http://www.news.com.au/common/story_page/0,4057,6120134%255E2,00.html
NEWS.com.au | War or no war, we are a target: PM (March 13, 2003)
HOME > STORY
Get News by EmailPrint This ArticleEmail This Article
War or no war, we are a target: PM
By Kate Meikle and wires
March 13, 2003
AUSTRALIA is a terrorist target and abstaining from war in Iraq
would not change that, Prime Minister John Howard warned today.
Prime Minister John Howard says we must disarm Iraq.
File picture
Putting his case for war to the nation, Mr Howard said the direct
and undeniable threat of the proliferation of weapons of mass
destruction was the reason his Government was pushing to disarm
Iraq.
"I understand why some of my fellow Australians do not agree with
the stance the Government has taken," he said.
"I respect their view but in return I ask them to respect and
understand the strength of feeling I have for the stance this
Government has taken."
Mr Howard said it was in the national interest to see Iraq fully
disarmed to prevent "the ultimate nightmare" that would occur if
terrorists were able to access weapons of mass destruction.
"As these dangerous weapons spread, so the risk that they could fall
into the hands of terrorists increases."
"If terrorists ever get their hands on weapons of mass destruction
that will, in my very passionate belief and argument, constitute a
direct, undeniable and lethal threat to Australia and its people."
The Iraq issue had greater urgency and relevance "because if the
world cannot disarm Iraq it has no hope of disciplining North
Korea", Mr Howard said.
"If Iraq is allowed to get away with it, other rogue states will
believe they can do the same because they will have seen a world
effectively stand by and allow it to happen."
The Prime Minister rejected arguments that the Government's position
had placed Australia on the radar of international terrorists and
said Australia could not shape its foreign policy under threat.
"International terrorism is borderless," he said.
"Australia is a Western nation, nothing can, will, or should alter
that. As such, in this world, we are a terrorist target."
Mr Howard said there was already intelligence that terrorist group
al-Qaeda was attempting to get its hands on chemical and biological
weapons.
"Australian intelligence agencies, including ONA (Office of National
Assessments), judge that al-Qaeda has demonstrated the intention to
acquire or develop chemical of biological weapons and an interest in
radiological and nuclear weapons," he said.
"This judgment reflects the intelligence community's professional
assessment and is based on the full range of intelligence material
available.
"But it is not just secret intelligence that leads to this
assessment.
"Information in the public domain indicates that al-Qaeda has made
repeated attempts to acquire chemical, biological and nuclear
materials and capabilities over almost a decade."
Mr Howard said terrorist groups, particularly al-Qaeda, would use
chemical and biological weapons no matter what the cost.
"The evidence is powerful and irrefutable that terrorist groups and
in particular al-Qaeda want chemical and biological weapons and if
they are able to get them or to develop them in a deliverable way,
they will use them whatever the ultimate cost," he said.
The Prime Minister said he had considered the humanitarian costs of
a military conflict in Iraq but ending Saddam Hussein's regime would
bring about a better life for Iraqis.
"Surely it is undeniable that if all the humanitarian considerations
are put into the balance, there is a very powerful case to the
effect that the removal of Saddam Hussein's regime would produce a
better life and less suffering for the people of Iraq than its
continuation."
Mr Howard has in the past insisted that Australia's primary
objective was to disarm Iraq and not to force regime change.
Earlier, Mr Howard declared there was enough legal authority to go
ahead with an attack on Iraq without another United Nations
resolution.
"There is already, in the existing resolutions, ample legal
authority to use force to bring about disarmament, I want to make
that clear," Mr Howard said.
"And the push to have another resolution is based on international
political and strategic considerations, not on legal imperatives.
"There is adequate authority, on my understanding, under the
existing resolutions to authorise the use of force."
with AAP