Preemptive blunder

Australian Prime Minister John Howard's remark during question time in the parliament in Canberra to the effect that his country has the right to launch a preemptive strike in a neighboring country is indeed a startling policy statement.

He defended his revolutionary position by stating that the canons of international law on the principle of national sovereignty had become outdated. Needless to say, all of this has caused consternation in the capitals of Southeast Asian countries.

Prime Minister Howard further defended his position by stating that when it came to protecting Australian lives from imminent acts of terrorism, the policy of preemptive strikes was bound to be followed by whoever was prime minister.

Malaysian Prime Minister Mahathir Mohamad referred to Howard's statement as a declaration of war. Jakarta's reaction was somewhat milder, although Indonesian Military (TNI) Chief Gen. Endriartono Sutarto stressed that any attack on Indonesian territory would be returned.

Australian Foreign Minister Alexander Downer, in an interview with CNN, tried in so many words to neutralize the intense reactions by saying the critics had not studied Howard's statement carefully and had taken it out of context. In a follow- up statement, however, Downer's boss, the prime minister himself, unintentionally shot holes in this effort. Howard stressed that he stood by his view that it was Australia's right to launch a preemptive strike against terrorists in the territories of other states when Australian lives were threatened.

There are two points regarding Howard's statement that are especially disconcerting.

The first is that Howard was likely fully aware his statement would cause a strong reaction in neighboring countries, but was nevertheless willing to take that political risk in order to achieve a bigger political end, which was to strengthen his political hold on the majority of Australians who are living in fear after Oct. 12.

Second, and what really boggles the mind, was his remark that his statement in parliament would not upset Australia's good relations with the governments of neighboring countries. Is the prime minister that insensitive?

Viewed rationally from the outside, even if Australia's prime minister, as leader of the Liberal Party, thought it necessary to boost his domestic political standing, his statement could have been formulated with greater wisdom. He could, for example, have said that whenever Australian lives were in danger in any given country, Australia, in cooperation with the host country's government and security apparatus, would jointly take the necessary measures to protect its citizens.

But in his statement before the Australian parliament, Howard completely ignored the new chemistry of empathy and close cooperation that had emerged after Oct. 12, especially between Indonesia and Australia. Police officials and intelligence specialists from both countries have been working together as if they have known each other for years. A reservoir of goodwill has developed among Indonesians for the Australian victims of the Oct. 12 bombing in Bali. That is why we think Howard's statement on the right to launch preemptive strikes in neighboring countries can be regarded as a preemptive blunder.

If Prime Minister John Howard now deliberately chooses to ignore this valuable chemistry that has developed between Indonesia and Australia in order to boost his domestic political standing, he is showing himself to be little more than a petty and cynical politician with little understanding of his country's long-term geopolitical interests.

Howard's latest statement cannot be regarded as a mere political misstep that will be forgotten with the passage of time. Its impact will be profound and long-term in nature. Even those Indonesians and other Southeast Asians who still believe that cooperation with Australia, as a modern Western country that happens to be located in the Southern Hemisphere, benefits the modernization efforts of the non-Western countries of the region are throwing up their arms in despair.

Of course, John Howard will not forever hold the reins of power in Canberra. But whoever replaces him will have the difficult task of convincing Australia's neighbors that Canberra will continue to adhere to the principles of mutual respect for each other's sovereignty and cooperation in facing the dangers that threaten the world, especially the danger of terrorism.