Good afternoon ladies and gentlemen. I've called this news conference to bring you up to date on the latest developments concerning Iraq. As you know there was a meeting in the Azores involving the British Prime Minister, the American President, and the Prime Minister of Spain - the three co-sponsors of the resolution before the Security Council - and it was also attended by the Portuguese Prime Minister who was the host of the gathering. President Bush called me at a quarter-to-twelve this morning to give me a briefing on the discussion. He indicated that one final attempt would be made by the three co-sponsors of the resolution at the United Nations in New York on Monday morning New York time to secure the support of the Security Council for the resolution. He indicated that the prospects of that on the strength of the publicly stated positions, particularly of the French, did not appear likely but he was determined as was the British Prime Minister to give the situation one more shot.
It's very very important that it be understood that this is the final attempt being made by the American President and the British Prime Minister to bring about a diplomatic solution to the situation. It has to be said that as a result of the developments that have occurred, military participation by Australia in action against Iraq is now even more likely than it may have appeared a few days ago. I think it's important to say that. I did not receive a formal request from the President for participation in military action, but I would expect in the event of the final diplomatic moves being unsuccessful I would expect that that request would be received in the very near future.
I've called a meeting of the Federal Cabinet this evening for the purpose of having a general discussion concerning this issue and of course a final decision on military participation is one for the Federal Cabinet to make. I should emphasise that if a decision is taken to participate in military action to enforce disarmament on Iraq then that decision will be completely in accordance with the legal authority already contained in a series of Security Council resolutions. The Government has received formal legal advice to the effect that it would be wholly consistent with existing Security Council resolutions for military action to be taken to enforce those resolutions without resort to....without the need rather, for a new resolution. Could in inquire if people are having difficulty hearing me. I apologise for that. I'm not in charge of the Joint House....yes well I thought it had been turned off. I don't control the Parliament. I try and control the Government but I don't control the Parliament. It's a matter for the Speaker. I'll have a word to him about his errant waterfall.
JOURNALIST:
Who is the advice received from and will you release it?
PRIME MINISTER:
The appropriate....well, we will do what is normally done in relation to those matters which is not to release the text of legal advice. But that matter will obviously be considered. But we have received formal legal advice both from the Attorney General's Department and the Department of Foreign Affairs.
JOURNALIST:
Prime Minister, would Cabinet decide tonight on military involvement?
PRIME MINISTER:
No - Cabinet will not make a final decision tonight. Cabinet has been called together tonight so that we can have a discussion about the whole issue. I thought it was a good idea given that the Parliament is convening tomorrow, I thought it would be a very good idea if the Cabinet had a meeting tonight. Obviously the Cabinet will meet again if and when a formal request is received.
JOURNALIST:
So what has occurred that makes it more likely? You can say now it's more likely, I think the quote was, that Australia will participate in military action. What has occurred that you can now say, that where you couldn't say it two days ago?
PRIME MINISTER:
Well I think as you get closer and closer to the final denouement of the Security Council it looks less likely that what I hope might occur and that is that all of the members of the Security Council would with one voice say to Iraq, disarm or we're coming after you, and that might have brought about a change of heart in Baghdad, might. I didn't put too great a store on it. But it appears less likely now. I mean the French have made it clear that they will veto anything resembling the American, Spanish and British resolution and the dynamic of the Security Council is that if a permanent member signals in advance a veto, particularly on a sensitive issue and this is plainly a sensitive issue, the independent non-aligned smaller rotating members of the Security Council are hardly likely to put their hand up because they will say themselves and they will rationalise to themselves and perhaps understandingly so - why should we venture a decision on a controversial issue like this when we know even if we vote for it it's not going to have any effect because one of the permanent members have said that it's to be vetoed.
JOURNALIST:
Have you been given any further details Mr Howard on the timetable if this last effort is unsuccessful....
PRIME MINISTER:
Timetable for what Michelle?
JOURNALIST:
The timetable for Presidential decision, action, et cetera.
PRIME MINISTER:
Well I would expect that the thing will come to a head in New York Monday morning New York time.
JOURNALIST:
But after that?
PRIME MINISTER:
I think it's fair to say things will move fairly rapidly but I don't want to say anything more than that.
JOURNALIST:
[inaudible] that sort of [inaudible] United States involvement that you wouldn't have another personal phone call for you from Mr Bush?
PRIME MINISTER:
Yes.
JOURNALIST:
Prime Minister, given the imminence of this conflict, what action are you taking to help Australians get out of the Middle East, is the Government making any special arrangements to fly Australians....
PRIME MINISTER:
You'll have to ask Mr Downer about that. Mr Downer issued a general piece of advice to Australians and as to the details of that I know DFAT has things in hand but I don't have the details of those with me. Ask Mr Downer or the Department of Foreign Affairs and Trade about that and I'm sure they'll be able to help you.
JOURNALIST:
And what about Australian diplomatic personnel, non-essential personnel....
PRIME MINISTER:
Well the same applies. Arrangements are being made. I mean I can assure you of that. There's always very great care to ensure that proper arrangements are made and I know if you go to Mr Downer's office he can give you some more details.
JOURNALIST:
You're saying that war is more likely, that Australian involvement is more likely. Can you see any circumstances where you would say no to a request from President Bush?
PRIME MINISTER:
Well if I thought that you had the fifteen of them all saying the sort of thing that I was talking about I think that would offer some hope. But I don't think there's much hope of that.
JOURNALIST:
[inaudible] harder to say no then either, is that correct?
PRIME MINISTER:
Well look, as I've said all along on this you can say what you wish. I choose to express my position in my own words.
JOURNALIST:
Mr Howard, did Mr Bush give you any indication as to why the US and the British have decided to put the vote to the Security Council with the full expectation of it being vetoed?
PRIME MINISTER:
What I've said is that the issue will be resolved in the Security Council, Monday morning New York time. It may not involve the resolution being put, I don't know and he didn't know when he spoke to me.
JOURNALIST:
But there's still a possibility it may not be put?
PRIME MINISTER:
That has been a possibility for some days. The Secretary of State indicated that a few days ago.
JOURNALIST:
The British government has indicated that their legal advice supporting why a further UN Security Council resolution is not needed has come from their Attorney General and they intend to disclose it. Why is the Australian Government refusing to say....and there are reports that they are disclosing it.
PRIME MINISTER:
Well I don't know what the British government is doing. We do what we do.
JOURNALIST:
Why won't Australia....
PRIME MINISTER:
Well we just do what we normally do in relation to these things.
JOURNALIST:
[inaudible] test for the United Nations, what does that mean for the UN if (inaudible) and if there's war, I mean do you fear a long term fracturing of the UN as a result of this?
PRIME MINISTER:
Well I hope not but the problem I have with the way the Security Council's behaving on this issue is it's not living up to the commitments contained in the last resolution it passed. I mean resolution 1441 required the active, unconditional and immediate co-operation of Iraq. Plainly after four months Iraq has not been active, it's not been unconditional and its certainly not been immediate. And what is disappointing to me and what must put doubts in the minds of even in the most avid supporters of the Security Council and the United Nations system is that if the Security Council can't summon the collective courage on an issue like this how are they going to do so on other difficult issues? Now that won't mean that Australia will walk away from the United Nations, we're not going to do that and I'm pleased to note that in their meetings in the Azores both President Bush and Mr Blair said that the United Nations would play an important role in any post-conflict arrangement in Iraq, and that's very encouraging. And could I also take the opportunity of saying how much I welcome what President Bush and Mr Blair have said about initiatives to resolve the long running Palestinian/Israeli situation. You may remember that I had quite a deal to say about this in my statement to the Parliament on the 4th of February. I hold very strongly to the view that the world has got to keep trying even harder to make progress on that front. And it needs action on both sides, it's good that the Palestinians are appointing a Prime Minister, I hope he has real authority and I also hope that Ariel Sharon understands that even the staunchest friends of Israel around the world, and Australia is plainly one of them, see this as an issue where there has to be some gestures from both sides. One of the gestures from the Palestinian side of course is the cessation the suicide bombings. Karen, can we have Karen.
JOURNALIST:
Prime Minister, what plans, if any, do you have to address the Australian people in the event of a final commitment to conflict?
PRIME MINISTER:
Well if the decision is taken for our forces to be involved I will seek the appropriate time on the ABC, and I assume that the other networks will carry it, for an address to further explain the reasons for the Government's decision. This is not an easy issue but the Government is strongly of the view that the policy we've followed to date is right and we are very determined to see that this issue is dealt with once and for all. We are satisfied that any action that might be taken involving a military commitment would be in accordance with the authority contained in the existing Security Council resolutions. And I might on that issue, as well as mentioning the advice that we have received and of course drawing attention to the very strong view of Mr Michael Costello, the former head go the Department of Foreign Affairs, Mr Beazley's former Chief of Staff, I might also remind you that in 1998 we committed forces to the Gulf, 150 SAS were sent early in 1998 after a request from President Clinton to me by the decision of the Cabinet and that was supported at the time, unreservedly, by the Leader of the Opposition, Mr Beazley, the Leader of the Opposition at that time. And there was not argument then that we needed an additional Security Council resolution. The issue was not even debated, it was assumed that existing legal authority was there and the reason why we have sought the 18th resolution is not legal, rather it's been the belief that if you assembled the combined view of the Security Council you'd be more likely to bring about a shift in attitude by Iraq.
JOURNALIST:
Prime Minister, is one of the concerns on that question of legal authority that if there were to be a failed Security Council resolution now it would undermine the pre-existing legal authority contained in resolutions going back 'til1990?
PRIME MINISTER:
That's not something that's been actively in my mind.
JOURNALIST:
But is that...
PRIME MINISTER:
Well from my recollection, having seen the opinion, that that is not actively canvassed.
JOURNALIST:
... final attempt to the Security Council take? What did Mr Bush tell you this final attempt...
PRIME MINISTER:
Well they're going to ring a lot of people and they're going to, through their permanent representatives at the Security Council try and nail down whether it is possible to get agreement, difficult though it may seem at this stage to get a resolution broadly equivalent to what they have tried to put up before.
JOURNALIST:
Mr Howard isn't it fair to say that what you're signalling now is that in fact from your part as Prime Minister of Australia the decision to commit, to involve Australian troops in battle against Iraq has been made, what just hasn't been made is the timetable of that and therefore the formal go?
PRIME MINISTER:
Well I think it's fair to say in relation to not only Australia but also the United States and the United Kingdom that there is still a diplomatic push underway and until that diplomat push is completely and utterly exhausted of course they haven't in a formal final sense committed either, even though they major forces there and it follows from that the final formal decision's not been made by Australia. I'm not disguising for a moment that the ways things have developed over recent days that the likelihood is much greater than it was a week ago, I mean there's always been a strong likelihood and what I've said all along is that I, and the Government would withhold the final decision so that if some unanticipated development occurred we would be in a position to say well because of that we're not going to make a final commitment. It's not been that I've disguised in any way that we have put ourselves in a position to take that final decision and obviously we've been far more likely to take that final decision than a country that hasn't pre-positioned any forces.
JOURNALIST:
If Cabinet makes a final decision while Parliament is sitting this week, how quickly would you take the decision to Parliament?
PRIME MINISTER:
As soon as practicable Jim, I have no desire at all to deny Parliament the full opportunity of debating this, we will handle the issue in accordance with the constitutional processes of the Government and that decision is taken by the Cabinet and once the Cabinet's taken the decision it's given effect to immediately in an executive sense and I would seek as soon as practicable, and I mean that, to take the matter to the Parliament and allow the Parliament the opportunity of a full debate.
JOURNALIST:
... a lot of the community support has been based on the idea of whether or not there would be UN backing. Now that UN backing is looking extremely slim what do you say to the Australian people who are probably the majority opposed to this at the moment?
PRIME MINISTER:
Well I don't think you really know ultimately what public opinion is on this until the final shape of the final decision is known, and there's some working out of that. What I generally say in response to that is that there's plenty of legal authority on the basis of existing United Nations' resolutions and any decision we take will be based on the legal authority that's contained there amongst other things and...
JOURNALIST:
What about the moral authority Prime Minister?
PRIME MINISTER:
... well I'll come to the moral issue in a moment, I'm glad you asked me that. And I would say to those people that I understand their anguish on this issue, it's not an easy one and we are living in a different world environment now where the clarity presented by a required response to one army rolling across the border of another is different from the sort of responses required from the world in which we now live. And I ask them to take that into account and I will continue over the days ahead, whatever precisely transpires I will continue to argue and put the explanations of the Government to the Australian people. But in the end Catherine we can't be poll driven on this.
JOURNALIST:
But if it's 60 or 70 per cent of the population, that's a large number of people who are possibility going to voice their concern to you.
PRIME MINISTER:
Catherine can I say with the very greatest of respect I don't know what the percentage is, but even if we accept that it is what you say, and I don't, but even if we do, in the past I have been condemned for taking, in this very courtyard, for taking decisions which 60-70 per cent of the Australian people have supported if in fact I've taken a decision that a majority of the Australian people may be opposed to in different forms, I would say to you and I'd say very respectfully to them that the decision that the government has taken has been based on its best assessment of what is in the interests of the Australian people and unless you believe in committing all of your decisions to the regular testing of opinion pollsters there is really no other way in which you can take decisions. I mean you cannot have it both ways. You cannot accuse a Prime Minister and the government of being populist in its decisions on some issues, condemn it for that, and then in the very next breath turn around and say to it well it's wrong because it doesn't calibrate its decisions on another issue according to what the opinion polls say.
JOURNALIST:
Do you think views will change as things go?
PRIME MINISTER:
I have always said Michelle that I don't believe that public opinion will finally settle until the issue is fully worked out and isn't that how it should be?
JOURNALIST:
(inaudible)
PRIME MINISTER:
There was somebody else's ....Karen?
JOURNALIST:
The moral authority question. There are people who are saying to set the legal authority to one side, what (inaudible).
PRIME MINISTER:
Well I don't argue that it should just rest on legal considerations. I think there is a very strong moral case for taking action involving military force if necessary to disarm Iraq. The threat that the possession of chemical and biological weapons that Iraq poses; the possibility that they will spread to other countries; the possibility in turn that they'll get into the hands of terrorists - I think that's a very compelling moral case and there's also a very compelling moral case though which says that on human rights grounds the suffering of the Iraqi people would be less if Saddam Hussein were removed, then if he continues in power. Now I think both on legal and moral grounds there is a very powerful case for the effective disarmament of Iraq.
JOURNALIST:
(inaudible) given what you've said about the moral case in respect of the spread of weapon (inaudible), have you given any thought yet or had in discussions with President Bush about North Korea, perhaps Iran and other states with these sorts of weapons who might bear the adjective "rogue"?
PRIME MINISTER:
Well as far as North Korea, I've had some discussion with President Bush about North Korea. We had some discussion about it in Washington a few weeks ago. Clearly we have to try a diplomatic approach for a little while longer in relation to North Korea. I mean people say you're not trying that in relation to Iraq, well we've been trying it for twelve years. It's only a matter of twelve or sixteen weeks since North Korea admitted that it had been in breach of the undertakings it had given the world community and I remain very concerned that if the Security Council has lacked collective will and collective force on Iraq, I worry about whether it will have the necessary collective will and force on North Korea. But clearly we have to turn our attention to the issue of North Korea but the circumstances, certainly time scale wise, are different. We've been trying for 12 years on Iraq. It's a much shorter period of time with North Korea.
JOURNALIST:
The SAS, the Special Air Service Association has called on you personally to intervene in the investigation of an SAS officer involved in the allegations in East Timor involving militia casualties. Are you aware of that request and do you intend to take any action on it?
PRIME MINISTER:
Well I'm frankly not. I've been in a plane for the last hour or so. I'm not aware of that request. My view is that these matters should be handled through the military disciplinary procedures that are laid down by the Australian Defence Force. The other general observation I would make at this time is that of course the codes of behaviour and the military discipline of our defence force has to be maintained, but equally, especially at this particular time I know there will be an overwhelming sense of empathy whatever people's political views are an overwhelming sense of empathy with the individual men and women of the Australian Defence Force and I wouldn't want anything to be done or said that would diminish that sense of empathy and support and commitment from the Australian community.
JOURNALIST:
Mr Howard, have you spoken to any other world leaders in relation to Iraq since you made your speech last week?
PRIME MINISTER:
No.
JOURNALIST:
Mr Howard, you mentioned North Korea should be given a little while longer down the diplomatic path. Have you any idea on how long that should be and what happens if those diplomatic efforts fail?
PRIME MINISTER:
I can't put a time on it. I don't think there's any point in trying at the moment.
JOURNALIST:
Can we try to put a time on when Australian troops might be in war, are they likely to be at war by the end of this week?
PRIME MINISTER:
I'm not going to try and do that Fran, it's not that I have some secret knowledge that I won't share with you. I just don't know. It's obviously, the final decision time is obviously getting that much closer but I don't want to commit myself to days or hours or minutes. That's unrealistic. Two more questions.
JOURNALIST:
If the UN Security Council doesn't back this is there a danger that it's going to create a humanitarian morass in the sense that it's going to be difficult to get countries to put in for support and funding for rebuilding at the end of this? Like is it something that America and Australia and Britain are going to be left holding the humanitarian burden?
PRIME MINISTER:
Well there's been an enormous humanitarian burden carried by a small number of countries, including I should say in fairness some countries other than America, Britain and Australia. But the truth is that, and this is a remark plainly directed at some of the people who've been obstructive on this issue. The fact is that in terms of peace keeping and other operations and intervening to prevent human rights disasters a lot of the heavy lifting has been done by a very limited number of countries and one of those countries is obviously the United States and another country, given our size, is Australia. And that's one of the reasons why there's a depth of feeling in a number of countries about the behaviour of, particularly the French, on this issue. I mean they've been perfectly happy to let the Americans to do the heavy lifting and the British and to station their troops there and to say thank you very much for the dividends. That military prescence has produced but now we're going to prevent the passage of the very unanimous resolution that might bring about the thing we all want. I mean what we've all wanted is two things : we've wanted the total disarmament of Iraq and we've wanted it done peacefully and I have believed all along and I still believe this very strongly that if every member of the Security Council got behind a resolution saying in effect to Iraq disarm or we're all coming after you, and the Arab states joined in as well, you'd be more likely through that process to get a buckling of the knees in Baghdad than any other process. But you won't get it through what has occurred and I think that underlines the sense of unease, let me put it that way politely, diplomatically, the unease people feel about the behaviour of the French in particular.
JOURNALIST:
Mr Howard, do you plan to speak to Mr Crean ahead of any formal Cabinet decision or will you be briefing the Opposition Leader after the Government's....?
PRIME MINISTER:
I think I'd be doing what is appropriate in the current circumstances. In other words if it's appropriate to speak to him personally at any time I will, let me put it that way.
JOURNALIST:
Do you believe it is appropriate to talk....?
PRIME MINISTER:
No what I'm saying is if it is. I'm not going to commit myself to doing it but I'm not saying I refuse to speak to him. But he's got a position on this. I understand that and he's made it, well I think he's now made it finally clear. I don't think he's sorted out his legal position but certainly Mr Rudd's got a very strong view and Mr Michael Costello's got an equally strong view. The problem for Mr Crean is those two views are in violent collision. I think Mr Costello is right.
JOURNALIST:
Mr Howard, do you now believe that there is absolutely no point in giving Saddam Hussein any more time, that it's the next 24 hours and that's it?
PRIME MINISTER:
I think the thing should be brought to a head and it will be. Thank you.
JOURNALIST:
... Steve Waugh?
PRIME MINISTER:
Well I think the Australian community, not just the cricket community, will be pleased at the decision. Very pleased. It's been a very, very dogged fight back, he was struggling a bit at one stage, but he's come back very well and I feel very privileged that I was one of 42,000 people at the Sydney Cricket Ground who saw that great century in the last test match. I wish him well, he's been a great Australian cricketer, he is a great Australian cricketer and I wish him well in the West Indies and I could well understand why he would want to go on one more tour, whether it's the last one is entirely a matter for him and the selectors. I never give public or private advice to the selectors, it is highly dangerous, I've got enough problems of my own.
JOURNALIST:
Is there a metaphor for other stayers?
PRIME MINISTER:
(inaudible).
JOURNALIST:
Would one more tour appeal to you...
PRIME MINISTER:
You never rest do you Geoffrey?
[ends]