Editing Harold Holt (section)

====Vietnam War====
{{Further|Military history of Australia during the Vietnam War}}
[[File:Holt-1-7-1966.JPEG|thumb|Holt with U.S. Defense Secretary [[Robert McNamara]] at [[the Pentagon]] in July 1966]]
The [[Vietnam War]] was the dominant foreign policy issue during Holt's term in office. He was a strong supporter of [[Military history of Australia during the Vietnam War|Australian involvement in the war]], which had begun in 1962,<ref name=personal/> and accused its critics of adopting a "[[Lotus Land]]" attitude.<ref>Frame (2005), p. 197.</ref> As well as citing Australia's [[SEATO]] obligations to [[South Vietnam]], Holt justified the war on the grounds that Australia was morally obligated to "resist communist subversion and aggression" and "defend the right of every people to choose their own social and economic order". He held that "unless there is security for all small nations, there cannot be security for any small nation".<ref>[https://electionspeeches.moadoph.gov.au/speeches/1966-harold-holt Australian Federal Election Speeches: Harold Holt], Museum of Australian Democracy. Retrieved 10 December 2017.</ref>

In March 1966, Holt announced that the [[1st Battalion, Royal Australian Regiment]], would be withdrawn and replaced by the [[1st Australian Task Force]], a self-contained [[brigade]]-sized unit based at [[Nui Dat]]. This effectively tripled the number of Australian troops in Vietnam to around 4,500, and also included 1,500 [[Conscription in Australia#Vietnam War|national servicemen]]&nbsp;– the first conscripts to serve in the conflict.<ref name="Frame 2005, p. 178">Frame (2005), p. 178.</ref> By the final months of Holt's prime ministership, Australia had over 8,000 personnel stationed in South Vietnam, drawn from all three branches of the [[Australian Defence Force]]; the final troop increase was announced in October 1967.<ref name=personal/> Holt "never deviated from his whole-hearted support for American bombing of [[North Vietnam]] and the hope that steadily increasing the number of foreign troops deployed to South Vietnam would lead to military victory and a solution to the crisis".<ref>Frame (2005), p. 203.</ref> [[John Gorton]] later said it was "ironical that, being a man of peace, he should have presided over one of the greatest build-ups of military power that Australia has found itself engaged in".<ref>Frame (2005), p. 270.</ref>

The government's handling of the war initially enjoyed broad public support, and was considered a key contributor to the landslide election victory in 1966&nbsp;– referred to by some as a "[[khaki election]]".<ref name=p188>Frame (2005), p. 188.</ref> By the end of the following year, however, opinion polls were showing that public sentiment had turned against the war, and previously supportive media outlets had begun to criticised Holt's decision-making.<ref>Frame (2005), p. 201.</ref> He did not live long enough to see the mass demonstrations experienced by his successors. Political opposition to the war was initially led by Opposition Leader [[Arthur Calwell]], who promised a total withdrawal from the conflict and labelled it a "cruel, unwinnable civil war".<ref name=p188/> His replacement, [[Gough Whitlam]], adopted a more pragmatic approach, focusing on policy specifics (particularly the government's apparent lack of an [[exit strategy]]) rather than the validity of the war itself.<ref>Frame (2005), p. 200.</ref>