Australia Muddles Along

The Australian government has released a first report into the missing WMDs, but is was only ever a delaying tactic. Now it is time for a more serious, independent review.

Meanwhile, there were some almost comical scenes in Australian parliament. As the SMH reports, at question time yesterday, following the release of the parliamentary committee report into prewar intelligence on Iraq, Prime Minister Howard and Foreign Minister Downer threw the quotes back at the Opposition time after time, as if they constituted a complete defence against all changes that Australia went to war on false pretences. As if to say: "You believed it too."

By the second or third repetition, it was clearly getting to Opposition spokesman on foreign affairs, Kevin Rudd and he interjected - almost plaintively - on Howard: "You gave us the information".

New Opposition Leader Mark Latham asked PM John Howard: "Given the range of intelligence deficiencies set out . . . and given that the doctrine of military pre-emption relies on a highly accurate intelligence system, will the Prime Minister advise the House whether he still supports military pre-emption?"

Howard, using one of his favourite words, said he "resiled" from nothing.

But, he added, "I do not see any circumstances, as currently advised to me, where this nation would need to take pre-emptive action"

As currently advised? As advised by whom?

Former Opposition Leader Kim Beazley, a member of the parliamentary intelligence committee that wrote yesterday's report,says that if Howard had abandoned the American charge into Iraq, the USA "would have lost his address as firmly as it lost [NZ anti-nuclear PM] David Lange's back in the 1980s. That was what was at stake," Beazley said.

In other words, Australia is no different from Haiti, Venezuela or any other country small enough, poor enough, corrupt enough or feeble enough for the US to manipulate.

Both the Australian government and its critics are claiming this first parliamentary report justifies their positions, but there is no denying it has been a very limited and almost meaningless exercise. One concerning revelation is that, in the space of a single day and for no clear reason, the Office of National Assessments changed its assessment of the likelihood of chemical and biological weapons in Iraq from "'no firm evidence" to "highly likely".

As the SMH editorial today says:

"The parliamentary inquiry has been careful in its consideration of a wealth of material and fair in most of its conclusions. Its recommendation of a further inquiry, though, should be strengthened. Such an inquiry should have the greatest freedom compatible with national security. To be thoroughly effective it should be a judicial inquiry. And needless to say, it should work at its own pace, without regard to the political calendar. "

Australians want to be more than just a thuggish lackey of George W. Bush. It's time to get rid of this spineless, racist, anachronistic Liberal government and stand proudly once again in the world community.