E&OE...........
CHAIRMAN:
John Howard, from your vantage point far away from here, how do you see the role of Australia in a more integrated Asian context?
PRIME MINISTER:
Mr Chairman, firstly can I join others in congratulating Davos for its emphatic act of comradeship and empathy with the people of New York and the people of America in shifting this conference to this extraordinary city, and to congratulate the Secretary of State and his fellow countrymen and women for the extraordinary resilience evident here in New York in the time I';ve been here with which they have responded to those quite extraordinary events.
I';ve periodically been asked why is Australia, geographically so remote from here, why is Australia so heavily involved. We';re heavily involved for three very important reasons. The first and most important of those is that in every single conceivable way I saw and most Australians saw what occurred as being as much an attack on our way of life as it was on the American way of life. We don';t delude ourselves, or only a few Australians delude ourselves that we are in some way immune from such a potential attack. It could have been on Sydney or it could have been on Melbourne.
We also of course have a very long-standing defence and other close friendship and alliance with the United States. A few days after the 11th of September our two governments agreed for the first time since its 50 years of existence to invoke the ANZUS treaty, the security pact that binds the United States and Australia together. And the fact that it was invoked for the first time in its history is a measure of the depth and the seriousness of the Australian response.
There are other dimensions of course to the terrorist attack and the threat of terrorism not only here but around the world. Australians as you know are, particularly amongst its young, are much travelled and are much travelling people and many of us saw the attack not only an awful attack on a huge metropolis but we also saw it as an attack on the capacity of the world to maintain that human mobility and that easy movement of people particularly amongst the young which has become a constant characteristic of the experience of nations such as ours in the decades that have gone before us. So for those reasons we saw ourselves as much needing to be part of the response as indeed the nations of Europe and the other close allies of the United States.
I think it has been an extraordinary coalition and that have led the United States of course deserve congratulations for the diplomatic and military skill with which the coalition has gone forward. It has achieved very early and very widespread success but I will join others who are saying that the campaign against terrorism is by no means over. And I think we must recognise that the possibility of activity elsewhere in the campaign against terrorism is very real and it would be failing to understand the character of what we are facing if that were not recognised.
I share views of other speakers about the need to find greater and more effective responses to poverty around the world. I think we should be careful not to see globalisation itself as a cause of the anger which in turn has produced terrorist behaviour. The failure of globalisation is not so much that its value is not there. If there';s a failure in relation to globalisation it is a failure of business and political leadership all around the world to advocate more effectively its benefits. The reality as so many of you will know is that if the benefits of globalisation could be extended through such things as the removal of many trade barriers to developing countries then their economic fortunes would be very significantly enhanced by globalisation.
It is necessary to, however daunting the task is, to try and find a solution to the hideously intractable problem of the Middle East. That can only be upon the basis of an absolute acceptance without qualification of the right of Israel to exist unmolested by secure and defensible boundaries, and equally to recognise the legitimate aspirations of the Palestinian people for a homeland. It is a tragedy that what looked so bright and aspiringly hopeful in the Middle East only a little over a year ago has turned into now such an awful nightmare. But all of those who have any influence on that troubled part of our globe have an ongoing responsibility to do what they can to bring, however difficult it may seem, to bring about that peace, that will make a contribution.
But finally Mr Chairman, I think the coalition has been an extraordinary success out of great difficulty and travail. I think those terrible events have encouraged people to talk together about what they have in common more than perhaps they have done for a long time. And on a personal note I found attending the APEC meeting in Shanghai in October which was attended of course by President Bush and President Putin and the President of China and the Prime Minister of Japan and so many other leaders, we saw people whose views many issues may be different talking together and making common cause about what they could do to mobilise the world against terrorism. That was a source of encouragement, even inspiration, at a difficult time and a reminder that out of awful tragedy new alliances and new momentums can be generated. Thank you.
Further remarks during panel discussion
Well, I don';t think you can effectively pursue the goal of a fairer world and thereby remove some of the bases of the emergence of terrorism without an infinitely more successful prosecution of policies of more open trade. I said in my introductory comments that the developed world, the wealthy nations of the world could do more to help the developing countries of the world by the removal of trade barriers than they could by several multiples increasing the amount of official development assistance which is now provided to developing countries. And the last 30 or 40 years of the world';s economic experience is replete with examples of countries which have pursued more open trade policies and have lifted people out of poverty. I think it';s also important in relation to poverty to bear in mind that we have made progress.
There';s always a danger when we talk about poverty, of repeating scenarios of despair, of talking as if no progress has been made. The reality is that progress has been made and if you adopt proper measures according to absolute numbers you can clearly argue that there has been a great deal of progress made and trade and openness of trade play an enormous part and I think the most voluble point in relation to globalisation visa vie the cry of the poor of the world is that remaining punitive trade barriers of many of the richer countries of the world do work an injustice to some of the developing countries and in a sense in so far as those who argue that globalisation is the problem, the answer is more globalisation via an even more open trading approach. We don';t as political leaders, business leaders in capitalist society, we don';t do a good enough job of explaining the benefits of globalisation.
We lose the argument, the rhetorical argument all too frequently, to the political anarchists who try to lay at the feet of globalisation all the sins of the world. So I think it plays a very big part, not only in substance but speaking as all of us are as practicing politicians, the political challenge is to win - to use that old clich - the hearts and minds of people about the benefits of globalisation. We';re too defensive, we';re all too readily think that humanising globalisation is to concede some of its critics'; arguments. Humanising globalisation is to point out the benefits it';s brought to poorer countries over the last decade or more and the benefits it can bring even more to those countries in the years ahead.
[ends]