From Peter FitzSimons in the Sydney Morning Herald:
After the Madrid train bombing, there was a great deal of discussion as to whether Australia would or would not be a similar target, because of our involvement in the disastrous Iraq war. Of all the worthy columns, letters to the editor and talk-back calls taking both sides, one brilliant letter to the editor in The Sydney Morning Herald stood out, cutting through all the nonsense in two crisp sentences. From memory it went like this: Is New Zealand a target for the terrorists? Why not?
We're now in a precarious situation. It is hard for Mark Latham to resile from the position we took in Iraq for fear of being seen to pander to terrorist. There is a way through this I am sure -- let's hope Latham is at his prime tonight and puts it very strongly to the Australian people and the PM that Australia should never engage in pre-emptive wars and only involve itself in UN sanctioned actions. A pro-UN policy is not specifically an anti-American policy (it is the US that is anti-UN). Taking this position does not erode the ANZUS policy either. It would be a brave position to take as the attack dogs of the conservatives and the US adminstration would be immediately biteing back. Far better that Latham takes a principled stand and faces defeat than takes a low profile and guarantees his loss. As much as Howard is loathed (even by so many of his own party) the circumstances do suit his return. Latham will have to positively win the election - we can't rely on Howard losing it.