THE HON JOHN HOWARD MP ADDRESS TO THE NATIONAL PRESS CLUB

email ^ | 13 March 2003 | mp john howard

[ATOMIC_PUNK]

17 March 2003

TRANSCRIPT OF THE PRIME MINISTER
THE HON JOHN HOWARD MP
INTERVIEW WITH SALLY LOANE, 702 ABC, SYDNEY

Subjects:

E&OE……………………………………………………………………………………

LOANE:

Prime Minister Howard, good morning and welcome.

PRIME MINISTER

Good morning. Nice to be here, sorry I'm late.

LOANE:

That's quite alright, that's our traffic. Well in breaking news as you heard this morning Alexander Downer has said that any Australians in Iraq should leave now and with President Bush and Tony Blair now saying war is likely to start before the end of the week, with or without the UN. George Bush said earlier in the early hours this morning it's essentially time. Can you tell the Australian people here this morning, will our troops definitely be fighting beside the British and American soldiers in Iraq?

PRIME MINISTER

Well a decision has to be made on that by the Cabinet. I would expect to have a discussion in the not too distant future with President Bush. I think I'll also have another discussion with Mr Blair and depending on what materialises in New York over the next 24 hours then I would expect that our Cabinet would meet and we would make that final decision. I mean it is obviously now more likely...

LOANE:

Would you say inevitable?

PRIME MINISTER

I beg your pardon?

PRIME MINISTER

Would you say inevitable now?

PRIME MINISTER

Well I always like to be cautious on these things because you never know what happens at the last minute. The United Nations Security Council has a long record of producing surprise end outcomes, I don't think that is going to occur, we have got a situation now where it seems very unlikely to me that a consensus on an effective 18th resolution can be reached. Mind you, you don't for legal reasons need it but perhaps we'll come to that later. But as far as the issue of commitment is concerned we'll put ourselves in a position to make the commitment, I've said that all along, and the only reason I've held back and said the final decision's not been taken is I've wanted to give the Government and the nation room to make that decision in full possession of all of the relevant facts and circumstances.

LOANE:

When would the soonest you'd be having a Cabinet meeting Prime Minister, will it be some time tomorrow?

PRIME MINISTER

Well it would be some time very early this week, I can't be absolutely certain about it, it depends on events as they unfold. But the sequence has always been the situation crystallises one way or the other in New York then we have a Cabinet meeting and we take a decision as a Government and then we immediately give effect to that decision by informing the Chief of the Defence Force of that decision and certain consequences flow from that. We will take the matter to Parliament and Parliament will have a chance of debating the matter, as it happens Parliament is sitting this week, fortuitously, and therefore the whole issue can, as I heard Barrie Cassidy say a moment ago, be played out against the backdrop of Parliament sitting.

LOANE:

Does it worry you that you haven't taken the vast majority of the Australian people with you on this, do you think perhaps you've used the wrong method, you've relied too much on all the way George Bush rather than arguing for example the legalities of a war against Iraq? Do you think you've taken the wrong tact and put people off with that George Bush type rhetoric?

PRIME MINISTER

Sally, different people will have different views about what is the better or the best argument and in the end whether people go with me or not on this is probably too early to make a call about, I think a lot of people are still undecided. I'm not doing this for reasons of populism or political popularity, I'm certainly not. I'm doing it because I believe it is in the best interests of Australia, I've endeavoured to argue the reasons and the reasons are really the concern I have that if a country like Iraq is allowed to keep chemical and biological weapons other states of a similar type will do likewise and the more countries like that that have them, the greater likelihood there is that they'll get into the hands terrorists. And once that happens they'll be used whatever the cost. That is the essence of my argument, the American alliance is an important part of it but it's not the dominant part. And in the end I think the Australian people will make a judgement on their assessment of how things work out, I know a lot of people don't agree with me and I suspect a lot of people do and I suspect there's an even larger number in the middle. But in the end in a situation like this my responsibility is to call it as I see it in the interests and the point of view of the country's longer term security and protection and that's what's motivating me on this, not some kind of short term political goal.

LOANE:

Since my interview on Friday with Michael Costello, the former diplomat and Labor staffer who argued that there is a legal case for war. You've actually quoted that and saying look yes you support that. Why haven't you argued this right from the start Prime Minister, if you believe this?

PRIME MINISTER

Well Sally I have, in the formal statement I made to Parliament on the 4th of February I said there was no reason in international law to have an 18th resolution. The reason we wanted an 18th resolution, or another resolution was political in order to put even greater pressure on Iraq. But I have always believed, and it's the Government's legal advice, as Mr Costello said, Mr Michael Costello said, that there is adequate authority in existing Security Council resolutions. And the reason I quoted Mr Costello yesterday was that his opinion is totally different from Mr Rudd's, Mr Rudd says it's illegal, Mr Costello says it's legal and Mr Crean says he doesn't know. Now you've got really three Labor opinions on this very important issue. In the end of course Mr Crean was right in saying one thing that perhaps the morality is even more important than the legality. If that is the case why is Mr Crean handing over his judgement about the morality of it to other people?

LOANE:

He's actually called for troops to be withdrawn...

PRIME MINISTER

Yes well he's also said all along that everything would be okay if you had another resolution. Now it seems to me that you can't have it both ways, you can't say that it's immoral and yet it suddenly becomes moral because you get another resolution when for legal reasons you don't need another resolution. Does morality now rest, international morality now rest in the palm of the hand in the permanent members of the Security Council, particularly the French who hold a veto? I mean in the end I would expect every Australian to make up their own mind as to whether something the Government does is moral or immoral. I've certainly done that myself and I would expect most of your listeners would and I don't think they'd ask the French Government or indeed any member of the Security Council to tell them what is right or wrong.

LOANE:

Mr Howard, in the event that we are there with the US and the UK by the end of the week do you expect fallout from our powerful Muslim neighbours like Indonesia and Malaysia? I mean you must be extremely worried about that.

PRIME MINISTER

Well Sally one of the reasons, not the main reason, but one of the reasons I deliberately went to Jakarta a few weeks ago after I had been to Washington and London was symbolically by doing that in the same trip to emphasise the importance of our relationship with Indonesia but also to assure President Megawati that there was nothing anti-Islamic in what we were doing. Our quarrel is with the Iraqi regime, it is not with the Iraqi people, and it's not with Islam. One of the obscene things about international terrorism is the way in which it has hid behind Islam, some say even hijacked a great religion for its own purposes and reassuringly President Megawati said to me on that visit that she did not see what Australia was doing as anti-Islam and that would be a view that she would put to other countries. Now that's quite reassuring to have the President of the largest Islamic country in the world saying those two things. That is not to say that she agrees with our policy on Iraq, clearly the Indonesian Government has a different view, but not a different view in the context of seeing it as some kind of anti-Islamic act. And our relations with Indonesia are very good, we had seven ministers go there last week and they all reported an extremely friendly reception and that's occurred against the background of our troops having been deployed and the two countries clearly having a different policy on Iraq.

LOANE:

24 past nine, I'm with the Prime Minister John Howard in the studio. Mr Howard, the possible threat of increased terrorist activity in the event of a war, the possible threat of young Australian soldiers coming back in body bags, does that keep you awake at night, you're on the verge of making probably the worst, or the biggest and probably worst decision of your political career, your long political life.

PRIME MINISTER

Well certainly the most difficult, the question of whether it's the worst decision will depend upon whether you agree with it or you don't. I don't accept that, but I certainly accept it is the most serious. Of course it does, or course I think about it all the time.

LOANE:

Does it keep you awake?

PRIME MINISTER

From time to time yes of course it does. I wouldn't be human if it didn't.

LOANE:

What do you draw on in those moments?

PRIME MINISTER

Well I draw on a lot of things, I try not to be heart on sleeve in relation to those things. They're internal, they're personal and they're important to me. But I want the Australian people to know that I've thought enormously about this issue, and I am not taking this decision lightly and it has been preoccupying my mind now for a lot of time, not to the exclusion of other issues, I want people to understand. But I don't want anybody to think that I'm adopting a cavalier approach to this, I think about the consequences, I think about the inevitability of there being casualties, we all hope and pray they're minimal but you have to consider in terms of the human rights, the human suffering element that there's a very powerful argument that there'll be less suffering for the Iraqi people if Saddam Hussein is removed. I mean that's something that's come through very strongly, especially over the last week, person after person, I think Ramos Horta argued very eloquently that the suffering argument was really in favour of the removal of Saddam Hussein and when you think of the possibility that chemical and biological weapons will spread then you're talking about a very powerful argument for action now being taken. But I want people to understand that it's not being taken as some kind of reflex response to an American request, I value the American alliance very much and I make no apology for that.

LOANE:

Prime Minister some people who can remember back as far as Harold Holt and all the way with LBJ and the enormous antagonism in a lot of Australian society to that, are saying look we're seeing this now with you, you're being pelted with eggs, you've got demonstrators now, you've got increased protection. I mean are you concerned about that for your own safety?

PRIME MINISTER

Look I'm not concerned about it.

LOANE:

And that you're going right against what so many Australian people seem to be saying?

PRIME MINISTER

Well historically you have to remember that initially there wasn't strong opposition to the Vietnam War, if you want to keep the history of it correct.

LOANE:

It built up.

PRIME MINISTER

In fact it was the other way around, Harold Holt won a very big victory in 1966. But these are very different circumstances, I see no comparison between the arguments for and against what we might do here and what was done back in the 1960s in relation to Vietnam. I mean that was an entirely different situation...

LOANE:

But there is a lot of public antagonism now...

PRIME MINISTER

But Sally I've had demonstrations against me from the very day I became Prime Minister. I had demonstrations when I went to my daughter's, I had demonstration against me when I went to my daughter's graduation at Sydney University within a few months of becoming Prime Minister. I mean I've forgotten what the demonstration was about, I think it was just because I was on campus at Sydney University and certain people didn't like it.

LOANE:

So this is no different?

PRIME MINISTER

Look I think these marches are large, I understand that. And I understand and respect the fact that there's a lot of people who disagree with our position, I do respect that, but I ask them to understand and respect our view, I ask them to accept that what we will do if we go in will be done in accordance with the legal authority previous given by the Security Council. So in that sense it can be argued that we've really tried to make the Security Council process work, I think the French have been very obstructionist, they've adopted a spoiling role on this issue.

LOANE:

In fact the latest news we've just got off the wires is that President Chirac has reaffirmed that France is ready to use its veto in the Security Council to block this resolution. So it's starting to look more and more inevitable.

PRIME MINISTER

If I can just take that point, I mean they voted for resolution 1441, the 17th resolution. Nobody is arguing that Iraq has complied with that 17th resolution, they're now saying they're going to veto an 18th resolution. They're also acknowledging and the French Foreign Minister acknowledged yesterday on television that the American and British military build up had in fact forced Iraq to let the inspectors in and to yield a few morsels of co-operation. Now do they expect the American and British troops to stay there for another six or 12 months? I mean there's a logical inconsistently with attacking the policy that has as its core the military build up yet say thank you very much for the benefit to the military build up and we'll build an alternative policy on the basis on those benefits. That is essentially the argument that the French have adopted and if I hear him correctly that really is the argument that Mr Crean has adopted because he is saying the Australian forces should come home, shouldn't have been there, that means the same thing in practice, but not the British and American because they're but his admission exerting pressure. So I see a hypocrisy and an inconsistently in all of that, we wouldn't have got the inspectors back had it not been for what the Americans have done. Now they have copped a lot of criticism, but they have tried to make the Security Council process work. The French I believe see this as an opportunity to reposition themselves in the international diplomatic firmament rather than addressing the merits of disarming Iraq. I think that's very disappointing to say the least.

LOANE:

Prime Minister we'll take a break now for the news headlines and we'll be back in just a moment.

[news break]

LOANE:

And I'm in the studio with the Prime Minister John Howard. Mr Howard the effect on our economy of a war, you must be really concerned about that, I spoke last Friday to former Liberal Leader John Hewson, in the business community now of course, he's very against a war as you know, but he's saying around the city people are just shaking their heads, they're really concerned about our economy. You concerned?

PRIME MINISTER

Obviously if it were to go on for a very long time and there were to be a sustained lift in the oil price then that would start to have an effect. But if the conflict is shortlived then I don't believe the effect is going to be anything like that. I don't find people shaking their heads, I don't. He must be talking to a different group of people from me. In fact I find a lot of people who are saying well the economic threat is the uncertainty rather than the actuality. A lot of businessmen have said that to me, as recently as last week I had a discussion with a number of very senior business figures in Sydney and that is exactly what they said to me. So in other words if the matter is confronted and dealt with in a relatively short period of time then the economic fall out, and I'm not stressing for a moment that the economic fall out is the most important, I don't want any of your listeners to think that but as you asked me a question about the economics of it I'll put it that in context.

LOANE:

Are we going to get some sort of quid pro quo from Americans, a story by Christine Wallace on the front page of the Oz this morning, the Bush Administration is prepared to confront Washington's protectionist farm lobby to secure a genuine free trade deal with Australia. Is this something that you're managing to put pressure on?

PRIME MINISTER

Well Sally we are not taking the stance we are on Iraq in order to win a trade deal, I want to make that very clear. I would never do that, I see the two things as quite separate.

LOANE:

It has to help though doesn't it?

PRIME MINISTER

Well I don't know, I'm not seeking to leverage one off the other. We have to look at these things quite separately. I believe very strongly in a free trade agreement with America if we can negotiate it because America is going to be more important to Australia in the future than even if it's been in the past. One of the reasons for that, and people tend to overlook this, is that on all of the trends out to the middle of this century America is going to grow at a faster rate, the American economy will be much stronger than the aggregate of the European economies by the middle of this century. A lot of people overlook that sort of thing when they, in a knee-jerk criticise, what we're trying to achieve with this Free Trade Agreement. If you throw yourself forward its fair to argue that the two great economic powers of the middle of this century would be America and China.

LOANE:

So you've tied your strings to the right caravan then?

PRIME MINISTER

Well if, you should use plural because there's no country we've worked harder to build a relationship with economically than China. I mean people who say we have disengaged from Asia must have been asleep for the last seven years, we have doubled our trade in China. And our economic relationship, and indeed political relationship with the countries of North Asia such as Japan, China and Korea has never been better. Sure we have difficulties with Malaysia but so did Paul Keating, my predecessor, I think the difficulty there is that at a political level rather than at a people to people level where the relationship was quite strong in Keating's time and is quite strong now. The American economy in the long term will be tremendously important to Australia and that's the reason I'm going for a Free Trade Agreement but I am not trading support over Iraq for a Free Trade Agreement, I expect that negotiation to be very tough and we'll be in there fighting very hard and I hope we can pull it off because if we can we'll be part of an expanding economic relationship not a contracting one.

LOANE:

Prime Minister, in all of the overseas news that I've been watching this morning the coalition of the willing only ever seems to say Britain and America, is that a blessing in disguise do you think or do you wish that the rest of the world would acknowledge that we're there with Britain and....

PRIME MINISTER:

I don't get really fussed either way, I think the British and American people understand and appreciate very much and I know that for a fact the stance we've taken. You've got to remember that the three Security Council members that were sponsoring the 18th resolution were Britain, America and Spain, we're not a member of the Security Council that's why the three of them met. We have taken the stance we have for our own good national interest reasons and I'm quite certain that it's well understood but I'm not seeking to ingratiate myself or Australia with the United States or the United Kingdom, we share a lot of values with those two countries and those two countries are very close to Australia, but we're also very close to other countries as well.

LOANE:

Do you wish George Bush could more convincing to Australians? Do you worry about his rhetoric that seems to be turning even Tim Fischer, the former (National) Party leader said, 'look, this boots and all, sheriff, sort of dead or alive rhetoric puts Australians off' - do wish that sometimes that his rhetoric was different, do you think things would be different in trying to convince Australians if he were a little more diplomatic in his language perhaps?

PRIME MINISTER:

Sally, everybody has their own style and the relevance of a political leader's style is how his own people react to it. I try and communicate in a language that the Australian people appreciate and understand. There are stylistic differences between Americans and Australians...

LOANE:

It's not helping you is it?

PRIME MINISTER:

Oh look, I, the question of whether it is or isn't, I don't know that I accept that, but I find George Bush when I meet him both a warm and an intelligent person, I like him...

LOANE:

Do you think that comes across in his public outings?

PRIME MINISTER:
Well, some people think so, some people don't, I mean, some people don't like me very much and others perhaps who are a little more positive but in the end you have to make a judgement on these things according to the merits of the argument not whether you like the style of the person who's putting forward the argument and I'm not going to give a commentary or give a, sort of, some kind of debating scorecard on my fellow political leaders. I believe very strongly that he's tried hard, George Bush, to make the UN process work and I think that the strength that Tony Blair's displayed on this issue has been quite remarkable and I've told him that, I told him that as recently as Saturday night when I spoke to him and I admire him in the long run I believe he will be seen by the British people including his many detractors now as having done the right thing.

LOANE:

Has he been a more articulate spokesman, do you...?

PRIME MINISTER:

Oh look, I'm not giving any attention to who's more, I mean...

LOANE:

More convincing?

PRIME MINISTER:

Sally, what matters to me about articulation is whether I'm succeeding in communicating my point of view and our position in Australia to the people of Australia.

LOANE:

That matters to you doesn't it, Prime Minister and?

PRIME MINISTER:

Well it matters, I mean well, of course it matters to...

LOANE:

The polls are going the other way to you.

PRIME MINISTER:

Well I don't know how the polls are going to end. I mean it always matters to a political leader whether he or she is getting the argument across, I mean, there's nothing strange about that but I make that point to illustrate that I'm not really interested in giving a commentary on Tony Blair and George Bush and I would say again that it is the merit of the argument not the style of the person, whether it's John Howard or Tony Blair, or George Bush, or Simon Crean, it doesn't really matter.

LOANE:

It's twenty to ten. Final question for the Prime Minister, will you be sending a message of support to our troops who are in...?

PRIME MINISTER:

I have sent a message of support to them from the very day they left.

LOANE:

What will you say to them when they are about to take part in war?

PRIME MINISTER:

Well, I say now to them that the Australian nation is very proud of you, the Australian nation admires your professionalism, the Australian nation will give you all support and I ask all Australians to say and think the same thing because a force's duty is to carry out the request and the orders of the Government of the day and the men and women of the Australian Defence Force have my total respect and affection and regard for their professionalism and their dedication and that'll be the spirit in which I always address them.

LOANE:

And will address them?

PRIME MINISTER:

And will address them irrespective of what the circumstances are because that is the point of view that I have irrespective of what they may be doing and I hope that all Australians feel the same way because their job is to serve and carry out the instructions of the Government of the day.

LOANE:

Prime Minister, thanks very much for your time this morning.

PRIME MINISTER:

Thankyou.

[ends]

[ATOMIC_PUNK]

Subjects:





E&OE……………………………………………………………………………………


I've called this news conference to announce that the Government has authorised the Chief of the Australian Defence Force, General Cosgrove, to place the Australian forces already deployed in the Gulf region as part of any US-led coalition operation that may take place in the future directed in accordance with existing authority under United Nations resolutions to disarm Iraq. This decision was taken at a Cabinet meeting this morning following a further telephone discussion between myself and President Bush. He indicated that the final diplomatic attempts in New York to obtain strong support for the 18th resolution dealing with the disarmament of Iraq had come to an end. The Government strongly believes that the decision it's taken is right, it is legal, it is directed towards the protection of the Australian national interest and I ask the Australian community to support it.

Iraq has a long history of acting in defiance of Untied Nations resolutions. Iraq has chemical and biological weapons and an aspiration to acquire nuclear weapons. If Iraq does not have taken from it those chemical and biological weapons, other rogue states will think they can imitate Iraq and as more rogue states acquire chemical and biological weapons, so the danger of those weapons falling into the hands of terrorists will multiply. If terrorists acquire weapons of that kind, that would represent a clear, undeniable and lethal threat to a western nation such as Australia. The action that might be taken as a result of this decision has a sound legal basis in the resolutions of the Security Council that have already been passed. If you go back to resolution 678, 687 and 1441, you find ample legal authority. That is not only the legal advice that has been tendered to us but it is also almost identically the published view of the Attorney-General of the United Kingdom Government. It also corresponds with legal advice that has been tendered to the United States Government. It is my intention to table in the Parliament this afternoon the text of the legal advice that has been provided to the Australian Government.

This, of course, is not just a question of legality, it is also a question of what is right in the international interest and what is right in Australia's interests. We do live in a different world now, a world made more menacing in a quite frightening way by terrorism in a borderless world. And the possibility of weapons of mass destruction falling into the hands of terrorists and the need to take action to prevent that occurring is one of the very strong motivations for the actions that the Government has taken.

The Australian Government believes that the United States has shown great leadership on this issue. It is always easy to criticise the one superpower of the world, it is always easy to find fault with the approach taken by the United States. The truth is for those who have said constantly and still say that all virtue lies in the lap of the United Nations Security Council should remember that it was the action of the United States that returned this issue to New York. Four months ago, the 15 members of the Security Council passed a resolution calling upon active, immediate and unconditional compliance by Iraq with the requirements of disarmament. That has plainly not been the case. It is equally plain that the only thing that has squeezed a few morsels of cooperation out of Iraq has been the presence of the British, or rather the American, and the British forces and to a lesser extent of course our own, given their smaller size in the Gulf region. It is equally plain that if those forces were withdrawn then any semblance of cooperation by Iraq would disappear. I believe that the United States and her allies on this issue have been very patient, they have tried hard but the people in the end who have made their task impossible, in the main of course, have been the people who comprise the Iraqi leadership.

I am very conscious of how difficult this issue is for many people in Australia. I respect the fact that not all will agree with me. I ask them to understand this Government has taken a decision which it genuinely believes is in the medium and longer-term interests of this country. I say to people who disagree - have your beef with the Government, have your beef with me, do not have your beef with the men and women of the Australian Defence Force. They are brave, courageous, young Australians who will need our support, our prayers, our encouragement and our thoughts. Let none of your rancour go in their direction, let it come, as it should in a great democracy, in the direction of those who have taken this decision.

JOURNALIST:

Has Australia declared war on Iraq?

PRIME MINISTER:

No.

JOURNALIST:

What other governments have agreed or will be in the coalition of the willing, Mr Howard, apart from Britain?

PRIME MINISTER:

I can't give you a full list but I can point out that many of the countries that are providing basing facilities are making a huge commitment. From a security point of view, the commitment of many of those Gulf states that are providing basing facilities is quite immense.

JOURNALIST:

Mr Howard, why are you now prepared to present your legal advice and yesterday you said you weren't?

PRIME MINISTER:

Sorry?

JOURNALIST:

Why are you now prepared to present your legal advice publicly when yesterday you said you weren't?

PRIME MINISTER:

Well, I decided to.

JOURNALIST:

What changed your mind?

PRIME MINISTER:

Well, I thought about it further and I was persuaded by the eloquence of the questions I received yesterday.

JOURNALIST:

If Australia is not at war with Iraq now, is there a point coming in the next few days, couple of days, when that will....

PRIME MINISTER:

If you're worried about or asking about whether some formal declaration of war is needed no it's not because the action is being taken on our advice pursuant to existing Security Council resolutions. So there's no formal declaration needed.

JOURNALIST:

What's the timetable then for possible action?

PRIME MINISTER:

I'm not going to talk about that, that is an operational matter.

JOURNALIST:

Alright, when does the ultimatum run out?

PRIME MINISTER:

Well the President will be making a speech in a few hours time and he will have something to say about that. But having now taken the decision to commit Australian forces to the coalition for possible future action, I am not going to speculate about when that might occur, that is an operational thing and I'm going to be very careful from now on not to talk about operational matters but to leave that to the military spokesman.

JOURNALIST:

... support in the joint party room ...

PRIME MINISTER:

The Cabinet decision? Well I don't talk about unanimity in Cabinet, but they were very supportive.

JOURNALIST:

Prime Minister is it the case that only the three combatant nations, the US, the UK and Australia believe that they have the full authority of the United Nations to go to war?

PRIME MINISTER:

I can't speak for other nations, I speak for Australia and speaking for Australia we have a very sound legal basis for this decision. We have never needed the 18th resolution of the Security Council to bolster our legal case. That's very clear, we wanted the 18th resolution to put more political pressure on Iraq. That's the reason why we wanted it.

JOURNALIST:

... not making this announcement in the Parliament?

PRIME MINISTER:

Why am I not making it in the Parliament? Well there are two reasons, firstly I'm going to repeat it in the Parliament at 2 o'clock this afternoon, so I will be making it in the Parliament. Secondly it is an executive decision and it's appropriate that it be announced here and then followed by the presentation of a resolution in the Parliament.

JOURNALIST:

... engagement under which the Australian forces will be operating?

PRIME MINISTER:

I'm sorry.

JOURNALIST:

Can you set out for us the rules of engagement under which Australian forces will be operating now that they're committed to this operation?

PRIME MINISTER:

Well I can arrange for, I don't have the details of them with me, but they have been separately adopted and I can certainly, to the extent that that consistent with any appropriate confidentiality, I can arrange for you to be briefed on that by the Defence Minister.

JOURNALIST:

Prime Minister would you expect the size of the existing Defence Force to be bolstered?

PRIME MINISTER:

No.

JOURNALIST:

Did President Bush request additional Australian Defence Forces to bolster the existing contingency that is in the Persian Gulf at the present?

PRIME MINISTER:

No.

JOURNALIST:

Can you guarantee that you won't increase the numbers?

PRIME MINISTER:

We don't have any intention of increasing the number we have deployed, the deployment we have made is quite a sizeable one given our size and our other commitments, it's managements but it's sizeable and we have no intention of making it bigger.

JOURNALIST:

Will the Iraq resolution go to Parliament today, but it sounded from you said before you're expecting a bit of rancour. Are you?

PRIME MINISTER:

Well I think the Opposition disagrees with me.

JOURNALIST:

I'm talking about what communities (inaudible) message to the nation...

PRIME MINISTER:

Some people agree with me, some people don't. Look the only point I'm making in fairness is that if people are unhappy about this decision they shouldn't give vent to their unhappiness towards the truth. That's all I'm asking, that people understand that in a democracy a government takes a decision and if people are unhappy with that decision they should criticise the Government and criticise the head of the Government, and that's me, on this occasion, but not criticise the troops. I think the way in which, on an earlier occasion, people who've disagreed with a decision about troop deployment treated those troops when they came home was a disgrace. And I think it's very important that our troops be honoured for doing their job and I want to make that very clear, very upfront.

JOURNALIST:

Prime Minister do you think it could affect the troops' morale?

PRIME MINISTER:

No.

JOURNALIST:

... legal basis for this military action, but isn't it true to say that if the current Security Council of the United Nations does not endorse military action, they've made that clear have they?

PRIME MINISTER:

Well the resolution hasn't been put.

JOURNALIST:

... legal basis for this action be undermined if that resolution was put and vetoed?

PRIME MINISTER:

Well there will be a range of views on that.

JOURNALIST:

Is that one of the reasons it wasn't put...

PRIME MINISTER:

It wasn't put because they didn't think it would win.

JOURNALIST:

Are you going to put the resolution to Parliament today?

PRIME MINISTER:

The resolution? Yes it's my intention to move a resolution at 2 o'clock.

JOURNALIST:

... majority of the world and the UN Security Council believe that diplomacy needed more time.

PRIME MINISTER:

I'm sorry I didn't hear the first part.

JOURNALIST:

Does it concern you that the majority of the world and the United Nations Security Council believe that diplomacy on Iraq needed more time.

PRIME MINISTER:

I would wish they'd have had another view, I'd have wished they'd all got behind the new resolution. I've being saying now for some days that if everybody had got behind a strong new resolution saying to Iraq disarm immediately or we're coming after you, that may just have produced the appropriate response in Baghdad but once Saddam Hussein saw the rest of the world was diplomatically divided on this issue the prospect of that happening evaporated.

JOURNALIST:

Prime Minister is the Government concerned about any possible terrorist reaction now that this decision has been taken by the United States, Australia and Britain and has the Government upgraded the security situation in anticipation of that?

PRIME MINISTER:

I've not had any advice recently suggesting the need for upgrading. As to the general question of terrorism, all Western countries are something of a terrorist threat, a terrorism target rather and the view of Dennis Richardson of ASIO, as expounded a few weeks at a conference here in Canberra, is that terrorist attacks tend to be planned over a long period of time and the actual fact that they've been planned is not necessarily affected by particular decisions taken by governments. I've been asked this question before and I can only repeat that as a Western nation we are a potential terrorist target, the only time that we've been specifically signalled out because of a particular thing we've done was of course by bin Laden in relation to the liberation of East Timor.

JOURNALIST:

... what does Australia see as being the end game? Is it just Iraq being disarmed or is it Saddam being removed?

PRIME MINISTER:

Well our policy is the disarmament of Iraq. That's our goal. But I've said before that if you disarm Iraq it's almost axiomatic that the existing regime will go. But our policy objective is the disarmament of Iraq and it follows from that if the sort of resolution of which I spoke had been passed by the members of the Security Council then you may have achieved the disarmament of Iraq peacefully with the regime remaining.

JOURNALIST:

... war might be over Mr Howard, would you expect a fortnight?

PRIME MINISTER:

Well I'm not going to get into any kind of specificity about that other than a broad indication that it's not likely to take a long period of time. But I am literally not going to get into that, you can ask the military briefers about that, I am not a military person and I am not going to get into that field.

JOURNALIST:

... as to how long a war might go and can you expand a bit on what he said to you this morning?

PRIME MINISTER:

No, I'm not going to expand on what he said yesterday morning and as for how long it would go, his remarks were essentially no different from the ones I've just made to you.

JOURNALIST:

[Inaudible] briefings from the military for us, Mr Howard?

PRIME MINISTER:

There will be an appropriate regulatory of briefings.

JOURNALIST:

Mr Howard, the former diplomat, Richard Woolcott, said this morning that he thinks this is the worst foreign policy decision by Australia in 50 years, what's your response to that? And what parallels do you see with history - some people have cited Vietnam, some have cited Hitler - are there any parallels with history?

PRIME MINISTER:

What was the first bit you said?

JOURNALIST:

Woolcott suggesting that this is the worst Australian foreign policy decision in 50 years.

PRIME MINISTER:

What, you want my reaction?

JOURNALIST:

I wonder what you think of that comment.

PRIME MINISTER:

Well, I expected him to say that. I disagree with him. I think he's wrong.

JOURNALIST:

Are there any parallels with history as far as you can see?

PRIME MINISTER:

You don't seek parallels with history when you make decisions about contemporary events. What you have to do is to deal with a situation as you find it. It's very hard to find any parallels to this situation because the world was different before we had international terrorism operating in a borderless environment. Most of the period of the last 50 years, of course, has not covered a period in which that operated. I mean, the disability of trying to draw his kind of comparisons is that we are living in a very different world than was the case in the 1970s, 80s, even into the 1990s. And I think people who are constantly searching for historical comparisons tend to forget that. And it is true that we should always learn from history, that's right, but it's also true that we shouldn't be so mesmerised by what happened in the past to assume that what happened in the past is automatically relevant to what is now occurring. There is something about the world we now live in which is different and does require a different response.

JOURNALIST:

How do you feel personally making this decision which has been anticipated for so long and is obviously so big?

PRIME MINISTER:

How do I feel about it?

JOURNALIST:

Personally.

PRIME MINISTER:

Well, I realise very much it's an extremely serious decision and I've thought about it a great deal and it does weigh very heavily on me and on my mind, very much so. These are the sorts of things that do keep you awake at night on occasions. If anybody thinks I've done this lightly or in some kind of cavalier fashion out of nostalgia for some kind of historical comparison, forget it, it's nothing of the kind. This has been a difficult, hard-slog issue for me through my own thought processes and having done that I believe very strongly that the position the Government has taken is right. I intend to explain it as best I can and to argue it as best I can to the Australian people and to point out as best I can to them in all the ways that I can the reason why the Government has taken this decision and why it is in the long-term interest of our nation.

JOURNALIST:

Mr Howard, I asked you this in a slightly different way the other day. When you sat down with your ministers in the first place to make your pre-deployment, did it come into your considerations at all at that time that Australia could be left the only medium-sized nation in the world beside the United States and the United Kingdom in Iraq at this time?

PRIME MINISTER:

I don't know that we specifically talked about it. It would have been in the consciousness of a number of us.

JOURNALIST:

Did you think there would be war?

PRIME MINISTER:

No, not necessarily.

JOURNALIST:

[Inaudible] say today to the families of...

PRIME MINISTER:

I beg your pardon?

JOURNALIST:

What do say today, Prime Minister, to the families of service personnel who are potentially going into a war zone, potentially...

PRIME MINISTER:

Well, what I say to them is that they are very much in my thoughts. I know they will be in the thoughts and prayers of millions of Australians. I know what an anxious, harrowing time it is for them. It's the hardest part of service life to have a loved one on active service, worrying that he or she may be injured or killed. There are no words that can be uttered that can completely replace or counter-balance that sense of anxiety and I think about them a lot. I want them to know that I do think about them a lot, their nation thinks about them a lot and their fellow service wives and husbands and lovers and mums and dads also think about them a lot and I think we all should do that because they are doing their duty by their country and they deserve our total support and sympathy and respect and understanding and compassion and I hope all Australians, in their different ways, can communicate that feeling towards them.

JOURNALIST:

Is this the most difficult political decision that you've had to make in your prime ministership?

PRIME MINISTER:

Well, I think in many respects it is but, you know, I haven't really sort of sat down this morning and worked that out. It's very difficult but it's the right decision, that's the important thing. Just because something is difficult to reach a conclusion about doesn't mean that having reached the conclusion the validity and justice of the decision is in some way qualified. And the difficult decisions in a way are easy to avoid because they are difficult and I wasn't going to avoid this. The populist thing would have been to have avoided it and I didn't think that, in the long run, was the right thing to do from Australia's point of view. That's why I've come to that decision and I now intend, as best I can, and all of my colleagues, to give 100 per cent support to our men and women who are over there, to look after their families and loved ones here in Australia and give them all the support and comfort we can and also to spend all of my waking hours explaining to the Australian public and talking to them. And I do believe this is right and I believe that over time the Australian people will form that same judgement. Thank you.

[Ends]