True examples of a political leader showing leadership are rare, such as when a politician takes an unpopular stand on principle. Here are a some good ones from around the world.

Australian premier: U.S. more important than U.N. for our security

"These things often change at the last minute,'' he said, adding that he remained committed to a peaceful solution. "Peace is a possible outcome if the world community speaks with one voice.''



"But I know that if the world community walks away from this issue, we could well have to confront it in a few years time at an infinitely greater cost.''

Howard also reiterated his commitment to following the United States' lead and called the security alliance between the two countries, "the ultimate guarantee'' in security.

"I have a great respect for the U.N. but I'm unwilling to utterly sublet Australia's foreign and security policy to the U.N.,'' he said.



From Tony Blair (with emphasis added):

Yes, there are consequences of war. If we remove Saddam by force, people will die and some will be innocent. And we must live with the consequences of our actions, even the unintended ones.



But there are also consequences of "stop the war".

If I took that advice, and did not insist on disarmament, yes, there would be no war. But there would still be Saddam. Many of the people marching will say they hate Saddam. But the consequences of taking their advice is that he stays in charge of Iraq, ruling the Iraqi people. A country that in 1978, the year before he seized power, was richer than Malaysia or Portugal. A country where today, 135 out of every 1000 Iraqi children die before the age of five - 70% of these deaths are from diarrhoea and respiratory infections that are easily preventable. Where almost a third of children born in the centre and south of Iraq have chronic malnutrition.

Where 60% of the people depend on Food Aid.

Where half the population of rural areas have no safe water.

Where every year and now, as we speak, tens of thousands of political prisoners languish in appalling conditions in Saddam's jails and are routinely executed.

Where in the past 15 years over 150,000 Shia Moslems in Southern Iraq and Moslem Kurds in Northern Iraq have been butchered; with up to four million Iraqis in exile round the world, including 350,000 now in Britain.

This isn't a regime with Weapons of Mass Destruction that is otherwise benign. This is a regime that contravenes every single principle or value anyone of our politics believes in.

There will be no march for the victims of Saddam, no protests about the thousands of children that die needlessly every year under his rule, no righteous anger over the torture chambers which if he is left in power, will be left in being.

I rejoice that we live in a country where peaceful protest is a natural part of our democratic process.

But I ask the marchers to understand this.

I do not seek unpopularity as a badge of honour. But sometimes it is the price of leadership. And the cost of conviction.

But as you watch your TV pictures of the march, ponder this:

If there are 500,000 on that march, that is still less than the number of people whose deaths Saddam has been responsible for.



If there are one million, that is still less than the number of people who died in the wars he started.





And even from Bulgaria:

In the meantime, Bulgaria has vowed to resist French attempts to bully it into withdrawing support for America's plans to disarm Iraq. Last week the French ambassador to Sofia warned Bulgaria that its pro-American stance could jeopardise its efforts to join the European Union.



"Bulgaria has to consider carefully where its long-term interests lie," Jean Loup Kuhn-Delforge said last week. "When people live in Europe they should express solidarity and think European-style."

Solomon Pasi, Bulgaria's foreign minister, condemned the French as neo-appeasers. "We all remember the hesitancy of the Allies, who weren't sure whether to attack Hitler. They could have prevented so much," he said.

"We're in a situation where we have a moral imperative to act and act now."



I guess Bulgaria is finding out that to belong to the EU, they have to subordinate themselves to France. That's why France is resisting letting many nations that are applying for EU membership attend an emergency conference this week. Most of those countries have sided with the US, so of course their opinion can't be considered.