John Howard on Irag

[sasquatch]

12 March 2006

TRANSCRIPT OF THE PRIME MINISTER

THE HON JOHN HOWARD MP

ADDRESS TO THE DEAKIN SOCIETY, MELBOURNE

"REFLECTIONS ON THE SITUATION IN IRAQ"

E&OE…

During our recent celebrations of the Coalition's ten years in power, I

have, as Prime Minister, been publicly reflecting on our Party's many great

achievements, as was appropriate to do. But on this occasion, among old

friends and senior colleagues, I wish to share some unsettling thoughts

about the situation in Iraq.

Three years ago in Sydney, when I spoke to the men and women of the

Australian Defence Force, who were gathered on the deck of HMAS

Kanimbla, I felt that above all other Australians, they were entitled to

know from me why it is that the Government had asked them to go to the

Persian Gulf and face the armed forces of a dangerous dictator.

I said then that all the intelligence material collected over recent times, to

which Australia had contributed, proved overwhelmingly that Saddam

Hussein had maintained his stockpile of chemical and biological weapons

and that he was on the brink of nuclear capability. This posed a real and

unacceptable threat to the stability and security of our world. I said that

unless Iraq was disarmed of its weapons of mass destruction totally and

permanently then the Middle East would remain a powder keg, waiting

for a match.

I sincerely believed that was true - on the best intelligence and advice that

was available at that time. On February, 2003, I told Parliament, that

disarming Iraq would bring enormous benefits to the Middle East and be

widely welcomed throughout the world. Unfortunately, our expectations in

this matter have not yet been realised. Even so, I have continued to hold

firm to our commitment, despite the ups and downs of the occupation,

because our alliance with the US is vital to the security of Australia.

On May 19, 2004, after my return from a visit to Baghdad, I told the

Institute of Public Affairs in Melbourne that the situation in Iraq was

rapidly improving. That the north of the country was relatively peaceful

and most of the south was reasonably stable. I pointed out that Iraq was

'no longer ruled by a loathsome and homicidal dictator, and potentially

hundreds of thousands of lives have been saved'. I sincerely believed that

at the time.

There had been so many encouraging signs of progress. Let me re-iterate

some of the signs I mentioned in 2004, and reflect on the situation from

today's perspective, as we approach the third anniversary of the

occupation.

I said then that electricity, water, telephone and sanitation were gradually

being restored to pre-war levels or above. Sadly, this did not happen. As

of February this year, 125 projects to provide electricity have been

cancelled. Of the 136 projects that were originally pledged to improve

Iraqi water and sanitation, only 49 will be ever finished.

I said then that six major water treatment plants had been rehabilitated.

Perhaps I should have pointed out that these plants had previously been

destroyed by British and US bombs during the 12 years of UN sanctions

against the Hussein regime. Today, the water situation in Iraq is dire.

Billions of dollars have been shifted from rebuilding vital infrastructure to

guarding the borders of Iraq.

I said that all 240 hospitals as well as 1,200 health clinics were fully

operational, which was the advice we had received from the then

administrator, Mr Paul Bremer. Unfortunately, this turned out to be overly

optimistic. On November 2004, at the start the coalition¹s pacification of

the city of Falluja, the city's General Hospital was occupied by US troops

and - I am sorry to say - that hospital staff were handcuffed and some

patients were dragged from their beds; perhaps for good reasons. Snipers

were posted on the roof of the building and ambulances were strafed. On

November, 6, the BBC reported that US air strikes had reduced the newly

built Nazzal Emergency Hospital to rubble.

One doctor reportedly told Reuters, and I quote: "There is not a single

surgeon in Falluja. We had one ambulance hit by US fire and a doctor

wounded. There are scores of injured civilians in their homes whom we

can't move. A 13-year-old child just died in my hands." Now I do not

wish to labour the point. But it should be conceded that an impartial

examination actions of the Coalition of the Willing during operations in

Falluja has raised uncomfortable issues for our Government. On the face

of it, the Geneva Conventions and core articles of the UN Declaration on

Human Rights have been ignored. During the siege of Falluja, many Iraqi

women and children were caught in the line of fire and some civilians

were shot as they tried to swim across the Tigris. It has even been reported

that weapons of dubious legality were used in Falluja, such as cluster

bombs, napalm, incendiary white-phosphorus and thermobaric, or "fuelair"

explosives, which can have the effect of a tactical nuclear weapon

without residual radiation.

The International Red Cross estimates that at least 60% of those killed in

the assault on the city were women, children and the elderly; a pattern of

destruction that has persisted throughout the occupation of Iraq, and, as

much as we would like to shut our eyes, this has served to boost the

recruitment of insurgents and harden their resolve. In May last year, the

city of al-Qaim near the Syrian border was the target of a major offensive

known as Operation Matador, which resulted in hundreds of Iraqi

casualties. This operation also displaced thousand of civilians, destroyed

entire neighborhoods, polluted water supplies and put one hospital out of

action. Six months later in al-Qaim, Operation Steel wiped out the General

Hospital, other medical centers, some mosques and schools, even the

electricity station.

These are the facts. There are many more examples. And they raise serious

concerns for the future predicament which our Government and our party

may find ourselves facing. We have been lucky up to this point, because

the full extent of the mayhem resulting from our U.N sanctioned

occupation has not been dwelt upon by the Australian media. You can

draw your own conclusions why this is so. However, having been kept

well briefed on the conflict by our intelligence agencies, and I can assure

you that many unpleasant details are still to emerge.

Also, on a personal note, it would be inaccurate for me to maintain that

the events unfolding during course of the occupation have left me

unmoved. It has long been my habit to keep aquainted with opinions

opposed to my own, and to canvas a wide range of views. If an edited

version of this talk is made available, it may reference sources from the

internet.

Under international law, all military forces owe a 'duty of care' to the

civilians of an occupied city. And I am starting to ask myself if this is a

commitment we have betrayed. In fact, I dare to wonder if we have

betrayed the very ideals that I invoked in my support of the invasion.

In my 2004 speech to the Institute of Public Affairs in Melbourne, I said

that, 'Iraq now has a growing and robust independent media, which is

absolutely essential for the development and maintenance of a healthy

democracy'. Well, I am afraid that was a little premature. Our US partners

thought it necessary to suppress the more irresponsible organs of opinion.

Several editors were arrested. And while I accepted assurances from our

allies that the bombing of the Baghdad offices of Al Jazeera in 2003 was

an accident, I must say, that in light of the recent unearthing of the

Downing Street memo, the contents of which are available to my

Government, I now hold grave doubts about the official story. All told,

since the start of hostilities in Iraq, it appears that 82 media personnel

have lost their lives.

I must say, that it came as a surprise to members of my Government when

General George Casey recently re-asserted the right of the US military to

plant paid-for stories in the Iraqi press. We believe this sets an unfortunate

precedent, in that it may lead to suspicion among Iraqi citizens that that

the West prefers a paid press to a free press.

I also noted in my 2004 speech that 'Australia had helped to re-establish

the Iraqi Ministry of Agriculture, [and] set up a payments system for the

2003 harvest and used our experience to help Iraqi farmers bring in the

bumper summer grains harvest'. Perhaps I should have been more

forthright about that experience. For many years the Australian Wheat

Board has been helping the Iraqi Government bring in bumper summer

grains from Australia. We have achieved this by channelling millions of

dollars of hidden commissions into the coffers of the man previously

described as a loathsome and repellent dictator. To be frank, we had been

privately funding a regime that we publicly claimed was a threat to the

world, and I can see now that this might lead some people to question our

probity.

All in all, since the war began I have consistently maintained that the

situation in Iraq was measurably better than it was under Saddam Hussein.

I held to this belief even during the dark days of the Abu Ghraib abuses,

which caused many in the region to question whether democracy would

make the slightest difference. But I strongly argued at the time that the

difference would be apparent for all to see, because the victims of abuse

would not only able, but would be encouraged to speak out, to seek

redress and to find justice.

Sadly, very few victims have been able to find justice. And those senior

figures who issued the orders to turn up the heat on detainees, have not

been properly investigated. In the matter of our own citizen, David Hicks,

who remains to this day Guantanamo Bay, often in solitary isolation, it is

becoming increasing difficult to distinguish his predicament from that

which would have faced a prisoner of Saddam Hussein. I believe the

Department of Foreign Affairs has been remiss in accepting the assurances

of some US officials at face value.

I speak to you here openly, and with sadness. I have no intention of

repeating or elaborating these remarks outside this room. For decades,

many of you have stayed loyal the principles of our Party. However, it is

not wise for any leader to mislead himself, and I have no wish to mislead

you. Like our good friend Tony Blair, I too admit to episodes of anguish. I

worry the situation is getting worse. Not only in Iraq, but elsewhere in the

world. You will of course be making up your own minds as you watch the

news in the coming weeks.

I note that the latest US Country Reports on Human Rights concedes that

in Iraq, 'civic life and the social fabric remain under intense strain from the

widespread violence'. The US ambassador to Baghdad, Zalmay Khalilzad,

has said we have 'opened a Pandora¹s box in Iraq'. There is mounting

evidence of arbitrary detention and torture committed by government

forces, both police and military.

During my recent trip to India, also horribly touched with extremist

violence, I was reminded by their soft spoken Prime Minister, Dr

Manmohan Singh, that the British had seriously erred by clinging too long

to their former colony. Despite widespread opposition to their presence,

British politicians continued to insist that their departure would lead to

chaos. Dr Singh said, 'But it would be our chaos, don¹t you see?' At that

moment I understood what he was saying.

There is tremendous pressure from the US for our troops to remain in Iraq,

and of course mutual loyalty is a vital component of the alliance. But the

longer the Coalition of the Willing remains, the more we are detested, and

the more blood is shed. The country is already tearing itself apart, so I am

asking you, could our departure really make it any worse?

Perhaps it is time for Iraqis to regain control of their future, and for the

coalition of the willing to be willing to leave the stage. When I say this, I

speak as a troubled private citizen, and not as the Prime Minister of

Australia.

Flying home from India, I started to ask myself what a leader like

Mahatma Gandhi would do, but I feared I would not be able to live up to

the answer, unless I have some wise advice form my longtime friends.

Please look into your hearts and let me know what you find.

Thank you.

[ends]

Send this link to a friend

[WantDaChronic]

For many years the Australian Wheat

Board has been helping the Iraqi Government bring in bumper summer

grains from Australia. We have achieved this by channelling millions of

dollars of hidden commissions into the coffers of the man previously

described as a loathsome and repellent dictator. To be frank, we had been

privately funding a regime that we publicly claimed was a threat to the

world, and I can see now that this might lead some people to question our

probity.

 

he said on sky news that his government had no knowledge of the awb scandle and that when accused of being a liar over the matter, he lied again by saying he had no knowledge

 

goddamn, that entire speech was like a confession of all his lies

[naturalmystic]

Is this for real or what , its like evrything i thought about the iraq war rolled into one speach , fuck this shit pisses me off . Like ive always said as much as saddam was an asshole the way this war has left these people suffering is beyond all comprehension and on top of that the place is contaminted with radioactive shit that will last for billions of years , the suffering the daily cost its nothing short of evil gone mad .

[Dohmar]

No its NOT for real.

 

The above speech was satire, taken from a website which has since been taken down by Melbourne IT on complain from the Prime Ministers office that it looked too similar. I don't know what the URL was, but I read this speech yesterday on a PDF file from its Author.

 

I suggest, Sasquatch, that when posting news you at least hyperlink, or state the true Author and origin of a piece.

 

-D

[Buddy]

[sasquatch]

Yeah, i gave you guys a hint in the title.

I wrote IRAG not iraq.

I guess at a not so long shot, that represents a huge segment of society who vote and the rest. They just eat up whatever they read without paying attention to detail and ... the rest.

Anyhow, it was just an experiment, not meant to upset you and i was coming back to post the link today to reveal all.

However!

Surprise surprise, our government has ordered the website to be shut down!

OH MY GOD

This country has really become something else alltogether.

[WantDaChronic]

spose i should have assumed howard would never have exposed himself like that

[Dohmar]

Yes, you wrote Irag. Most people took it for a typo.

 

So, did you put Irag instead of Iraq simply to test if we're anal about spelling, or was it supposed to be funny?

 

I would like to point out the header in the Australian Marijuana News section:

 

" ALL NEWS MUST HAVE SOURCE(S) LISTED IN THE FOLLOWING FORMAT:

 

Author:

Date:

Source:

Copyright:

 

PLEASE LIST ORIGIN OF NEWS (When Applicable) IN THE "Topic Description" INPUT BOX."

 

Fairly plain to see, even for folks that post messages in a forum without paying attention to detail...

 

Incidentally the government didnt 'order' it to be shut down, it was shut down by Melbourne IT (who delegate .com.au domains) after a complaint from the Prime Ministers office. That does not surprise me, given that the website was effectively copied from the prime ministers official website and then modified. Melbourne IT have a long standing policy against phishing as well as a history of enforcing complaints based around copyright law and political deception.

 

There *is* a difference between ordering a site to be removed and petitioning the governing body based upon a legitimate complaint.

 

It was a brilliant speech, however the author should have simply posted it as satire, instead of doing the mock up to make it look like the prime ministers official website. I don't like to be fooled by the government, and as such, I dont like to be fooled by political pundits.

 

This is the basis of Melbourne IT's decision. Its bound to be controversial, but I believe they would do the same regardless of person or party targeted in the satire. The fact that its the PM office complaining is, in my opinion, irrelevant.

 

-D

[naturalmystic]

Yeh thanks sasquatch i needed that mate , i thought it was too good to be true in a world ruled by lies and deciet .

 

cheers

[sasquatch]

Okay, guys. Point taken. Apologies.