Andrew Wilkie fails to force parliamentary debate on Iraq
|
Version 0 of 1. The independent MP Andrew Wilkie has failed in a bid to force a parliamentary debate on Australia’s involvement in the 2003 invasion of Iraq and to secure a commitment against the deployment of troops for the current crisis. Wilkie’s motion, supported by the Greens, also called for a royal commission into Australia’s involvement in the Iraq war and the conduct of the then prime minister, John Howard, and the then foreign minister, Alexander Downer. But Wilkie failed to secure adequate support to put normal parliamentary business on hold to debate the motion shortly after question time on Tuesday, with neither the Coalition nor Labor backing the push. The Greens deputy leader, Adam Bandt, and the independent MP for Indi, Cathy McGowan, were the only ones to vote to suspend standing orders. The parliamentary push coincided with indications from the United States that up to 275 combat-equipped troops could be sent to Iraq to provide support and security for personnel and the US embassy in Baghdad. The prime minister, Tony Abbott, said last week after a meeting with the US president, Barack Obama, that he did not rule out potential Australian military intervention but he hoped it did not come to that. The foreign affairs minister, Julie Bishop, said on Sunday she did not "envisage a circumstance where we would be sending in troops" but emphasised Australia's willingness to provide humanitarian assistance. Wilkie has long opposed the previous Iraq war: he resigned from his role at the Office of National Assessments on 11 March, 2003 in protest at the then looming invasion. The unsuccessful motion called on the lower house to express its “disapproval of any future deployment to Iraq of Australian combat forces” and call on the prime minister “to make a clear public statement today ruling out any future deployment to Iraq of Australian combat forces”. It also called on the government “to instigate a royal commission into Australia’s involvement in the invasion of Iraq and subsequent 11 years of war, and in particular the conduct of the main Australian protagonists for this unmitigated foreign policy, security and humanitarian disaster, including then prime minister John Howard and then foreign minister Alexander Downer”. Wilkie sought to draw a link between the unfolding crisis in Iraq and Australia’s decision to join the invasion in 2003. He said the current situation was the “end game of the second Iraq war”, a conflict that was “based on a lie” about weapons of mass destruction. Arguing for the suspension of normal parliamentary business, Wilkie spoke of the risk of Iraq becoming a “failed state”, a “terrorist state”, or broken up. Military intervention by western countries would “at best … delay the day of reckoning”, he said, warning of the prospect of repeating errors of the past. Bandt backed the motion, saying it might be the only opportunity for parliamentary debate on the possible deployment of Australian troops and there was a “lack of clarity” about the government’s intentions. The leader of the house, Christopher Pyne, said it was a “serious issue” but ministers would not be able to address it without revealing the deliberations of the national security committee. “On behalf of the government I would make it perfectly clear that while this is a serious issue and there may well be a time for its debate down the track … today is not the day,” Pyne said. Abbott told parliament on Monday the situation in Iraq was “serious and deteriorating” as a “radical Islamist group” had made “major advances across wide swathes of Iraq”. “It seems that this group has proceeded through Iraq with maximum violence and terror to the civilian population and has behaved with extraordinary brutality towards surrendering Iraqi soldiers and policemen,” Abbott said. “Should the control of this group be consolidated, we are faced with the situation of a terrorist state – a terrorist state with considerable sway over parts of a quite sophisticated country. Not only is it a humanitarian disaster for the people of those sections of Iraq but also it is a security disaster for the Middle East and also for the wider world.” Abbott said consultations between Australia and the United States would continue and “no one should underestimate the difficulty that this development poses to the people of Iraq, to the people of the Middle East and ultimately to the people of the whole world”. Labor has previously said it would assess a potential role for the Australian military based on “whether or not it is in the Australian national interest”. The opposition leader, Bill Shorten, said on Friday the developments in Iraq were “very concerning” and Labor had sought a government briefing. “That is the test which Labor would apply – is this in the Australian national interest? Furthermore, historically Labor did oppose sending troops to Iraq to help [former] president [George] Bush in his search for weapons of mass destruction,” Shorten said. Bishop said she supported the 2003 decision to send troops to Iraq. Asked during an interview with Sky News on Tuesday whether Isis was more brutal than Saddam Hussein, who was removed in the initial war, Bishop said: “We can spend time putting people on a scale of brutality but the focus we have now is on the safety of our staff in Baghdad and trying to help with humanitarian needs.” |