PRIME MINISTER
TRANSCRIPT OF NEWS CONFERENCE, PARLIAMENT HOUSE,
AUGUST 1990
E OE PROOF ONLY
PM: The decisions I'm about to announce of course are
against the background of Australia's total unequivocal
condemnation of the invasion by Iraq of Kuwait and its
subsequent reported annexation. We join with the rest of
the world in saying that we will not tolerate, will not
stand idly by while any member of the international
community purports to break the rules of civilised
conduct in that way. We've been considering what more
should be done in addition to our joining with the rest
of the world in imposing sanctions, to give an additional
response to what is happening in the gulf. We have been
in contact with Washington on this issue. I have
discussed the matter with a number of my Ministers, the
Deputy Prime Minister Paul Keating, with Ministers Evans,
Ray, Duffy and Button. And against that preparatory
thinking that we've been undertaking President Bush
called me this morning, I had a lengthy conversation with
him. And out of that conversation we agreed that
Australia would contribute to a multinational task force
in the gulf. Let me make it clear that the primary
purpose of that multinational naval task force will be to
enforce the blockade on Iraq and Kuwait and of course to
protect the exports from other oil producing gulf
countries and to protect other trade in the gulf. That's
its primary purpose, to enforce the blockade and to keep
other trade free. But by its very nature its worth
saying that the force will contribute to the deterrence
we believe of further aggression by Iraq. Obviously when
a decision of this sort is made there is a number of
important issues of detail that have to be resolved and
there will be discussions going on now between the United
States people and ourselves to deal with those matters.
Without being exhaustive they obviously include the
question of the status of the force, what the other
membership of it will be and the command structure. Our
ships of course will remain under Australian National
command, but they may operate when they get there, under
US or some other form of actual operation control. Now
these issues are important issues and they will be
discussed now in the hours and the days ahead. We will
send two guided missile frigates, FFG's, the Adelaide and
Darwin and they will be supported by the replenishment
tanker Success. Let me say, and if you want to go to any
more technical questions on these matters, Admiral D
Beaumont is available. But let me say that these two
FFG's are extremely capable ships with comprehensive self
defence capability. They have a Standard air defence
missile, Close In Weapons System, the Harpoon Anti-Ship
Missile, Electronic counter measures and they will also
be equipped with Sea Hawk helicopters. Each frigate has
a crew of approximately two hundred, that's for each of
the frigates and also the Success has a crew of the same
magnitude. I'm given to understand that the ships will
be able to leave Australia within five days and they will
be on station within twenty two days. Let me say that we
understand that in making this decision the deployment
may involve significant risks. It is a potentially high
threat environment into which the ships will be moving,
but we have profound faith in the equipment and the
training of our men in their capacity to meet any
situation which they will be confronted. The actual
conditions of service and other aspects will be
considered by Cabinet, but let me make it quite clear
directly to the members of our naval forces that are
concerned and to the public that the Australian
Government will be providing conditions commensurate with
the serious nature of this deployment. So I conclude
ladies and gentlemen as I began by saying that what we
are witnessing in the gulf at the moment is a series of
actions and threats which are entirely unacceptable to
the Australian Government and we are prepared to play a
responsible part in seeking to ensure that this
aggression is deterred and that the blockade that has
been decided upon and the embargoes that have been
imposed should be effective. And I express the hope that
in this way a further escalation of conflict will be
avoided and the hope that President Suddam Hussein will
understand that the only sensible course of action now is
to withdraw his forces from Kuwait and to allow the
restoration of the former government in that country.
JOURNALIST: Prime Minister is Australia responding to a
request from the United States or is this offer made off
our own bat?
PM: The matter was raised with us initially in the
United States and we therefore responded. We had
discussions with them there and it was out of those
preliminary discussions that were initiated from the
United States that the President rang me today and that
out of those discussions we agreed that this Australian
naval asset would be provided.
JOURNALIST: Prime Minister these United Nations
sanctions, wouldn't it have been better to wait for the
United Nations or seek a United Nations response before
committing ships?
PM: We can always find a reason and an excuse for not
playing a responsible role in a threatening situation and
if we had wanted to do that yes we could have easily done
that, but I believe that the gravity of the situation is
such that it warranted this action at this time by
Australia. Obviously I believe it would be the
preference of the United States as well as of Australia
that there could be a United Nations flag operation and
that is not out of the question. It may be that that
emerges. But in circumstances of this kind I think it's
not appropriate to wait until the ideal actually emerges,
but if that can emerge Australia will be very happy.
JOURNALIST: What other countries are going to be
involved in this force?
PM: Well already you will appreciate that there are
naval forces there. You've got the United States, you've
got Britain and you've got the Dutch. The Italians are
going to be providing facilities and there is the NATO
meeting today in Paris in which this whole issue will be
discussed. So obviously a number of West Europeans will
be involved and I know that the matter is being
considered by our friends in Canada. I have had
discussions by telephone with my friend Brian Mulroney
and no decision has been made there, but the matter is
being considered in Canada. It may be also that Japan
could be involved.
JOURNALIST: Any discussion Prime Minister of aircraft or
ground crews?
PM: No. There has been no question raised of any other
Australian commitment other than the naval assets to
which I have referred.
JOURNALIST: Prime Minister US television networks have
reported that you at some stage actually phoned President
Bush, was there an earlier conversation?
PM: No I didn't phone President Bush. But as I said
quite straightforwardly there had been earlier
discussions at officials levels initiated in the first
place by the United States, but the only contact between
President Bush and myself was the phone call from him to
me this morning.
JOURNALIST: Prime Minister did President Bush give you
an assessment this morning of the likelihood of the
conflict escalating?
PM: Well he was you'll appreciate there are some
aspects of the conversation that I can't make public
but I think I can say this, that the President was
optimistic about the degree of support that was being
proffered. For instance in an operational sense he
indicated that port facilities would be available in some
neighbouring States, I won't name them for obvious
reasons, but it wouldn't be therefore a situation that
our naval forces would be operating without access to
relatively adjacent port facilities.
JOURNALIST: Have you thought how long you might leave
these ships there? The reason I ask is that I understand
Iraq has supplies and it will be months before these
sanctions bite, and secondly where are these three ships
at the moment?
PM: The two that we're talking about, the Adelaide and
Darwin where are they Admiral?
ADMIRAL BEAUMONT: Eastern Australia. In Sydney.
PM: They are actually in Sydney. They are in Sydney.
And the Success. And as I say, I'm informed it's five
days, within five days.
ADMIRAL BEAUMONT: They sail on Monday Prime Minister.
PM: Yes, they sail on Monday.
JOURNALIST: In the past both Presidents Carter and
Reagan faced some pretty important consequences as a
result of deploying forces into the Middle East. What
are your apprehensions about sending an Australian
contingent, given that background?
PM: Well these are not decisions that any Prime Minister
here or President of the United States makes lightly,
because the record of the Government with which we are
now particularly concerned is not a terribly attractive
one. The United States particularly has a large number
of people who are being detained in Iraq and Baghdad. We
are doing everything we can of course to try and protect
the welfare and the safety of Australian citizens. We
are in constant communication, not only of course with
our own diplomatic representatives but they with other
like-minded countries. We will do everything we can to
ensure the safety of Australians. But when you're faced
with a situation like this you've, I believe, got to make
the decisions which you believe are most calculated to
bring about a situation where the aggressor will
understand that a continuation of those actions is not
only not acceptable to the international community but
that any intelligent assessment of self-interest on the
part of Iraq must lead to the conclusion that the troops
should be withdrawn.
JOURNALIST: first question Prime Minister, how long
are we likely to stay there given Iraq's
PM: I'm sorry Laurie. Well, obviously I can't give a
definitive answer to that. I can express the hope that
it would be a relatively short period. But you are right
in referring to the fact that there is, according to the
reports, a fairly substantial reserve of foodstuffs. We
understand for instance that there's something like six
months' supply of grain there in Iraq. But there is
already, may I say, an impact of the sanctions. For
instance, in regard to both pipelines, that is the
pipelines across Turkey and across Saudi Arabia, there
are no tankers loading and those pipelines are now not
operating. They will already be suffering an impact upon
their receipts. And of course any expectation that they
may have had about being able to receive the income from
the very substantial Kuwaiti assets abroad, has been
frustrated by the action that's been taken around the
world including here in Australia to freeze those assets.
So Laurie I think that in fact you'll already be starting
to get a very significant impact, and that's an impact
which will escalate in economic terms very significantly
in the days and weeks ahead. So I repeat, that any
intelligent rational assessment by the leadership of Iraq
ought to lead to the conclusion that their best interests
are served by a withdrawal. Now, unfortunately, we can't
proceed on the basis that rational, intelligent
assessments will be the only criteria in considerations
which lead to action there. So I can't be dishonest to
say I know how long, but I think what is true, Laurie, is
that the more nations like Australia with a capacity to
make a commitment as I've made, the more this is done and
the more that the leadership of Iraq understands that
they are confronting a very, very comprehensive
opposition to their position, the more likely it is that
we will be looking at a relatively short period. May I
finally say, in answer to your question, that I think
you'll agree that an important part in this gathering of
a representative opposition will be what is done by parts
of the Arab world and I'm hopeful that there may be some
accession of Arab forces in those that will be lined up
in opposition to Iraq.
JOURNALIST: Despite the petrol price freeze, some of the
impact of the Gulf conflict will feed through to the
September quarter CPI. Do you believe this should be
discounted from the wage increase that will flow as a
result? PM: Well, frankly, I have, as a result of the action
that the Treasurer took yesterday on behalf of the
Government that we won't actually see any significant
feed through, so to that extent I hope, Milton, that the
question remains hypothetical and I therefore, you know,
don't address it now. I mean, if the issue arises, we'll
address it at the time.
JOURNALIST: Prime Minister, just to clear up something
PM: Yes, sure.
JOURNALIST: Are we committed for the duration of the
blockade? PM: Yes, we, as I've said, the primary purpose of the
commitment of the Australian naval forces is to enforce
the blockade and that's on Iraq and Kuwait and to
protect, as I say, the movement of other oil producers in
the region and our intention would be to commit these
forces for as long as is necessary to successfully
achieve that primary purpose.
JOURNALIST: Do you believe it would be necessary to
protect our personnel in the Navy from the possible use
of chemical weapons?
PM: Well, I'm sure that our naval authorities will be
completely aware of the environment and the potential
dangers into which they are moving and that they'll have
all the appropriate protective apparatus. But when I've
finished, if you want to address any, as I say, technical
question like that, but that would be my obvious
assumption. JOURNALIST: Prime Minister
PM: And I see from the affirmative nod of the Admiral,
that the Prime Ministerial assumption is correct.
JOURNALIST: Mr Hawke, do you see the need to increase
security on our shores because of any possible terrorist
threats arising from our involvement?
PM: Well, we have, as a Government, have attached very
considerable importance to ensuring the capacity of
Australia, both by our own efforts and by a high degree
of cooperation with other nations, having the capacity to
meet any terrorist threat. We haven't been slack in that
regard in the past and I would believe that in the
circumstances all those who have a responsibility in this
area would be particularly alert.
JOURNALIST: Prime Minister, indications last night
that you'd wait till next week before announcing a
decision, did President Bush urge you to make an
announcement more quickly than
PM: No, as I've said to you, my dear friends, before and
I say it again, don't get led away by what you write
yourself in creating an expectation for me about my
parameters and framework of decision-making. I mean, you
don't do it and you haven't on this occasion.
JOURNALIST: Prime Minister, has any assessment been made
of the likely Iraqi reaction, especially with regards
Australians that are still in Iraq or in Kuwait?
PM: Well, let me say this. As you would imagine I have
been following these issues almost on an hourly basis
since the crisis arose and I have been reassured in my
reading of the continuous stream of cables about the fact
that our representative in Baghdad is in continuous
contact with the Ministry of Foreign Affairs there about
the welfare of Australian citizens and is doing that in
very significant cooperation with other like-minded
countries. So I can assure you that up till this point,
we've been doing all that we can and clearly in these
circumstances we'll continue to do that.
JOURNALIST: Is there any contingency for an adverse
reaction by the Iraqis to our sending ships to the Gulf?
PM: Well, the point I'm making is I don't think we could
have been, up until this point, doing more than we have
been doing to try and secure the safety of Australians in
the region and we'll continue to do that.
JOURNALIST: What is the extent of Australian role here?
You've said that it's mainly an enforcement mechanism for
the sanctions that are imposed, you've also said that US
ships would be in control of the Australian ships
PM: that could be, well..
JOURNALIST: I'm just wondering, do you say that
Australian ships will not be involved in any direct
military attack or support for it
PM: Let me, yes, that's a good question. I have
said what the purpose is, what the agreement has been.
If there were any request to escalate the role of our
assets, then that would be a matter for request,
discussion, negotiation and then decision.
JOURNALIST: A related question, Prime Minister.
PM: Yes.
JOURNALIST: Is this the absolute limit of our
involvement, having ruled out the use of ground troops
and our aircraft
PM: Well, Laurie, no question has been raised about that
and I will be totally frank with you in this, no question
has been raised about it. It's our belief that the best
that Australia, the most effective contribution that
Australia can make is the one that we are making and I
don't anticipate any request for assets from our airforce
or from the army. I don't anticipate any requests
because I don't think, in that respect, we are likely to
be seen as able to be as effective by way of contribution
as we are in our naval assets. If, and this is purely
if such a request were at any time in the future to
be made, we would obviously consider it, but I doubt that
any such request would be made.
JOURNALIST: Prime Minister, what are the chances of
boosting our naval contribution to the blockade?
PM: Well, let me say this, that the President was very
grateful for the commitment that I made. It's seen as a
very significant contribution and indeed when you look at
our size, by any objective assessment, it is a
significant contribution and again, from the
conversations that I've had and that have been held by
our representatives, I don't anticipate that there will
be a request for any larger commitment of our naval
assets. Again, let me say this, if a situation arose
where there were to be such a request we'd examine it,
but I don't expect that such a request will be made.
JOURNALIST: Prime Minister, have you discussed this
commitment with any of the Arab countries and
particularly Saudi Arabia?
PM: No.
JOURNALIST: Did you have any discussions with President
Bush or have you got any information on the likely
strength of Arab on this?
PM: I did have a discussion with President Bush about
this. I do have some understanding of his expectations,
but I think, for reasons you'll understand, I can't go to
that. JOURNALIST: What about the security of Australians
elsewhere in the region, such as Saudi Arabia and
Bahrain, other States?
PM: Well, the comments that I made before about the
safety of Australian citizens apply to those regions.
Just, if I could refer to, give you some numbers. We
know of 55 Australians in Iraq, about 3,000 in Saudi
Arabia and less than 20 in Kuwait. I won't go to
individuals, there is some information about some
individuals, but that's the disposition, as it were, of
Australians in the region and in each of those areas we
are, either through our own diplomatic presence or in the
case of areas where we don't have representation through
other friendly embassies, we are in constant
communication. We don't have reason at the moment to
believe that all Australians, for instance, need to be
evacuated from Saudi Arabia. We're recommending quite
clearly that people don't travel there now. I mean, it
would be quite pointless for people to be travelling in
to that region, but you would appreciate that not only in
regard to Australians, but in regard to a number of
foreigners who are there in that region, a lot of them
would be involved, for instance, in the oil production
processes and it's important with the loss of the Iraq
and Kuwait production which is of the order of four
million barrels per day, that we don't have people
leaving en masse from the other Gulf producing areas, oil
producing areas, because it's important that to the
extent they can, they increase their production to make
up in part for the shortfall created by that loss of four
million barrels per day.
JOURNALIST: Mr Hawke, if there was a request later for
wider military involvement, would you think it's
necessary to take that to your full Cabinet and,
secondly, did you give any consideration to calling the
full Cabinet together on this matter?
PM: In answer to your first question, obviously at the
next Cabinet meeting, whether there is a request or not,
I will give a detailed report to the full Cabinet about
this matter and if the question of further involvement
did arise, we would have time to have a full Cabinet
consideration of it and that would be done. In these
circumstances, Michelle, I didn't regard it as necessary,
but I think you can see that it was a fairly
representative group of Ministers that I consulted.
JOURNALIST: In light of decision, Prime Minister, is
a special watch being kept on the Iraqi community in
Australia? PM: On the?
JOURNALIST: Light of today's decision
PM: Whether
JOURNALIST: Is a special watch being kept on the Iraqi
community in Australia?
PM: I think that question, the answer to that question
is comprehended in something I said earlier, we would
regard our normal processes, our normal relevant
processes in Australia, to be operating appropriately and
effectively. JOURNALIST: Prime Minister, what's your best assessment
now of, firstly, the likelihood of an Iraqi invasion of
Saudi Arabia and, secondly, the ability of the other oil
producing countries to crank up their production and take
up the shortfall?
PM: Alright, well, there's two separate questions there.
In regard to the first, as I say, I have been, I've had
the capacity to follow all the intelligence on this
matter and let me pay tribute to our relevant bodies here
in Australia, particularly the Office of National
Assessments which keeps up a continuous flow of
information. I mean, I pay tribute to them. They are
very effective. So relying on that and the conversations
I've had, I would think on balance that an invasion from
Saudi Arabia is unlikely, but as I said before, in answer
to a previous question, one has to understand that in
trying to analyse these situations, there's not only the
criterion of rationality and self interest assessment,
which needs to be taken into account because one would
have thought that if those had been the only criteria
that had been applied, one would have thought the
leadership of Iraq would have adhered to the promise that
it made to its Arab neighbours, to the Arab community
generally, that they wouldn't invade Kuwait because an
application of those criteria will have led to the
conclusion that an invasion was against the best
interests of Iraq. But to the extent that you can
therefore apply considerations of what intelligently is
the most likely course of action, my answer is I think it
not likely. Now in regard to the second but there is,
could I just add this, this rider. There is so much
evidence of an Iraq, a continued Iraqi presence in Kuwait
beyond what is necessary merely to hold their position,
and of a build-up of forces, additional forces still
within Iraq and on the border, that you can't discount
the possibility for that reason. Now as to the second
question, let me say this. That, as I put to you, the
combined production in day terms of Iraq and Kuwait is of
the order of four million barrels per day. These things
need to be taken into account in looking at the likely
impact on the availability of oil and of prices. It is
the case that the world has a higher level of stocks now
than it has had for about six years and therefore there
is a capacity to run down, let's say, those stocks by a
million barrels per day for some time. If you make that
assumption then the additional production that would be
necessary from the rest of the OPEC and the non-OPEC
countries would be only to the order of three billion
barrels a day to make up the balance. The assessment is
that there is that capacity available. It will obviously
be regarded as in the interests of many of those
producers to do so. There is evidence that they are
doing it. In the pricing field you can perhaps draw some
conclusions. Prices are expressed in United States
dollars. Before the invasion the price per barrel was
just under $ 2OUS a barrel. It peaked a couple of days
ago at $ 30 a barrel. It's down to $ 25 now. Now you
can't, just from those figures, draw any absolute
conclusion but it's not inconsistent with the proposition
I just put to you.
JOURNALIST: Prime Minister, could I ask a question of
Admiral Beaumont through you, a technical question?
PM: Yes sure.
JOURNALIST: During the Kangaroo ' 89 military exercise,
the Fills armed with exocet missiles bombing runs
against the guided missile frigates, such as the ones
we're sending. Are you able to say how often the Fills
with the exocets have been successful in killing the..?
ADMIRAL BEAUMONT: No I'm not.
JOURNALIST: Can you confirm that that does happen?
ADMIRAL BEAUMONT: It does happen occasionally, yes. But
for the most part against individual ships. But these
ships would be operating as part of a task group we
believe, so there'd be a layered defence process. But
yes, it does occur. I'm not able to say how frequently.
But suffice to say that the guided missile frigates have
a very competent and very capable anti-air missile system
and have very good results in our exercises.
JOURNALIST: Admiral, is that system a phalanx system?
ADMIRAL BEAUMONT: No, I'm talking about a standard.
JOURNALIST: So they're not equipped with that.
ADMIRAL BEAUMONT: They are equipped with phalanx as
well... JOURNALIST: On another topic, can you tell us what the
implication will be for federal Labor with the change of
leadership in Victoria?
PM: No I can't. I don't want, obviously, to intrude
unduly in what I've said consistently is the affair of
the Victorian Parliamentary Party. I would like to take
this opportunity of saying, I repeat what I said
publicly, that I respect greatly the manner in which John
cain relinquished the Premiership. Mrs Kirner's win was
a decisive one. I believe that Mr Crabb is serious in
the unqualified commitment he gave to her leadership. I
believe now that there will be a concentrated attempt by
all groups within the Victorian Labor Party to get behind
Joan Kirner and to give her all the support that she's
obviously going to need in this very challenging task.
As far as the Commonwealth Government is concerned, we
will, within what is appropriately in our capacity, do
everything we can to assist her.
JOURNALIST: In light of the present trends can you see
Ros Kelly as the likely next Prime Minister?
PM: Well, how old will she be when I retire? She'll
have a lot of experience under her belt by then.
JOURNALIST: Mr Hawke, on the September special national
conference, do you see the need for more flexibility to
make decisions between meetings of the national
conference itself. Do you think it would help your
Cabinet if you did have that power?
PM: Look, I'm not going to speculate in any way which
may be unhelpful to the processes which, I can assure
you, and you know, are going on now, between now and the
special conference. There's a lot of talking going on
between a lot of people and a lot of groups to try and
get an outcome which is going to be the best for the
Party and the Government. I think that when the time
comes the Party will understand the importance of making
decisions that are in the best interests of, not just the
Party, but of the country. I have confidence that that
will be the outcome. So I don't want to say anything
more particular than that which could be unhelpful in
these very detailed processes of discussion which are
going on.
12
JOURNALIST: Prime Minister, does the fact that Michael
Duffy is taking part in the opening ceremony of the new
Chinese embassy indicate a thaw in our relations with
China? PM: No, I think that's an appropriate level. He's the
acting Foreign Minister and I think that's appropriate.
We are handling this issue I think in a sensible way, and
I don't mean just the issue of the opening of the
embassy. I mean the issue of our relations. As I made
clear, we've got to walk that, at some times difficult
line, between making sure that China understands our and
other nations' position that what happened some more than
twelve months ago is not something to be forgotten, and
at the same time on the other side try so to conduct our
relations with them in a way which will mean that China
is going to remain open to the rest of the world because
it's in no-one's interests, and least of all those within
China who want to see a reformed China and an open China,
if countries like Australia close themselves off from
them. So that's at times, as I say, a difficult line. I
think we're walking it appropriately.
JOURNALIST: Do you see any inconsistency though in
actions like Mr Duffy's and the Government's, in
particular Senator Evans', strongly repeated condemnation
of the National Party's visit to China?
PM: No.
ends
0