Senator Hill Q&A Iraq and Kopassus 2004

8/8/2019 Senator Hill Q&A Iraq and Kopassus 2004

1/5

TRANSCRIPTSENATOR THE HON ROBERT HILL

Minister for DefenceLeader of the Government in the Senate

_______________________________________________________________________________________

QUESTION AND ANSWER SESSION

Menzies Research Centre

1:15pm, Tuesday 25 May 2004

E&oe______________________________________________________Iraq, WMD,terrorism

Question:

(Inaudible).

Senator Hill:

No not at all. I think that overwhelmingly in Iraq the coalition forces haveoperated within the rule of law and have operated humanely. There are, as weknow, incidents that I think the words I used were appalling. But the bestevidence that I have is that they are isolated. The most often referred to are theprison abuses that were revealed through the New Yorker. But in that instance,the United States identified the problem as a result of information provided

within not from without. Back in January when provided with that information,investigation was immediately instituted. The fact that it was being institutedwas made public. Obviously highly reputable, competent investigators werebrought in. Their reports are now in and actions in terms of disciplinary actionsand punishment is being meted out. So when, as I said, and you might havemissed it, one of the contrasts is that even within our system there will always bethose, there will always be some that abuse the rules. The distinction is whenthe rules are abused under our system, consistent with the rule of law, those whobreak the rules are punished. So no I think it would be grossly unfair togeneralise and in some way label the vast majority of the armed forces of thesome 32 countries that currently have forces supporting the Iraqi people in Iraq,with the abuses of a few.

Question:

Robert Ayson from the Australian National University. (Inaudible).

Senator Hill:

I think it would, because as you say the attacks that weve experienced to datehave not utilised weapons of mass destruction I believe it would be a greatmistake to assume that that would not occur in the future or in some way to treatit as a less likely alternative. Its clear from the doctrine of the extremist groupsthat they regard the use of these weapons of mass destruction as legitimate. AsI said and from a number of his statements, Osama bin Laden actually regards it

as a duty to acquire weapons of mass destruction. We know from documentsthat were obtained within Afghanistan that that goal of chemical and biologicalweapons was one that was being pursued. In some other instances around the


2/5

world we have evidence of other associated groups moving towards theseweapons. The arrests in Britain for example, it was late last year. I couldnt thinkof a greater error that we might make than to assume that organisations whoclearly regard mass destruction, the mass killing of people as a legitimate targettowards a political goal would not use the most dangerous of all weapons if theycould put their hands on them. And thats why we regard it as so important towork to contain proliferation and to avoid the transfer of weapons, the horizontalproliferation, through every means that is possible. The tradition diplomaticmeans that I referred to and means that I think are more akin to the particularchallenges we face today such as the development of the Proliferation SecurityInitiative. And its been interesting to see the extent to which that initiative hasbeen taken up around the world. When it commenced there were clearlyexpressions of concern. Was this a legitimate response, was it measured and soon. And now as I said there are 80 countries invited to the next major conferencewhich I think is indicative of the way the world sees this concern, the real(inaudible) associated with this concern and the fact that there is a wide spreaddetermination to deal with it effectively.

Question:

Minister, you mentioned the cooperation between the Special Forces (inaudible).

Senator Hill:

Cooperation has occurred with Special Forces in such places as the Philippinesand Thailand and is continuing in form of exercises. In relation to Indonesia it isnot as well advanced for reasons that are known to all. But we have sought toreengage Kopassus because we regard it as the principle counter terrorismcapability within Indonesia. There are other capabilities that are developing,particularly within the police and were supporting that as well. But if a veryserious incident, such as hijacking, it may well be more likely then not Kopassus

that is brought in. And that incident may well involve Australians. And to be ableto understand and know the doctrine and the capabilities of Kopassus and ifnecessary even to work with them in such an incident that affected Australians,we believe is in Australias national interest. Now in terms of the history ofKopassus, there are difficulties in that regard and we have said that we cannotwork with those who have committed crimes in the past. This has not made iteasy to develop that relationship but were trying to achieve a win-win situationhere. The first that we can work with this organisation where its necessary toprotect Australian lives, but secondly not to send a message that might beconfused in relation to basic adherence to basic human values. We haventproceeded far yet other then through exchanges of senior personnel, meetingsbetween leaders, commanders of the organisations and we are continuing towork down that path and to identify those that we can work with and to gain theconfidence of Indonesia in respecting the restrictions that we need to impose. Soits a work in progress. Not withstanding the difficulties and the criticism bysome, we continue we intend to continue to work down that path.

Question:

(Inaudible).

Senator Hill:

I suppose any hospital system would obviously be stretched by, evenoverwhelmed by a catastrophic number of casualties as you put it. Certainly we

have exercised the capability of the Australian health system to cope withattacks and we have encouraged and worked to build a better understanding

2


3/5

between the agencies which include at the state level the health capabilities. Wehave a better understanding of what domestic health assets there are in theevent of such an attack. And as I understand it to some extent that was lookedat again in the preparations for exercise Mercury. So we think that, it depends onyour definition of catastrophic, but we think that we are better resourced thanmost in terms of our health capabilities to meet that challenge and as I think youknow were also working with other regional countries to that may not be aswell equipped or as well able to deal with such attacks, helping them to developthe capabilities to manage the consequences of such a disaster. Thats not onlyin their interests, which they appreciate, but in the worst of circumstances, mightturn out to be in our interests as well.

Question:

(Inaudible).

Senator Hill:

We are as I said significantly increasing the size of our Special Forces which has

required an increase in recruitment and as you know we, in terms of SpecialForces, we are using some somewhat novel means in that were recruiting direct. This has been something of an experiment but so far the results are verypositive. Its not necessarily means that somebodys coming with no militarybackground, for example we find people who did have a form of militarybackground, in some instances are returning from the private sector. Perhapsfound life on the outside not quite as exciting as what they had anticipated. Butso far that new recruiting program is working extraordinarily well. We are losingsome, it is true, to private security contractors. Thats a field that seems to berapidly growing in this insecure world. But I looked at the numbers the other dayand I dont regard the loss levels as significant. So were on a growth path.Were determined to grow but at the same time maintain the extraordinarily high

standards that the Australian forces are proud of and I think we can achieve boththe goals of growth and maintaining those standards.

Compere:

Any other questions. Thank you down the back.

Question:

(Inaudible).

Senator Hill:

Well in Iraq what we are now seeking to do is to assist in the stabilisation of thecountry and the transfer to Iraqi sovereignty. Sovereignty under which the Iraqi

people will have a freedom that many would never have dreamt of. There arethose who are determined to defeat that objective including clearly those whoare prepared to use terrorist means and weve seen the very significant attackson the new Iraqi leadership through suicide bombers of recent times as anillustration of that. To, as I said in my address, to ensure that they dont succeedis very important. Important for a number of reasons. Firstly because a free Iraqand the benefits that can flow from that to the Iraqi people within that region canbe a real demonstration and in some ways a material demonstration of thevalues that we are seeking to promote. But also of course if they deceive ifthey succeed through extremist means to defeat the opportunity of the Iraqipeople establishing their government in free circumstances, they will claim a

huge victory for tactics of that type. And as weve seen through the history ofthese organisations, without any hesitation at all be willing to continue and I fearexpand the use of those tactics elsewhere in the world. These extremists are in

3


4/5

a majority its fair to say are from within Iraq and they are being assisted andsupported by others from without. The victory over that extremism at themoment I regard as critically important in terms of winning the wider war againstterrorism.

Question:

(Inaudible).

Senator Hill:

Well I think the biggest challenge is within Islam itself. The biggest challenge isfor the vast majority of Muslim people who are non violent and adhere tointerpretations of the Koran that dont demand that they go on jihad to win overthe minority that see it the other way. And they that mass of moderateMuslims are in many ways at least as threatened, if not more threatened than thebelievers in other faiths. And I made that point in quoting the extremist viewsput on the internet last month and thus we see these attacks in Islamic countriesas well as non-Islamic countries. So I think the challenge is to work with

moderate Islam wherever it is in support of them there is a mutual benefit towork with them to succeed in this war against extremists because, as theextremists have said, really were all equal in terms of being threatened. And weare seeking to do that because it is obvious with countries and with communitiesthat do adhere to non-violent values and it is also as you are hinting I think, avery important part of winning the ultimate war against terrorism. Winning thewar against terrorism not only requires a military victory but also requires avictory of hearts and minds.

Compere:

Any other questions.

Senator Hill:Back to Estimates.

Compere:

Yes, time for one then well wind it up thanks very much.

Question:

(Inaudible).

Senator Hill:

Acoustics should be fantastic in this particular hall but Ive missed it Im sorry.

Question:(Inaudible) ... shouldnt there also be a hand over of command to coalition forcesin Iraq?

Senator Hill:

Well I think theres principle and there is reality. The principle is that we arelooking for the interim government to be genuinely sovereign but the reality isthat it is not going to be capable to provide the security that is necessary for thefurther process of transition within Iraq. Processes which will involve the work upto the elections to be held in January, the development and passage of the newconstitution and so forth. And thats why within the transitional law, the Iraqishave agreed themselves that they need to work with the international communitywith the multilateral force if they are to be able to continue the process towardstrue independence in fact as well as in law. And thats why as I read it the United

4


5/5

Nations in its last resolution also urges the international community to stay withthis challenge and to provide military forces in support of the Iraqi people. Thetransitional law talks about a unified command as I a unified force as I recall.

The exact detail of the command is obviously something that is still to bedetermined. But it is whilst I met the new Iraqi Defence Minister and hes amost impressive man, and whilst Ive met his equivalent of our CDF, both hadonly just taken office. And whether they would feel that they would be able tocommand a multi-national force of the size and complexity of what is there at themoment, I very much doubt. So I dont think its in our interest to build unfairobstacles to this process of transition. I think the process of transition is going tobe difficult enough as it is. I think the important thing is to work constructivelywith the interim government towards the goals that they aspire to and that weshare for them. But to, if we can help them achieve that in providing for securityand stability then we will be making a major contribution.

Compere:

Thank you very much for those questions and thank you also Minister for taking

what I think was nearly 25 minutes of questions.ENDS

5

Documents

Senator Hill Q&A Iraq and Kopassus 2004