Key Reflections
* The Australian Federal Police (AFP) has sought to foster strong international partnerships that are critical in successfully countering cross-border criminal syndicates, terrorist groups, and hostile state actors.
* Global policing faces the challenges of borderless entries and crimes, evolution in the cyber realm, worldwide instability including the consequences of COVID-19, and the Taliban’s return to power in Afghanistan.
* Australia is part of the Joint Investigation Team (JIT), which concluded that a Russian-supplied Buk TELAR surface-to-air missile system was used to down Malaysia Airlines flight MH17 in 2014. Several Russians stand accused of orchestrating the atrocity.
* Operation Silves in 2017 involved Australia’s law enforcement and intelligence community disrupting the most serious terrorist plot the country has ever faced, with ISIS plotting to bomb a plane flying from Sydney to the U.A.E.
* Currently, espionage and foreign interference have become Australia’s principal security concerns. Hostile state actors seek information about strategic capabilities, economic and policy priorities, technology, and defence. To counter this, multilateral partnerships such as with the Five Eyes and the Quad have become even more essential.
* It is vital to actively encourage, recruit, develop, mentor, and bring women through ranks of law enforcement and provide opportunities to advance their career pathways in counter-terrorism and national security.
Transcript:
SG: Dr. Sajjan Gohel
JH: Jennifer Hurst
SG: Hello, and welcome to DEEP Dive, brought to you by NATO’s Defence Education Enhancement Programme. I’m your host, Dr. Sajjan Gohel. Each episode, we speak to experts and practitioners in international security and defence, counter-terrorism, and geopolitical current events to gain insight into the most pressing matters of global affairs.
SG: In this episode, we speak to Commander Jennifer Hurst of the Australian Federal Police (AFP). Jennifer commenced her career with the AFP in 1985 and has been involved in numerous frontline roles handling international security issues including transnational terrorism and hostile state actors. During 2003, Jennifer established and implemented the AFPs first Joint Counter Terrorism Teams (JCTT) in Sydney, Australia, working in partnership with New South Wales Police and intelligence agencies. In 2005, Jennifer was selected for a secondment to INTERPOL in Lyon, France, undertaking the role of Assistant Director for Public Safety and Security, and assisting and supporting INTERPOL member countries with their terrorism investigations. In August 2015, Jennifer was appointed as Commander for the AFP’s counter-terrorism operations, nationally and internationally. In January 2018, Jennifer was selected as the AFP’s Commander for Europe, Middle East and Africa where she has provided strategic oversight and engagement for the AFP’s activity in these regions. Commander Hurst was awarded the Australia Police Medal (APM) in 2005 for her investigational leadership in the areas of Counter Terrorism and Narcotics.
Commander Jennifer Hurst it’s a real pleasure to have you joining us on NATO DEEP Dive.
JH: Thank you so much Sajjan, it’s an absolute pleasure to be here with you as well.
SG: So, let’s start with the work of the Australian Federal Police (AFP) as an international partner in global security. From my own observations, the AFP has taken the lead in numerous multilateral forums for cooperation and strengthening resilience from a variety of transnational threats. Often, that also includes engaging with academia with NGOs, and I’ve seen this first-hand in Europe, the Middle East, Southeast Asia. It’s clear there’s a methodology behind this, but could you perhaps explain why the AFP has been so effective in international law enforcement efforts and cooperation?
JH: The AFP has been around for quite a while now and we are the Australian government’s primary law enforcement agency, so we naturally have a remit in international engagement. And probably, just as a bit of an opening Sajjan, we’re all very, very experienced in law enforcement now and I think we very much understand that strong and collegial partnerships, internationally, are absolutely critical, because the leverage and the impact that we can bring to bear on any criminal syndicates, terrorist groups, operating, is much more powerful when we all work together. And I think from an AFP perspective, that’s very much what our mantra is.
A lot of the investigations that we do now, have an international nexus, and I would suggest that there’s probably very few things that we do, that do not actually have an international nexus. So, for us, our international partnerships, our relationships, our engagement is absolutely key. And I think it has never, ever been more important to strengthen our international engagement. So, that’s sort of front and centre.
SG: To build on that, you spoke about the fact that most of the work the AFP is tasked with has an international nexus, so how does the agency’s global remit work?
JH: From an AFP perspective, we really have a very unique international remit amongst Australian law enforcement agencies. So, we operate one of the world’s largest and most diverse international law enforcement networks; we’ve got 200 members that we currently have offshore; we cover 35 International posts across 35 countries; and we also do some work, in our missions, when we go in and assist from a capability perspective and lifting their capabilities in their policing services. So, globalisation is just one of those things that we’re all tackling now. And the movement of criminals across international borders is easy for them, they can do it relatively easily. So, we need to be able to be operating collegiately and together, to actually bring about maximum impact.
I think, with the AFP, we’ve always approached our position, offshore, as something that’s quite humbling. And it’s a privilege to be working in these countries, and respecting that they have sovereignty, and we are just there, assisting them, providing them support, and vice versa with some of our investigations offshore. So, internationally, we really do hold this as—there’s a cliche that the AFP uses— ‘the jewel in the crown’ of what the AFP does. And we have been very successful, because we are very respectful of our partners and what we do offshore, but also very much of the understanding that we can’t do any of this alone, we cannot operate alone in this current environment, which is complex, it’s global, and it’s very, very challenging. And the only way that we can bring maximum impact to what we’re doing, is by working together. And it’s interesting, actually, I was reading something that our Commissioner [Reece Kershaw] — he did a speech just recently—he has just taken over as the Chair of the Five Eyes Law Enforcement Group (FELEG), which is a really critical position, and the AFP is really privileged and quite proud that we’ve now taken over the chair of that for the next two years.
And we’re talking about a very powerful group there, Sajjan, these are heads of our Five Eyes law enforcement partners, working together to leverage collective legislation, capability, and intelligence to maximise the impact on the criminal environment. And our commissioner was just talking, recently, about taking over the Chair of the FELEG and he made a really, really interesting point. And he said, we have all of these syndicates that are operating globally, and they work together, and they get things done globally with relative ease, unfortunately, for us as law enforcement. But he made a particular point. And he said that the largest syndicate that operates in this world is the law enforcement syndicate. And you know what? He’s absolutely right. Law enforcement, as a collective, operating together, as a syndicate, this is where we have maximum impact. And we can bring a lot of leverage and power to play. So, law enforcement internationally is probably the largest syndicate that operates, and we just need to be very, very in tune that we need to be doing this together and working together as much as we possibly can.
SG: You touched on so many important points, and just demonstrates the breadth and scale that the Australian Federal Police are having to deal with in terms of the challenges and I want to unpack a lot of those as we continue our discussion. But before we get into that, specifically, let me also factor in your own role in this. So, what made you decide to work in law enforcement?
JH: Well, it’s funny, actually, I’ve, even as a small child, I wanted to do one of two things, Sajjan, I wanted to be a police officer, or I wanted to be a kindergarten teacher. Now, I don’t know where the alignment comes in relation to that, but I’m sure that there could be some crossovers there! But I joined the AFP way back in 1985 and I’ve got to say, I’ve had the most amazing career, and I’ve had the most amazing experiences in law enforcement and by joining the AFP in the breadth of work that we do and what we are responsible for.
But I think if I sort of unstitched a little bit, why did I want to join law enforcement? Primarily, I think it’s that wanting to serve; that public service; that protection of the society and community that were primarily involved in working with; and helping people through, probably some of the most challenging and difficult periods of their life; and playing a really important role in supporting our community and our society, where things have happened and they need the support, they need the assistance from law enforcement. So, I think that it’s just a deep-rooted feeling in myself about wanting to serve and protect and support. That’s really strong with me and it’s not just from a community perspective, it’s how I actually overlay just my work as a commander in the AFP as well and that’s what I apply as well, to my thinking, in relation to the people that work with me, my teams, it’s just my thinking, it’s just who I am and what I’m all about is that protection and that wanting to serve and support people.
SG: How do you feel policing has changed over the years, from your perspective?
JH: If I look back to when I joined, in 1985, I’ve got to say, I think back then, and where we are now, in relation to just the complexities of what we’re dealing with now, I mean, it’s quite extraordinary. As I was thinking about the podcast today and sort of thinking about some of the things that really have changed, and just the whole globalisation, the flow of people now, that we never had back in 1985; borderless entries; borderless crimes; the cyber area that we’re in now; the movement in technology; the global instability that we are now seeing that’s manifesting itself in a whole range of different crime types that we never had to think about back when I first joined.
And it’s just that change, the changing threat environment constantly, the criminals and the syndicates, the terrorist groups that are operating offshore now, trying to avoid law enforcement detection, all makes our job significantly harder. And the advances in technology, the communication platforms that these people are using, it’s a really hard task to actually keep up with what the criminals are now using. So, the environment is so much more complex, the scrutiny that is now applied to law enforcement agencies as well has never been stronger than when I first joined it, that dynamic has really changed now.
And if I talk a little bit about COVID-19, a current issue that we’re all starting to come out of now, I think that there’s going to be flow on effects for that for years to come, if I’m perfectly honest with you. Some of the things that we’re currently seeing now as a result of COVID-19, is that absolute uptick in relation to the people that have been online, and the number of people that have been online, during COVID-19, they’ve now been targeted, as vulnerable individuals—by whether that be terrorist groups, or criminal groups—targeting them, targeting the most vulnerable because of the sheer volume of people who have been online during COVID-19. And I think there’s other flow on effects that we are yet to see [such as] criminals and other groups changing their modus operandi and how they’ve actually done business during COVID, because trust me, whilst there might have been a slowdown slightly, they were still doing business during COVID-19, that didn’t stop, they didn’t really suffer too much as a result of that.
If I have a look at the moment in relation to what we, from an Australian Federal Police perspective look at, we have 70% of all of our transnational and serious organised crime targets either living offshore or having links offshore. Now, that’s significant. If we look at the terrorist threat, at the moment, still very well-established networks causing us all great issues. And they’ve got the ability, now, as I mentioned, with the online uplift over COVID-19, they’ve had the ability, and they’ve had the time, to radicalise individuals online. And that whole domestic threat picture has now increased, I think, as a result of that.
So, whilst I’ve touched on a lot of areas there, I think what is fairly evident is just what we’re dealing with now is vastly different to whatever would have come across our desk 30 years ago. We are living in a very complex environment at the moment. And it’s even changed as well, the people that we’re now looking to recruit, and maybe we can come on to that a little bit later on. But we’ve got some very smart, intelligent, capable, diverse people with multiple talents and skills that we now employ to help us actually tackle the threats that we’re now dealing with.
SG: So, certainly, it’s very much a complex security environment, as you mentioned. And this leads me to discussing your own role in aiding international security. You have a unique vantage point in that you were involved in investigating two separate and very different threats on the aviation industry. One entailed the downing of a civilian airliner by entities supported by a state actor, and the other was a plot from a transnational terrorist group.
Let’s look at the former first. So, you were involved in the investigation into the downing of Malaysia Airlines flight MH17, over Ukraine, which everyone remembers. And that occurred back on the 17th of July 2014. And that happened whilst this airliner was flying over eastern Ukraine and it was hit by a missile. All 283 passengers and 15 crew were sadly, tragically, killed. This included 38 Australians. How did you first get involved in this case?
JH: Yes Sajjan, this has been an incredibly complex and challenging investigation. The downing in relation of MH17, the AFP notes as Operation AREW. It has required a relentless commitment to task with many partners looking to bring justice for the families of the victims involved in this absolute tragedy. On 4 August 2014, a joint investigation was established under Eurojust provisions and that was the Netherlands, Australia, Belgium, Ukraine, and Malaysia later joined in December 2014. Now, just to give you some context, that Joint Investigation Team (JIT) is still running Sajjan, and the Joint investigation has just been extended until March 2023.
There have been some really key developments over the course of many years which the investigation team is extremely proud of, and we are proud of them. In September 2016, the Joint Investigation Team publicly announced the first results of the investigation, and that was MH17 was shot down by a missile launched by a Buk TELAR that came from the Russian Federation. On 5 July 2017, not long after that announcement, the JIT countries announced their full support for a Dutch National Prosecution. This in turn allowed alleged offenders involved to be prosecuted in the Netherlands under Dutch law. Then, on 19 June 2019, the Dutch Prosecution Service, charged four alleged offenders with murder in connection with the shooting down of MH17. That was three Russians and one Ukrainian. International arrest warrants have been issued for all the four accused. The trial commenced in The Hague on 9 March 2020, so several years after this tragic event with none of the accused in attendance. The court is currently deliberating and may deliver the judgement later on this year [2022]. The JIT investigation remains ongoing to identify further suspects. The AFP remains absolutely committed to this task, Sajjan. Very committed, very dedicated people we have involved in this. We have deployed in excess of over 500 personnel since July 2014 in support of this investigation and we remain part of the investigation team.
I think for all of us that have been involved in Operation AREW, as we call it, this has been a very, extremely complex investigation for a whole range of reasons. And it’s been very, very challenging for those involved. I’ve been involved with a number of international press conferences over the last couple of years since I’ve been here in London, and I’ve overseen our people that have been working on this in Kyiv, and also in the Netherlands. Due to what’s going on now with Russia and Ukraine we’ve actually moved our people out of there, they are now all based in the Netherlands. But we’ve done some fantastic work, and we’re still involved in that investigation. And we now have three that remain in the Netherlands still working as part of the JIT. So, it has been long standing, it’s been something that I’ve overseen since I arrived in London as the commander in this region, since January 2018. And obviously have been heavily invested in.
SG: It’s just a reminder of what a tragic incident that was and remains something that requires resolution, especially for the family members who lost their loved ones under the most horrific circumstances. Perhaps it’s an obvious question, but did Russia try to interfere in or impede the investigation?
JH: I think we’ve seen a lot of open source in relation to that. And what I can say, Sajjan, is that they probably haven’t given us all of the assistance that we would have liked, is probably the answer that I would give to that particular question.
SG: Absolutely. So, the other major security issue that you’ve had to deal with was known as Operation Silves. On 29 July 2017, an Australian counter-terrorism operation foiled the most serious ISIS plot the country has ever faced. Two brothers in Sydney, guided by operatives in Syria, had tried to bomb an Etihad plane flying from Sydney to Abu Dhabi in the United Arab Emirates, which was going to carry some 400 passengers. They also tried to build a chemical weapon to disperse a lethal gas attack against members of the public. These were very serious plots. How close were the plotters to executing this attack?
JH: So, just on that particular operation. So, just to put some context here, there’s probably not a lot I can say on the particular operation at the moment, Sajjan. The matter is actually still before court, and it’s subject to some suppression orders. But to provide some context, so I was actually one of the CT commanders back in Australia at the time this operation started and I’ve got to say, I’ve been working in and out of counter-terrorism now, probably, since the best part of 2003, so I have a real passion for working in this particular crime type and I absolutely, really enjoy it I’m very, very passionately committed to it.
But this was one of these operations where, when we saw what could have happened, it really shook me, I guess. It was probably one of the operations I’ve been involved in where I sort of sat back and thought about what could have been. And if this had have happened, and as you rightly say it’s been reported, quite largely, in open source about there was an attempt to put an IED onto an aircraft that was leaving Sydney, by these particular individuals. If that had have happened, that would have been an absolutely tragic day for everybody concerned. And it was just something that really caused me just to sit back and think about what could have been, because, yes, absolutely, it was close to happening, it was probably close to happening more than any other, or as close as any other, plot that we have foiled over the years. And, you know, we were able to take some disruptive action, which went our way, fortunately, and we located what we needed to as part of that, so it didn’t ever go ahead. But absolutely, it was close to happening. And, for whatever reasons, they delayed what they were doing and that was probably fortunate for us that we were able to intercept at that stage.
But we’ve all spoken about what the current threat looks like, and we often speak about lone actor attacks, low sophistication of weaponry, cars or knives or something else that might be opportunistic, which would be quite easy for an attack to occur anywhere in the world. But this one was, if we think back to 9/11 days, this was close to that type of thing that could have happened, and it’s not that we’ve ever taken our eye off the ball, in relation to that possibly occurring again, but I guess this was a bit of a wake-up call to say, this is what these people are still thinking about: blowing up an aircraft, working with people overseas. It seems to have some reminders for all of us, I think, about 9/11 and the tragic events over there. And if this had happened over Australia that would have just shaken us globally, we are in an absolute wake-up call that we’ve still got people out there that do have the capabilities, or the interest, or the wherewithal, or the motivations and the guidance from those overseas. This is still happening, and we can’t afford to take our eye off the ball. But that was just something that really shocked me, I guess, to the core, to think about what could have happened. And as I said, I’ve been working in this field for a very long time, but that particular operation, yes, it did have an impact on me.
SG: It’s again, another reminder, as you mentioned, 9/11, about the terrorists’ pathological obsession that they have in targeting the aviation industry. And this was just a few years ago, this wasn’t a decade ago, two decades ago, it was quite recent in many ways, and the full ramifications of it are yet to fully transpire. You’re drawing that linkage, Jen, with 9/11; it brings me to the issue about what’s happening right now in Afghanistan, where the country has come under control, again, by not just the Taliban, but in particular, the Haqqani Network, which is an internationally proscribed terrorist group, allies of al-Qaeda. Does it concern you, does it worry you that when you have this situation unfolding in Afghanistan, the fact that the pandemic, ostensibly, is now becoming part of the ‘new normal’ where people are beginning to travel, that we could have a situation where foreign fighters will emerge from the theatre in Afghanistan and pose a similar threat to the one that we had seen with ISIS in the past and al-Qaeda previously, and potentially the return of al-Qaeda, and maybe new groups that we haven’t been able to anticipate, but ones that could emerge in the vacuum that is created in Afghanistan and possibly Pakistan too?
JH: Totally agree. I think Afghanistan, and what happened there with the withdrawal and now the Afghan government as it is, I think that’s a real concern for all of us, if I’m being honest with you. And I think that not even just from a terrorist perspective, but I think just generally from a whole range of possible criminal activity that’s going to emerge out of there. But absolutely, I think that it’s a real concern, a concern that we all need to monitor and to watch. And absolutely, I agree with you about al-Qaeda. I think that just from my observations is that we’ve had ISIS for many, many years now. And I think that al-Qaeda has, they’ve certainly been there, they’ve certainly not gone away, I think they’ve just managed to sit under the radar and watch while ISIS had all the attention. So, I think that what we need to now do as law enforcement, and with our intelligence partners, is now have a look at that changing dynamic and what that currently looks like in that environment. And as you rightly say, looking at what other potential splinter groups who may or may not be in support of either of those groups, and what that might mean for us as law enforcement.
I think definitely we’re looking at the attraction of people to go from Australia and to travel over into the conflict zone, that’s still something that we’re very concerned about, we’ve certainly got legislation that we can actually use to stop people from doing that, and that’s really beneficial from an Australian perspective. But Australia does have quite a number of Australians that are in the conflict zone, some that we’re not even sure if they’re still alive or not, but they’re certainly of concern to us regardless. So, we still have Australians over there, and if they were ever to return, the threat that they actually pose, whether that be in Australia, or whether they might travel elsewhere and be a security threat elsewhere. But certainly, that’s a concern to us, and people still looking to that interest, that motivation that they’re looking to be part of, the new Afghanistan or what might be evolving there in a new threat environment.
SG: What’s becoming clear in our discussion is the variety of threats and challenges that Australia has to face. So, the country is in a, and I use the word again, very unique, geopolitical position. It faces the same threats that Europe has had to endure, with its nationals being recruited by groups like ISIS and al-Qaeda. And then Australia is also a key ally of NATO, in countering Russia’s aggression towards Ukraine. And then on top of all of that, there are these growing tensions with China. What do you believe will be Australia’s primary security priorities in the years to come? Is it going to have to be a balance between dealing with transnational terrorist groups and state actors? Is one going to end up taking the priority? Or is this going to have to be that difficult juggling act of constantly trying to balance both with the resources that are available?
JH: I think you’ve just hit the nail on the head, Sajjan. I think we do have a number of threats that are currently existing and the resources that we need to apply to them, and not only the resources, but also the capabilities that we need to apply. Because as I mentioned, at the start of the podcast, how much things have changed over the 30 years that I’ve been in law enforcement, and we look at the complex environment, really challenging environment that we’re operating in now is vastly different. And we need to keep up with that. So, we need to keep up with our resources, and we need to also keep up on our capabilities as well to match what’s going on in the criminal environment. I think that if we come on to — there’s a lot in open source in relation to some of the countries that we’re all concerned about in relation to state and non-state actor threats. And certainly, Australia is not immune from any of that. And, I think one of the things that actually surprised me, as I’ve sort of looked into this a little bit more when we’re talking about terrorism, and the threat that that still poses for all of us, and also the state and non-state actor threats that were that we’re all experiencing, from an Australian perspective — and I’ll just provide that overlay — from an Australian perspective, what we’re seeing now is that espionage and foreign interference has supplanted terrorism as our principal security concern at the moment. It’s actually demanding more attention, and it’s demanding more resources, and it’s currently outpacing the terrorism threat. So that’s really interesting, when I’ve sort of unpacked that and had a look at that.
I’m not suggesting for a minute that the terrorism threat in Australia has lowered because it hasn’t, but what we’re dealing with now is an increasing threat around espionage and also foreign interference. And the problem with this threat is that it’s pervasive, it’s multifaceted, and its potential to do such serious damage to our sovereignty, values, and national interest. So, it really goes to the core of the Australian principles and way of life. But our experience is not unique though, Sajjan, we are not the only ones that are actually dealing with this. I think it’s shared across a number of like-minded countries and our concerns in this space. And I think that multiple countries now are seeking to conduct espionage against Australia. I mean, that’s just what we’re seeing in Australia at the moment. They’re seeking information about strategic capabilities, economic and policy priorities, research and development, and also defence capabilities. So, you know, when you look at that, and what we need to actually counter that and try and detect that, it’s very, very challenging.
And we have a number of Australians who are targeted or are currently being targeted by foreign intelligence services. And these are people that are either current or former high-ranking government officials, they are academics, they are business executives, they are members of diaspora communities. It’s a whole range of areas that are actively being targeted by foreign intelligence services. So, these are really great threats to us, and obviously things that are really demanding a lot of attention at the moment. If we have a look at — we just, as you may or may not know, we just had an election in Australia. So, in the recent government election that we had in Australia, our domestic intelligence agency detected and disrupted a foreign interference plot that was attempted by a foreign government and their intelligence agencies. And it was an attempt to actually identify and target vulnerable individuals through inducements and cultivation, to advance their own interests of the foreign government. So, it’s absolutely alive in Australia. That is for sure. And it’s something that’s going to be with us for a long time, I think.
SG: It’s interesting hearing that perspective about the threat from state actors. In the beginning of our conversation, you spoke about how important partnerships and relationships are for Australia when it comes to dealing with counter-terrorism. Does the principle still apply when it looks at dealing with the threat from state actors, because of course Australia is a key member of the Five Eyes which you mentioned earlier, which is in partnership with the United States, United Kingdom, Canada, and New Zealand. And then Australia has also become a very important cog within what’s known as the Quad, which is a strategic relationship with the United States, India, and Japan. Do those multinational, multilateral, partnerships become even more important when you are dealing with the state actor threat?
JH: Oh, absolutely Sajjan. I think that just goes without saying, particularly when you’re talking about Five Eyes and the Quad, that absolutely goes without saying that this is something that we’re all dealing with, and we all need to work together on and to learn from each other, learn from each other’s best practice in relation to detecting this, because it can go largely undetected. But the influence and the issues that any form of foreign interference or espionage, when it’s targeted against a particular country, the damage that is done is not just necessarily within that country, it can be broader than that as well. So most definitely, those relationships, the engagement, particularly across the Five Eyes is absolutely critical in this space, Sajjan.
SG: Very much so. One final question, the final part of our discussion involves the vital role that women play in law enforcement for international security, for protection of the value system that you mentioned, and you yourself are a key example of that. And I noticed in many conferences that there are so many women in law enforcement that are pivotal and essential to providing that security, that have been responsible for foiling and disrupting major international plots, and it’s frightening to think what would have happened if they had not been allowed to be in those positions. Are we heading into the right direction for having more women in this field? And what can be done to encourage more female participation?
JH: It’s a really good question. And I’m actually going to start off with something that I only just remembered when I was preparing for this. When I was working in counter-terrorism, back in Australia, before I came out to undertake my role here in London, so I was one of the commanders for counter-terrorism, a senior executive role within the AFP and working with all of our Australian law enforcement agencies in that space. And I was out with an assistant commissioner from another one of our state law enforcement agencies one day and a good partner and friend to the AFP working in the area of counter-terrorism. And he said to me one day over coffee, he said, “Jen, do you realise” — and this was, now think about this, Sajjan, so this was 2017, just before I came to London in 2018 — and he said to me, “Jen, do you realise that you are the only female senior executive working in law enforcement in the area of counter-terrorism?” I was the only one, Sajjan, as a senior executive female working in the area of counter-terrorism, and I was the only one in Australia across all of Australian law enforcement agencies. Now, the thing that struck me there was I actually hadn’t even thought about that myself. It was actually brought to my attention by an assistant commissioner colleague of mine who’s also working in the area. So that actually did cause me to sort of think about that. But I just remembered that actually when I was thinking about our podcast today, and I just wanted to start with that, because things have changed. And that’s a good thing.
And certainly, from an AFP perspective, we are actively seeking to recruit, develop, mentor, and bring women through, into law enforcement, into the AFP. We are really doing a lot of work in relation to that. And when we think about it, as law enforcement agencies or officers, we need to be representing the communities that we serve. And if we’re thinking about just straight men and women in the community, we’re talking about a 50/50 split there. Well, I don’t think that law enforcement agencies are really overly reflective of that. And not just women in law enforcement agencies, I think from a whole range of diverse cultures, you know, we need to properly represent the communities that we serve. So, it’s not just women, it’s a diverse cultural experience. And people from different nationalities, we need to bring them in, because that’s where we get the most value. That’s where we get to represent the communities that we serve. So we are, you know, very much in the AFP looking at that as a collective and how we attract women into the AFP to start with and how we can actually support them through that journey, whether that be looking at some flexible options if need be if they have commitments. But this is not just for women, I think we’re looking at how we actually have that proper work-life balance across the AFP. And currently in the AFP, from a sworn officer, so a police officer perspective…23.3% of our staffing level is currently women. And by 2028, we’re looking to actually increase that to 30%. Well, I’d like to think that we could probably do better than that by 2028. And we need to do a lot of work to actually encourage this.
But if I think about the role of women in law enforcement, I mean, you’ve even touched on it in some of the things that I’ve had the fortune of listening to you talk about, Sajjan, particularly in relation to Afghanistan and women’s rights being eroded there, and what impact that has, because you simply do not have a woman’s voice at the table. And applying those soft diplomacy skills in a very male-dominated arena, and having that different opinion, as I say, just bringing a different voice to the table, I think it’s quite powerful. And that’s what we miss when we don’t have females, I think, around the table. And working in the area of counter-terrorism, we are trying to do a lot more work to bring women through. And one of the current initiatives — which I’m so pleased that this has been accepted, and we’re working through it now as a Five Eyes collective — so as part of the Leadership in Counter Terrorism (LinCT) programme and conference that you’ve been part of — so that’s the Five Eyes group there that work together. And they’ve actually just signed off and agreed to a new programme that they’re going to be implementing, and it’s called “Women in Counter Terrorism.” And the UK and Australia are really leading on that at the moment, and I’ll run through sort of what they’re looking to do, I’m sort of involved in that on the margins here in my position in London, but we’re actually going to be bringing on obviously the US, Canada, and also New Zealand into this so we can make it a collective exercise.
But it’s really looking at encouraging women coming into CT policing and advancing their career pathways through either counter-terrorism and or national security. And what we’re looking to do with the programme is to harness the support and the influence of senior women across the CT environment and offer training, support, coaching, mentoring, and what’s really interesting and really exciting is that we’re looking to do secondments. So, we are looking to exchange women into our CT areas, for anywhere from 6 to 12 months at a time, to actually get that experience and build their experience and knowledge. So that’s what we’re currently doing. And I’m really pleased that that’s starting to get a little bit of traction now. And, in fact, I know I’ve got a meeting in the next couple of weeks to discuss that even further. But I’m really pleased that we’re doing that, it’s such a critical role. And I think we need to encourage women to get the experiences that I have had, for example, and probably understand and unpack a little bit why women are a little bit put off by working in this area, particularly in counter-terrorism. It is high-stress, it is high-pressure, absolutely. But I think that this is where the mix comes in when we talk about diversity, that actually helps with the stress and with the pressure by bringing different voices and different opinions to the table. It is, you know, it can be quite a male-dominated environment. But we also need to look to see how we can change that as well.
SG: These are such important points that you’re making, and that initiative of Women in Counter Terrorism led by the Leadership in Counter Terrorism (LinCT), that’s fantastic. And I think that will hopefully play a very important role in encouraging more women at high-levels to be involved in counter-terrorism and international security. And it’s so essential, because we’ve seen women play an intrinsic role in disrupting major plots that could have been devastating economically, politically, socially. There were women that were critical to providing the intelligence that led to the location of Osama bin Laden in Pakistan. And then we’ve been talking about your experiences in disrupting plots and foiling the roles of state actors. So, it’s so important in this age now, where we address this and see what can be done to redress the balance, or the lack of a balance that has existed in this field. So very important points that you’ve mentioned, Jen. Is there anything else in our discussion that you wanted to touch upon or add that we haven’t looked at so far?
JH: Well, I don’t think so, I think we’ve probably covered the most significant areas, and just examining how things have changed in the 30 years since I’ve been in law enforcement. But you know, probably just to sort of finish off, Sajjan, we’ve spoken a lot about the AFP, our international role, what we do internationally, and how important those partnerships are. Can I tell you that, for me, personally, and also professionally, some of the most rewarding work I’ve ever done is working with our partners and our stakeholders internationally and working together to actually bring about a resolution to a problem or work together on an investigation or work together on an operation. I often talk about particularly the CT family, and the CT family internationally is huge. And we rely on each other, when times are tough, or when things are happening or an attack has happened, or investigation is ongoing. You know, it is often that I would get messages from my international friends and colleagues that I’ve worked with over many years, offering me support in whatever might be going on in Australia at that time, or in any role that I might be undertaking. So that, you know, I just think it’s so incredibly rewarding to be working in the international space and working with so many wonderful people that are working towards a common cause and just looking to protect and serve our community.
And I look at the attacks that go on globally, and particularly here in the UK, with the multiple attacks this poor country suffered in 2017, just before I came out here. And every time an attack happens somewhere in the world, we feel it. We feel it as law enforcement officers working in the area of counter-terrorism. And I felt, even though I was back in Australia at that time, my heart went out to the people that were caught up in these attacks, the devastating consequences of that. But my dear friends and colleagues here in the UK that I knew were working night and day to bring about some justice for those people that were caught up in dealing with the aftermath of such horrible, horrible attacks on our community and the people that live here in the UK. So, every attack that happens anywhere in the world, we feel it, we feel it as the counter-terrorism family, as the counter-terrorism law enforcement family. And this is what makes me so passionate and so incredibly committed to the work that I do, and why I just love working internationally with my partners, my friends, my colleagues, and people like you, Sajjan. I mean, it’s been an absolute pleasure to have met you back in 2018 I think we first came across each other. And honestly, I consider you a dear and trusted friend, and I really enjoy our conversations and just having that connection with you as well and just people like you, I think it’s amazing.
SG: Oh well thank you, Jen, that’s very kind of you to say. And look, the feelings are totally reciprocated, you’ve been absolutely critical to helping to coordinate counter-terrorism efforts, you brought in multiple stakeholders, not just within law enforcement, but beyond, you’ve engaged with academia, with the NGOs, you’ve always tried to find answers to problems, to see what solutions can be done. You’ve been relentless, even during the pandemic, you were keen to constantly communicate with people, find ways of dealing with potential threats that were going to emerge, and you very much represent the finest qualities and aspirations of the Australian Federal Police. And we are going to miss you in London. And just wanted to say thank you again for agreeing to be on the NATO DEEP Dive podcast, and my gratitude to you and also to all your colleagues in the Australian Federal Police for doing what you do, not just for Australia, but for global security, because Australia is very much a positive actor in that international cooperation. And I think the podcast hopefully will provide greater insight to those that may not necessarily always be aware of what Australia does, but hopefully now are able to get a better insight into just how much Australia plays in terms of international support and coordination and cooperation.
Commander Jennifer Hurst, thank you very much again for joining us on the NATO DEEP Dive podcast.
JH: Thank you so much, Sajjan, very kind words, and I appreciate it very much. It’s been an absolute pleasure, and I’m very flattered that you invited me onto the podcast today. So, thank you so much.
SG: It’s our pleasure.
Thank you for listening to this episode of DEEP Dive. I’m your host, Dr. Sajjan Gohel. DEEP Dive is brought to you by NATO’s Defence Education Enhancement Programme. The production and research team are Marcus Andreopoulos and Victoria Jones. For additional content, including full transcripts of each episode, please visit: deepportal.hq.nato.int/deepdive.
Disclaimer: Please note that the views, information, or opinions expressed in the DEEP Dive series are solely those of the individuals involved and do not necessarily represent those of NATO or DEEP.
This transcript has been edited for clarity.