Weapons of Mass Destruction (WMD)

Brigadier Mike Hannan: Good morning, and welcome to our regular update on operations in the Middle East. It will be a short brief today as there have been no significant changes to our operations in the Middle East over the past 24 hours. Importantly, all our people remain safe and accounted for.

Starting with Maritime operations.

HMAS Darwin has returned to patrol duties in the Northern Persian Gulf after a period of replenishment, while HMAS ANZAC remains on task in the K-A-A supporting on going clearance operations. HMAS Kanimbla is undertaking replenishment requirements.

Our divers and their Army colleagues crewing the supporting Landing Craft remain in the port of Umm Qsar in southern Iraq. They continue their clearance operations in the new port area. The Royal Fleet Auxiliary ship, SIR PERCIVAL, is among the most recent humanitarian assistance ship to arrive in the port - it will off-load around 300 metric tons of HA goods over the coming days.

Turning to Land Operations.

Our special forces continue their operations in Iraq and there have been no major incidents to report over the past 24 hours.

And now to Air Operations.

Our aircraft have again been active in the air over Iraq. Our C-130s continue to fly supply missions throughout the Middle East, including into Iraq itself.

Our FA-18s have again been flying close air support missions in support of the ground forces now completing the operation to cut off and isolate Bagdad. All aircraft have returned safely to base and, once again, several sorties returned without using their weapons.

That concludes today's brief, and I'd now be happy to take any of your questions.

QUESTION: Brigadier, Catherine Philp* from Channel 10 news. I just wanted to check with you what kind of reassessment there's been of security for Naval vessels in the harbour since yesterday's protest?

BRIGADIER MIKE HANNAN: Yeah, well look that's a question that's better directed towards the New South Wales Police who are responsible for that. In terms of the Navy's part in activities, we're fairly relaxed about people protesting. It's a right of Australians to do so. Our only concern, though, is that protestors don't endanger their own lives and obviously the lives of other Australians in the process of doing so.

QUESTION: Hasn't yesterday's protest highlighted how easily perhaps terrorists, though, could access Naval vessels in the harbour? Isn't that a concern to the Navy?

BRIGADIER MIKE HANNAN: Oh, no, not at all. I think we can tell the difference between a protest boat going about the business of protesting, and the issues of terrorists. If there is a severe terrorist threat or if they're in a different location, the Northern Persian Gulf for instance, then we'd have a very different stance and a very different response.

But I think the Navy's correct response is to respect the rights of Australians to protest. But, of course, the police have something to say about the way people do it.

QUESTION: I mean you're suggesting that terrorists are only a threat over in the Gulf. Obviously terrorists can come to us as well. Couldn't they just have easily approached the boat yesterday if they'd wanted to?

BRIGADIER MIKE HANNAN: Well, look, I think we can tell the difference between a protest - a small protest boat clearly not carrying explosives or anywhere near the cargo needed to do that - and a group of folks setting about to make a political point. It's our responsibility to respect the rights of people to do that. Our only concern in this is that it's done safely and that people's lives aren't put at risk. What they did yesterday was pretty silly. It's a dangerous thing to do.

QUESTION: Phillipa Quinn from the 7.30 Report. Brigadier, just a quick question about the SAS. Are they operating in full uniform at all times?

BRIGADIER MIKE HANNAN: The SAS in fully uniform?

QUESTION: Yes?

BRIGADIER MIKE HANNAN: Yes.

QUESTION: Well, it's just that in a Pentagon briefing on Monday there is a small portion of the US forces that aren't operating in full uniform. And I just wanted to know if we were?

BRIGADIER MIKE HANNAN: Oh, okay, yes. Look, I can't account for the US Special Forces or their dress. Our Australian soldiers operate in Australian uniform on operations.

QUESTION: And just - I've got a question re POWs.

BRIGADIER MIKE HANNAN: Yeah.

QUESTION: Have our SAS detained any POWs?

BRIGADIER MIKE HANNAN: No.

QUESTION: And to your knowledge, is there - has there been a tribunal set up in the theatre of war to assess whether they're combatants of war or POWs? And are we a part of that tribunal? And also, sorry, I mean what is our position about prisoners of war over there at the moment?

BRIGADIER MIKE HANNAN: Okay. Well let's deal with the most generic part of the question first. Our position is that prisoners of war are treated absolutely in accordance with the Geneva protocols at all times, and that includes the handing on of prisoners. That is ensuring that they're going to be treated in accordance with the rules by whoever we hand them on to.

QUESTION: Do you know where the prisoners of war are being kept?

BRIGADIER MIKE HANNAN: Well, as I've said we have not taken any prisoners of war, so we're not keeping any of them.

QUESTION: No, no, but generally. Just generally?

BRIGADIER MIKE HANNAN: No, I'm not sure in those terms.
Now, in terms of the tribunals, under the terms f the Geneva Conventions there is a provision for the establishment of tribunals to determine the status of an individual under the conventions. That is whether a person is a bona fide prisoner of war or another type of person.

Now, I'm not aware that the other Coalition partners have or haven't established tribunals. That'd be a matter you'd have to address to them. But I think, considering the numbers of prisoners that have been taken and the numbers of people that have come into their orbit who are indeterminate, that is in civilian clothing and not clearly identified as military, then there would be a need to have some filtering process to sort through them. And probably that would be done in accordance with the provisions.

QUESTION: So given that we're one of the Coalition partners, are we not part of that - any tribunal at the moment?

BRIGADIER MIKE HANNAN: No.

QUESTION: [Inaudible]

BRIGADIER MIKE HANNAN: No. No, I would suggest that the UK forces are probably undertaking that in their own area; and the Americans in their own areas.

QUESTION: But we don't have an area?

BRIGADIER MIKE HANNAN: We have an area but we don't have any prisoners.

QUESTION: Mark Forbes from The Age, Brigadier. Just briefly, those Greenpeace people had some fairly impressive boarding skills being exhibited. Any thought to attempting to recruit some?

BRIGADIER MIKE HANNAN: [Laughs] Oh, I think perhaps for the Army Adventure School, Mark.

QUESTION: And, more seriously, I mean the excuse that we continue to be given about the lack of access or vision or interviews with our SAS troops is that, well we're told that this is something that other forces don't do. You don't see the American forces doing that. Well, this week we've been seeing footage of elite special forces American troops guiding Turkish troops in Northern Iraq. They've been on camera, unobscured. There've been interviews. I mean doesn't this put the lie to your claims that we're simply doing what the Americans and other special forces do?

BRIGADIER MIKE HANNAN: Yeah, well look, I can't speak for the Americans. They're clearly - they clearly make their own arrangements for their own purposes. But look, these provisions we have for the secrecy surrounding both the SAS and the Commandoes, that applies back in Australia as well as in the area of operations. And it applies because those troops have the domestic role for counter-terrorist capability.

They provide the east coast and west coast tag. So those same provisions apply back here in Australia and you are well aware of that. The fact that we're applying the on operations as well is a simple extension of that.

QUESTION: But the fact that they are logical provisions back in Australia as well doesn't mean that that makes sense. Unlike the British SAS, as you've just confirmed, our SAS always operate in full uniform, therefore identification of their faces is not going to be a giveaway. A terrorist isn't going to be caught by surprise by standing next to someone who's in full SAS kit? I mean they're not operating under cover. I mean what is the real rationale for this?

BRIGADIER MIKE HANNAN: Well, there's a whole range of other issues as well, Mark, as you're well aware. These folks are dispersed in small groups around in the middle of Iraq. You know that. I mean what is the proposition here? That we take journalists out to meet them in the field? I mean I think that that's a crazy proposition. It's not something we have the capability to do and it's not something that our security of those small groups who rely on their secrecy for their own defence would be interested in entertaining. So, you know, overall it's a very difficult proposition.

QUESTION: Brigadier, Lincoln Wright from The Canberra Times. I just wanted to talk a bit more generally about the battle in Baghdad at the moment. In recent days there have been several reports which indicate that the American war machine is perhaps getting a little bit out of control. The Russian Ambassador was fired upon in Iraq. Al Jazeera television station was attacked. Palestine Hotel, where Australian journalists are, was shelled by the Americans. We've got reports that marines are shooting kids, in Kabul, of 10 years old. And apparently there's no anaesthetic in a lot of Iraqi hospitals and they're conducting amputations without anaesthetic. What is your view on whether or not the Americans have told the truth about the bombing of Al Jazeera? Vincent Brooks has said they don't target journalists. What's the Australian viewpoint?

And, secondly, will you condemn those American attacks over the past few days?

BRIGADIER MIKE HANNAN: Well, I don't speak for the Americans. I speak for the ADF and the ADF point of view. Those are questions about US behaviour, you should address those to the Americans.

QUESTION: But what's your view? Surely we have an official view on this?

BRIGADIER MIKE HANNAN: You know what our view is. We don't target civilians and, you know, reporters obviously come under that category.

QUESTION: But do you think the Americans are telling the truth about al Jazeera?

BRIGADIER MIKE HANNAN: You need to address questions about the Americans to the Americans. I don't have a view on their position.

QUESTION: Catherine Philp again. I just wanted to check with you whether the fact that our Hornets haven't been firing and haven't been flying over Baghdad of late has anything to do with our targeting policies? Our rules of engagement differing from those of the US?

BRIGADIER MIKE HANNAN: No, not at all. The F/A-18 are used where their capabilities are best fitted into the Coalition - the overall Coalition air task. The fact that they've been returning with ordnance unused, it just indicates the fact that there are fewer targets now that there had been in the past. And, obviously, less opportunity to engage them.

They've been working in direct support of the ground troops, you know, pretty close in.

QUESTION: Mark Phillips from News Limited. I'll just ask another question about post-war Iraq. The pieces seem to be falling into place for Australian involvement in humanitarian and other forms of assistance. I just wanted to ask if there's any detail on where there's been any request for military involvement or defence involvement in post-war Iraq?

BRIGADIER MIKE HANNAN: Well, this is a matter the government has under current consideration. It's very much a matter for government. And, as the Prime Minister has said, the Australian approach will be primarily one of providing humanitarian assistance.

The ADF may be part of that, and certainly we have some capabilities that could be useful. But I point out to you that the specialist roles that we have in the operation at the moment are primarily combat roles, and they would probably not be the capabilities that could be useful in humanitarian activities.

QUESTION: Cynthia Bannan from The Sydney Morning Herald. Two question, the first is what's the ADF's position on when the Coalition forces can declare victory in Iraq? What needs to happen, in your view, in order to be able to declare victory?

BRIGADIER MIKE HANNAN: Well, when you say declare victory I guess you mean declare the end to the Phase 3, that's the direct military action, and start the reconstruction phase, or Phase 4. I think what you'll find is that there is quite a blurred line between the two events. Clearly, some activities which are Phase 4 type activities, that is rebuilding and humanitarian type activities, are already underway. And you might find that after the declaration of cessation of hostilities that there will be some residual hostile actions still taking place.

So in terms of the practical events on the ground, there could be quite a fuzzy period. But in terms of when the decision is made, that would be a matter of judgment. It'll be made by the senior commander taking into account the best assessments of when is the best time to make it in terms of the physical realities and the political needs.

So it'll be a matter of judgment, but it won't be a clear cut matter of today we're doing one thing, an announcement's made and tomorrow we're doing something else. There will be an overlap in both directions.

QUESTION: Any prediction for when that will be?

BRIGADIER MIKE HANNAN: I think there's still quite a lot of work to be done yet.

QUESTION: My other question just concerned the cooperation between the Kurdish forces and the Coalition forces. And I just wonder whether the ADF has a view on whether this might cause any problems in the future in a sort of post-war reconstruction phase? Or whether inherent in it are any complexities that...

BRIGADIER MIKE HANNAN: Well, the ADF really doesn't have a view on that beyond pointing out the fact that contrary to many of the pundits, the circumstances in the peripheries of the countries are quite calm. And we think that that's encouraging.

QUESTION: Mark Forbes again, Brigadier. The Prime Minister and Defence Minister have suggested a largescale military contribution post the immediate conflict in Iraq is unlikely. But yesterday the Prime Minister seemed to be holding out the prospect of an on-going security role. Talking about the need to prevent suicide bombings, escort aid shipments and deliveries and so on. Do you see a more sort of niche security role post Phase 3 for the ADF as the Prime Minister seemed to be suggesting?

BRIGADIER MIKE HANNAN: Well, the structure of our aid for post conflict reconstruction will be decided by government. And, you know, the ADF has a wide range of capabilities it could contribute to that. And clearly that includes all of the things you've mentioned. But as to whether they would be included or not, again I certainly couldn't have a comment on that. That's very much a matter that will be decided by government.

QUESTION: Brigadier, Deng Jian from Radio Free Asia. I'm just trying to get this Russian diplomat thing sorted out.

BRIGADIER MIKE HANNAN: Yes.

QUESTION: How many people are there in the convoy out there? And what are they? And what sort of injuries have they got at the time they met the Australian SAS troops out there? And what did the SAS troops do in terms of medical treatment to the Russian diplomats?

BRIGADIER MIKE HANNAN: Yes. Now, I'll give you some general background on this. It might not be quite as accurate as I might like because it's from memory. But about a dozen people in the group. There were some gunshot wounds and which have been bandaged. All of the people in the convoy, however, are able to get themselves out of the vehicles and move into the shade. And some of the vehicles showed signs of being damaged, that is they had gunshot holes in them.

Those vehicles, about half a dozen in all, were given a cursory search and allowed to proceed.

QUESTION: And where were they heading to?

BRIGADIER MIKE HANNAN: They were heading west.

QUESTION: Don Alford* from APP, Brigadier. Two questions, if I may. Firstly, we do know that there's various Australian civilians of one sort or another in Kuwait as part of the post-war planning.

BRIGADIER MIKE HANNAN: Yes.

QUESTION: Is there now or is there any intention to have any ADF people as part of this group?

BRIGADIER MIKE HANNAN: Well, bearing in mind that there are ADF planning officers in the Middle East already, I'm sure there'll be some ADF involvement in that. But I don't know the details. This is a whole of government matter that's being dealt with as a whole of government matter. It's still very much a decision for government, and the ADF is just going to provide its advice to government on how it can best assist to achieve the national objectives.

QUESTION: And back to the SAS for a moment, I quite take your point that it wouldn't be very practical for journalists to go out in the field and join them, given the sorts of things they do. But can we take it from what you said that in fact no SAS who have gone out, and some went out from the beginning, have as yet come back? In other words, those who are out there have been out there for the duration?

BRIGADIER MIKE HANNAN: Yes, you can take that as correct.

QUESTION: And how long are they capable of staying out?

BRIGADIER MIKE HANNAN: Well, I think the longest patrol in Afghanistan was 54 days. So you're well short of that yet.

OFFICIAL: One more question.

QUESTION: Brigadier, I'm just trying to work out this Iraqi Information Minister was talking about surprises when the Coalition troops moved into Baghdad. We haven't seen many surprises yet. Do you think there is a possibility that western journalists out there in Baghdad could be the hostage of the Iraqi troops?

BRIGADIER MIKE HANNAN: Well, I think it's a possibility. I mean this is a regime that's used civilians as shields; it's occupied hospitals with military - with combatant units; it's used schools for the storage of weapons; it's used children as hostages; it's had civilians go forward to fight at the threat of execution if they don't. Would they use journalists as hostages? Yeah, they'd use journalists as hostages. That's well within their capability.

OFFICIAL: That concludes this media brief. Thanks for attending.