Howard's support of US defies public opinion (AUSTRALIA ALERT)

The Daily Telegraph ^ | February 8, 2003 | Barbie Dutter

[MadIvan]

John Howard, Australia's prime minister, flies to Washington today to confirm his place in the coterie of leaders girding for military action against Iraq.

Mr Howard's stalwart support of American moves to disarm Saddam Hussein has caused uproar in Australia, where three-quarters of the population opposes going to war without United Nations backing. Critics have accused Mr Howard of being President George W Bush's southern hemisphere surrogate, condemning his decision to deploy 2,000 Australian troops to the Gulf without the mandate of parliament, the public or the UN.

Mr Howard has fractiously maintained that he abhors the prospect of war and hopes his whistle-stop tour next week - taking in talks with Mr Bush, the UN secretary-general, Kofi Annan, Tony Blair and President Megawati Sukarnoputri of Indonesia - will be a mission of peace. But he has acknowledged that his pro-US stance on Iraq is a gamble that has already dented his personal standing and could cost his government dearly.

While much of the pacifist protest has been put down to anti-American sentiment or anxiety over US unilateralism, the vast majority of Australians are clearly not persuaded that their national interest lies in attacking Saddam Hussein.

For the first time since Mr Howard's third consecutive election victory in 2001 the opposition Labour Party is surging out of the political sidelines with public opinion filling its sails. In an unprecedented move the Senate passed a no-confidence vote against a serving prime minister, censuring Mr Howard over his handling of the Iraq crisis.

"John Howard has let this nation down," said Senator Bob Brown, the leader of the Australian Greens. "He stands condemned, censured and without the confidence of the house of review, the senate in Australia." Commentators have claimed that Mr Howard is pinning his hopes on a swift, UN-sanctioned liberation of Iraq that will vindicate his position and restore his popularity at the grassroots.

In the meantime, Mr Howard has emphasised the importance of the Australia-US alliance and hinted broadly to parliament that Australia would consider joining an American-led strike even if the UN did not authorise the use of military force.

[MadIvan]

Good on John Howard. I think he realises once Iraq is liberated and the extent of the weapons programme, to say nothing of the torture chambers is revealed, the opposition to war is going to look extremely foolish.

Regards, Ivan

[MadIvan]

Bump!

[wretchard]

Most Australian broadsheets, such as the Sydney Morning Herald and the Australian are virulently anti-war, as are the members of the cultural elite. That the average Australian isn't is a testament to the common sense of the average Aussie.

John Howard has four things working for him. Reality: he can count on a steady stream of outrages by the Islamic fundamentalists, many of whom are in Australia, to jolt spines straight when the slouch starts. Information: he knows what is going down and can position himself with a far clearer view of future events than Labor or the Greens. Instinct: Howard seems to sense what the ordinary Australian cares about in ways the cultural elite can never. Guts: Howard would commit political suicide if by doing so he would preserve the safety of Australia.

[zefrog]

Well, well, another place where governments choose to side with the US, while knowing that a democratic referencum in their country would tell them that their people are opposed to this. After Britain, Spain, Italy, or Portugal. And the US, by the way.

France and Germany may find themselves isolated from these coalition of obedient and fearful vassals, but at least they have not isolated themselves from the people's hearts and minds on the planet.

BTW, a final note: actually, I think the people are wrong on this one.

[Brian Allen]

<< Good on John Howard ..... he realises once Iraq is liberated and the extent of the weapons programme, to say nothing of the torture chambers, is revealed, the opposition to war is going to look extremely foolish. >>

Well said! You too wretchard!

[CWOJackson]

And 200 Aussies weren't killed in Bali by Muslim extremists.

[KeyWest]

Interesting how Roosevelt also went against public opinion before WWII in supporting Britain. He is now praised for his courage. A leader leads and does not follow. Clinton never learned that.

[Always Right]

And 200 Aussies weren't killed in Bali by Muslim extremists.

Hard to believe there isn't more outrage in Australia.

[backhoe]

-The Bali Horror- a partial Archive--

[cb]

I wonder: How many australians have to die before "the public" would be for the war? Same in the other places cited. In the US, how many americans must die before pelosi,for instance, would be for the war?

[Oztrich Boy]

Guts: Howard would commit political suicide if by doing so he would preserve the safety of Australia.

Maybe. Expect the Australian Left to throw its support behind the immediate overthrow of Saddam Hussein by Monday.

Prime Minister John Howard has promised to stay in office until Iraqi President Saddam Hussein is defeated.

[MadIvan]

Instinct: Howard seems to sense what the ordinary Australian cares about in ways the cultural elite can never

Howard's instincts are indeed extraordinary. Remember how before September 11th, he turned away a boatload of Afghan refugees. People were saying how inhumane it was. After September 11th, it looked like genius.

Regards, Ivan

[Oztrich Boy]

For the first time since Mr Howard's third consecutive election victory in 2001 the opposition Labour Party is surging out of the political sidelines with public opinion filling its sails. In an unprecedented move the Senate passed a no-confidence vote against a serving prime minister, censuring Mr Howard over his handling of the Iraq crisis.

Sorry Ivan, but the Telegraph is full of it. They've either decided to go over to the Dark Side, or are showing a misplaced confidence in a correspondent named "Barbie".

Despite what Barbie says Howard is probably as embarrassed by the Senate no-confidence vote as Blair is by pro-foxhunting votes in the Lords.
It means nothing. All that has happened is that in the absence of a leader, the Labor party decided to follow the loony fringe of the Greens and Democrats.

Which could come back to bite them if the UN eventually gives approval, because then they will either have to switch Labor support to Howard, or follow Brown in defiance of the UN.
The Greens aren't going to support military force EVER.
The Democrats are in an even worse place. Most of their voters would support UN action, and a majority of their parlimentary members would do likewise. However they are controlled by the Dem party's Compliance Committee, which ensures that policy follows the faction of the Party which claims electoral success will come from being crazier the the Greens.

In reality they don't care about electoral success, It's all about The Protest.

[Oztrich Boy]

Most Australian broadsheets, such as the Sydney Morning Herald and the Australian are virulently anti-war, as are the members of the cultural elite.

Maybe the SMH, but The Australian appears to accepted that Howard will have the support of the people Editorial: Saddam can't save Simon
08 February 2003
To see a leader in mortal peril, look beyond Baghdad, and consider the circumstances of Simon Crean. By staking his future on popular opposition to the prospect of American-led action against Iraq without UN support he may have won some brief respite for his leadership. But Mr Crean is immuring himself in the church of the ALP Left by playing to that principal article of its faith which holds that all the woes of the world are the product of American foreign policy.

Michael Costello: Anti-war talk backfires on Crean

PAUL KELLY Labor on a war highwire

DENNIS SHANAHAN Dennis Shanahan: Crean stalled on a road to nowhere

Only Philip Adams is agin. But he's in a state of moral crisis after realizing his bold Heros, Gough and Paul, were big cowards all the time.

[wretchard]

Simon Crean has concluded that Kim Beazley's attempt to contest the middle was doomed because Labor would lose its conservative wing to the Liberals and its left wing to the Greens. Unable to move right, Crean moved left, where he can only hope that some unforseen upending of the world will give him power.

This will have tragic consequences. Rather than having two wings of a basically centrist position, Australian politics will soon consist of a contrast in relative extremes. The issue of national security has been permanently ceded to the Liberals, while environmentalism and welfare issues have been correspondingly hijacked by the Left. What room is left in the inn for alternative, but sane defense policy? Where now can a scientific environmentalism find a home? When the great issues have been settled, one hopes.

To everything there is a season, and a time to every purpose under the heavens.