Lyn Allison (Victoria, Australian Democrats) Share this | Hansard source

I move:

That, in the opinion of the Senate, the following is a matter of urgency:The need for the Australian Government to develop its own plan to withdraw all Australian troops not involved in personal security roles from Iraq as soon as practicable, given that:

(a)

The March 2003 invasion of Iraq and Mr Bush’s 2005 ‘Victory in Iraq’ strategy paper has demonstrably failed and, as Secretary-General of the United Nations, Kofi Annan, former United States Secretary of State, Colin Powell, and former Iraqi Prime Minister, Ayad Allawi, have all said, Iraq has descended into civil war;

(b)

The Bush Administration-appointed Iraq Study Group report, due on 6 December 2006, is tipped to recommend that America begins a phased withdrawal of combat brigades in Iraq, starting in 2007 and ending in 2008;

(c)

The United Kingdom announced its intentions to hand over security in Basra in 2007;

(d)

A poll by the University of Maryland found 71 per cent of Iraqis now want the United States out of Iraq; and

(e)

Former United States Defense Secretary, Donald Rumsfeld, suggested that the United States should consider an accelerated draw down of bases.

Three years and nine months ago, Australia joined the United States in invading another country based on a lie. Last month, finally, a US committee on intelligence said that there was little or no evidence to support claims by US intelligence of weapons of mass destruction or links between Iraq and al-Qaeda—something that weapons inspectors and intelligence analysts had been telling anyone who would listen well before the invasion. The strike was all over within weeks. Iraq not only had no weapons of mass destruction but had very little by way of military defence in the face of the firepower from the world’s most heavily armed country.

When you keep changing the rationale for pre-emptive strikes—one day weapons of mass destruction, the next day liberation of the people from an evil dictator—the problem is you never know when the job is done. Now the talk is about the need to protect the fledgling democracy we imposed on Iraq to stop Iraq tearing itself apart. Of course there are many ways of liberating a country. Usually the residents of that country rise up and liberate themselves. That is how America did it. Citizens also do it through non-violent, mass civil disobedience. That is how India did it. You can get the world to boycott a regime until they are so ostracised they capitulate. That is how South Africa did it. Or you can just wait them out and sooner or later the king’s legions simply leave. That is how Canada did it.

Against the advice of the United Nations Security Council and the Australian parliament, and despite the biggest mass demonstrations ever seen in our streets, our Prime Minister decided we would join in the invasion of Iraq—and it turns out that he made that decision well before he told us.

The Democrats strongly opposed this invasion of Iraq. However, we did recognise that once the bombing had stopped we had an obligation to help rebuild the massively damaged infrastructure. Three years and nine months on, the postwar death toll is higher than that caused by the invasion—all up an estimated 600,000 people. Heroic assumptions about bringing democracy have all but failed. Basic services are still a pipedream. The reputation of the United States has been sullied by Abu Ghraib and massacred civilians. Oil supply arrangements and lucrative rebuilding contracts have benefited the occupier.

It is little wonder that our presence is doing more harm than good, regardless of how necessary our work might be, or might be seen to be. Fourteen hundred Australian soldiers are still there as an occupying force. According to the University of Maryland, more than two-thirds of Iraqis want us all out. Richard Woolcott, former secretary of the Department of Foreign Affairs and Trade, says that the world and Australia have been less safe since the invasion and occupation of Iraq and terrorism has increased in Iraq and beyond, including in Indonesia. Although it was a minor terrorist target before the invasion, he says Australia is now a much higher profile target than it was. Dr Scott Burchill says:

The war was lost 2 years ago, and the insurgents have been celebrating their victory ever since by attacking coalition troops and tormenting the civilian population. It cannot be won now by extending or intensifying the occupation. Many insurgents presumably want US, UK and Australian troops to stay on where they can be further humiliated. As US General Casey admitted last year, the presence of coalition troops fuels the insurgency. A withdrawal, on the other hand, removes its raison d’etre.

The invasion of Iraq has been very costly in humanitarian, economic and environmental terms too. The cost to Australia of the Iraq war will be $1.6 billion by the end of the year. Two thousand nine hundred and six American soldiers are dead. Luckily, Australia has had no deaths in action but hundreds around the world have died in retaliatory terrorism incidents. The cost to Iraq and innocent Iraqi civilians is incalculable. An estimated 655,000 civilians have died since the invasion. Amnesty suggests women are no better off now in terms of safety than under Saddam Hussein, with increased murders and sexual abuse, including by US forces. Former US Secretary of State, Colin Powell, and former Iraqi Prime Minister, Iyad Allawi, say that Iraq has descended into civil war. Kofi Annan says the situation in Iraq is worse than civil war, that the ordinary life for Iraqis is far more dangerous than it was under Saddam.

The majority of Iraqis see us as part of an occupying force that is delivering nothing but instability and violence and not liberation. Sixty-one per cent of all Iraqis support insurgent attacks on US troops. It should be a lesson to us that you cannot bring peace by force, that you cannot always impose the Western notion of democracy—with its many flaws—and that you cannot impose cultural change from without, particularly from a Western nation that is so clearly at odds with the norms and the religious bases of its warring factions. The international chorus has been joined by a growing number of Australians from across the political spectrum and within defence, but this government has nothing to say.

We will not be with President Bush and Tony Blair, who are meeting in Washington tomorrow to talk about a phased withdrawal, starting early next year. In a classified memo leaked over the weekend, former US defence secretary Donald Rumsfeld laid out a series of policy options that included a modest withdrawal of US troops. The UK defence secretary announced on 27 November that the number of British troops in Iraq will be ‘significantly’ reduced by a ‘matter of thousands’ by the end of 2007. The Iraq Study Group report, due today, is tipped to recommend that America begin a phased withdrawal of combat brigades in Iraq, starting next year, saying this should pressure the Iraqi government to clamp down on sectarian violence.

The Prime Minister may be incapable of admitting his terrible mistake. Indeed, he said a week or so ago that he still holds the view that the decision to invade Vietnam was right. The least he can now do is show some clear leadership rather than wait for instructions from Mr Bush. We should not be stuck here waiting for the US to tell us what to do next, waiting for the next piece of hollow rhetoric from President Bush about victory and staying until the job is done. He is apparently not going to cut and run. Apparently Mr Howard said a couple of weeks ago that he would pass on ‘some ideas and information about how to reduce the violence in Iraq’ but what this is is anyone’s guess. Is he ready with a plan? It does not seem so. I hope Mr Bush gives the Prime Minister a heads-up before he announces the US withdrawal; otherwise we will still be there when everyone else has gone.

More violence never stopped violence. Only talking, diplomacy, agreement and sorting out the issues have delivered long-lasting peace. The Democrats say that the way to peace and stability in Iraq, as elsewhere, is to withdraw Australian troops other than personnel essential in protecting diplomatic staff, encourage engagement of the warring factions and the Iraqi people in ceasefire talks, and divert the billions that are currently spent on keeping troops in Iraq to rebuild essential services and schools and hospitals.