KEY POINTS:
Australian infantry troops are ashamed and furious that they are being kept from combat and regarded as cowards by allied troops in Iraq and Afghanistan.
Army chief Lieutenant General Peter Leahy has confirmed that morale has been hit by operations that place special forces in combat roles but
keep infantrymen in protection, support and policing roles.
The complaints were aired in the official Australian Army Journal by officers who questioned the future of foot soldiers kept at the rear despite world-class training and equipment.
In an article headlined "We were soldiers once", Major Jim Hammett said that in a period during which the infantry have been busier and deployed overseas more than at any time since the Vietnam war, frustration was growing.
He said angst was emerging from behind earlier silence because while the infantry had not been tasked with conducting offensive actions since Vietnam, special forces had been engaged in combat operations almost continuously since 2001.
"The logical deduction is that either the role of the infantry is now defunct, or that only special forces are considered capable of the role," Hammett said.
This was despite training that had pushed the Defence Force, and the infantry in particular, to a previously unseen level of readiness for combat.
"It could be argued that the infantry corps, in relation to war-fighting operations, is over-trained yet under-experienced."
Hammett said anecdotal evidence suggested that disillusionment was a major factor in the infantry's problems in keeping its soldiers.
In Afghanistan, where American, British and Canadian counterparts were aggressively used against the enemy, the restriction of Australian infantry to the protection of its reconstruction task force had drawn adverse comment and questions from the international media.
"The restrictions placed on deployed elements ... have at times made Australian infantrymen ashamed of wearing their Australian uniform and regimental hat badge," Hammett said.
He said that at the combat coalface, Canberra's claims to be a staunch ally of the US were dismissed as political rhetoric. While American, British and Canadian soldiers laid their lives on the line, Australian infantry appeared to do little more than act as interested spectators.
Despite mutual diplomatic accolades, Australia's contributions to both Iraq and Afghanistan had been derided and scorned by soldiers and officers of other nations more vigorously engaged in combat.
Australia's much-heralded deployment in the southern Iraq province of al Muthanna had been met with incredulity by British troops, who used the region for respite for soldiers taking a break from sustained fighting in Basra or Al Amarah.
"The initial caution of such a deployment is both prudent and understandable," Hammett said.
"[But] the ongoing inaction and lack of contribution to counter-insurgency and offensive operations has resulted in collective disdain and at times near-contempt by personnel from other contributing nations for the publicity-shrouded yet force-protected Australian troops.
"The restrictions and policies enforced on infantrymen in Iraq have resulted in the widespread perception that our army is plagued by institutional cowardice."
In another article in the same publication, Captain Greg Colton said there was a growing sense of frustration within the infantry that regular units were only receiving perceived second-rate operational taskings, while the Government and army hierarchy seemed to favour special forces for offensive operations.
While special forces were being stretched by back-to-back tours, infantry company and battalion commanders were missing an excellent opportunity to gain the operational experience needed as they moved into influential, higher command positions.
Leahy confirmed to ABC radio that infantrymen were unhappy that they were excluded from combat.
"I've travelled around on visits to our deployments," he said. "These are some of the views that I have got and I must say they are not ones I share entirely because what we've seen is the changing nature of war.
"This is no longer infantry wearing red jackets and white cross-straps, taking on the army of another king.
"What we're seeing now is that we're required to work in different populations to protect, to support and persuade ... "
