E&OE……………………………
O’BRIEN:
With me now is the Prime Minister. Prime Minister, America continues to make plain that it is going to make sure Iraq is disarmed, with or without the United Nations. Do you understand the point at which America would draw the line on Iraqi non-compliance?
PRIME MINISTER:
I understand this Kerry and I think the world understands this – that you’ve got a 15-nil resolution of the Security Council and that in large measure came about because America was so strong. If America had not gone to the General Assembly through President Bush on the 12th of September and laid out the reality, I don’t think you would have had that resolution carried 15-nil. At the moment everybody is hoping that firstly Iraq within seven days says yes we will admit the weapons inspectors and then plays the game, if I can put it that way, and is completely transparent, declares all its weapons of mass destruction, participates in a full inspection and cooperates in the destruction of any that may be found. Now I don’t think it helps the cause of a peaceful outcome to start speculating about what might happen if Iraq defies the United Nations. I hope Iraq doesn’t. If Iraq complies with what the Security Council has asked for, this issue can be resolved without military force. That is the wish of the President of the United States as conveyed to me as recently as last Friday night when I spoke to him on the phone.
O’BRIEN:
But when you say it’s not helpful to canvass what might happen if, I mean the President of the United States himself has canvassed that, as has Secretary of State Colin Powell. President Bush said on Saturday – quote ‘if Iraq fails to fully comply with the UN resolution, the US in coalition with other nations, will disarm Saddam Hussein’. Colin Powell has said yes if there is non-compliance we will first go back to the United Nations, but if the United Nations does not back us, we will go into Iraq. Now they’re canvassing that possibility. Why shouldn’t we?
PRIME MINISTER:
Well you can canvass and ask me. My view is that you will get the maximum pressure put on Iraq if the issue continues to be handled in the way that it is being handled. I mean right at the moment Iraq is more in the dock than it has been over the last 12 months. And that is because largely through American leadership, we have assembled through the Security Council a resolution that puts maximum pressure on Iraq and quite frankly that is where I intend so far as Australia is concerned, to leave the issue at the moment. I do not intend on this or any other program to canvass a hypothetical situation in the event that Iraq does not fully comply or only partially comply. I will deal with that issue… as Prime Minister of Australia I will deal with that issue only if and when it arises. Right at the moment I hope it doesn’t and I think that applies to everybody including the President of the United States.
O’BRIEN:
But you have had many discussions now with President Bush. Your Ministers have had discussions with senior members of the US Administration. Defence officials have spoken to defence officials. Surely amongst those conversations you have sought from the United States some indication of what they will regard as serious non-compliance. I mean will it come if Saddam Hussein in his first 30 days comes up with a list of acknowledged weapons of mass destruction sites that the US disagrees with, that doesn’t accord with their list? I mean at what point is non-compliance serious enough to canvass war?
PRIME MINISTER:
Look you don’t hypothesise about something such as this and I’m not going to do it. I’m simply not going to. It’s too serious. We have got a resolution. It’s a very tough resolution and I hope that Iraq for the sake of her own people agrees to allow the inspectors in and plays a transparent game because a lot of suffering for her own people can be avoided if that happens.
O’BRIEN:
But isn’t there a point of principle in which Australians have a stake as much as anybody, around the issue of when a war is justified, at what point, at the issue of legality of a war with regard to the United Nations.
PRIME MINISTER:
Well Kerry let me answer that question this way. I can assure you and through you the viewers that if at any time in the future while I am Prime Minister this country commits military forces to any conflict, I will accept the responsibility to justify that commitment in full to the Australian people. I owe them that and I will do that. But we’re dealing here with a hypothetical situation. We have not been asked by the Administration to commit forces. We are dealing with a situation where we hope through the diplomatic means that the Americans have been engaged in and others have been engaged in, to achieve an outcome that does not involve military conflict. Now I hope devoutly that that remains the case. If at some time in the future in this or any other situation military commitment were needed, of course the issue of principle as you put it would have to be satisfied. Of course I would have to explain to the Australian people. But the Australian people want of me a handling of this issue that maximises the possibility of a peaceful non-military outcome. It does not achieve that end for me to be hypothesising about a military outcome on this or indeed any other program.
O’BRIEN:
And are you confident that if there is a flashpoint, at any stage over these next few weeks where suddenly a decision become is confronting everybody about whether there is justification in going to war against Iraq, are you confident that there will be ample time for Australia to have a proper debate about that, particularly if it does not have United Nations backing?
PRIME MINISTER:
Well Kerry, once again you're asking me to hypothesise and I'm not going to do that. What I'll tell you is that if in relation to this, or indeed any other issue while I'm Prime Minister, Australian military forces are, by the decision of the Government, committed we will take that to Parliament and we will allow for a full debate. I've given that undertaking to the Parliament and I intend to honour it. I intend to do in relation to any situation that might arise in the future, now this is generic and not specific to Iraq, do what Bob Hawke did in relation to the Gulf War in 1991 when he said that although it was a decision of the Executive Government, it should be taken to Parliament and what I did as Prime Minister in relation to the East Timor deployment in 1999.
O'BRIEN:
What is not hypothetical, I would suggest to you Mr Howard, is that there does seem to be a clear divide, a clear difference of opinion within the Security Council about whether America can commit to a war in Iraq legally without the sanction of the United Nations. Now surely, that is an issue, and there is a division, and it's not hypothetical.
PRIME MINISTER:
Well Kerry, we're dealing with a resolution which has just been passed. We're waiting to see if Iraq responds. The right time to deal with any non-compliance by Iraq or any argument about non-compliance is when that arises - that hasn't arisen, I hope it doesn't. And I'm simply not going to fuel a hypothetical debate by commenting further.
O'BRIEN:
Well although, you must acknowledge surely that you're saying you won't fuel a hypothetical debate, but it's a hypothetical debate which is being led by the United States.
PRIME MINISTER:
Well, everybody has their own way of dealing with this kind of situation. I speak as the Prime Minister of Australia. I answer for the Government of Australia. I don't give running advice to the President or the National Security Adviser as to how they should conduct the issue in the United States. I believe that the Americans have handled this extremely well. I think the strength and patience that George Bush has shown has resulted in a strong resolution. And I think that's a good outcome because I think that maximises the possibility of Iraq complying with the resolution.
O'BRIEN:
Well, without going into how you might debate the issue, do you acknowledge that there is clear public unease in Australia, if not outright opposition, to the prospect of Australian troops going into Iraq with the US, without UN sanction.
PRIME MINISTER:
There is a range of views on this issue, of course there is. And I can only say to you directly again that if at any time in the future, speaking generically and not specifically, we commit Australian forces, I will accept the obligation to justify that - morally and legally and in the national interest.
PRIME MINISTER:
Prime Minister, your Defence Minister, Robert Hill - moving on to another issue - has had quite a bit to say now in the wake of the Bali bombings on possible cooperation with Indonesia's special forces unit, Kopassus. Given their past record of human rights abuses in East Timor and elsewhere, and their possible connection to Muslim extremists engaged in brutal campaigns against Christian communities in Indonesia, is that cooperation something Australia can even begin to countenance?
PRIME MINISTER:
Well, I think in the wake of what has occurred, you have to look at a range of things. I think… we haven't made any decision, incidentally, to re-engage with Kopassus and Senator Hill hasn't said that. Senator Hill has simply said it's something that would need to be on the table. I think the things you mention would have to be taken into account…
O'BRIEN:
Do you find their record rather repugnant in that regard?
PRIME MINISTER:
Well, I find a lot of things in the world repugnant. And it's a question of trying to make sensible decisions on balance in the national interest. I mean, on the one hand we're being told by our critics that we have to get closer to Indonesia and as soon as a Government Minister says - well look, one way of doing that is maybe to re-engage with their military forces - we then have some of the same people coming back and saying oh that would be outrageous. Now, we haven't taken any decision, Kerry, to
re-engage with Kopassus. I am aware of the allegations about them, very well aware, and I can assure you that a consciousness of those things will be in our minds when we look at this issue.
O'BRIEN:
Now domestically, Senator Hill also said yesterday the Government - as head of the Senate, the Government leader in the Senate - that the Government isn't afraid of a double dissolution election over the sale of Telstra if the Senate rejects it. Is he speaking for you as well there? You're not afraid of a double dissolution on Telstra?
PRIME MINISTER:
Well look, yesterday was the first anniversary of our re-election, and we only have three-year terms in this country, and quite honestly I'm in no hurry to go back to another election.
O'BRIEN:
No, I'm talking about tomorrow, or next week, or next month.
PRIME MINISTER:
No, well… I mean, whenever you talk double dissolution in this country, people think of an election sort of being held 18 months or two years after the previous one. And look, the Australian public does not like early elections. And the track record is that he who goes to an early election without good cause, gets a punch in the nose. It happened to Bob Hawke in 1984 and I'm very conscience of that. I'm also aware that there are deadlock provisions in the constitution and you naturally have those in mind. We will keep trying to get our programs through. If we decide to go further on Telstra, and we haven't decided to do so yet, we will look at Estens. But if we did…
O'BRIEN:
Well, Senator Alston seems to be saying Estens gives you the all clear and he's your Minister for Telstra.
PRIME MINISTER:
Estens is very good. It's a very good report and it’s certainly very positive about what the Government has done. But we'll be looking in detail at Estens over the next week or so and then we'll reach a decision. And if we then decide to go a bit further, well an announcement will be made and…
O'BRIEN:
I don't think selling the rest of Telstra is a bit further - it's a lot further.
PRIME MINISTER:
Well, it would be a significant step forward. But there are a lot of factors involved in the timing of the sale of the rest of Telstra - we've got to be satisfied about the bush, we've also got to be satisfied that if we were satisfied about the bush that we sold at a time and a price that would maximise the return to the Australian public. And that could have quite a factor if we were, sometime in the hypothetical future, to get parliament's authority.
O'BRIEN:
I didn't think you talked hypotheticals. Prime Minister, thanks for talking with us.
PRIME MINISTER:
Always a pleasure, Kerry.
[ends]