Kerry Nettle
On March 22, following the Greens call to have Australian troops out of Iraq by the end of June, I asked the following question of defence minister Robert Hill:
"Is the minister aware of evidence that General Peter Schoomaker, the chief of staff for the US army, gave to the US Congress that the United States is planning for a steady troop level of 100,000 through year-long rotations that extend into 2007? Can the minister confirm whether it is this government's intention that Australian troops should stay as a part of the occupying forces in Iraq until 2007?"
Hill gave an evasive reply so I asked again: "Can the minister outline at what point the 850 Australian troops will be withdrawn from Iraq?"
But, of course, all I got was more rubbish ending with "We, as I said, are proud of what this country has done to help the Iraqi people and it is our intention that we continue to help them at this very difficult time".
The next day, the press gallery asked my question again to Hill — who said the government would consider what the Iraqi interim government wanted.
The following day, ALP leader Mark Latham came out with his "troops home at Christmas" pledge, and the media went into meltdown. The Greens are pleased that the ALP has moved closer to our position, but recognise that their reasoning has more to do with playing political games than an analysis of the interests of the Iraqi people.
This lack of analysis is a worry, because it makes it more likely that an ALP government would renege on this commitment. The ALP continues to articulate a qualified position that allows it to leave troops in Iraq after Christmas. Meanwhile, the occupation becomes more appalling.
Civilian deaths are as high as 10,282. The death toll for US and coalition forces is close to 700 and at least 3000 US wounded. At last count, Iraqi military deaths are past 10,000.
The daily repression and grind of the occupation is starting to mirror the occupation of Palestine. Military units do house-to-house searches and people are shot after the 9pm curfew. The new Spanish prime minister is right. The occupation is a "fiasco".
Resistance across the country is growing. While the media focuses on the violence, not a day goes by without strikes, demonstrations and other non-violent protests.
Many people are asking "why the US and Australia invaded without an exit strategy?" The answer is simple. The US does not intend to leave Iraq. While there may be a formal handover to an Iraqi government on July 1, the US has made it clear that it will still run the country. The US hopes Iraq will become its main host for military bases in the Middle East. The troops will stay, because the US is pressuring the Iraqi Interim Governing Council to sign an agreement to that effect by the end of this month.
The US wants to dominate the new government of Iraq, privatise the economy and control the oil.
Iraq is being sold off, with the US-appointed governing council imposing new rules for the economy. Iraqi companies can be wholly owned by foreign companies, with the exception of oil, gas and mining. There will be no regulations on the amount of profit that can be repatriated and no requirement to use local products. Corporate tax will be set at 15% and virtually all tariffs will be removed.
The Greens say it is time to show leadership in opposing this process. Removing the troops is part of this, but we also need challenge the US's neoliberal plan for Iraq.
It is time to rethink our relationship with the United States.
The missile defence shield, involving the US Pine Gap spy base in Alice Springs, will start a new arms race. The planned purchase of US tanks, ships and fighter planes will further entrench our defence forces as an arm of the US military, and the US-Australia free trade agreement will undermine future governments' ability to regulate the economy in the public interest.
But worst of all, the support for the aggressive imperial foreign policy of the US, particularly in the Middle East is threatening the interests of peace and stability for the whole world.
We utterly reject this approach. Australia can and should play an active role in pursuing a just peaceful settlement in Palestine, pushing for free and fair elections in Iraq, bringing Australian and US troops home, and delivering the Iraqis genuine independence.
Only this will bring security and the prospect of democracy to the Middle East. Only this will make Australia safer from the threat of terrorism.
Bringing "the troops home by Christmas" is a positive move by Labor, but lacks the necessary understanding of the plight of the Iraqi people under the continued occupation. The Greens are committed to bringing this analysis to the debate and making Australia part of the solution for Iraq, not part of the problem.
[Kerry Nettle is a federal Greens senator. In April she will be part of an international fact-finding mission to Iraq, and intends to tour Australia upon her return reporting on conditions there.]
From 91×ÔÅÄÂÛ̳ Weekly, March 31, 2004.
Visit the