Australia warned of growing isolation
By Mike Seccombe in Canberra in
Sydney Morning Herald February 24 2003
Richard Woolcott, a foreign affairs adviser to seven governments and Australia's last representative on the Security Council, said divisions in the council had sharpened since the last resolution, warning Iraq to disarm, was passed last year.
Australia was isolated internationally, being among the few countries to agree that disarming Saddam Hussein justified "a devastating and very costly war".
In a stinging criticism, Mr Woolcott debunked five "myths" which, he said, the Government relied on to support its position on Iraq.
(1) The first was that Iraq presented a threat to Australia's interests. It had been "perfectly well contained" for more than a decade and, if it presented a threat to anyone, it was not Australia.
(2) Second, that failure to agree to war would render the UN irrelevant. In fact, the Security Council had been hamstrung by superpower rivalries for most of its history and, before Iraq, a number of nations, particularly Israel, had got away with being "serial resolution defiers".
(3) The third myth was that Australia's deployment of troops was not a commitment to war. This was a deception of the people by the Federal Government, more serious than that of the "children-overboard" affair.
(4) The government-sponsored myth was that Australia enjoyed the broad support of the world.
(5) The fifth was that going to war against Iraq was in Australia's national interest.
Mr Woolcott, a former ambassador to Indonesia and the Philippines, said:
"I don't think it is in Australia's national interest to get involved in a distant, costly war ... There is no other country in our region of the world - indeed in the southern hemisphere - that I know of which is going to participate in this war."
The cost of the war also came under fire from the leader of the Australian Democrats, Andrew Bartlett, who condemned the Government for its failure to provide figures on the cost of Australia's involvement.
"They are being dishonest with the Australian people about the actual costs. It is likely to be at least half a billion just for deployment, let alone the flow-on costs to the Australian economy with the increase in the price of petrol and all those things." he said.
Australia warned of growing isolation
By Mike Seccombe in Canberra in
Sydney Morning Herald February 24 2003
Richard Woolcott, a foreign affairs adviser to seven governments and Australia's last representative on the Security Council, said divisions in the council had sharpened since the last resolution, warning Iraq to disarm, was passed last year.
Australia was isolated internationally, being among the few countries to agree that disarming Saddam Hussein justified "a devastating and very costly war".
In a stinging criticism, Mr Woolcott debunked five "myths" which, he said, the Government relied on to support its position on Iraq.
(1) The first was that Iraq presented a threat to Australia's interests. It had been "perfectly well contained" for more than a decade and, if it presented a threat to anyone, it was not Australia.
(2) Second, that failure to agree to war would render the UN irrelevant. In fact, the Security Council had been hamstrung by superpower rivalries for most of its history and, before Iraq, a number of nations, particularly Israel, had got away with being "serial resolution defiers".
(3) The third myth was that Australia's deployment of troops was not a commitment to war. This was a deception of the people by the Federal Government, more serious than that of the "children-overboard" affair.
(4) The government-sponsored myth was that Australia enjoyed the broad support of the world.
(5) The fifth was that going to war against Iraq was in Australia's national interest.
Mr Woolcott, a former ambassador to Indonesia and the Philippines, said:
"I don't think it is in Australia's national interest to get involved in a distant, costly war ... There is no other country in our region of the world - indeed in the southern hemisphere - that I know of which is going to participate in this war."
The cost of the war also came under fire from the leader of the Australian Democrats, Andrew Bartlett, who condemned the Government for its failure to provide figures on the cost of Australia's involvement.
"They are being dishonest with the Australian people about the actual costs. It is likely to be at least half a billion just for deployment, let alone the flow-on costs to the Australian economy with the increase in the price of petrol and all those things." he said.
