SECRETARY RUMSFELD:
I am delighted to have with me the Prime Minister of Australia, Mr. Howard. He is a great friend and ally for many, many decades of the country. We've cooperated together in so many ventures over most of my lifetime and before. And this is your first visit to the Pentagon during the past two years that I've been here, so I welcome you and thank you publicly for the wonderful support that your country and you personally have provided to the global war on terror. It's going to be a long effort and it takes the steadfastness and purposefulness of people like you and countries like yours, and we're most grateful. Mr. Prime Minister.
PRIME MINISTER:
Well, thank you very much, Mr. Secretary. I'm delighted to be back at the Pentagon. The relationship between Australia and the United States has many facets. One of those has been our constant cooperation in military conflicts over the years. We value very much that association. Australians, particularly the older generation, remember the vital help rendered to us during World War II by the United States. And together we have fought on many battlefields and done many things in pursuit of the values that we share.
We face as close friends the threat around the world of weapons of mass destruction in the hands of rogue states and the frightening possibility that those same weapons could fall into the hands of international terrorists. That is a new dimension of instability, replacing some of the older threats. And that's the motivation for what Australia has been doing, in partnership with the United States, concerning Iraq.
We hope that military conflict can be avoided. It can only be avoided, if there's a faint hope of it being avoided, that can only happen if you get the entire world through the United Nations, saying the one thing to Iraq: the game is up. You must disarm. If that were to happen, and we were to see the Arab states energized to say the same thing, we may be able to avoid a conflict. And that is why we believe, not as a matter of international law, but a matter of accumulating international political pressure and diplomatic pressure, that a further resolution is desirable.
I've had a very good discussion with the Secretary about the pre-deployments. The basis of ours is understood by the United States. There's yet to be a final decision taken, if military conflict becomes the ultimate option, and that is one that will be dealt with in accordance with the constitutional processes of Australia. We have, nonetheless, along with the United Kingdom, predeployed forces. Australia does not believe that all of the heavy lifting on something like this should be done by the United States and United Kingdom alone, albeit our contribution is a much smaller one commensurate with the different size of our country. But you are sending a new and sharper signal when you predeploy, and that's what we've done, and we've been very willing to do that in cooperation with our American and British friends. And as always, the Australian military is very happy to work in close harmony and cooperation with the United States military. It's been a long association and a very positive one.
SECRETARY RUMSFELD:
Questions? Charlie?
JOURNALIST:
Mr. Secretary, France, Germany and Belgium today vetoed NATO protection for Turkey, saying that that would simply make it easier for the United States to invade Iraq. Could NATO begin disintegrating over decisions like this?
SECRETARY RUMSFELD:
Oh, I think not. NATO's been around a long time, and I suspect it'll be around a long time ahead. I think that technically what they did was not veto, but I think the phrase is they broke silence on a what otherwise would have been a planning process for NATO. And I have not heard precisely what they said as to what their reasons were, but NATO very likely will end up engaged in that subject through a different route. It's my understanding that the next step very likely would be Turkey coming back in, as is the right of any member nation, and having the subject engaged again through a different mechanism of NATO. I think the...it was...it's unfortunate that they are in stark disagreement with the rest of their NATO allies. There's three countries. There are 19 countries in NATO. So it's 16 to 3. I think it's a mistake. And what we have to do for the United States is make sure that that planning does go forward, preferably within NATO, but if not, bilaterally or multiple bilaterals. And we are already going about that task.
As you'll recall, what...all that was asked for was that planning begin for AWACS, which...and for chemical and biological detection units and for Patriot capability, all of which are defensive. And it seems to me that NATO will end up doing that, and the time that's lost will be made up because we'll start to do it bilaterally. And in the event that the three stand out at the end, my guess is that the other 16 nations of NATO would form a coalition to provide that kind of assistance.
JOURNALIST:
Could any delay for such protection delay a possible attack on Iraq were President Bush to make such a decision?
SECRETARY RUMSFELD:
Well, no, because the planning's going to go forward outside of NATO if necessary, the plan to see that Turkey's circumstance is at it should be. It's an important ally in NATO. It's a moderate Muslim state. And it seems to me that those three countries taking that position prevents NATO from fulfilling its obligation to a NATO ally. And I'm sure that NATO will find a way to do it eventually.
JOURNALIST:
Mr. Secretary, you just have come back from Germany, and you've spoken over the weekend to so many of the United States allies. What is your real sense of what is going on in Europe at the moment? If Germany and France, two of our most traditional allies, plus Belgium, are now taking this view, aside from the fact the U.S. is going to go forward, as you say, what does it really say to you about U.S. relations with Germany? I mean, what do you take from all of this? What does all of this really mean?
SECRETARY RUMSFELD:
Well, there have been differences within NATO my entire lifetime,adult lifetime. I could list six or eight of them: the natural gas pipeline, the Skybolt back in the Kennedy and McNamara era. I mean, there's always been something. And that's,that's the nature of it. When you've got that many countries going together, everyone's not always going to agree on everything. And what's the meaning of it? I guess time will tell. But at the moment, what it means is that three European countries are isolated from the rest of the NATO alliance: 16 countries, two North American and 14 in Europe, don't agree with them, with those three countries. That's what it means.
JOURNALIST:
And how soon will the U.S. begin now fulfilling what you've just said, deploying equipment, perhaps on a bilateral basis to Turkey?
SECRETARY RUMSFELD:
I don't know. The....we were hopeful till the last minute that those three countries would not do what they've now done. The work is starting, and it will proceed at a good clip and in good time. Questions for the Prime Minister? Yes?
JOURNALIST:
Mr. Howard, in your discussions this morning in the Pentagon, have you received any further information about Australia's position? And do you feel that Australia's commitment in the early pre-deployment, along with the U.K., is making Australia a greater target for terrorist attacks?
PRIME MINISTER:
Well, any Western country and its people are targets of terrorist attacks. We have made a pre-deployment of the type that I have outlined for the reasons that I've outlined. And the discussions this morning didn't bear on, in any way on the likelihood of Australia being a greater or a lesser target. I mean, I think it's important to remember that the most frequently quoted reason from the terrorist side for Australia being an object of hostility from international terrorists was in fact the deployment in East Timor, something that had the overwhelming support of the Australian public, and something of which most Australians feel, reflectively, quite proud that we'd done the right thing.
But this question of whether or not you are a target, it is a way of life that is despised by international terrorists. I haven't seen the program, but I understand the ABC's run a program in Australia,