The controversy erupted after the broadcast of an interview with Howard on the national Sunday current affairs program. Asked whether his government would be prepared to use special forces to launch a strike in another country if a "terrorist group" was planning operations, Howard was unequivocal. "If you believed that somebody was going to launch an attack against your country, either of a conventional kind or of a terrorist kind, and you had a capacity to stop it and there was no alternative," he said, "then of course you would have to use it."

The statement had particular resonance given the Australian government’s aggressive military stance in the region, particularly over the recent period. The imperialist rulers have led a United Nations occupation force in East Timor, intervened militarily in the Solomon Islands and Bougainville, and have mounted aggressive naval patrols to head off boats carrying immigrants from Asia.

Australian federal cops and officers of the secret police headed to Bali and Jakarta in Indonesia following the October 12 bombing on the Indonesian island of Bali in which nearly 100 Australian citizens were killed.

In the Philippines capital of Manila people took to the streets to denounce Howard. Renato Reyes of Bayan (the New Patriotic Alliance), told reporters December 2 that the Australian government was a "bully," and "no different from the United States."

A few days earlier the Australian government had closed its embassy in the city, citing a "specific threat" from "Islamic extremists." The Canadian government followed suit. The Philippines government initially criticized the action, but changed its tune after being briefed by Australian foreign affairs officials.

Southeast Asian government leaders and media commentators protested Howard’s veiled threat. Malaysian Prime Minister Mahathir Mohamad said his government would consider it "an act of war" if Canberra carried out any such military attack. Howard, he said, acts like "a white-man sheriff in some Black country," representing a European enclave that sticks out like a "sore thumb" in Asia.

Indonesian military chief General Endriartono Sutarto said, "Such an action [would be] an act of aggression against another sovereign country and we will not stand by should they attack."

"Australia ready to invade Asia" was a headline in Jakarta’s Republika newspaper.  
 
Threat to sovereignty
Senior officials in the Philippines, Thailand, and Singapore denounced the comments, reported the Sydney Morning Herald, as a "threat to sovereignty, an unfriendly act, and a blow to regional cooperation against terrorism."

Seeking to downplay Howard’s threats, Foreign Minister Alexander Downer called a meeting December 4 with the 10 ambassadors of the Association of Southeast Asian Nations (ASEAN) countries. The governments "know the obvious point that we are not about to launch bombing raids or land troops in ASEAN countries," he said.

Howard has restated his position, saying that international law should be redrafted to give the cover of "self-defense" to powers using first strikes against "terrorists" in foreign countries without UN approval. The statement drew further protests.

The Australian prime minister’s remarks were consistent with the foreign policy stance of his government on Asia and the South Pacific and as part of the U.S.-led war drive in the Middle East. Defense Minister Robert Hill said that "it’s time for a new and distinct doctrine of preemptive action" against countries such as Iraq in a new environment of "global terrorist threats."

The government-funded Australian Strategic Policy Institute warned November 28 that Indonesia and "Pacific states like the Solomon Islands and Papua New Guinea" could be a source for terrorists and financing. Its Beyond Bali report recommended boosting federal, state, and secret police powers and numbers under a new "counter-terrorism intelligence center" with an overall national director.  
 
Debate in ruling circles
The regional response to Howard’s stance sparked some debate in ruling circles in Australia. Labor opposition leader Simon Crean described Howard’s remarks on the Sunday program as "provocative and unnecessary." When pressed, however, Crean refused to rule out backing for such military action.

Crean recently announced Labor proposals to create a federal home affairs department to coordinate "national security," and to establish an oceangoing coast guard.

A December 3 Sydney Morning Herald editorial criticized Howard’s comments, belatedly warning that "any suggestion of arrogance on Australia’s part, such as a perceived disrespect for sovereignty, or the assumption that Canberra is peddling Washington’s strategic priorities in Southeast Asia, could further fan anti-Western sentiment."

Senior officials in the imperialist capitals of Washington and Tokyo were more supportive of the Australian prime minister. "I consider Australia is in favor of respecting international law," said "counter-terrorism" ambassador Hiroshi Shigeta after reviewing Howard’s remarks. White House spokesman Ari Fleischer praised Howard’s comments as "echoing U.S. policy."

Ron Poulsen is a member of the Maritime Union of Australia.  
 
 
Front page (for this issue) | Home | Text-version home