task Force on Planning and Preparedness, comprising operational-level governmental officials, who will coordinate and harmonise the development of the operational systems. Senior Officials’ Meeting Co-Chairs have undertaken to meet with ASEAN institutions to identify extant capacity, complementarities and shared interests, with a view to coordinated responses in the future. ADFM recommendations on security matters were also endorsed. The SOM Co-Chairs’ Statement, and the Andaman Sea Review Outcome Document are available here: http://www.baliprocess.net/ad-hoc-group/ad-hoc-group-senior-officials-meetings/

Senior officials and representatives of member states and organisations of the Bali Process expressed their gratitude to the ADFM for first proposing a review of the region’s response to the Andaman Sea situation. Further to this, the meeting agreed to invite the ADFM to partner with Bali Process members and organisations to provide ongoing policy advice and ideas. The critical paragraph [18] of the Review is extracted below.

“We believe that substantial progress in these areas requires joined-up expertise across the region. In this regard, we recognise the contributions made by the Asia Dialogue on Forced Migration, and look forward to its continued partnership with the Bali Process. We believe that the Dialogue is well-placed to undertake targeted research and contribute ideas that could assist the Task Force on Planning and Preparedness in its work. For example, the Dialogue could undertake work to identify existing technical capacity in the region, particularly in humanitarian assistance and disaster management, and how this might be utilised in the event of large influxes of irregular migrants. The Dialogue could also undertake research or prepare policy papers on critical issues, such as:

(1) root causes of mass displacement;

(2) temporary local stay arrangements; and

(3) expanding safe, legal and affordable migration pathways as an alternative to irregular movement.

Such papers could be considered by the Task Force on Planning and Preparedness. The Task Force Co-Chairs could also commission the Dialogue to undertake other specific tasks on an ad hoc basis, that would be of value to the Task Force. In carrying out such tasks, the Dialogue would take into account the existing and previous work undertaken by the Regional Support Office and other relevant programs. We are conscious that such work may contribute directly to the development of the global compacts on refugees and migrants, for which negotiations will soon commence; and in which the members of the Bali Process have a direct interest.”  

We are pleased by the progress made in the region, and also by this encouraging recognition of the ADFM. We are also mindful much work remains to be done to address the challenges of forced migration in the region.

We note the grave turn of events in Rakhine State in Myanmar and express our concern about the increasing reports of violence against people who identify themselves as the Rohingya. ADFM conveners made a statement regarding the situation in November 2016, which is available here:

ADFM statement: Situation in Rakhine State in Myanmar of grave concern – the region must be on high alert - 29 November 2016.

The next ADFM meeting will be held in Indonesia on 5-7 March 2017 where will we discuss human trafficking and the best way to take forward the actions agreed in Colombo.

Thank you for your ongoing interest in and support to the ADFM. For more information, click here to visit the ADFM homepage. 

 

The post Asia Dialogue on Forced Migration – December update appeared first on CPD.

Fellow Ian Dunlop calls for political-climate honesty and responsibility

As Federal Parliament wraps up for 2016, we’ve witnessed another year of dismal, polarising discussion of climate change. Instead of talking about the energy, health, economic and security implications of climate change, the political debate still often fixates on whether it is real or not.

Throughout 2016, our Fellow for Climate and Energy Policy, Ian Dunlop, has tried to raise the standard of public debate on climate change. In June he joined a growing number of prominent Australians to sign the Climate Emergency Declaration to call for urgent government action.

In his latest op-ed he shows the tangible impacts of climate change across the world, and argues that the Paris Agreement is no panacea for the array of climate challenges we face, including energy security. Ian also argues that in a real sense, we are approaching the point-of-no-return and identifies the projects that must be halted to begin working towards our international and moral commitments to climate change action.

Read Ian’s op-ed here.

 

Image credit: Mining.com

The post Fellow Ian Dunlop calls for political-climate honesty and responsibility appeared first on CPD.

Fellow Ian Dunlop calls for political-climate honesty and responcibility

As Federal Parliament wraps up for 2016, we’ve witnessed another year of dismal, polarising discussion of climate change. Instead of talking about the energy, health, economic and security implications of climate change, the political debate still often fixates on whether it is real or not.

Throughout 2016, our Fellow for Climate and Energy Policy, Ian Dunlop, has tried to raise the standard of public debate on climate change. In June he joined a growing number of prominent Australians to sign the Climate Emergency Declaration to call for urgent government action.

In his latest op-ed he shows the tangible impacts of climate change across the world, and argues that the Paris Agreement is no panacea for the array of climate challenges we face, including energy security. Ian also argues that in a real sense, we are approaching the point-of-no-return and identifies the projects that must be halted to begin working towards our international and moral commitments to climate change action.

Read Ian’s op-ed here.

 

Image credit: Mining.com

The post Fellow Ian Dunlop calls for political-climate honesty and responcibility appeared first on CPD.

Avoiding gridlock: policy directions for Australia’s electricity system | DISCUSSION PAPER | December 2016

Today CPD is releasing a new paper titled Avoiding Gridlock: Policy Directions for Australia’s Electricity System.

The paper is written by Alexander Marks, who was the recipient of the 2016 CPD Sustainable Economy Program Studentship. The paper is based on research Alex completed at Oxford University’s Smith School for Enterprise and the Environment.

Avoiding Gridlock highlights that an updated regulatory approach is required to build the secure, sustainable energy system Australia needs to power a decarbonised economy in the 21st century.

 

Key documents

       

Discussion Paper                Press Release

 

Summary

Rising electricity prices, policy changes and technological advances have supported rapid uptake of rooftop solar panels. Wide adoption of improved battery storage technology looks set to follow. These trends are paving the way for a future energy system where centralised renewable generation of electricity is complemented by distributed generation by households who can carefully track and tailor their electricity consumption, store energy for later use, or feed it back into the system.

This future is well and truly within sight, but only if policymakers and the other actors who shape our electricity system get the difficult transition phase right.

 

“The rapid uptake of renewable technology and leaps forward in energy efficiency and storage have been game changers for generators, distributors, retailers and consumers of electricity. If harnessed effectively, these changes can move us closer to the sustainable energy system we need to power a decarbonised Australian economy in the 21st century. But this will only happen if the way we regulate electricity markets keeps pace.” Alexander Marks, Avoiding Gridlock author

“People going off grid means that the costs of the grid fall on a shrinking customer base. Even more affordable battery storage and solar power will make this even more acute. This could pose real problems for the owners of network.” Ben Caldecott, Director of the University of Oxford’s Sustainable Finance Programme

“There are inevitably challenges integrating new technologies and services into existing markets and regulatory arrangements, which if not properly managed could lead to adverse outcomes for consumers. Our electricity sector needs to be fexible enough to accommodate innovation in a range of forms, while maintaining security, reliability and affordability.”  Preliminary Report of the Finkel Review

Avoiding Gridlock focuses on energy distribution networks, whose traditional role in transmitting electricity from distant powerplants to homes and businesses – and the value of the expensive poles and wires they use to do so – is being reshaped by these trends. The paper examines the role of massive infrastructure investment by distribution companies in driving up retail prices, and their past performance in rolling out innovative ‘behind the meter’ technologies like smart meters that can help households use electricity more efficiently and affordably.

It recommends that upcoming reviews of the energy system consider the following policy options:

Revamping the National Electricity Objectives so that distribution networks focus on whole-of-system resilience in a future of high penetration of distributed renewables and batteries and in the context of a changing climate
Restrict owners of electricity networks from competing in beyond-the-meter services and other naturally competitive markets, due to high risk of uncompetitive behaviour
Restrict the exclusive hold of networks so it onlcy applies to the parts of the electricity system that are core their business – i.e., the plants and wires
Legislate changes to the valuation and treatment of networks’ regulated asset bases, to reduce network tariffs and the cost burden of electricity bills on Australian homes and businsess.

Read the paper in full by following the links above, or check out media coverage and further reading on this issue below.

Media coverage

US energy giant GE backs states going own way on renewables, Peter Hannam, SMH 12 December 2016.

 

Further reading

Read more about Oxford University’s Sustainable Finance Program 

Preliminary Report of the Independent Review into the Future Security of the National Electricity Market (The Finkel Review), December 2016

Electricity Network Transformation Roadmap, Energy Networks Australia and CSIRO, December 2016

Preliminary Report and Update Report into Black System Event in South Australia on 28 September 2016, Australian Energy Market Operator, October 2016

The post Avoiding gridlock: policy directions for Australia’s electricity system | DISCUSSION PAPER | December 2016 appeared first on CPD.

Public policy and political amnesia – CPD in The Canberra Times

Earlier in 2016, CPD Policy Director Sam Hurley spoke at a NSW Fabian Society event on the theme of “reforming the public sector for a more equal society”.

Sam’s remarks explored themes in findings in Grand alibis: how declining public sector capability affects services for the disadvantaged, a major report CPD released in December 2015. Grand Alibis looked at how outsourcing services could erode public sector capability to design and deliver better services and public policy outcomes over time. This work built on the important False Economies series which examined the damage wrought but blunt public sector cutbacks in the name of ‘efficiency’.

Sam’s remarks were published in November in a Fabian’s pamphlet, which also includes excellent contributions on similar topics from Senator Jenny McAllister and CPSU Deputy Secretary Melissa Donelly.

They were also featured in The Canberra Times under the title ‘We can’t ignore the past when designing future public services.’

Read @samhurley05‘s contribution to the @fabiansAUS pamphlet on the public sector in today’s @PSInformant https://t.co/qPo8Hwv5s1

— NSW Fabians (@NSWFabians) December 5, 2016

Our Effective Government Program continues to focus on the interaction between public policy capability, service design and disadvantage  – keep an eye out for more CPD work on these issues in 2017.

Cover photo:  G. Lipman

The post Public policy and political amnesia – CPD in The Canberra Times appeared first on CPD.

Fellow John Menadue recounts immigration policies of PM Fraser on ABC’s AM

On Saturday CPD’s founding Chairperson and Fellow John Menadue AO spoke with Elizabeth Jackson on ABC Radio AM programme, commenting on recent remarks by Immigration Minister Peter Dutton about “mistakes” made in immigration policy under Prime Minister Malcolm Fraser.

John was the head of Department of Prime Minister and Cabinet under Prime Ministers Gough Whitlam and Malcom Fraser, and also served as Secretary of the Department of Immigration and Ethnic Affairs in the early 1980s. John outlined the history and realities and of the refugee and migration policies in this period, stating that “the contribution that Malcolm Fraser made has strengthened the country”. Recounting some of the issues and difficulties that accompanied Australia’s migration program from the 1970s to today, John said “since we’ve ever had migration, there have been problems” and every migrant group faced unique challenges and complexities. John argues that it is unfair to highlight particular individuals or groups to discredit others or migration itself.

Listen to the interview and see a transcript of the discussion here.

The post Fellow John Menadue recounts immigration policies of PM Fraser on ABC’s AM appeared first on CPD.

CPD Fellows contribute to Guardian special investigation on private health insurance

Three CPD Fellows feature prominently in Melissa Davey’s ‘Sick System, a special investigation series on private health insurance for The Guardian. CPD Fellows Ian McAuley, Jennifer Doggett and Founding Chair and Fellow John Menadue draw on their extensive research experience on Australia’s private health insurance system, arguing that the system is broken and reforms must be a priority.

The investigation explores the data behind private health providers its benefits for consumers, drawing on Ian, Jennifer and John, and other experts including Professor Graeme Samuel and Stephen Duckett. Ian and Jennifer critique the system and dispels some of the prevailing myths and misconceptions that surround private insurance in Australia. While insurance provides security and peace of mind, Ian states that purchasing private health insurance is “not a rational choice” for most Australians. They conclude that it is only worth paying top private insurance dollar if consumers are over 75, particularly unhealthy, or live a higher-risk lifestyle. Ian, Jennifer, and John comment on and dispute the statistics and findings of executives from the private health insurance industry, and argue that the reforms and review by Health Minister Susan Lay are welcome and overdue.

Read the first part of the ‘Sick System’ special investigation featuring CPD Fellows here, and the second part here.

See the most recent updates of Davey’s investigation here, including other opinion and think pieces on Australia’s private health insurance sector and responses from consumers.

 

Private health insurance in Australia only worth it for the pregnant,rich &v sick. Great reporting by @MelissaLDavey https://t.co/1Jc4BqnIzl

— Bridie Jabour (@bkjabour) November 16, 2016

The post CPD Fellows contribute to Guardian special investigation on private health insurance appeared first on CPD.

Fellow Ian McAuley contributes to special investigation on private health insurance

In the first part of Melissa Davey’s special investigation for The Guardian, CPD Fellow Ian McAuley draws on his extensive research experience on Australia’s private health insurance system.

The investigation explores the data behind private health providers its benefits for consumers, drawing on Ian and other experts including Jennifer Doggett, Professor Graeme Samuel, and Stephen Duckett. Ian critiques the system and dispels some of the prevailing myths and misconceptions that surround private insurance in Australia. While insurance provides security and peace of mind, Ian states that purchasing private health insurance is “not a rational choice” for most Australians. Ian concludes that it is only worth paying top private insurance dollar if consumers are over 75, particularly unhealthy, or live a higher-risk lifestyle.

Read the first part of Melissa Davey’s special investigation for The Guardian here.

See the most recent updates of Davey’s investigation here, including other opinion and think pieces on Australia’s private health insurance sector.

 

Private health insurance in Australia only worth it for the pregnant,rich &v sick. Great reporting by @MelissaLDavey https://t.co/1Jc4BqnIzl

— Bridie Jabour (@bkjabour) November 16, 2016

The post Fellow Ian McAuley contributes to special investigation on private health insurance appeared first on CPD.

CEO Travers McLeod calls for an integrated approach to foreign policy development

Our CEO Travers McLeod was invited to contribute a think-piece for the Australian Council for International Development’s October 2016 National Conference, entitled Australia Ahead of the Curve: An agenda for international development to 2025. ACFID asked key figures and thinkers in the aid, development and policy community to consider: What should Australia’s role be in assisting developing countries and responding to global development challenges to 2025 and beyond?

In his think-piece published in the ACFID Conference papers and online on the ACFID blog, Travers draws on the examples of forced migration and climate security to show why Australia must adopt a more integrated and inclusive approach to foreign policy development, beginning with our next White Paper. A broader set of inputs will enable Australia to be an influential and constructive regional power in an older, hotter, more volatile and more porous region. For this to happen, more non-government stakeholders and civil society organisations must engage the space where domestic and regional security, trade and human wellbeing are now inseparable.

The piece was been enriched by advice from CPD Policy Director, Rob Sturrock, and assistance from CPD Research Associate, Massimo Amerena.

Read it here.

The post CEO Travers McLeod calls for an integrated approach to foreign policy development appeared first on CPD.