Is It Just to Leave the Safety of Australia for War?
24 March 2025
As the world grapples with ongoing conflicts, particularly in Ukraine and the Middle East, the question of whether it is justifiable for Australians to leave the safety of their homeland to engage in wars abroad becomes increasingly pressing. Distinguishing between government-deployed personnel and individuals choosing to fight in conflicts not directly related to Australia’s interests presents a moral dilemma that merits deep reflection.
In contemporary society, the motivations behind individuals who elect to join foreign battles warrant careful examination. Many parents within the Australian Islamic community express profound concern when their children decide to enlist in conflicts that their own families have fled. In a desperate attempt to protect their children, some parents go so far as to report them to authorities, hoping to dissuade them from aligning with extremist groups. This situation prompts a critical inquiry: What distinguishes the motivations of those from the Islamic faith who leave Australia to fight from their Christian counterparts?
Turning a blind eye to the atrocities occurring beyond our borders can have dire repercussions. As Australians, we must ask ourselves whether we have the right to engage in wars that do not directly involve our nation. Should we adopt an isolationist stance, similar to that of the United States, prioritizing self-reliance over global responsibility? These questions deserve serious debate, as doing nothing may unintentionally condemn those who could contribute to a more peaceful world. In our interconnected reality, it is imperative that every nation strives for harmony, recognizing that we are part of a global community rich in diverse cultures and shared resources.
It is crucial to acknowledge the efforts of religious leaders—whether Imams, priests, or other community figures—who work diligently to guide young people away from violence. These leaders have a responsibility to highlight the positive aspects of their faiths, rather than allowing their positions to become breeding grounds for radical ideologies.
The fervour with which young individuals pursue their beliefs mirrors the commitment shown by youth throughout history. From Israeli fighters during their struggle for independence to young Latin Americans advocating for social justice, the drive to fight for one’s beliefs is a common thread woven into the fabric of human experience. Similarly, Hellenic youth who valiantly defended their homeland during the Greek War of Independence and World War II exhibited the same commitment to preserving their way of life—a sentiment echoed by those joining contemporary conflicts today.
For many in the West, it can be challenging to grasp the passion that compels individuals to take up arms. Until we confront a similar dilemma, it is difficult to fully appreciate the emotional and moral weight of such decisions. If faced with a fight for survival, it is conceivable that our citizens might rise to the occasion, motivated by a sense of duty to protect their homes and families.
However, this raises significant concerns about the implications of such actions. As Western nations prioritize safety and security, we must question whether our privacy and freedoms are being compromised in the name of vigilance. While law enforcement agencies monitor online activities to prevent radicalization, this balancing act can sometimes encroach upon civil liberties, resembling a “Big Brother” approach.
Additionally, we must address the inconsistencies in how Western nations respond to conflicts abroad. Many individuals leave their homes to fight for what they perceive as a just cause, yet government responses can vary widely. The attention we give to extremist groups like ISIL can inadvertently enhance their visibility and recruitment capabilities. A strategic reduction of their online presence could significantly diminish their impact.
When considering personal involvement in a conflict, I would only contemplate such a drastic step if Australia were confronted with a force intent on imposing alien values and threatening our way of life. Should my birthplace face extinction, I might feel compelled to act. However, my preferred course of action would lean towards humanitarian efforts—providing aid, raising funds, and advocating for those affected through media channels.
Engagement in warfare should not be our primary option. Instead, focusing on humanitarian efforts, raising awareness, and supporting those in need should take precedence. It is essential to approach these situations thoughtfully, weighing our options and recognizing the potential consequences of our actions.
In the event that Western nations face overwhelming threats, solidarity among allies like the UK, USA, France, New Zealand, and Canada will be crucial. However, reaching such a critical juncture would require significant preceding events. We must remain aware of our national interests and economic stability, abiding by our laws even when we may disagree with the direction of current policies.
The voices of everyday citizens in the West carry weight, and their opinions can be expressed freely without fear of suppression. We are fortunate to live in a society where expression is respected and valued, making it understandable that many seek refuge and economic security within our borders to escape the turmoil of their homelands.
In summary, the decision to leave the comfort and safety of our nation for the chaos of war is not one to be taken lightly. It requires deep introspection, a commitment to humanitarian principles, and a nuanced understanding of global conflict. Ultimately, we must strive to preserve the freedoms and values we cherish while extending compassion and support to those in need—both at home and abroad.
Original Article: Is it a just war to leave the safety of our nation & the western way of life – 16 July 2014
Peter Adamis
Freelance Journalist