Australian Opposition Leader Slams Iraq War
Pacific Rim Bureau (CNSNews.com) - The Iraq war and Australia's involvement in it was "a mistake," according to the leader of Australia's official opposition party, who hopes to succeed U.S. ally John Howard as prime minister.The comment, coming at a time when the Howard government is in talks about cooperating in Washington's missile defense plans, has highlighted the importance of the U.S.-Australia relationship as an issue in Australia's election campaign expected later this year.
Mark Latham was elected leader of the opposition Labor Party last December, and opinion polls suggest that he holds a significantly better chance of ousting Howard than did the man he replaced. Nonetheless, Howard maintains a healthy lead in the polls.
In his early days as Labor leader, Latham sought to distance himself from some controversial earlier positions, including his stated view that President Bush was "the most incompetent and dangerous president in living memory."
He even held a press conference with an American flag as backdrop, to assure Australians that Labor was behind the bilateral alliance.
But he began the new political year with an attack on the decision to go to war against Iraq.
In a radio interview, Latham was questioned about former Treasury Secretary Paul O'Neill's reported charge that Bush had been intent on invading Iraq before the 9/11 attacks.
Latham responded by saying he was worried that the war was executed "on a premise that hasn't been proven and hasn't been justified."
Noting that weapons of mass destruction had not been found in Iraq, he said "I think they made a mistake in going to war in Iraq. Whatever the reason or motivation was, I think it was a mistake."
From Australia's point of view, Latham argued, "we shouldn't be getting into overseas conflicts unless we've got the very best reason to do so."
The comments drew a quick response from the government.
Cabinet minister John Anderson, who is acting prime minister while Howard is on leave, said that by questioning the war, Latham was effectively saying Saddam Hussein should still be in power.
"He's also failed to notice how other rogue states have become noticeably more cooperative since the coalition's action in Iraq," a spokesman for Anderson quoted him Tuesday as saying.
Also responding on the government's behalf was Defense Minister Robert Hill, who questioned whether Latham had what it took to be prime minister.
"In making decisions on national security you don't have the benefit of hindsight. You make judgments on what's necessary to protect Australians and Australian interests on the basis of the information available at the time," Hill said.
"Latham, in his comments, doesn't demonstrate that he would be prepared to do so," he added.
Canberra is going ahead with plans to cooperate with the U.S. plans to provide a defensive shield against missiles fired by rogue states or terrorist groups.
Hill said talks were underway in Sydney Tuesday with U.S. officials, to negotiate a memorandum of understanding on Australia's involvement in the program.
He told Australian radio that the country may in the future deploy destroyers capable of shooting down incoming enemy missiles as part of the defensive shield.
At the last election, Labor's platform opposed the U.S. missile defense proposals, echoing arguments used by Russia, China and other critics that the plans had the potential to undermine non-proliferation efforts and "to trigger a new nuclear arms race."
Since his election as party leader, Latham has yet to comment specifically on Australia's planned involvement.
Hill said Labor's previously voiced concerns about the program had more to do with divisions within the party than with defense matters.
"If they want to act in a way that protects Australian lives in the future, they would clearly, unambiguously be part of this project," he said. "They're not prepared to do that which suggests to me that they are still deeply divided within."
'Foreign issues will be important'
In a recent Newspoll opinion poll for The Australian newspaper, 49 percent of respondents chose Howard as preferred prime minister while 28 percent named Latham (and 23 percent were undecided). The ruling coalition scored 43 percent to Labor's 37.
Although Howard's lead remains strong, Latham's figures are considerably higher than those of his predecessor, Simon Crean, who never exceeded 18 percent in his last nine months as leader.
Although domestic issues tend to dominate Australian campaigns, experts agreed Tuesday that foreign policy was likely to be more important in the 2004 election than in any previous one since the Vietnam War.
During Vietnam, there were clear-cut differences between the parties over whether Australian troops should remain engaged or be brought home.
Since then, it was hard to think of one foreign issue that played a major role in an Australian election campaign, said Dr. Tim Tenbensel of the political studies department at the University of Auckland.
This time, however, Iraq could make a difference, he said.
Dr. Ian Ward of the University of Queensland's school of political science agreed that foreign issues had not generally been important in campaigns since Vietnam, but said that in the last election, the Howard government had made an issue of "its ability to provide security in a troubled international environment."
"I'd expect that in the coming campaign, it will try to essentially rerun the themes [of the last campaign] ... where it merged the question of international terrorism and the threat it posed to Australians with the more localized threat of unwanted immigrants arriving as asylum-seekers."
In the 2004 campaign, Ward said, "the international environment will have some importance. The alliance with the U.S. will be something the government will draw to the attention of the voters."
Latham's appearance with the U.S. flag last month had been an early effort to pre-empt government attacks on his stance with regard to the bilateral alliance, he said.
On the Iraq war issue, Ward said the government had by and large succeeded in sweeping aside questions about WMD - compared to the political problems facing British Prime Minister Tony Blair.
"As Howard has said, the Australian people have moved on."
The issue continued to divide the Labor Party, however.
Tenbensel recalled that the previous Labor leader, Crean, had also ruffled U.S. feathers on Iraq, "but without saying it in so blunt a way."
He described Latham as a "higher risk" Labor leader than his predecessor, but said he also potentially offered the party a "higher payoff."
He would likely alienate some traditional Labor voters, but would pick up others, especially among the "aspirational working classes" because of his own working-class background.
Howard has yet to call a federal election, but the three-term prime minister is expected to select a date in the second half of this year. Some pundits have tipped Oct. 30 as the most likely date, which would mean Australians go to the polls just three days before their counterparts in the U.S.
See earlier story:
Harsh Critic of Bush Eyes Leadership of Australia (Dec. 2, 2003)
Send a Letter to the Editor about this article.