Tony Abbott: any Iraq involvement will continue to be humanitarian
|
Version 0 of 1. Australia’s potential involvement in a US-led military operation in Iraq would not be aimed at “trying to bring liberal pluralist democracy” to the region, Tony Abbott has said. The prime minister confirmed on Friday that Australia remained in talks with the US on what contribution it could make to “prevent the slaughter of innocents” by the Islamic State (Isis) militant group. But he sought to differentiate the options under consideration from the circumstances of the 2003 Iraq war, saying any operation would be done with the consent of the Iraqi government in accordance with law, and nobody was contemplating putting combat troops on the ground. Australian political leaders have increasingly turned their focus to global affairs and security, amid reports the US president, Barack Obama, was seeking to build support from a coalition of nations to deal with the Isis threat in Syria and Iraq. But Obama said on Thursday the US was yet to draw up a strategy. Abbott said the world faced “uncertain times” but he underlined his concerns about “at least 60 Australians who are known to be involved with these terrorist groups” in Syria and Iraq. “We have seen what they can do,” he said in Canberra on Friday. “We have seen the beheadings, the crucifixions, the mass executions. This is pure evil and it does need to be dealt with as best we can.” Abbott reaffirmed that any action by Australia would require clear and achievable goals, a careful assessment of the safety risks, and an overarching humanitarian purpose. “I suppose the most humanitarian purpose of all would be to prevent the slaughter of innocents because the slaughter of innocents is what we have seen on a gargantuan scale in Syria and northern Iraq in the last few months,” he said. Abbott declined to comment on the prospect of an Australian aerial role in Iraq, after the defence minister, David Johnston, signalled earlier in the week that the use of Super Hornet aircraft would be an option. Asked about the potential timeframes for a decision, Abbott spoke of “two fundamental considerations”. “One is the position of the United States, which inevitably will be the leader in any international action, and the other is the position of the Iraqi government, because whatever is done needs to be done in accordance with law,” he said. “It needs to be done with the consent of the Iraqi government. It needs to be done to help the people of Iraq and other countries in the region. These are the sorts of things which obviously are being worked through at the moment.” Abbott’s comments are in line with indications from Johnston on Wednesday that the US and Australia wanted to see a stable government in Baghdad before discussing military assistance with Iraq. Johnston said this would not happen until 10 September when the new prime minister, Haider al-Abadi, took over. Abbott said the Australian role would be limited. “Both President Obama and everyone else who has been asked to discuss this issue have said from the beginning that no one is talking about combat troops on the ground and no one is talking about what might be described as trying to bring liberal pluralist democracy to a part of the world which hasn’t experienced very much of that,” he said. “We have to accept that the Middle East is a witch’s brew of complexity and danger but where there are clear evils that can be averted through international action, well then I think the international community does have a responsibility to consider that action.” The government has rejected calls from the Greens and the independent MP Andrew Wilkie for a parliamentary debate and vote before any decision to commit to a military operation. The Labor opposition has sought to avoid creating a point of difference from the government on national security matters. The opposition leader, Bill Shorten, said Labor had repeatedly expressed its support for the government’s earlier decision to provide humanitarian airdrops of supplies in northern Iraq, and agreed with “the importance of tackling this dreadful organisation, the Islamic State”. “This basis of our support and actions in Iraq is based upon the humanitarian support of minorities who are being persecuted by a dreadful terrorist organisation,” Shorten said. “It is also to stop and discourage the flow of Australian foreign fighters and, in addition, it is to make sure that the Iraqi government has the space to be able to create the most national unified position. Labor has said that we don’t support sending combat troops in formed units into Iraq, just as the government has said. But if people are looking for a lot of political division and debate between Liberal and Labor on this most important issue, they will be sorely disappointed.” Labor’s foreign affairs spokeswoman, Tanya Plibersek, said on Thursday the government should be “very, very cautious” when considering potential military involvement as the 2003 war was “damaging” for the US, Australia and Iraq. |