Subjects: Nato, Defence issues; September 11
E&OE...........
PRIME MINISTER:
I just wanted to say very briefly that General Ralston, and I'm certainly very happy to have the opportunity of talking to General Ralston. We have met on a couple of previous occasions and we've talked about the war against terrorism, the interaction between North Atlantic Treaty Organisation and European security intentions and also it's been, it has been a very useful opportunity at such a high ranking level to get the views of the Supreme Commander regarding the security situation of not only in the Balkans but also in Afghanistan and elsewhere and quite recently there was some very valuable official talks between the Australian Defence Forces and NATO and although by definition NATO is a fair distance from Australia, it's always been a very positive participation by Australians in the forces of member countries, most particularly the United Kingdom and the United States. And the willingness on the part of the Australian Government to see those personnel involved in any deployments of NATO forces. But I want to thank General Ralston for the opportunity of being brought up to speed on his area of responsibility and the interaction that has with the involvement of Australia alongside the United States in Afghanistan and elsewhere.
GENERAL RALSTON:
Mr Prime Minister thank you for the opportunity to meet with you and discuss these important issues. I would like to take this opportunity to publicly thank the Prime Minister and all the citizens of Australia for the great support you have given with your soldiers that are in Bosnia, and the soldiers that have served Kosovo and in Bosnia as part of other units. I've got many years of great experience with the Australian Armed Forces. They are, they're a most professional force, I would serve with them anywhere, any time and I just have to upfront thank all of the people of Australia for that great contribution. Thank you.
JOURNALIST:
Prime Minister last night Senator Hill, our Defence Minister, said on national television that Australia has the capacity to put an armed brigade into the Middle East now, if required, is this in any way a hint of what our thinking is or what's being asked of us?
PRIME MINISTER:
No I think Senator Hill would have been, I haven't actually seen a report of those remarks so I'm not speaking directly to them because I don't know the context, I'm always very cautious in reacting to remarks of other people put to me by a third person - no disrespect - but I imagine he would be speaking broadly of capacity not of any indication of a request or anything of that kind. I mean our position in relation, if you were thinking of Iraq, our position in relation to that has not changed. It was as I outlined it before I went to the United States, since I've returned and that is that any request will be assessed at the time in the circumstances and according to the character of the request.
JOURNALIST:
Do we have a brigade though at a state of readiness where it could deployed at short notice.
PRIME MINISTER:
Well we do, we indicated, we'd demonstrated at the time of East Timor that a high level of preparedness.
JOURNALIST:
General, in general terms, Australia is reviewing its military priorities in the light of September the 11th, do you think that middle ranking powers like Australia post September the 11th with facing, we we're facing asymmetric and unconventional threats, that countries like Australia need to look to their capacities more about injection of forces to trouble spots around the globe rather than simply homeland defence as it were?
GENERAL RALSTON:
Well obviously these are decisions that only the Government and people of Australia can make and I'm not about to advise what you should or shouldn't do. Let me say from a generic point of view, if there was anything that 11 September demonstrated that I think everyone can agree upon is that threats don't necessarily have to emanate from the nation state that is adjacent to your borders. Here we had a plot that was hatched in Afghanistan and planned somewhere else, executed in the United States. Now if you're going to effectively counter that kind of a threat then you need the capability to move your forces wherever and whenever they need to be moved. So I think that it a prudent option in a generic sense, but once again I stress this is something that only the Australian Government and the Australian people can decide for Australian Embassy Brussels
JOURNALIST:
Prime Minister there are reports in Australia today that we have purchased US surplus torpedos for Collins Class Submarine but they've been found to be too heavy and the Collins Submarines are going to have to be re-fitted again at a cost of $260 million. Are you aware of this?
PRIME MINISTER:
I haven't seen those reports. I'll get some, before commenting further I'll get some advice on that and can I just indicate that if there are some domestic political questions you want to ask me or things related to my visit I would be very happy to facilitate that in a separate arrangement and in fairness to the General I don't think we should weary him with the minutiae of Australian politics. Interesting though that is to you and to me.
JOURNALIST:
Prime Minister the General was talking generically about the way in which nations respond to the threats post September the 11th, do you concur in general that this is the way that Australia should be looking in terms of the balance of its Armed Forces?
PRIME MINISTER:
Well yes, I do. We had a White Paper which was based on developing a capacity to provide continental defence. Obviously a peacekeeping capacity in our region. We're not looking for further East Timors, certainly not, but we accept that in our part of the world that type of situation could arise but also a capacity to be involved alongside an ally in another part of the world which was demonstrated in Afghanistan.
JOURNALIST:
So does that mean that we will be looking towards more heavy lifting capacity, either airborne or seaborne, in terms of (inaudible)?
PRIME MINISTER:
Well I think it means that we need a capacity that is within the limits of Australian affordability given our size to meet the goals outlined in the White Paper.
JOURNALIST:
General, the apparent conflicts of interpretation of the powers of the proposed International Criminal Court within NATO allies and within US allies generally, is that argument being settled or is it still going to be a significant difficulty when mounting policing operations or peacekeeping operations in future?
GENERAL RALSTON:
Well let me answer your question this way. Obviously this is discussions that are ongoing as we speak at the United Nations. From a military point of view from NATO and our operation that we have in Bosnia, the operation is continuing as planned as sometimes gets a little confused in the media, the roughly 16,000 troops that we've got in S4 are operating there not under the United Nations control but that is a NATO operation with a mandate from the Dayton Peace Accords. The UN peace is the International Police Task Force, the IPTF, which is about 1,500 people that are there who were due to leave at the end of this year and the European Union would then pick up that particular mission. So within NATO this is something that we're continuing to do our job as we are. This is something that is discussed on the political level in New York and I think that's the appropriate place to ask the questions.
JOURNALIST:
You've been asked to contribute an opinion though surely Sir?
GENERAL RALSTON:
Not today!
(ends)