Amanda Vanstone (SA, Liberal Party, Minister for Immigration and Multicultural Affairs) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

I table a statement on the Australian Defence Force commitment to southern Iraq and seek leave to incorporate the statement in Hansard.

Leave granted.

The statement read as follows—

Earlier this week Iraq’s Prime Minister, Nuri al-Maliki, announced the transfer of responsibility for security in Al-Muthanna province from Coalition forces to the Iraqi Government (a process referred to as Provincial Iraqi Control).

Through the course of next month, the Iraqi Security Forces will take over responsibility for providing security in Al-Muthanna, with the Coalition providing support if requested by the Iraqi Government.

This is an important step towards the Iraqi Government taking control of the country’s security situation. Al-Muthanna is the first province to be transferred entirely to Provincial Iraqi Control.

That this step can be taken is due in no small measure to the hard work, bravery and commitment of the Australian Defence Force. It also reflects the Australian Government’s determination to help the Iraqi people secure a better future.

Since May 2005, Australia’s Al-Muthanna Task Group has trained about 1,650 Iraqi soldiers of the National Iraqi Army’s 2^nd Brigade. This Brigade is already conducting security operations in Al-Muthanna and it contributed to the success of the December 2005 elections. In conjunction with other Iraqi security forces, these soldiers will now assume primary responsibility for security within the Al-Muthanna province.

The second key role of Australia’s Al-Muthanna Task Group has been to provide a secure environment for the Japanese Iraq Reconstruction Support Group conducting a range of important rehabilitation projects in Al-Muthanna.

These projects have included the provision of training and technical support to four hospitals; the rehabilitation of approximately 30 health clinics and 35 schools; and the completion of dozens of other infrastructure projects.

Following the Iraqi Prime Minister’s announcement on security arrangements in Al-Muthanna, and in accordance with the prospective completion of Japan’s reconstruction mission in the province, the Japanese Prime Minister Junichiro Koizumi has announced that his country’s contingent in Al-Muthanna will be withdrawn.

The ADF will continue to provide security for the Japanese contingent until they have completed the final elements of their mission, which is likely to occur by the end of July.

Japan will remain a vital Coalition partner in Iraq. Along with continued reconstruction assistance, Prime Minister Koizumi has announced that Japan will expand its Air Self Defence Force contribution to provide air-lift support for the UN into Baghdad and Irbil.

These developments highlight both the determination of the Iraqi authorities to take control of their own destiny and the determination of Australia and other Coalition partners to help them do so.

It is important to note the progress that Iraq is making on other fronts. Since January 2005, we have seen Iraq hold three national polls and draft a constitution. More than 15.5 million votes were recorded in elections in December last year, including approximately 12,000 recorded at polling booths across Australia.

Last month, Prime Minister al-Maliki’s Cabinet was approved by the National Assembly.

Despite a difficult security environment, Iraq’s economy is growing strongly, with the IMF estimating real GDP growth this year of 10.4 per cent. International assistance is also playing a critical role in accelerating the delivery of basic services.

Electricity generation capacity has increased by 30 per cent. Roughly a third of Iraq’s school buildings have been rehabilitated in the last three years and 36,000 new teachers have been trained.

Iraq is experiencing significant growth in telephone and internet subscriptions. Vaccination programmes for Iraqi children to ward off ailments such as measles, mumps, rubella and polio have expanded rapidly.

We have witnessed important progress in the judicial system. All provincial courts are operational. More than 700 judges have been trained. And Saddam Hussein is being publicly brought to justice for his crimes against the Iraqi people.

We have seen a flowering of free speech and a free press in Iraq, including 54 commercial television stations, 114 radio stations and 268 independent newspapers and magazines. 

To see the Iraqi people striving to reclaim civil society in the cradle of civilisation, sometimes at great cost and against great odds, is a humbling experience for those of us privileged enough to live in a free and democratic society.

The courage of the Iraqi people serves as a constant reminder of why the international community must maintain its support for Iraq’s democratic transition and development.

Mr Speaker, clearly the security situation in Iraq continues to be dangerous, notwithstanding that it has improved sufficiently in Al-Muthanna province for responsibility to be handed over to Iraqi forces.

The death of Abu Musab al-Zarqawi earlier this month has strengthened the hand and the resolve of all who want to see a peaceful and stable Iraq emerge from the grip of violence. But Iraq remains an active battleground in the global fight against terrorism. It also faces major challenges in terms of sectarian and criminal violence.

The transfer of security responsibility that will take place in Al-Muthanna is an important step. But it is only one step.

There is still a big job to do in assisting the Iraqi authorities in meeting their security challenges. There remains a need for strong and continued support from the international community.

After careful consideration by the National Security Committee, the Government has decided that Australian forces will take on a new role to support the Iraqi Government and security forces.

Planning for this role has been done in consultation with our Coalition partners and with the Iraqi Government.

The ADF contingent will relocate from its current base at Camp Smitty near As Samawah in Al Muthanna province to the Coalition Air Base at Tallil, located some 80 kilometres to the south east in the neighbouring province of Dhi Qar.

From its base in Tallil, the ADF will contribute to coalition operations in South East Iraq under the banner of Operational Overwatch – the Coalition effort to support the handover of primary responsibility for security to Iraqi authorities. The focus of ADF operations will initially be in Al Muthanna province, and may expand to cover Dhi Qar province later in the year.

Our forces will have two responsibilities. The first will be to continue to engage with Iraqi Security Forces and local authorities, building on the relationships we have developed and the successful ADF training and mentoring programme that has been underway since April last year.

This will involve a range of activities, including regular meetings with local leaders, exercising with the Iraqi Security Forces, and supporting and mentoring them as they consolidate their capabilities.

As part of this engagement, we will also continue the ADF program of reconstruction assistance. This has so far delivered many valuable improvements to services and infrastructure for the local community in critical areas such as transport, health, veterinary and agricultural services and utilities.

The ADF contingent’s second responsibility will be to support the Iraqi authorities in crisis situations. While southern Iraq is relatively calm compared with other parts of the country, the security environment remains dangerous. Should situations develop that are beyond the capacity of the Iraqi Security Forces to resolve, the Iraqi Government may call upon the Coalition to provide them with backup.

This could involve the ADF providing support in areas such as communications, command and control, intelligence and surveillance and, in extreme cases, through direct military action.

The intelligence assessments available to the government indicate that the areas in which the ADF will be operating in its new role have among the lowest threat levels in comparison to the rest of Iraq.

That said, the ADF’s new role will be higher risk.

The Government is keenly aware of the risks associated with this new mission, and will ensure that the ADF has the resources it needs to carry out its tasks as safely and effectively as possible.

ADF troops in southern Iraq are well structured and equipped. In addition, ADF elements have access to Coalition support capabilities including medical evacuation, air support and other ground support enablers such as logistics and fire support.

A Battle Group similar in size and structure to the Al-Muthanna Task Group (approximately 450 personnel) will be based at Tallil Air Base. It will comprise two Combat Teams: one cavalry combat team drawn from 2/14^th Light Horse Regiment based in Brisbane, and one motorised infantry combat team, drawn from 2^nd Battalion, Royal Australian Regiment, based in Townsville.

The Battle Group will be under the command of Lieutenant-Colonel Michael Mahy, Commanding Officer, 2^nd Battalion Royal Australian Regiment.

The force will also include an ADF Training Team of approximately 30 personnel. Since the beginning of this month, the Training Team has been training and mentoring Iraqi instruction personnel at the Iraqi Army Basic Training Centre at Tallil Air Base. We are also making a small training contribution at the Counter Insurgency Academy in Taji, north of Baghdad.

Mr Speaker, let me be very clear. Australia will not be hostage to a particular timetable for withdrawal from Iraq. We will only leave when the job has been finished.

Iraq is an active battleground in the international fight against terrorism. To leave Iraq prematurely would not only destabilise the Middle East. It would also provide comfort and strength to extremists all around the world.

To say that we should fight against the terrorists in Afghanistan but walk away from the struggle in Iraq is simply illogical. If countries such as the United States or Great Britain or Australia were to follow such logic it would be nothing less than a disastrous defeat for the cause of freedom and the values we hold dear.

The point that Britain’s Prime Minister Tony Blair made in this House in March is as powerful today as it was then. And I quote: ‘Here are Iraqi Muslims … saying clearly that democracy is as much our right as yours. … This struggle is our struggle.’

‘If the going is tough – we tough it out. This is not a time to walk away. This is a time for the courage to see it through.’

Helping Iraq to achieve stability and democracy is in Australia’s national interest. And it is part of Australia accepting its global responsibilities.

Our support is at the request of the Iraqi Government and the Iraqi people and is dependent on progress by Iraqi authorities in managing their own affairs.

We in the Government are very mindful of the risks our men and women face in Iraq. I have never sought to hide those risks. As always, our thoughts and prayers are with all those who are serving their country bravely.

Andrew Bartlett (Queensland, Australian Democrats) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

by leave—I move:

That the Senate take note of the document.

I will briefly speak to this and then seek leave to continue my remarks. I think it is valuable and a positive thing that the government has tabled a statement in regard to this issue. There has been a decline in recent times in ministers making or tabling statements about important matters, and it is pleasing to see that on this occasion there has been a statement made. I do think it is important to take the opportunity to state for the record the Democrats’ view about Australia’s commitments in Iraq and the broader situation in Iraq. It has been the Democrats view all along that, while it was no secret that we did not support the invasion of Iraq, once it occurred we had an obligation to help rebuild that country and for our troops to stay there while it was still beneficial as part of the rebuilding process, and obviously to contribute in many ways other than just military ones to help with the rebuilding process.

I think it has been clear for some time that it would, on balance, be more beneficial if Australia were to withdraw. The ongoing instability in that country over a number of years now is well documented. The widespread problems that have occurred are also well documented. Indeed, the disappearance of support among the neoconservatives in the United States for this war has also been well documented. It is disappointing that the level of media debate on all sides and the media coverage about a variety of aspects to do with the situation in Iraq is much more dynamic and much more diverse in the US and the UK than it appears to be in Australia. You get a much narrower view about both what is happening on the ground in Iraq and what the varying views are about where to go from here if you just read the mainstream media in Australia compared to reading the mainstream media in the US or the UK, including the right-wing or conservative press and media in those countries. That is a bit unfortunate.

It is a crucial time in terms of the Australian military contribution in Iraq. There is open speculation now about whether our troops may be home by Christmas. ‘Troops home by Christmas’ is a phrase that is probably going to be resonating in the political lexicon for some time to come due to a previous Christmas that it was suggested troops might need to be home by. I believe it is time for our troops to withdraw.

The other important thing I noted today was a suggestion that one of the problems that applies is what might be called an attention deficit disorder: there is a lot of focus on something for a while, then everybody gets bored with it and focuses on something else. Frankly, one of the problems I saw with the intervention in Iraq was that we had not got anywhere near addressing and trying to finish and stabilise the situation in Afghanistan before we went off on some other grand adventure, with the flow-on consequence that not only Iraq but also Afghanistan is in a much less stable situation than it might otherwise have been. If we had kept our focus on Afghanistan then things might be better there than they currently are.

We do need to maintain attention. Even if our troops are withdrawn, it is very important that we maintain attention on that part of the world and try to contribute in a better way to help to stabilise not just the country of Iraq but also the region more broadly. That is something that I think will, sadly, take a long period of time, which is another reason the attention needs to not be in deficit. For that reason, whilst obviously there are aspects to the government’s approach towards Iraq that I strongly disagree with, I at least welcome the fact that there has been a statement presented—that there is attention drawn in a formal parliamentary sense to that situation.

We do have, of course, the reports overnight about the involvement of some Australians in the inadvertent shooting of a bodyguard. That is clearly an unfortunate situation and one that the government is responding to here. That in itself obviously raises some issues. I think that, by keeping an eye on the broader situation, there is certainly something that I am more focused on and the Democrats are more focused on, both in terms of what happens in Iraq and also that wider issue that many people, including the Democrats, have raised a number of times about where our Defence resources should be best focused. I think many people believe that they should be focused much more in our own region, not to the total exclusion of elsewhere in the world but certainly much more than they have been. I think recent events demonstrate that even more clearly than before.

Bob Brown (Tasmania, Australian Greens) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

I note the minister’s statement but want to draw the Senate’s attention to some very different points of view, as Senator Bartlett was just indicating. If you turn to the Guardian Weekly of last week, you will find a column entitled ‘Blair’s imperialist illusion’ by Simon Jenkins. He talks about the new Iraqi Prime Minister, Nuri al-Maliki, whom Australian Prime Minister Howard refers to in the first sentence of this statement, in these terms:

This exit strategy was galvanised last month when the new Iraqi prime minister, Nuri al-Maliki, said he expected coalition troops to leave 16 of Iraq’s 18 provinces by the end of the year. The only remaining American troops would be in lawless Sunni Anbar and in Baghdad. His statement implied a total withdrawal from all Shia provinces, including the British from the south.

Maliki’s statement should have been music to London’s ears. Here was an elected leader eager to appear his own man, to show the militias, clerics, warlords and ubiquitous Iranian agents that he was not a coalition puppet. His view is supported by the shrewd American ambassador in Iraq, Zalmay Khalilzad.

So why did Blair rush to Baghdad and dismiss Maliki’s request out of hand? His spokesman indicated that Iraq would not be remotely “ready” for such a British troop departure by the end of the year. Offered a window through which to escape, Blair slammed it shut. Told to prepare to leave by the very democratic leader he had helped to install, he refused to listen.

Ditto Prime Minister Howard. The new democratically elected Prime Minister of Iraq is saying that he is planning for coalition troops to leave 16 of Iraq’s 18 provinces, including Al Muthanna, where the Australian troops have been, by the end of the year. But there is no indication in this ministerial statement that Australia is going to comply with the expectations of the Iraqi Prime Minister. As the British commentator said, given the opportunity to leave Iraq, the Prime Minister has slammed the window shut in front of him.

A recent opinion poll in Iraq was conducted for worldpublicopinion.org by the Program on International Policy Attitudes at the University of Maryland in the United States and fielded by KA Research Ltd/D3 Systems. Polling was conducted in January with a nationwide sample in Iraq of 1,150 people, which included an oversample of 150 Arab Sunnis. Asked whether the US government plans to have permanent military bases in Iraq or to remove all its military forces once Iraq is stabilised, 80 per cent overall assumed that the US plans to remain permanently, including 79 per cent of the Shiites, 92 per cent of the Sunnis and 67 per cent of the Kurds. Only small minorities believed that the US plans to ‘remove all its military forces once Iraq is stabilised’.

When the Iraqis were asked what they would like the newly elected Iraqi government to ask the US-led forces to do, 70 per cent of Iraqis favour setting a time line for the withdrawal of US forces. These are the people of Iraq. Asked if it was a good idea for Iraqi leaders to have agreed at the Arab league conference that there should be a timetable for the withdrawal of US-led forces from Iraq, 87 per cent said it was. That included 64 per cent of Kurds, 94 per cent of Sunnis and 90 per cent of the Shiah.

When the Iraqi people were asked earlier this year whether or not they approved their government endorsing a timetable for US withdrawal, 35 per cent supported it being within six months and another 35 per cent within two years. Overall the figure was 87 per cent. We know the Kurds have looked much more favourably on the occupation; nevertheless, 64 per cent of them wanted a withdrawal. For the Shiah it was 90 per cent and for the Sunnis it was 94 per cent. What is more, asked how they felt a six-month withdrawal would go, 67 per cent of Iraqis thought it would increase their overall day-to-day security, 64 per cent said it would lead to a reduction in violent attacks, 61 per cent said it would reduce interethnic violence and 56 per cent said it would reduce the presence of foreign fighters.

I wanted to put those matters on record because, as Senator Bartlett said, they are almost counterintuitive to the media we read. We have here the Prime Minister of Iraq reflecting the feeling of his people, who put him there, that it is time for the occupying forces of the coalition to leave, that it should be a phased withdrawal and that it should be soon. The Prime Minister of Iraq says he hopes troops will leave all but two of the provinces—and one of them notably is Baghdad, where there is a concentration of this awful violence—and that it should happen by Christmas; and our Prime Minister is making no such commitment.

I think Prime Minister Howard would do well to listen a lot more to Baghdad and a lot less to Washington. There is more at stake than the wishes of the Iraqi people here; there is the security and wellbeing of our own security forces. I am one parliamentarian who does not like to have security forces there not necessarily in the best interests of our country, and we are here to the debate that matter.

I do not think it is in our best interests as a nation to have this prolonged presence in Iraq. I have called today, on behalf of the Greens, for the return home of the Australian security forces, particularly in this milieu in which the Iraqis are saying that that is going to be a good thing and will decrease violence in their country. I might add that the awesome other side of that polling is that a majority of Iraqis support the attacks on US troops. It is an extraordinary situation. Although we cannot stand looking at the violence in Iraq day by day, I think it is a great pity that, since there was coverage of how well the invasion was going, it has gone from the front page to the back page.

I did wake up one morning last month to hear the Mayor of Baghdad say that 1,100 people had been murdered in that city in the previous month. In the last couple of days, we heard shocking evidence about two American soldiers kidnapped, murdered and tortured. How can you, having heard about their kidnap, not feel a chill of utter despair and horror at the circumstances those two 20-year-olds from the United States found themselves suddenly in before they were put to death in that way—and the horror for their families, of course. Eleven hundred people in Baghdad suffered fates like that in one month, and it has been occurring at a rate of more than 1,000 a month in Baghdad throughout this year. It is a horrendous situation. The Iraqis say that, having now established a democratic form of government, they would be better off and there would be less violence if the occupying troops were withdrawn. That is what I would have liked to have seen in this statement.

I would like to have seen some acknowledgment by the Prime Minister or the Minister for Defence that we have an open ear to what the Iraqi people themselves are saying. I know that the United States is building the largest embassy anywhere on the planet in the green zone in Baghdad at the moment. One news report says it takes five minutes to drive past one side of the perimeter fence. I seek leave to continue my remarks later.

Leave granted; debate adjourned.