Senator the Hon. Robert Hill,
Minister for Defence
Leader of the Government in the Senate
Senator Robert Hill:
It’s going to be a long-term struggle and it is going to be extremely difficult. On the weapons of mass destruction front, the emphasis clearly has switched now from Iraq to North Korea. North Korea as it applies to nuclear weapons is in some ways a more difficult challenge than Iraq because whereas in the case of Iraq Saddam Hussein had aspirations for nuclear weapons in the case of North Koreas there is some evidence to suggest that they already have those weapons. The meeting was clearly of the view that North Korea in possession of nuclear weapons is unacceptable but that challenge is how we can achieve a Korean Peninsula without those nuclear weapons, assuming that it is already in possession of them. The view clearly was that concerted international diplomacy from within the region, particularly the determination by the major players, which is South Korea, Japan, the United States and China is the best way to forward at this time. Certainly that diplomacy has the support of Australia.
Journalist:
The discussion of pre-emptive strike (inaudible)…. What exactly does that mean? What’s Australia’s position?
Senator Robert Hill:
Self-defence has always been accepted as legitimate under the charter of the United Nations. It’s always allowed for a pre-emptive action in a sense that you don’t have to be attacked first, but there has to be imminent threat. The debate today is how you define that imminent threat in the circumstances of a terrorist attacks and also the usage of weapons of mass destruction. In other words the doctrine was developed when there were long lead times, there was lots of evidence of what was occurring in relation to the threat – armies were on the move and the like. In the case of strikes by terrorists or in the case of the use of weapons of mass destruction those lead times are no longer there. So the debate is really how you update the doctrine to adequately address the contemporary threat.
Journalist:
Senator, when Mr Howard first raised the issue of pre-emptive strike it was (inaudible) ….. How do you gauge the reaction now to this issue of Australia perhaps launching preemptive strikes?
Senator Robert Hill:
I think that the region clearly understands what we mean, and that is that states, particularly with threats of weapons of mass destruction are entitled to defend themselves and all regional states would accept the legitimacy of that point.
Journalist:
(inaudible) Deputy Sheriff’s comments?
Senator Robert Hill:
We share values with the United States and with other democratic nations. We treasure freedom and we believe that it doesn’t come without costs. So we will work cooperatively with all states that are joining in the struggle to defeat terrorism, to defeat threats associated with weapons of mass destruction and basically to defeat threats that threaten peace and liberty.
Journalist: (inaudible)
I haven’t seen any evidence of that and we work very cooperatively with regional states and the way in which we’re all together addressing the threat of terrorism is a good example of that. We can’t effectively fight terrorism separately, we have to do it cooperatively. What I’m saying to you is I think there’s been very positive moves in practice, not just in theory, in that regard over the last 12 months. When I look at Australia’s perspective, for example, we were extremely pleased with the way in which Indonesia sought the attackers in Bali, I’m pleased at the way in which they cooperated and took advantage of some support that we were able to give through our police resources, and that sort of cooperation is what I think we need more of if we are to effectively beat the threat of terrorism.
Journalist:
Do you regard the Aceh separatists as terrorists? Do you (inaudible)… what they’re doing in Aceh?
Senator Robert Hill:
The Australian position on Aceh is that Indonesia is entitled to defend its territorial integrity. We hope they do that with minimum force, that’s what we say to them but for those who demand independence through violence and threaten that territorial integrity of we say Indonesia is allowed to respond to that threat.
Journalist:
JI base (inaudible)…. Can you confirm that, or give more detail?
Senator Robert Hill:
I don’t know that, there is some evidence of JI in Australia and particularly after the attack in Bali there was a great deal of effort made to better understand who they were and what they were seeking. But I don’t know of any (inaudible).
Journalist:
Minister, there’s been talk about American repositioning its forces in South-East Asia. What’s Australia’s position in terms of cooperation and offering facilities, and how do you view the American presence in South-East Asia?
Senator Robert Hill:
We think that as the global superpower the fact the US accepts a responsibility for stability and security across the region is a good thing. In the past, they’ve done that, particularly in East Asia through the presence of substantial bases. We accept that they may well be able to take advantage of new doctrine and new capabilities to provide the same reassurance with a different force structure and they are conducting that review at the moment and we look forward to the outcome. There was some suggestion that they may seek to relocate substantial forces from Okinawa to Australia and they’ve now said that that’s not so and it didn’t make any sense to me in any event. In terms of what Australia does, we obviously as I’ve said cooperate with the United States. In the last year we’ve started sea swaps with them, as Singapore, to help their navy. So if their navy has to rotate crews it doesn’t necessarily have to take the ships all the way back to the mainland United States. We provide some facilities for them for exercises, but actually a lot less than what we do for Singapore. And if there are other ways we can cooperate and support a good friend and ally that we would. But there’s been no suggestion of any substantial US bases in Australia.
Journalist:
(inaudible) training centre in South East Asia?
Senator Robert Hill:
Somebody else asked me a similar question earlier. I think that, the question was put to me in the form – do you see a threat radiating from the Southern Philippines, I’d prefer to put it in what I think was really said at last year’s meeting that the increasing evidence of linkages between these terrorist groups throughout the region, that it’s two-way movement between the States, but it just further reinforces my view and I think the view of all the Ministers here that the most effective response is a cooperative response, where all states work together to defeat the threat.
