I’ve just watched George Bush’s address to the nation. Frightening, yes. But also inclusive and measured. It was the speech to mark the offical beginning of war by America.
We now need an address to the nation from our leader, to clearly lay down Australia’s perception of the war, what we are fighting for, and the possible extent of our involvement. We too need to be united. In this issue, I include an editted text of a courageous address to the nation this week by Pakistan’s leader.
In this issue:
THE WAR
1. H Fraser, an Australian in New York, castigates some contributors as naively anti-American.
2. Chris Chesher and Sean Cody, had a go at their own version of the Bush address before he gave it.
3. Justin Ansell, Sean Richardson and Becki Whitton discuss war strategy.
4. The text of Pakistan president General Pervez Musharraf’s address to his nation, a nuclear state,
5. A poem for the victims by Michelle Jones.
BOAT PEOPLE
1. Song lyrics by Mike Seccombe.
2. ALP member Guido Tresoldi.
3. Malcolm Steet on why we don’t want the Afghan refugees.
4. Daniel Maurice replies to my opinion piece yesterday in the Herald and in Bush’s rhetoric gets more disturbing each day.
5. Peter Kelly replies to Peter Maresch in Poll praise.
6. John Wojdylo replies to today’s Herald letter to the editor by Piers Ackerman
I advise that the National Library has sought and obtained my permission for Webdiary to be included in its Pandora archive of online publications ‘of national significance�. I also advise that we’ve just moved to a new operating system for Webdiary and there’s a few glitches which we’re ironing out.
THE WAR
1. H Fraser
As an Australian in New York I am disheartened and embarrassed by some of the uninformed and dare one say stupid comments of some of your “informed” contributors. The death toll is now over 6,500 and represents some 80 countries – this is no longer soley about t he US.
What will it take some of your contributors to realize what happened on Tuesday? I question their reaction if the jets had not flown into the WTC but rather the fully laden Olympic Stadium at Homebush.
I also question whether your contributors understand why the US was targeted. The US was targeted because it is the strongest nation in the free world. if it can be brought to its knees then so to can countries such as Australia. Do Australians realize that this is not a game to the Taliban? This is a country that has no problem trying two Australians for preaching Christianity and threatening to put them to death – and your contributors think the US is over-reacting to these people?
The US is not stupid or uninformed – they have no intention of bombing disabled orphans – a rather touching but daft pict ure painted by your contributors. If they did they would have bombed them already.
What is needed from Australians is their support. Having talked to a lot of Australians in recent days I believe your contributors to be out of touch – a sad indictment on you and your newspaper. If the US/Coalition fails then it is only a matter of time before these terror cells come-a-calling to Australia.
Think this is far fetched – talk to an American two weeks ago and make the statement that terrorists would kill flight crews and crash planes into the WTC. Noone likes having to admit that we have failed to pay attention to the groups until only force is necessary but to ignore it would be naive and foolish.
2. Chris Chesher, Lecturer, School of Media and Communications, University of New South Wales in Sydney
The new warmongers manifesto
Let’s all support the first war of the twenty-first century. Let i t be a new kind of war – one quite unlike twentieth century wars.
This new kind of war will require strategies pr eviously unimaginable in the history of war. But if we are to get to the root of the threats to world freedom and security, we must face the unthinkable. It will take time. It will be expensive. But not to act would be to allow the conditions in which these events occurred to continue.
We are all appalled by the attack on the World Trade Center. The images of a guided missile (itself full of people) slamming into a building full of people has chilled and horrified us all. It has shown that a strategy motivated by self-righteous vengeance and carried out by violence is unacceptable. It does not work, either & ;#45; we do not hear the ‘message’ they are sending. Our resolve is only strengthened. No matter what cause those who hijacked these flights were fighting for, their tactics are unacceptable and ineffectual.
Therefore we renounce vengeance and indiscriminate military force. We abandon our bombers and decommission our cruise missiles. We put down our guns, and garage our tanks. In twentieth century wars, factories producing agricultural machines and sewing machines were converted to build weapons.
At this time of crisis, we must convert these outmoded industries into more appropriate technologies to take on other forms of defence.
This war will require sacrifices. Our collective security compels us all to band together for the common good. It may be necessary to increase taxes on large corporations. It may require thought and action that does not begin by thinking about personal, corporate or national interests. As unfamiliar as these measures may seem, these are extraordinary times.
While the immediate objective may be bringing to justice the organisers of the dreadful hijackings on September 11, we must not stop there. We must take on with a new resolve the forces at the root of the attack. We must hunt them down and eradicate these scourges against freedom, democracy, justice for peace-loving people around the world: wo rld debt, poverty and disenfranchisement of dispossessed peoples.
Of course there will be some collateral damage. Global companies may need to pay sweat shop workers a decent wage. Banks and other large investors may need to cancel loans. Overdeveloped countries may need to acknowledge that their wealth has come from centuries of colonial and post-colonial dom ination, exploitation and interference in internal political affairs of countries in the poorer parts of the world.
Our attack must move on several fronts. We must commit front line troops to education. Air support is critical – a dem ocratisation of media organisations. This is total war, which means expanding democracy beyond national boundaries to give all people whose interests are affected, whether or not they are citizens in large states, a say in policy.
The battleground will involve close hand-to-hand contact with people who are different from us. Although it requires years of training, it is possible to engage with people of different faiths and cultures without killing them.
Moving into a new century we must not disgrace the memories of all those who died in twentieth century wars by repeating them. Let this new war be genuinely new. Let it be a precedent for war in the twenty-first century.
Sean Cody
My fellow Americans.
The past week has been a terrible time of agony for America as a nation and the world as a whole.
The vicious attacks that have been perpetrated against us have been attacks on freedom and democracy, and freedom and democracy will respond to them.
We will not stand by and allow our people to be indiscriminately murdered in cowardly acts of terrorism, and be sure, the world’s justice to those responsible for these crimes will be swift and unrelenting.
As global citizens, we must all recognise that the deeds of a small group of individuals must not lead us to believe that the larger ethnic or religious group of which those individuals are a part are of the same nature. Just because Islamic extremists have murdered our brothers and sisters, our parents and children, we will not, as civilised and freedom loving people, blame Islam as a whole. To do so is to stoop to the same level as those responsible for these heinous attacks, and America will not allow the foundations upon which it was built to be destroyed by the evil of terrorism, nor the evils of racial and religious hatred.
America stands ready to help its own in this time, regardless of their religion. Furthermore, we stand as a force to lead the freedom-loving people of the world in what may well be a protracted and difficul t struggle against the evil that is responsible for these acts.
Accordingly, I have proposed to the United Nations that a multinational force be assembled to act, under the direction of the United Nations Security Council, to eliminate this scourge of terrorism. We will not stand by and let our cities be attacked and our people be murdered, and we recognise that because this is an attack on freedom and democracy as a whole, then freedom and democracy as a whole must respond. America cannot act alone in this struggle, for it involves all the peoples of the earth.
We have secured the support of all of our allies in this matter, and talks are continuing with those nations that we have had difficulties with in the past. Russia, China, and all of Europe are committed to this multi-national force, and many of the nations of the Middle East have also comm itted their support. This is a global coalition, and we shall act globally.
We recognise that it is not Islam that is responsible for the attacks on September 11.
We also recognise that, within the folds of the Islamic world, extremism does exist. There are many reasons for this, but we recognise that it is now time to stop the cause of the hatred.
We must end the cycle of violence.
We must stop the killing.
I have, therefore, today further proposed to the United Nations that the economic sanctions that have been in place against Iraq and Afghanistan be eased and, in some cases, lifted. These countries, and others, are recognised as being the wellsprings from which terrorism is born and supported, and so we, as citizens of the world, must recognise that the only way to stop the flow of those who are willing to attack freedom is to remove the source of their hatred. We believe that the lifting of economic sanctions against these countries will contribute to that goal. Further, we implore those countries to accept this gesture in good faith, and to respond in kind – to end their support for terrorism.
Make no mistake, we are not returning international legitimacy to these countries. We are not lifting arms embargoes. Our weapons inspection programmes in Iraq will continue, and we will deny those states that are perceived to be a threat to world peace access to weapons of mass destruction.
What we are doing is lifting the economic sanctions in these countries. We shall no longer deny their people access to food. United Nations aid organisations are to be given extra funding and facilities to enable them to deliver much needed food and medical aid to those most in need – the populations of these pariah states. The details of the relaxation of these embargoes will be release d later today or tomorrow, but suffice to say at this point that Iraq will be subject to eased regulations regarding the importation of goods for food production and medical aid, and will be allowed greater flexibility in the export of oil to pay for these goods and services. We fervently hope that the Iraqi leadership will take these offers in good faith and recognise that the wellbeing of its citizenry is what concerns us.
In the case of Afghanistan, we propose that if they immediately extradite Osama bin Laden for a fair trial, sanctions against the country will be eased. We shall work in conjunction with them to allow United Nations aid organisations to distribute food and aid to their population.
If, however, they do not deliver bin Laden to the world to face the world’s justice, then the world will show them its resolve. They will learn that the world will not stand by and allow terrorism to grow and flourish in a nation that does not recognise freedom and humanity. And they will understand that the world is united against terror and hatred.
I call upon you, my fellow Americans, and the world, to join with me in this commitment to a new peace in our time.
To the elimination of the hatred that flows through so much of the world.
To the establishment of a new harmony around the globe.
To join in this commitment for the sake of our continued futures.
God bless America, and god bless the world.
3. Justin Ansell
Like Sean Richardson in Bush’s rhetoric gets more disturbing each day, I am not about to engage in some Tom Clancy type scenario but deal in facts. But I feel his thoughts display some fundamental flaws which display why we get this militaristic chest puffing when scenarios like this occur. You can almost hear the longing in his email, something I encountered all too frequently in my few short years in the defence force, to get out there and do something. Understandable in some ways when you know that the military is trained for.
Our “grunts” may be best trained for some aspects of this, but the numbers we could provide are so small that our offer would more than likely be knocked back. Plus, like the great bulk of our western troops, they will not be acclimated to high altitude fighting and will find the going extremely difficult. Our likely response will be, as in the past, to supply a few ships as moral support during any operation and troops afterwards as peacekeepers.
Any 12 year old can point an AK-47, but we aren’t talking about some 12 year old or some third rate East Timor militia organisation used to terrorise civilians but unable to face a military operation. We are talking about people who are, unlike most western troops, battle-hardened, and trained by mercenaries, the British SAS an d the CIA. They know the terrain and are aclimatised. A ground invasion is do-able but you are severely underestimating the cost in lives, the most important factor).
Let’s not go over this American/Australian fantasy again, whereby we invade North Vietnam and win the Vietnam war. The Vietnamese didn’t want us there, and they would still be hidng in tunnels delivering the biggest hiding we ever had. They wanted to get rid of colonial powers, the French, Americans, us whoever.
Which leads me to the next point – an East Timor style mission will not work and will still lead to a large Islamic b acklash. This whole affair is not about bin Laden and the Taliban, its about western interference in middle-eastern affa irs. Install a western-imposed constitution, control the country until western style elections are held and a government the west are happy with is installed and the rest of the Islamic world is not going to love us.
Invasion is a fools game, so is the cloak-and-dagger crap – the exact reason we got to this point through the CIA, MI6 and their friends messing with affairs they shouldn’t have. This is a long-term affair which should involve smarter foreign policy, development help for poorer countries and an appropriate use of the judicial system, not some misguided military effort. This is the only way we will be able to live without fear.
Sean Richardson
Let’s learn from history. Hitler was democratically elected by a civilised, first world people due to a variety of social, historical and economic factors. To David Davis, John Wojdylo and other lovers of all things tutonic, I’d add that the support of certain linguistics-obsessed German philosophers didn’t hurt. The fact is that, once he’d entrenched himself in power with a cabaal of fanatical supporters, launched his blitzkreig and his final solution, it was time to stop hand-wringing and wishing w e’d given the Germans a better deal at Versailles.
Chamberlain steps off the plane waving his piece of paper. No doubt many people at the time saw him as an enlightened man whose moral courage and ability to forgive had brought them back from the brink of war. History remembers him as a pathetic figure who niaively thought the Devil would keep his bargains. Of course it was important to re-build Germany as an integral part of Europe, to put political and economic structures in place which have avoided any repeats of history. But first we had to root out the Nazis and step on their necks.
Whatever got them started, the Nazis were still gasing and burning men, women and children even as they retreated on all fronts, their defeat obvious and inevitable. It’s called fanatacism. Similarly, I doubt there is anything we can do to APPEASE bin Laden, other than universal conversion to his particular brand of Islam and bowing down before Osama as leader. The increased security which has followed September 11 will hopefully buy us some time, before he can learn how to get around those measures and try something else. During that time the man must be brought to heel. Bush is not getting the level of support that he is because of some peverse need on the part of Australia, Britain, Germany et al to kiss American butt. It’s because no one wants to be cleaning the remains of sky-scrapers from downtown Sydney, London or Bonne.
It takes two sides to have a fight, but only one to make an assault or a murder. If bin Laden’s extensive network can be eradicated without any violence, superb. I’m all for it. On the off chance that he decides to go down fighting, so be it. I, too, hope that the first world will wake up to how unfairly it treats the third when the dust has died down from this attack, and do something about it. In the meantime we have a duty to defend our own and our allies lives from this very specific and real threat
Becki Whitton
I thought these (slightly modified) lines from an old anti-Vietnam War song captured the lunacy involved in tryi ng to fight another futile war against an invisible enemy:
Afghanistan Now!
And its one, two, three – who are we fighting George?
Dont ask me I dont give a damn!
Next stop is Afghanistan.
And its five, six, seven – open up the pearly gates
Well there aint no time to wonder why
Whoopee! we’re all g oing to die!
4. Excerpts from the official English-language translation of the 15-minute televi sed speech of Pakistan’s President General Pervez Musharraf on Wednesday night
The act of terrorism has raised a wave of deep grief, anger and retaliation in the United States.
Their first target from day one is Osama bin Laden and his movement, al-Qaida. The second target is the Taliban and that is because the Taliban have given ref uge to him and his network.” The third target is a long war against terrorism at the international level. The thing to ponder is that in these three targets nobody is talking about a war against Islam or the people of Afghanistan.”
Pakistanis being asked to support this campaign. What is this support? First is intelligence and information exchange, second support is the use of our airspace and the third is that they are asking for logistic support from us. I would like to tell you now that right now they do not have any operation plans.
We know that whatever the United States’ intentions they have the support of the UN Security Council and General Assembly in the form of resolutions. This is a resolution for war against terrorism and this is a resolution for punishing those people who support terrorism. Islamic countries have supported this resolution.
Pakistan is facing a very critical situation. The decision we take today can have far-reaching and wide. 5;ranging consequences. The crises are too strong and too widespread. If we take the wrong decisions in this crisis it can lead to even worse consequences. On the other hand, if we take the right decisions, its results will be good.
The negative consequences endanger Pakistan’s integrity and solidarity. Our critical concerns, our important concerns can come under threat. When I say critical concerns, I mean our strategic assets and the cause of Kashmir.
Politically we can re&# 45;emerge as a responsible and dignified nation and all our difficulties can be minimised. I have considered all these factors and held consultations with those who hold different opinions.
Let us now take a look at the designs of our neighbouring country (India). They have offered all their military facilities to the United States. They have offered without hesitation, all their facilities, all their bases and full logistical support. They want to enter into any alliance with the United States and get Pakistan declared a terrorist state.
What do the Indians want? They do not have a common border with Afghanistan anywhere. It is totally isolated from Afghanistan. It is my view, it is not surprising that the Indians want to ensure that if and when the government changes, it shall be an anti-Pakistani government.
It is very important th at while the entire world is talking about this horrible terrorist attack our neighbouring country instead of talking of peace and cooperation is trying hard to harm Pakistan and defame Islam.
I would like to tell India ‘lay off’. Pakistan’s armed forces and every Pakistani citizen is ready to offer any sacrifice in order to defend Pakistan and secure its strategic assets. Make no mistake and entertain no misunderstanding. At this very moment our air force is at high alert. And they are ready for “do or die”.
My countrymen, in such a situation, a wrong decision can lead to unbearable losses. What are our critical concerns and priorities.
They are four: first of all is the security of the country and external threat. Second is our economy and its revival. Third are our strategic nuclear and missile assets and (fourth) the Kashmir cause.
Any wrong judgment on our part can damage all our interests. While taking a decision, we have to keep in mind all these factors. The decision should reflect supremacy of righteousness and it should be in conformity with Islam. Whatever we are doing by now it is according to Islam and it upholds the principle of righteousness.
At this moment, it is not a question of bravery or cowardice. We are all very brave. My own response in such situations is usually aggressive. But bravery without rational judgment is tantamount to stupidity. There is no clash between bravery and sound judgment.
Allah Almighty says in the holy Koran: ‘The one bestowed with sagacity is the one who gets a big favour from Allah’.
We have to take recourse to sanity. We have to save our nation from damage. We have to build our national respect. Pakistan comes first, everything else comes later.
Some scholars and religious leaders are inclined towards taking emotional decisions. We have to take a strategic decision. There is no question of weakness of faith or cowardice. For Pakistan, life can be sacrifices and I am sure every Pakistani will give his life for Pakistan. I have fought two wars. I have seen dangers. I faced them and by the grace of Allah never committed a cowardly act.
But at this time one should not unnecessarily bring harm to oneself. We cannot make the future of 140 million people bleak. Even otherwise it is said in the Sharia that if there are two difficulties at a time and the selection has to be made it is better to chose the lesser one.
Some of our friends seem to be much worried about Afghanistan. I must tell them that I and my government are much worried about Afghanistan and the Taliban. I have done everything for Afghanistan and the Taliban when the entire world was against them. I have met about 20 to 25 world leaders and talked to each of them in favour of the Taliban. I have told them that sanctions should not be imposed on Afghanistan and that we should engage them. I have been repeating this stance before all leaders but I am sorry to say that none of our friends accepted this.
Even in this situation we are trying to cooperate with them. I sent the director of the ISI (Interservices Intelligence) with my personal letter to (Taliban leader) Mullah (Mohammed) Omar. He returned after spending two days there. I have informed Mullah Omar about the gravity of the situation. We are trying our best to come out of this critical situation without any damage to Afghanistan and the Taliban. This is my earnest endeavour and with the blessings of Allah I will continue to seek such a way out.
We are telling the Americans too that they should be patient. Whatever their plans, they should be cautious and balanced. We are asking them to come up with whatever evidence they have against Osama bin Laden. What I would like to know is how do we save Afghanistan and the Taliban?
And how do we ensure that they suffer minimum losses. I am sure that you will favour that we can bring some improvement by working with the nations of the world.
We want to take decisions in the interest of Pakistan. I know that the majority of the people favour our decisions. I also know that some elements are trying to take unfair advantage of the situation to promote their personal agenda and advance the interests of their parties.
They are poised to create dissentions and damage the country. There is no reason why this minority should be allowed to hold the sane majority hostage.
I appeal to all Pakistanis to display unity and solidarity and foil the nefarious designs of such elements who intend to harm the interest of the country. At this critical juncture, we have to frustrate the evil designs of our enemies and safeguard national interests. Pakistan is considered a fortress of Islam. God forbid, if this fortress is harmed in any way it would cause damage to the cause of Islam.
My countrymen, have trust in me the way you reposed trust in me before going to Agra. I did not disappoint the nation there. We have not compromised on national honour and integrity and I shall not disappoint you on this occasion either. This is my firm pledge to you.
In the end before I take your leave, I would like to end with the prayer of Hazrat Musa as given in Sua. 5;e-Taha: ‘May Allah open my chest, make my task easier, untie the knot of my tongue so that they may comprehend my inte nt’.
May Allah be with us in our endeavours. Long Live Pakistan.
. Michelle Jones
Any other day
We will not forget the office workers arriving at work as any other day
Who kissed and said goodbye
And did not know it really was ‘goodbye’
In too much of a rush to say ‘I love you’
Picked the outfit that was later to be torn and covered in ash
Slipped on the shoes later removed to run faster
Thought about what they would do that night
Or next week
Futures they would never come to realise.
Another day at the office
Would mean never another day.
***
We will not forget the families seeing them off as any other day
A kiss on the cheek, a see you tonight
A don’t forget to pick up milk on your way home
Who watched as they were leaving
And would never see them again.
Clutching a photo and praying
As tears run down their face
Like the people surrounding them, also in hope
That the next person found in the rubble is their loved one
And that the next body found is not.
***
We will not forget the Police and Fire men and women
Wearing their uniform as any other day
Called to a job they did not know would be their last
Running up instead of down
To not only do their jobs, but do whatever they could
To save the screaming masses
From a fate which would be their own.
***
We will not forget a day that started out as any other day
The hustle and bustle of people who barely know each other
As they go about their daily lives
In the huge structures reaching into the sky.
A city would be wounded like never before
On a day that turned the world to tears
In which the very freedom which surrounds us was threatened
And so many things taken away from so many people
Who simply cry in disbelief.
***
We shed a tear for the American people
Innocent people
People with families, friends and loved ones
People with work lives, social lives, personal lives
People like you and me.
***
And we will never forget them.
BOAT PEOPLE
1. Mike Seccombe composed these lyrics for the Canberra Press Gallery singing group The Howlers, to be sung to the tune Message in a Bottle.
Ship of castaways, on the Timor Sea& #45;o
Tampa saves the day, picks up the refugee-o
I’ve got a plan, this can save Macfarlane,
We won’t let them land, on our sovereign Island ..
I’ll send the SAS to the boat,
I know the SAS will get votes,
I’ll have that Beazley crawling, I’ll get get the bigots calling, I’ll get the shock jocks bawling
Send them back to Java
Send them back to Java.
…
A week has passed since my boat came in
Things haven’t happened quite as I planned
Indonesia, Norway and Timor,
Said �They’re all yours, pal; we won’t let them land.
But I’ve got th e SAS on the boat,
I know the SAS will get votes,
I’ll have that Beazley crawling, I’ll get the bigots calling, I’ll have the shock jocks bawling.
Send them off to Nauru, Send them off to Nauru.
Sending out the SAS, I’m sending out the SAS, Sending out the SAS….
2. Guido Tresoldi in Melbourne
I am a rank and file member of the ALP and have been so for 19 years. I disagree strongly with the way the parliamentary ALP has handled the refugee issue. Branches in my part of town in the northern suburbs of Melbourne, which have one of the highest proportions of residents with middle-east backgrounds, have passed resolutions condemning the way the ALP has acquiesced with the government.
In the 80s when Labor was in government there was a Kaz Cooke cartoon of a woman waering a T-Shirt with �Join the ALP and develop your sense of irony�. Many times as a member I disagreed strongly with many decisions taken by th e parliamentary leaders of the Party, however, I came to realise that the ALP cannot be the great left-wing progressive party that many people – especially on this Webdiary – would like it to be.
I live in inner suburb an Melbourne. I am not working class. I class myself as a cappuccino middle class socialist interested in issues like racism, reconciliation and the republic. I never worked in a factory except when I was studying for my degree. But meeting voters during campaigns I found that, whether I like it or not, there are people who would fall in the natural constituency of a Labor voter who feel that they cannot afford the openness that I feel towards refugees. They are living on a knife edge, balancing work, mortgages and kids. They feel hostile towards these ‘foreigners’ who are demanding help from us.
Who are they? Why they should come here and pretend we help them? I slave day and night to keep my head above water and the government uses MY tax money to help these people. Why should we solve their problems? We have enough of our own. And so on.
These are the ‘battlers’ John Howard so successfully wooed in the 1996 elections by exploiting the perception that Keating was pandering to ‘elites’ (inner suburban trendoids like me) instead of looking after the real Aussie worker. No matter that the Liberals later betrayed them by slapping a GST on them and washing his hands once they became unemployed through no fault of their own.
Howard went to town on the Tampa issue as it provided an opportunity to bash Labor by saying that they would permit these people to come in and do whatever they liked. What Labor was to do?
Labor is a pragmatic party seeking power. We all would like it to be a party of principle but that went out of the window around 1982. But who would blame them? Labor heritage is full of decades in opposition because it maintained its purity. Should it maintain a moral stance to satisfy someone like me who is in the minority or kill the issue and move to something else?
To everyone who was a Labor voter and now has vowed to never vote Labor again, just think that on issues such as reconciliation, the republic, industrial relations, workers’ entitlements and so on the ALP is still a better choice.
Howard has taken the refugees as an opportunity to whip up the secular insecurity that Australians have about ‘the outside world’. As some commentators have noted, opinion surveys have constantly showed since the 60s that people thought we were taking ‘too many migrants’ irrespective of whether Australia’s intake was 500,000 or 5,000. Howard is the first Prime Minister who has no qualms in exploiting this fear for his electoral advantage. Very cleverly he stays out of the fray looking statesmanlike while his liutenants like Reith and Slipper do the dirty work by insinuating links between the refugees and terrorism.
Call me cynical, but it is no surprise that the ALP is refusing to play ball and is taking a realpolitik approach by going along with the government. An election where race is a main issue would be disasterous and the fact that the race issue may have been defused is a good thing.
I only hope that the ALP will get in and once in government it will pursue the refugee issue quietly, without fuss and humanely by devising a policy where refugees are treated according to our international obligations, as previous Liberal and Labor governments have done in the past.
I also thought many times to leave the party, but for whatever its failings and limitations it is still the only organisation that has a chance to get into government and pass some progressive legislation. Sure, we can all look at the Greens and Democrats and admire how ethical they are in their policies, but I can’t see them occupying the government benches for a while.
As a great ex-Prime Minister once said: “Only the impotent can afford to be pu re”.
3. Malcolm Street in Canberra
Afghan refugees as potential terrorists…I think I understand now. The reason Australia was reluctant to accept German Jewish refugees in the 1930’s was that we were concerned they’d bring Nazism with them.
4. Daniel Maurice in Sydney
Your piece in Bush’s rhetoric gets more disturbing each day talking of “people fleeing the terror of today’s equivalent of Nazi Germany, the Taliban”, is the latest in an endless series of contributions to your diary that seem to confuse lack of compassion with common sense measures to control the entry of people into Australia.
No-one can doubt that there are many innocent victims of the Taliban, Saddam and other despicable regimes throughout the world. It’s a noble thought that we should throw open Australia’s doors to such people. However this view utterly ignores the practical reality that such generosity, if extended, is bound to be abused. I do not have to lock doors to protect my property against the 99% of people who are decent, honest and law-abiding, but against the 1% who are not.
And so it is with entry into Australia. An open door policy designed to help victims of the Taliban, will quickly turn into a conduit for other, much less deserving people, whether they be simple economic refugees, or worse still, undesirables. This must already be happening as there is no other logical explanation for why so many boat people destroy their identification papers. Australians who support tougher refugee entry are not hard hearted nor are they racist. Rather they live in the real world where some people will always abuse the system.
Postscript: I guess I’m not the first to point out the irony that so many people who call for tolerance and understanding in respect of refugees are themselves utterly unwilling to accept the sincerity and legitimacy of the views different from their own, but rather resort to vilification or cheap sloganeering against their fellow Australians. We are a decent, open, generous and tolerant society by any objective standard.
5. Peter Kelly
I am writing in response to Peter Maresch , who asks in Poll praise why the Afghans don’t stay and fight, and questions the motives of those who flee. This is really rich coming from someone who faces no such dangers in his life. I would suggest that he go to Afghanistan and overthrow the Taliban government himself to show the locals how it is done if he is so clever.
He seems to be ignorant of the history of Afghanistan in the last two 2 decades. It has had war for all this time with all the attendant problems that war brings. He seems to think Afghan people are free to associate politically. I challenge him to stay in the face of food shortages, religious police and brutal punishment, civil war and the world’s largest population of land mines. Peter has demonstrated all the expertise of an armchair expert.
As for being “recalcitrant” because they do not want to be pushed around, they are only doing what he would in their positions.
6. John Wojdylo, our Australian in Germany
Puzzled truthseeker, Piers Ackerman (SMH Letters, 21/9), rightly asks why Australia is different to “almost every Western nation” that is calling for tighter border controls following the terrorist attacks in the United States. Why indeed.
As it happens, amidst the swell of fear, Piers, populist wave-rider extraordinaire, has failed to ask himself or his readers a simp le, innocent question, viz.: who would have processed the Tampa 433 had they landed at Christmas Island?
Answer: the Department of Immigration.
As Piers and the Defence Minister have reminded us, the Tampa 433 are a threat to Australia’s security. “There is a definite link between the Tampa boatpeople and terrorists.” But on what grounds do Piers, the Defence Minister and 75% of Australians doubt the capacity of the the Department to do its job properly and screen the Tampa 433 for terrorists?
Indeed, if DIMA is doing an excellent job, why is our sovereignty threatened? And why isn’t Mr. Ruddock honourably defending his department from these insults?
Piers Ackerman and those who agree with him have implicitly given DIMA a vote of no confidence. They cannot trust DIMA to screen out the terrorists.
But wait a minute.
DIMA has screened about 10000 middle-eastern boatpeople since 1996. You start to see why p uffed-up Piers and 75% of Australians are afraid: according to the Howard Government , many, any or all of these 10000 could be terrorists, because DIMA is as leaky as the boats they came on.
DIMA has tried to put the facts on the table – facts that, as clear as black and white, blow out of the water the lies being told by the Federal Government and Beazley’s complicit opposition. But Piers Ackerman is already too puffed-up with his message of fear to think rationa lly anymore.
Where is this shameful episode in Australia’s history heading? With the left hand, the Government and gullible, hot-headed, meekly-complicit shock-jocks have generated a climate of fear. With the right h and, the Government smoke machine is generating the antidote for fearful Australians: tough new laws that will make Australians feel good about their national sovereignty.
But who’s going to process the tens of thousands of future asylum seekers arriving on Australian soil after they’ve played chasey across the Pacific and been pre-processed by an Australia n-sponsored, money-laundering banana republic?
Answer: the Department of Immigration. Depite the new laws, nothing will change.
But a dangerous wave of fear has been set in motion. As seen in the U.S. this week, terrorists can afford perfectly forged passports. Unless you realize that valid travel documents are no guarantee of identity, and unless you stop doubting DIMA, then you will soon be so afraid, that you’ll be voting for the end of all migration and asylum from the middle east.
The wave of fear is taking us in this direction. No other Western nation intends abrogating its responsibility to humanity so arrogantly.
Wake up, Australia! The Government is pulling the wool over your eyes.