AN UNUSUAL APPROACH TO WAR

by Geoffrey Evans

It must be assumed the purpose of publicity given to the massing of armed forces close to Iraq has been to persuade President Saddam Hussein of the futility of resisting demands that he should surrender the weapons of mass destruction he is believed to possess. Even so the publicity at times seems to have been carried to an unusual extent, especially to anyone who has lived through or taken part in 20th century wars. Formal 'farewell' ceremonies for sailors, soldiers and airmen as they depart for the scene of potential hostilities, details of ships and various defence force units, media illustrations of the likely battle- field, conjecture about probable tactics and casualties for attackers and attacked alike, endless debate on what happens afterwards, the effect on the United Nations Organization - a matter of vital importance so far as the future is concerned - all regrettably to no avail as this column goes to press. To this observer it seems that too many national leaders have painted themselves - and their countries - into a comer and extrication without loss of face by one or another will be difficult if war is to be averted.
FOREIGN POLICY, TRADE AND DEFENCE
It hardly needs to be stated that foreign, trade and defence policies are closely linked and so this writer was pleased to receive from the Department of Foreign Affairs and Trade a copy of "Advancing the National Interest", the Government's second White Paper on foreign and trade policy: Defence policy was outlined in the Defence 2000 White Paper and is currently under review as a consequence of terrorist activities during the last eighteen months and rather surprisingly, a Parliamentary committee is conducting a public examination of a cornerstone of defence policy - a maritime strategy - at the same time. Advancing the National Interest is a comprehensive document detailing Australia's relations with countries, large and small, in every part of the world. The United States is seen as the most powerful military and economic power and assured of pre-eminence into the foreseeable future; with an economy accounting for 33% of global GDP and defence expenditure more than five times greater than any other nation (in fact more than the next ten defence spending nations combined), this is not surprising and has no doubt strengthened the resolve of successive governments to seek the closest possible relations with that country. While stressing the pre-eminence of the United States, the White Paper by no means overlooks Australia's geographical situation and the importance of its relations with the diverse range of countries that constitute Asia. Australia now has a major economic interest in Asia and its markets in 2002 accounted for some 56% of Australia's total merchandise exports: Japan remains the largest export market while those of China, SE Asia and India have grown. Australia's links with other regions - the Middle East, Europe, the Americas and with neighbouring PNG and Pacific island states - some historical and nearly all involving trade in goods or services, are fully reported in the White Paper together with global security implications and the threat posed by terrorism. The writer has some reservations about a section asserting the stability of great power relations: At the time of writing it does not seem an appropriate word to use in connection with major power relations. As a final observation, the writer has noted the importance Advancing the National Interest attaches to trade. Most of Australia's trade in the form of goods must cross the seas in vulnerable merchant ships; protecting the ships is a maritime task and a part of the nation's maritime security strategy, and as mentioned above, in process of review by a committee of the Parliament. One would expect the policy to be confIrmed and the planned means of implementation undertaken without delay.

WE NEVER LEARN - Foolishness & the Iraq War - Geoffrey Evans
22 April 2003

"-In August 1940 the Menzies Government suffered a severe blow when three Cabinet Ministers including the Army and Air Ministers, together with the Chief of the General Staff, were killed in an air crash at Canberra. In April 2003 the Defence !-1inister, Chlef of the Defence Force and the Departmental Secretary fly off together to the Middle East, not exactly a zone of peace. NO doubt air travel is much safer in 2003 than it was in 1940 but evenso aero~lanes still fallout of the sky on occasion and we are constantly warned of the dangers posed by terrorists. While no-one is irreplaceable the simultaneous loss of the three principals of the nation's defence organisation - or even one of them - would be most inconvenient. It is surprising the Prime Minister permitted such foolishness.