{"id":33261,"date":"2017-08-02T11:16:59","date_gmt":"2017-08-02T01:16:59","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/www.aspistrategist.ru\/?p=33261"},"modified":"2017-08-02T11:16:59","modified_gmt":"2017-08-02T01:16:59","slug":"reviewing-adfs-role-domestic-counterterrorism-responses","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/www.aspistrategist.ru\/reviewing-adfs-role-domestic-counterterrorism-responses\/","title":{"rendered":"Reviewing the ADF\u2019s role in domestic counterterrorism responses"},"content":{"rendered":"
\"\"<\/figure>\n

Responses to the federal government\u2019s announcement<\/a> two weeks ago that it\u2019s expanding the ADF\u2019s role in domestic counterterrorism (CT) responses were quickly subsumed by public discussion about the new Home Affairs portfolio. But with public discourse now moving on, it\u2019s worth taking a closer look at how the announcement came about and what it might mean for the ADF into the future.<\/p>\n

The review into the ADF\u2019s role in domestic CT matters was commissioned in early 2015 following the rapid rise of Islamic State in 2014 and the early findings<\/a> on the Sydney Lindt Caf\u00e9 siege. The review involved the Department of Defence and various policing agencies and took nearly two years to complete.<\/p>\n

Over that time, the importance of the review only increased. Driven by protracted unrest in the Middle East and Central Asia, the influence of Salafist-inspired extremism has spread from the ungoverned regions of conflict to the ungoverned digital domains of the internet. The threat from returning foreign fighters, and the increasing efforts by the Islamic State to inspire attacks in Western countries following its impending military defeat in Iraq and Syria, further cemented the government\u2019s commitment<\/a> to redefining the ADF\u2019s role in support of law enforcement agencies.<\/p>\n

The protracted time taken to finalise the review was due in part to the timing of the NSW Coroner\u2019s inquest<\/a> into the Lindt Caf\u00e9 siege and in part to the complexity associated with making changes to the Defence Act.<\/p>\n

Achieving a balance between effective military responses and the primacy of civil authority is a vexed issue in any democracy. Identifying the appropriate policy effects without overtasking the ADF or undercutting the constitutional rights of the states is the central premise of the reforms. To that end, the changes are designed to:<\/p>\n