Never is there a more critical passage for a nation than when its leaders make a decision to go to war.
In our case, the Prime Minister has committed us to a war which the international community and public sentiment here at home, including the federal opposition, consider to be illegal and morally wrong—illegal because it is set to take place without the sanction of the UN Security Council and morally wrong because it is the result of a unilateral action based on a new and dangerous concept of pre-emptive strike.
At about 12 o'clock today, Australia will begin its passage from a well-respected global citizen, a defender of international law and supporter of the authority of the United Nations, a country not generally known for conducting a belligerent or aggressive foreign policy and one that does not prey on its neighbours, to a country that, by rushing to be at the forefront of the coalition of the willing, has placed itself in very precarious and uncharted waters. It is this loss of our innocence that grieves me the most, and I know that it grieves and bewilders the people of Australia. I know many have argued that the world has changed dramatically since September 11. Indeed, it has changed; we cannot deny that. But it is precisely because of these changed circumstances that now, more than ever, we need to pursue resolution and action within the processes of the United Nations. Now is not the time to throw caution to the wind, to sidestep international law and participate in an action that, far from protecting our national interests, exposes our country and our citizens to the harm of potential retribution.
Try as I might, I cannot see how participation in an American-led war on Iraq can serve our national interests. How is it in our national interests to be party to a war which, in the words of the United Nations Secretary-General, Kofi Annan, lacks legitimacy? At 12 noon today, we begin to gamble with the future of our national interests and security. Australia cannot afford to place itself outside the UN processes. We cannot afford to be marked as a crusader nation—especially given our geographic location. Whether we like it or not, our neighbourhood is Asia and many of our neighbours are of the Muslim faith. It is in this neighbourhood that we trade and conduct business activities that have significant impact on our economy. This is the message that has resonated loud and clear in my own electorate of Calwell but also in the broader Australian community, and this is the message that the Prime Minister has chosen to ignore.
Over the course of the past few months I, like many of my colleagues, have sought and obtained the views of residents of my electorate. I can tell you that opposition by the residents in the electorate of Calwell to action without United Nations support was as high as 83 per cent in survey returns. No doubt members opposite, if they were able to speak openly and honestly, would report similar attitudes and feelings in their own electorates. My constituents, like a great many other Australians, are deeply concerned about the anticipated deaths of innocent civilians during the execution of this enormous military action against Iraq, but they are also concerned about the impact of this unilateral war closer to home.
We have a very large Muslim community living here in Australia; in fact, we have a very large Arabic community. Australians of Muslim and Middle Eastern appearance have endured vilification and abuse since September 11, and the Prime Minister has done nothing but pay lip-service to their predicament. Australians of Arabic and Muslim background can find no comfort in the Prime Minister's reassurances because there is none. His actions constantly contradict his words. In fact, Australians across the board can take no comfort in the Prime Minister's reassurances because he is, unfortunately, driven and swayed by the ideological agenda and military timetable of a foreign President, the President of the United States. Our Prime Minister has forgone his duty to the Australian people by involving us in a war that is not directly our business, leaving us highly exposed subscribers to a doctrine of pre-emptive strikes which will strain the future of international cooperation and security.
Today is a sad day for Australians but also for the people of Iraq. I have no doubt that many of them want to see the back of Saddam Hussein, but I am certain that they were hoping and praying that this crisis would be resolved by diplomacy and not war. Instead, sometime within the next few hours the might of the American military machine will darken their skies. Only time will tell whether this military assault will become their liberator, but what is certain is that death, displacement and destruction will be visited upon the people of Iraq today.
Disarmament through diplomacy was not given a chance to fully exhaust its processes because it fell victim to the neo-conservative ideologues that run the Bush administration. Our Prime Minister must be condemned; for, in his own moment of truth, he has finally shown how much he and his government have fallen for the appeal of the White House hawks. He has shown how much he is prepared to make Australia—for the first time ever—an aggressor nation willing to defy international law and world public opinion. What concerns me is the lack of foresight the government is showing in relation to our neighbourhood. Is it really in our national interest to be encouraging the view that we are white colonialists, or white crusaders, as put to me recently by a visiting Malaysian academic? Did the Prime Minister, or indeed the foreign minister, at any stage consult with any of our regional neighbours before embarking on this strategy of pre-emptive strike?
At a time when the Asia-Pacific region is at the crossroads, with rising tensions in the Korean peninsula, the government does not appear to be too concerned about the possibility that its actions could isolate us and thus leave us vulnerable. What contingency plans, if any, does the government have in this scenario? Can the Prime Minister assure us that, in the event of trouble in the region where Australian national interests and security are at stake, our American ally will come to our aid? Many people fear that, if the US had to make such a determination, it would be done on the exclusive basis of its own national interests. If those interests should be inconsistent with Australia's then the answer is, perhaps, don't hold your breath.
Never has a script for war been written with so much hypocrisy and posturing. We do not know what will happen from this point onwards because we cannot totally predict the outcome of a pre-emptive strike policy engineered by a superpower that has treated the UN with nothing but contempt and disdain. We are concerned that the Prime Minister of Australia has indulged in the President of the United States' deception, sharing in his vanity and recklessness and in his phoney diplomacy to justify a manufactured war. As such, John Howard has let the people of Australia down. He stands condemned for discarding the diplomatic process in favour of unilateral military action. He stands condemned for seriously and dangerously compromising Australia's national security, he stands condemned for unnecessarily endangering the lives of Australian service men and women, he stands condemned for placing in serious danger the lives of Australian citizens, and he stands condemned for allowing the reputation of this great country to be tarnished and perhaps irreversibly damaged through his commitment to the coalition of the willing. Finally, he stands condemned for aiding and abetting one country's determination to preserve its economic, military and political supremacy over all others at the expense of Australia's national interest.
