The Cabinet has today considered and agreed in principle to a request
from the United States to participate in an international coalition
should military action against Iraq become necessary.
Our aim in doing so is to help enforce the UN Security Council's
resolutions, ensure that Iraq's chemical and biological arsenals
are not used or expanded, and prevent Saddam Hussein again becoming
a threat to the security of the Middle East and the world.
The Government sincerely hopes that military force will not be necessary
and that Iraq will respond to the clear message it is being given
that the international community expects it to adhere to its UN obligations.
The Government will continue to apply all possible diplomatic resources
to efforts to achieve this.
If Iraq refuses, however, the Government believes that Australia's
national interests and the interests of the international community
in preventing Iraq from using and further developing its chemical
and biological arsenal are so great that Australia should support
military action against Iraq. We also believe that President Clinton
should be supported in the leadership he is showing on this issue.
The Government takes this decision only after very careful consideration
of all the issues involved. The risk to any Australians who might
be engaged in supporting any military action is one of the most serious
of these issues.
But Iraq's defiance of UN Security Council resolutions requiring
it to destroy its weapons of mass destruction and accept UN inspections
by the UN Special Commission (UNSCOM) has to be a matter of the gravest
concern for Australia and all other members of the world community.
Iraq has consistently frustrated the efforts of the United Nations
to identify and destroy chemical (CW) and biological (BW) weapons
and ensure such weapons are not developed in the future. It has repeatedly
been found to have lied about its capabilities. Iraq's refusal
to permit UN inspectors to do their work can only exacerbate the concerns
of the international community about its capabilities and intentions.
Iraq's CW and BW programmes were vigorous and determined and
we know that Iraq maintains such weapons and the capability to produce
them. Iraq has a record of using such weapons against its own people
as well as its neighbours. There are good grounds for fears that Iraq
may still have operational missiles with chemical and biological warheads,
as well as artillery shells and bombs. According to UNSCOM, precursors
which could produce hundreds of tonnes of CW and BW agents, such as
the nerve agent VX are not accounted for.
Unless UNSCOM inspectors are allowed to do their work, Iraq will keep
the capacity to threaten its neighbours. The use by Iraq of this material
would have devastating human consequences and have incalculable consequences
for the security of Iraq's neighbours and the Middle East as
a whole.
If UN inspections do not continue or Iraq is not otherwise prevented,
Iraq will be free to develop more of these weapons and the means of
delivering them.
Australia may be beyond the reach of Iraq's missiles. But we
have a direct national interest in ensuring that these weapons do
not proliferate and that the mechanisms established by the international
community to prevent this are as effective as possible. There can
be no doubt that allowing Iraq to flout its obligations will increase
the risks for the rest of the world including Australia.
Any military action would be designed to force compliance with UN
Security Council resolutions and prevent Iraq from building its CW
and BW capability and the means of delivering it.
It would be designed to avoid to the maximum extent possible any civilian
casualties within Iraq. But it would be unrealistic to rule out the
possibility. That is why, the Government would encourage the Iraqi
Government to conform to UN resolutions and make the use of force
unnecessary.
The sort of contribution the Government is discussing with the United
States includes up to a company from the Special Air Service regiment
to support, for example, US search and rescue activities; two Boeing
707 tanker aircraft to provide air-to-air refuelling and specialist
personnel to provide back-up in medical and technical support. Support
of this kind could involve up to 200-250 people.
It is possible that the situation will require a different sort of
contribution. The Government would be prepared to consider providing
other capabilities of a similar order.
As I have undertaken to do so already, I will continue to keep the
Australian public as fully informed of developments as possible. I
have advised the Leader of the Opposition of the Cabinet's decision.
I emphasise that the Government very much hopes that a peaceful solution
can be found. No one wants force used or lives put at risk.