污斑英雄 : Flawed Hero完結篇

不用研究澳洲歷史都大概知道澳洲有段是放逐囚犯之地的歷史。一直以來, 在西方世界眼中, 澳洲佬是次貨, 要上戰場才想起這遠親, 呼喚他們去打前鋒賣命或幹苦活。這種情況是近三十年才明顯改變, 澳洲因天然資源蘊藏量豐富, 遇上需求量大, 國家富起來, 才漸漸在國際政治舞臺冒起。特種部隊也要跟其英美「表親」看齊, 希望被認受。這情況似曾相識, 與香港暴動時那些手足心態相近。Masters在書中很精確分析了干犯戰爭罪行的幾個原因。

With traditional forces, transparency was more readily applied. There were plenty of eyes on them and a much less aggressive posture. But with special forces, secrecy was encoded, along with a bias for offensive action. Justification emanated from their counter-terrorism remit. Clandestine operations against terrorist cells remain secret because there is no logic in signalling to the enemy your intentions or capability. With the SASR's mission consigned to a grey zone of international law, it became unusually challenging to apply effective command and to manage integrity.

Furthermore, the regiment's officers were kept at a distance. In contrast to the Commandos, who operated in larger numbers and with officers engaged in the close fight, small SAS patrols regarded it as more expedient to keep their officers outside a target area until it had been secured.

Australian cultural cringe and a streak of vanity was also on show. There is an international cousinage of special forces, a kind of bristled brotherhood, with the Aussies routinely demonstrating keenness for acceptance and approval. (p.134)

講到戰爭罪行, 英美的情況也「不遑多釀」:

In 2015, The New York Times published an extensive investigation of the Navy SEALs, detailing the evolution in Afghanistan of a 'kill fest' in which the victims were too often unarmed civilians. SEALs were using customised weapons, such as what the newspaper described as 'primeval tomahawks', and practices such as 'canoeing' (splitting open a victim's skull). There was a similar reputational blight reported in Britain, with its famed Special Air Service (on which Australia's SASR is modelled) accused of planting weapons and unlawful killing. (p.135)

英美污班英雄也同樣落難, 而且是被刑事檢控。美國有Eddie Gallagher, 但在審訊時, 控方證人在庭上翻供倒戈, Gallagher 最終獲判無罪。在英國則有Alexander Blackman被控把阿富汗人就地正法(summary execution), 被判終身監禁, 上訴後獲改判誤殺。無論在那個國度, 政府都不熱衷檢控戰爭罪行, 市民也不熱切於有否追究這種事, 俗語謂懶理。

書中也提到國防總長Campbell將軍為戰爭罪行公開道歉時引用調查戰爭罪行的Brereton Report的講法:

......Some domestic commanders of Special Air Service Regiment bear significant responsibility for contributing to the environment in which war crimes were committed, most notably those who embraced or fostered the "warrior culture" and empowered, or did not restrain, the clique of non-commissioned officers who propagated it.......

這就可以反映出欠缺制衡可導致無法無天的情況。這不是上樑不正下樑歪, 而是為求達到目的不擇手段, 軍方上層對惡行隻眼開隻眼閉。當惡行被捅出來, 上層就可置身事外。

7台老闆自掏腰包為Robert-Smiths興訟, 現在估計敗訴要賠給被告一方2500萬澳元, 為啥? 無他, 遇上昂堂七尺樣貌出眾的戰爭英雄, 幾十載難逢, 當然要力撐, 以滿足南隅袋鼠的先天不足, 立國歷史短, 又欠缺出類拔萃的武將, 難得出現一個可塑造的人物, 當然就不吝嗇對他來講這少許金錢, 何況在澳洲告傳媒誹謗贏面甚高, 在商言商, 打起算盤也覺得這不是蝕本生意。但有時天機算盡, 也會出人意表的。Covid的爆發, 機緣巧合地幫助了McKensie和Masters, 開庭因疫情延誤, 給予被告一方更多時間要求對家披露資料, 繼而發掘到更多證人, Masters認為是疫情幫助了他們。

戰績可以作大來獲勳, 成功推薦Robert-Smiths為Australia's Father of the Year就有點離奇了。他時常在外打仗, 又不是湊仔(女)公, 又沒有為他兩個女兒做了甚麼特別的事, 用甚麼標準選他? 最尷尬的是及後訴訟捅出他與7台的女同事的婚外情, 審訊期間又被拍到跟代表他的女律師Monica Allen的牽手照, 也涉嫌在女律師住所過夜, 認真是笑話一場。陳世美也可當選Husband of the Year 了。笑看人生, 做人做事要認真, 原則要堅持, 虛名就真的不要上心, 只有自卑心重的人才要時常找尋機會往臉上貼金, 時常聽到甚麼的傷害了人民感情, 又是不是自卑心理反射呢?

我敬重兩位記者的勇氣, 偵查事實的報導風險大, 惹起的麻煩多, 也往往徒勞無功。澳洲人一般都生性豁達, 遇到甚麼事也處之泰然和健忘。政客受賄, 跟火車或巴士誤點一樣是理所當然的。噢!他們犯了戰爭罪行, 一覺醒來就忘得一乾二淨了。Crossing The Line及Flawed Hero怎會銷得? 有幾多人像我傻兮兮兩本都看? 自由可貴的是, 他們可以寫, 可以發表, 在網上也受到自由的trolling(在網上攻擊), 但不會被政府殺頭, 書不會被禁, 也不會在圖書館下架。最大的危險是訴訟的經濟壓力, 揭發真相要視乎你有沒有銀兩的。Masters說得對: "Litigation is too often a contest of deep pockets." 勝負往往要幸運之神眷顧的。

寫完這課題又要移情別戀了。