Editorial: NZ doing the right thing in a just cause

An entity as evil as the Islamic State cannot be left to flourish.

No New Zealand government should commit troops to a war zone without a clear awareness of the ramifications. In the case of the fight against the Islamic State, the consequences could be particularly grim.

The barbaric treatment of prisoners signals the fate of any New Zealander who falls into its hands. Then there is the manner in which New Zealand's involvement will heighten the chances of terrorism on home shores. Finally, there is the reality that our troops will make little difference in a conflict that defies easy answers. Nonetheless, the Government has made the right call in committing more than 100 regular soldiers to a non-combat training mission at Taji Camp, north of Baghdad.

For some time, the Prime Minister insisted that sending troops was his "least preferred option". In that, John Key reflected the concerns of President Barack Obama who sought initially to limit the United States' re-involvement. But much has changed in a few months, and just as President Obama has reassessed his policy, so New Zealand has greater reason to become involved.

The most powerful reason for sending soldiers is the just nature of the cause. Whatever the doubts about the Iraqi Government and the eventual make-up of the region, an entity as evil as the Islamic State cannot be left to flourish. In the past few weeks, the increasingly horrific nature of its behaviour has confirmed that. The international community cannot allow atrocities to proceed unchecked.

Some have been intimidated. But, most tellingly, the Islamic State's barbarity has triggered the greater military involvement of Jordan and prompted Egypt to join the American-led aerial bombing campaign. Its actions and ideology have left it isolated, with any prospect of geographical spread severely dented by the success of the air strikes.

These have rendered nonsensical any talk of the Islamic State occupying Baghdad. But they will not be enough to secure its demise. Nor will American boots on the ground. The Iraqi army, whose dismal performance enabled the Islamic State to gain momentum, must play a leading role. Improving its skills and hardening its resolve is where New Zealand, acting in concert with Australia, can contribute. There will be a danger that the troops could be drawn into the fighting during their maximum of two years there. But, again, that risk does not justify remaining aloof.

The decision to send troops comes at a time of emerging consensus on how the Islamic State can be eliminated. Its ideology requires continuing territorial expansion. If that does not happen, it will stagnate, losing much of its allure, especially to potential recruits in Western countries. Achieving that containment need not involve major battles. It can be realised by continued aerial bombing and stronger resistance by the ground forces arrayed against the Islamic State, especially the Iraqi army.

Therein lies the role of the New Zealand troops. They may not be crucial to a final victory. But they will personify, once more, their country's willingness to stand up for what is right.

Debate on this article is now closed.