Like what you've read?

On Line Opinion is the only Australian site where you get all sides of the story. We don't
charge, but we need your support. Here�s how you can help.

  • Advertise

    We have a monthly audience of 70,000 and advertising packages from $200 a month.

  • Volunteer

    We always need commissioning editors and sub-editors.

  • Contribute

    Got something to say? Submit an essay.


 The National Forum   Donate   Your Account   On Line Opinion   Forum   Blogs   Polling   About   
On Line Opinion logo ON LINE OPINION - Australia's e-journal of social and political debate

Subscribe!
Subscribe





On Line Opinion is a not-for-profit publication and relies on the generosity of its sponsors, editors and contributors. If you would like to help, contact us.
___________

Syndicate
RSS/XML


RSS 2.0

A real 'war on terror' would put Australia's national interest first

By Mark Latham - posted Wednesday, 26 February 2003


That is the sentiment, passionately and meaningfully expressed.

The Prime Minister talks about strength, but from time to time, real strength and purpose in national leadership comes from saying 'no' to another country, which is what Mr Howard should have said to the Americans instead of committing Australia to forward deployment and the inevitability of war in Iraq. But he is too weak, and behind him sits a weak and ineffective backbench. It has been left to the elder statesmen of the Liberal Party to articulate a true "small-l liberal" position. Mr Howard and his government are just yes-men to the United States, a conga line of suckholes on the conservative side of Australian politics. The backbench sucks up to the Prime Minister, and the Prime Minister sucks up to George Bush - and they have the hide to call themselves Australians. In my book, they are not Australian at all.

Australia deserves better than to have an American apologist as its Prime Minister; than to have someone who is too weak to say no to Uncle Sam. In his statement to the parliament, the Prime Minister dismissed the opposition to war as 'just anti-American prejudice'. Imagine, the member for Bennelong lecturing us about prejudice: the same Member of Parliament who opposed sanctions against South Africa, who wanted to cut Asian immigration, who opposed the Mabo judgment tooth and nail, who welcomed Pauline Hanson's first speech in this place as an outbreak of free speech. He still refuses to say sorry to the stolen generation and, to this day, cannot bear to utter the word "multiculturalism". This bloke has a PhD in prejudice; he has no right to be lecturing anyone else.

Advertisement

I would argue that opposition to the government's strategy is not a form of anti-American prejudice; it is an expression of Australia's national interest. I believe there is a new nationalism in this country - the sort of nationalism that says that Australia should be part of the international community, and engage with other countries - but with a very clear sense of our interests. Australians are saying that we are not a little colony or junior nation any more, but a mature nation that takes a mature view about our interests. The right-wing elite opinion in this country is out of sync with public opinion; with the new nationalism that stands tall in this nation.

We should now approach the United States with an independent foreign policy that puts our interests first. We can have a defensive military alliance with the US, but we do not have to stand shoulder to shoulder with them in every single conflict and on every single international issue. Just as there were no American boots on the ground in East Timor, there should be no Australian ground forces in Iraq. Even if the UN sanctions some form of military action, Australia's commitment should be limited. I strongly endorse the Australian Labor Party policy statements of April 2002 and 15 November 2002, the latter of which states that "... in light of the threat to Australia from terrorist organisations operating in South East Asia, the priority for the deployment of Australian military resources must lie within our own region."

The Iraqi regime is not a direct threat to Australia. We must deal with the threat in our own part of the world first. We have higher priorities to pursue in the war against terror. I oppose the Prime Minister's strategy, his toadying to the United States, the way in which he is leaving us defenceless, and pushing fridge magnets into the front-line of our nation's defence while sending our SAS and other commandos to the other side of the world. He ought to be ashamed of himself. I believe he has disgraced our great nation and placed its future security and safety at risk. Every year, each and every one of us as members of parliament says, in remembrance of past wars, "lest we forget". The truth is that the Prime Minister has forgotten: how to stand up for Australia's national interests; how to keep our lives safe and secure; and how to be a good Australian, instead of some yes-man to a flaky and dangerous American president. I reject his blind rush to war with Iraq, and I trust and dearly hope that in time, the Australian people themselves will reject this Prime Minister and his government.

  1. Pages:
  2. 1
  3. Page 2
  4. All

This is an edited transcript of a speech to Parliament.



Discuss in our Forums

See what other readers are saying about this article!

Click here to read & post comments.

Share this:
reddit this reddit thisbookmark with del.icio.us Del.icio.usdigg thisseed newsvineSeed NewsvineStumbleUpon StumbleUponsubmit to propellerkwoff it

About the Author

Mark Latham is the former Leader of the Opposition and former federal Labor Member for Werriwa (NSW).

Other articles by this Author

All articles by Mark Latham
Related Links
Australian Labor Party
Photo of Mark Latham
Article Tools
Comment Comments
Print Printable version
Subscribe Subscribe
Email Email a friend
Advertisement

About Us Search Discuss Feedback Legals Privacy