John Howard Purpose

Using the latest technology, Australian border forces and investing $35 billion, the government aims to reduce the threat of terrorism at our borders in an effort to keep our country secure.

Australia’s first anti-terror laws were enacted in response to the terrorist attacks of September 11 (Prof Andrew Lynch 2010). In recent years, increasing Australian involvement in international conflict has seen these laws shift to accommodate alarming trends in home grown terrorism (Australian Security Intelligence Organisation 2014). Sydney’s 2014 terror raids prompted the most significant changes to Australia’s counter terrorism legislation in the last decade (Commonwealth of Australia Department of Defence 2015). Amendments granted law enforcement and intelligence agencies new and somewhat controversial powers, in the name of national security.

The opportunity to contribute to society are many and varied and include positions within defence or local community protection. This provides the opportunity to work in a field which promotes and supports the community and the Nation’s interests. In regard to working within ASIO, the focus is on analysing and reporting prospective threats, resulting in the production of protective security measures, to ensure the safety of Australia’s communities, people and assets. In the words of Pietsch and McAlister “Australia has been relatively immune from acts of terrorism” (Juliet Pietsch & Ian McAllister, 2012). “I want Australians to be aware that a terrorist incident on our soil remains likely but also that Australians should be reassured our security agencies are working diligently and expertly to prevent that happening” (Malcolm Turnball, 2015). Terrorism is an increasingly greater threat in the 21st century, and it is clear from these statements that ASIO has an important role to play in ensuring the security of Australian

While I acknowledge that any planning of a terrorist attack is not a joking matter, the fact that this story came to light just three days after Australia Day 2016 is interesting. It is even more interesting when we realize that the boy in question

In 1978, on Monday the 13th of February, Australia faced what is believed to be its first experience of terrorism, when a bomb hidden in a bin outside the Sydney Hilton Hotel exploded, killing two council workers and a policeman (Cahill & Cahill, 2006). At the time, the hotel was hosting eleven heads of government who were in Sydney for the Commonwealth Heads of Government Regional Meeting (Cahill & Cahill, 2006). The Australian government reacted by mobilising the military, which came to be referred to as ‘Siege of Bowral’, that highlighted issues with the legislation that dealt with terrorism and how unprepared Australia was at responding to a terrorist event (Hancock, 2002). Over the following years, a range of legislation was enacted to handle matters associated with terrorism, laws such as allowing for defence to aid to the civil power, aviation and shipping safety, chemical, biological or nuclear weapons, surveillance and intelligence services (Hancock, 2002).

This essay will be arguing that Australia’s historical fear of invasion does continue to influence Australia’s foreign policy today. This essay believes that the fear of invasion in Australia has evolves and changes over time from a traditional realist perspective that focused on states, to one focused on individuals and non-state actors. Firstly, this essay will briefly discuss the previous fears of invasion, from the introduction of the White Australia Policy to the War on Terror, and how events in Australia’s past shaped foreign policy. Secondly, this essay will discuss the current, evolved fear of invasion Australia experiences. How it has evolved away from the threat of invasion of another state or foreign political system to the invasion of individual people and conflicting ideologies. Lastly, this essay will briefly discuss foreign policy and the relation it has to the new fear of invasion. The policy that will be discussed is immigration restrictions and the treatment of people who have attempted to enter Australia informally.

The case of Thomas v Mowbray revolutionised and created a new, broad, perspective of the constitutional defence powers in regards to terrorism. This was the first case to reach the High Court on the validity of anti-terrorism measures that were recently introduced to Australia by the executive. Thomas made several submissions within this case, including that the defence power was limited to defence against threats from foreign states and that the words ‘naval and military’ present in the wording of the section confines the defence power to those activities and cannot underpin broader activities to protect the community. Unfortunately, on the first point there was a 6:1 majority that the law was valid under the power for threats both domestic and foreign. Kirby J dissent held that the Commonwealth had essentially failed to establish the factual basis that was needed to support its reliance on the defence power. Further, Kirby J concluded that the ‘facts underpinning the war on terror did not constitute hostilities for the purposes of the first limb of the defence power.’ The majority of the High Court upheld the constitutional validity of the anti-terrorism laws that allowed for the courts to impose control orders upon persons of whom they believed to pose a threat due to their connections to listed terrorist organisations, regardless of the possibly that some derogable rights maybe be overridden. The control order imposed on Thomas required him to remain in his residence

John Winston Howard, OM, AC (born 26 July 1939), was the 25th Prime Minister of Australia, serving from 11 March 1996 to 3 December 2007. Only Sir Robert Menzies has served in the position longer.

Intelligence and Warning is Border and Transportation Security is responsible for protecting America's borders, territorial waters, and transportation systems by centralizing information-sharing and databases that track and monitor all aspects of border control and America's transportation systems. Domestic Counterterrorism covers a wide variety of activities, ranging from National Security Agency monitoring of telephone conversations to local police monitoring of persons of interest. Protecting Critical Infrastructure and Key Assets identifies a clear set of national goals and objectives and outlines the guiding principles that will underpin our efforts to secure the infrastructures and assets vital to our national security, governance, public health and safety, economy, and public confidence. Defending against Catastrophic Threats reduces vulnerability of the United States to terrorism. Emergency Preparedness and Response will create one emergency response plan to be used at all levels of government and will ensure that first-responders, from the federal government level down to local levels, receive proper training and equipment.

In 2010, the Australian Federal Government released its Counter-Terrorism White Paper. It stipulates that Australia’s counter-terrorism strategy has four fundamental key points: (The Counter-Terrorism White Paper, 2010, p iii) Analysis - focussed on prevention through intelligence, protection - focussed on border management and increased airport security, Response - cooperative relationships between Intelligence, security and Law enforcement agencies nationally and Resilience - Unified rejection

“Today, our fellow citizens, our way of life, our very freedom came under attack in a series of deliberate and deadly terrorist acts. We have taken the necessary security precautions and are prepared to do whatever is necessary to protect America and Americans.” President George W. Bush

Ms. Gillard and Mr. Abbott are both former prime ministers of Australia. However, both of them have different strategies and methods beginning with moving Australia in the right direction. Even though, they both served at different times, nevertheless, they expressed their opinion openly about the job they were doing, Ms. Gillard served as prime minister before Mr. Abbott, laying a solid foundation for Australia. She initiated policies and procedures to help Australia become a better place to live. Although, Australia suffered an economic crisis while Ms. Gillard was in office, she made Australia a better place. Following, Ms. Gillard, Mr. Abbott became prime minister. He made changes by implementing new laws. Ms. Gillard and Mr. Abbott both have different views on same sex marriages, education, and Medicare.

“Things will never be the same.” (Miller, Stone & Mitchell, 2002, p. 3) Law enforcement has undergone dramatic changes as a result of the devastating events in the United States on 11 September 2001 (9/11). This essay will examine how law enforcement, specifically within Australia, has shifted its policies and strategies to fight the post-9/11 terrorist threat. An analysis of police actions towards terrorist related incidents since 9/11, displays how law enforcement agencies have demonstrated their

“Mr Burke – I understand that legislation will shortly be introduced in the Parliament to give effect to the Convention on Hijacking, which Australia has recently ratified. Will the legislation apply to aircraft hijackers presently at large in this country, who cannot be proceeded against under any existing law?

In order for the United States of America and its allies to live a life free of terrorist threats, they need to counter violent extremism and terrorism with swift and deliberate prevention efforts world-wide.