PRIME MINISTER

IRAQ

The Cabinet has today considered and agreed in principle to a request  from the United States to participate in an international coalition should  military action against Iraq become necessary.

Our aim in doing so is to help enforce the UN Security Council's  resolutions, ensure that Iraq's chemical and biological arsenals are not  used or expanded, and prevent Saddam Hussein again becoming a threat to  the security of the Middle East and the world.

The Government sincerely hopes that military force will not be necessary  and that Iraq will respond to the clear message it is being given that the  international community expects it to adhere to its UN obligations. The  Government will continue to apply all possible diplomatic resources to

efforts to achieve this.

If Iraq refuses, however, the Government believes that Australia's national  interests and the interests of the international community in preventing Iraq  from using and further developing its chemical and biological arsenal are  so great that Australia should support military action against Iraq. We also

believe that President Clinton should be supported in the leadership he is  showing on this issue.

The Government takes this decision only after very careful consideration  of all the issues involved. The risk to any Australians who might be  engaged in supporting any military action is one of the most serious of  these issues.

But Iraq's defiance of UN Security Council resolutions requiring it to  destroy its weapons of mass destruction and accept UN inspections by the  UN Special Commission (UNSCOM) has to be a matter of the gravest  concern for Australia and all other members of the world community.

3281

Iraq has consistently frustrated the efforts of the United Nations to identify  and destroy chemical (CW) and biological (BW) weapons and ensure such  weapons are not developed in the future. It has repeatedly been found to  have lied about its capabilities. Iraq's refusal to permit UN inspectors to

do their work can only exacerbate the concerns of the international  community about its capabilities and intentions.

Iraq's CW and BW programmes were vigorous and determined and we  know that Iraq maintains such weapons and the capability to produce  them. Iraq has a record of using such weapons against its own people as  well as its neighbours. There are good grounds for fears that Iraq may still  have operational missiles with chemical and biological warheads, as well

as artillery shells and bombs. According to UNSCOM, precursors which  could produce hundreds of tonnes of CW and BW agents, such as the  nerve agent VX are not accounted for.

Unless UNSCOM inspectors are allowed to do their work, Iraq will keep  the capacity to threaten its neighbours. The use by Iraq of this material  would have devastating human consequences and have incalculable  consequences for the security of Iraq's neighbours and the Middle East as

a whole.

If UN inspections do not continue or Iraq is not otherwise prevented, Iraq  will be free to develop more of these weapons and the means of delivering  them.

Australia may be beyond the reach of Iraq's missiles. But we have a direct  national interest in ensuring that these weapons do not proliferate and that  the mechanisms established by the international community to prevent this  are as effective as possible. There can be no doubt that allowing Iraq to  flout its obligations will increase the risks for the rest of the world  including Australia.

Any military action would be designed to force compliance with UN  Security Council resolutions and prevent Iraq from building its CW and  BW capability and the means of delivering it.

It would be designed to avoid to the maximum extent possible any civilian  casualties within Iraq. But it would be umealistic to rule out the  possibility. That is why, the Government would encourage the Iraqi

3282

2

Government to conform to UN resolutions and make the use of force  unnecessary,

The sort of contribution the Government is discussing with the United  States includes up to a company from the Special Air Service regiment to  support, for example, US search and rescue activities; two Boeing 707  tanker aircraft to provide air-to-air refuelling and specialist personnel to  provide back-up in medical and technical support. Support of this kind

could involve up to 200-250 people.

It is possible that the situation will require a different sort of contribution.  The Government would be prepared to consider providing other  capabilities of a similar order.

As I have undertaken to do so already, I will continue to keep the  Australian public as fully informed of developments as possible. I have  advised the Leader of the Opposition of the Cabinet's decision.

I emphasise that the Government very much hopes that a peaceful solution  can be found. No one wants force used or lives put at risk.

10 February 1998

3

3283

