Accordings to Jane’s Defence website,Australia’s
East Timor policy is “to play a leading and possibly open-ended role in ensuring political stability”
Some of ISF decisions look ill-considered, when measured against this policy.
Let us look at ISF decision-making in the window 01 March 2007 through 04 March 2007.
It was reported on Thursday, 01 March 2007, that East Timor Prosecutor General Longuinhos Monteiro said he is awaiting the response from Alfredo to meet him as the State negotiator and not as Prosecutor General. Following a meeting with ISF commander Brigadier Malcolm Rerden, Prime Minister Ramos-Horta and President Xanana Gusmão at the Palácio das Cinzas, Monteiro said the negotiation would be on the surrender of Alfredo or the hand over of guns.
It was also reported on Thursday, 01 March 2007, that East Timor ISF Commander Brigadier Rerden said there is no longer negotiation with Alfredo (Reinado)
So Longuinhos Monteiro wanted a friendly meeting with Reinado.
ISF didn’t seem to want the meeting. (If it did want it, it’s a funny way to indicate it, by asserting there is no longer negotiation).
On Sunday, 04 March 2007
ISF international stabilisation forces fired on Reinado’s people.
ISF “outcomes” don’t seem to measure very well against the policy as stated in Jane’s website.
So if ISF’s purposes don’t coincide with Australia’s policy, what are ISF’s purposes ?