English blasts Government's 'both ways' stand on Iraq

By AUDREY YOUNG political reporter

National has accused Labour of "trying to have it both ways" in responding to the United States call for military intervention in Iraq.

In a parliamentary snap debate after the Government confirmed up to 10 medical and communications defence personnel would support United Nations weapons inspectors in Iraq, National leader Bill English said the New Zealand Government had been the most strident critic of threats of military action by United States President George W. Bush.

But he said the only reason Iraqi leader Saddam Hussein had agreed to readmit weapons inspectors was "because of the credible threat of military action".

"The attitude of President Bush that scares the Labour Party is the same as the one that has scared Saddam Hussein," Mr English said.

It left Labour sitting on the sidelines criticising Mr Bush for making threats, "and when they work they say it is a triumph of United Nations diplomacy".

"We do not support an unprincipled stance of the New Zealand Government that says we will rely on the military threats even though we oppose them and consistently criticise them, then we will support United Nations action that is based on those threats.

"Labour is the party that in the run-up to the election used the clip of [US Secretary of State] Colin Powell describing New Zealand as a 'very, very, very, good friend' for a very, very, very, short time - a very, very, very good friend until the election is out of the way."

Now the election was over, Labour was reverting to its instincts, which were anti-United States and focused entirely on international "rather than an alliance way of running the world".

Deputy Prime Minister Michael Cullen said Mr English appeared to believe New Zealand was an "ally" of the United States.

If Mr English wanted to become an ally, he would have to repeal the anti-nuclear ships legislation.

Dr Cullen accused Mr English of being confused about the objective of intervention: removal of weapons of mass destruction or removal of the Saddam Hussein regime.

"The Government's position is clear. The priority is the removal of weapons of mass destruction.

"The argument for military intervention is if that becomes necessary - and perhaps leading to regime change - as the means of achieving the removal of weapons of mass destruction.

"To suggest that unilateral action for trying to achieve regime change in the judgment of a country simply taking unilateral action is a very dangerous position for New Zealand to adopt within the world community."

Since the foundation of the United Nations, New Zealand and had always taken the position that profound issues of that sort had to be decided on a multilateral and international basis.

Prime Minister Helen Clark said a Defence Force staff member would go to Vienna early next month to take part in a training course with the United Nations Monitoring, Verification and Inspection Commission and then train those selected for deployment.

What the parties say


Labour: Michael Cullen

"[Supporting] unilateral action for trying to achieve regime change [by the United States] ... is a very dangerous position for New Zealand to adopt within the world community."

National: Bill English

"The Labour Government is sitting on the sideline, criticising President Bush for making threats and when they work, they say it is a triumph of United Nations diplomacy. That is rubbish. The only reason the weapons inspectors are there is because of the threat of military action."

New Zealand First: Winston Peters

"We want to see the evidence. We believe the Prime Minister should have asked for it. It is all very well to demand that there be United Nations action, when on this issue, as on many issues in the past, the United Nations has sometimes been far too reluctant to act."

Act: Ken Shirley

"The President of the United States, when he was building coalition support for actions to back up existing United Nations resolutions, all he got from New Zealand was a slammed door in the face and . . . that will have ramifications."

Greens: Keith Locke

"Tell the United States to address the real security problem in the Middle East, and that is Israel's continued occupation of the West Bank and Gaza in violation of UN resolution after UN resolution. They even stopped the UN inquiry team from going in to the West Bank town of Jenin to investigate a massacre."

United Future: Peter Dunne

"It is too easy to say that in pursuit of New Zealand's narrow interests we should be prepared to saddle up to unilateral action that has no guarantee of success, it has nothing but down-side for us in the international community and particularly given our relations with the Arab world from a trade perspective and will not necessarily achieve the ultimate objective, the removal of the regime or the removal of weapons of mass destruction."

Progressive Coalition: Matt Robson

"I am disappointed that [with] an issue so important as war and peace that National, New Zealand First and Act are taking such a bellicose attitude. The fact is the UN, and in particular the Secretary-General, helped us to move back from the brink of war."

Further reading
Feature: War with Iraq

Iraq links and resources