Mr KELVIN THOMSON (4:39 PM) —On behalf of the people of the electorate of Wills, I wish to extend to the people of East Timor our acute sense of distress and grief at that which they have been experiencing in recent times and, of course, in many respects for the best part of 25 years. It is extraordinarily difficult for us to contemplate the magnitude of the horrors that people in that place have been through and, indeed, to reflect on how difficult it will be for them to rebuild their community and rebuild their society.

I feel obliged to offer an apology on behalf of all of us who have been involved in the political process. While I think we should be careful about wallowing in blame, we should understand that it is the Indonesian military who have been primarily responsible for this tragedy, for this debacle. All of us who are involved in politics, people involved in the media, and people involved in other aspects of public life, must share some responsibility for what has occurred here because there is no doubt that to some extent the people of East Timor have been effectively lured into a trap and that they have suffered grievously as a result.

What has occurred in East Timor leads me to make some sad reflections on human nature and the fact that people are still prepared to kill and torture others in cold blood. Some of my earliest political views were formed as a student of history and politics at the University of Melbourne. We used to study and reflect on things that had occurred back in the first part of this century, particularly things that had occurred in the Soviet Union with the rise of communism and the work of Lenin and Stalin and others in that place.

We also used to study the rise of Hitler and the Weimar Republic and things that occurred during the Second World War, and events such as the Spanish Civil War, the conflict between the nationalist and communist forces in China, and so on. It was appalling, bloodcurdling, to realise what people were prepared to do to each other as part of these political conflicts. But, when I reflect on these things, I used to think of them as things of the past, as things that belonged to a different time. I used to think that in some ways we had learned from these dreadful experiences and had become more civilised as a result. However, when we see what has occurred in East Timor and, indeed, in other places in recent years as well, we realise that this has not occurred and we have to make some pretty sad reflections on human nature.

I want to make a few brief points about this tragedy as I see it. I want to borrow to some extent from the work of Gareth Evans, who is uniquely qualified to comment on some of the history of the situation that we now find ourselves in. If we look back on the past years, one of the points that ought to be made is that Australia was not in a position militarily to stop or reverse Indonesia's invasion of East Timor in 1975, and neither were we in a position to move in unilaterally, against Indonesia's will, to stop the recent carnage.

Perhaps we could have done more back in 1975 to try to discourage Suharto at that time, but there is very little reason to believe that it would have made any practical difference. There was very little international enthusiasm for getting involved in another conflict in Asia in the wake of the Vietnam War, and it seems highly likely that the Indonesians would have invaded East Timor irrespective of our views.

The de jure recognition of Indonesian sovereignty over East Timor has been the subject of quite a lot of comment. I think it ought to be recalled and remembered that Australia continued to recognise East Timor as a non-self-governing territory entitled to self-determination. That was its status under Portuguese sovereignty and it continues to be the case under Indonesian sovereignty.

We ought to be aware that, before the economic crisis of 1997, with its political aftermath which changed everything, there seemed to be absolutely no realistic prospect that Indonesia would ever actually agree to a fully-fledged act of self-determination on the part of the East Timorese in which independence was an option. I think people who followed that period closely would accept that. Of course, after 1997, this all changed dramatically and the economic crisis saw Indonesia coming under a great deal of international pressure and being very keen to get international support. So, with Suharto's downfall, we did see these new options for the resolution of the East Timor situation open up.

As part of that, it should be noted that, at the time, those calling for independence—for example, Xanana Gusmao and then Jose Ramos Horta and Bishop Belo—talked about a decade of autonomy before a referendum on independence was held. Those East Timorese leaders knew all too well the potential for violence if things were rushed and handled poorly.

The next point that ought to be made is that a great deal more could have been done to work for better security for the East Timorese during the ballot process and its aftermath. Clearly, what went on put the safety of pro-independence supporters horribly at risk. But we did not try in this area—and, indeed, we sought to dissuade other countries from pursuing the peacekeeping options. We should have done more with the US, but I guess we will never know whether that would have changed things because we never really tried.

There are these issues of the past: whether we should have had this ballot on independence without East Timor going through a substantial period of autonomy; whether we should have proceeded with the ballot in the absence of proper protections for the preservation of physical security; and also the length of time that it took us to get the peacekeepers in there. But what we have to do now is to look to the future.

In looking to the future, there are a few points that I think are very important. Firstly, we have to understand that our quarrel in East Timor is with the Indonesian military, not with its government, not with its people. I think some of the protests that have been made in terms of picketing embassies, bans on Garuda and so on, miss the point in this regard.

Secondly, we are leading the United Nations military operation because we reflect the collective concern of the whole international community. As Gareth Evans said:

We shouldn't be spooked by the strident claims of some Indonesian spokespersons . . . that Australia is playing regional policeman out of colonialist instinct and residual racist sentiment.

Nothing could be further from the truth. Indeed, I want to say, as forcefully as I can, that there is no such thing as Asian human rights and other people's human rights. There are universal human rights and universal values.

Next, I think we should still see our security interests as being best pursued with Indonesia and our Asian neighbours rather than against them. When this is all over—and it may take a very long time before it is all over—they will still be there and it is absolutely essential that we continue to have good relations with Indonesia and the other countries of the region.

As I said at the outset, I feel—and I know that many people in the electorate of Wills who have contacted me feel—a great sense of grief and distress at what has happened to the people of East Timor during recent times. Our hearts go out to them and I am pleased to have had the opportunity to contribute to this debate in support of the UN resolution.