PRESS OFFICE TRANSCRIPT WEDNESDAY, 23 JANUARY, 1980
PRIME MINISTER INTERVIEWED ON " WILLESEE AT SEVEN"
ON SITUATION IN AFGHANISTAN
Willesee It takes a lot to call off an Olympiad. The last time it happened
there was a world war in progress. But now with Russian troops
occupying Afghanistan, the United States'Government wants to
boycott the Moscow Olympics and so now does the Australian
Government.-And of course the Games have always been political.
Let's not forget that, most notably Hitler's Berlin Games in
' 36, and again at Munich in 1972 when Israeli athletes were
assassinated. But the emphasis in past Games has been directed
more to nationalism, propaganda or sheer publicity. This time
it is the Olympics being used as a weapon against a gross act
of invasion and whether Mr. Fraser is right or wrong in this,
he is certainly right when he pleads that this issue should not
obscure the major issue, and that is the Russian invasion itself.
To talk about this whole question in our Melbourne studio,
the Prime Minister, Mr. Malcolm Fraser.
Mr. Prime Minister, thanks for coming in.
Prime Minister
Thank you, and good evening.
Willesee What do you see as the primary reason for the Soviet invasion
of Afghanistan?
Prime Minister
I think it is hard to judge with absolute accuracy -the--reason.
Also, I am not sure that the reason is entirely relevant. The
more important fact is that they are there and being there that
will open opportunities for-them, if they want to take it and
if they think there is a chance of getting away with it, of
moving further either towards Iran or towards Pakistan. But you
asked what is the reason. I could think of two. Again, let me
make the point, the more important question is that they are
there. They could have been disturbed that a communist
revolution, coup, of nearly two years ago was going badly. There
was a further coup a few months ago. All communist coups, or
revolutions. Then a third, which they established by force of
arms. They could have been disturbed that a communist revolution
was going badly and might not have been sustained. They could
have been concerned about the impact that would have on their
own Muslim minorities. But on the other hand, they could have been
saying ' here is a position in a small country that is not a threat
to us. If we move in there will be later opportunities for us,
either in moving towards Pakistan or towards Iran-and gaining
influence or control over oil production", which they would see
/ 2
-2
Prime Minister ( continued)
of course as a weapon of enormous economic importance.
Willesee Well what do you fear then could happen next in that region?
Prime Minister
The more dangerous thing, the most dangerous thing, would
be a Russian move towards Iran, and let's say either
spontaneously or as a result of it being engineered, a minority,
pro-Marxist, pro-Russia minority in Iran said that they were
being persecuted under the present regime and they wanted help
from the Soviet Union. That could give them the kind of excuse
they need to move. Then of course, they would gain direct
access to the Indian Ocean, to the Arabian Sea, the Persian Gulf.
Warmwater ports have always been
Willesee But technically that would be of enormous difference.
Prime Minister
Yes, it would.
Willesee If the Russians go into Iran, even with some sort of request
from whoever may nominally head that Government, do you see any
circumistances where the Western world would allow Russia to do that.
Prime. Minister
I would certainly hope not. But also may I say that the total
activity of the United States, a'number. of other countries, and-*.
with whatever weight a nation of 14 million can throw onto the
scales, what we are about now is designed the create the
circumstances where that will not happen so that the worse.
options will not then have to be faced by a further Russian
military invasion.
Willesee Without trying to digress too much, could I just ask one
question on Yugoslavia because it may be relevant. What are
your fears for Yugoslavia, or your concern, in the event of
Tito dying?
Prime Minister
Well, in the event of that of course, there is an obvious
concern that there could be some internal problems within
Yugoslavia and again, that the Soviet Union might exploit that
opportunity-to re-establish a Government in Yugoslavia that
would be subservient to Moscow. Marshall Tito has, especially
in the light of what had happened'in Czechoslovakia, what had / 2
-3
Prime Minister ( continued)
happened in Hungary, has shown enormous skill and enormous
strength in establishing a very real degree of independence for
Yugoslavia even though within the communist orbit, within the
Soviet orbit, area of influence. Obviously, the concern is that
that degree of independence-would be lost.
Willesee Mr.. Fraser, is there any question of trying to get the Russians
out of Afghanistan or do you see the simple priority as being
one of containment, that they go no further?
Prime Minister
Obviously we will need, when I say we I mean independent nations,
the United States, will need to try and establish the circumstances
in which the Soviet Union might be persuaded to withdraw
because of the extent and the strength of the revulsion right
around the world. I think the Soviet Union would have been very
surprised at that vote in-the United Nations in which they had
only 18 supporters and a very very large number against them
from all groups, all countries around the world. But I do not
think we can establish that as a primary-objective.
Wi lies ee
It's pretty unlikely isn't it?
Prime Minister
I think it is very unlikely and I have said that before. So that
means that the major priority has to be to prevent any further
move, establish the circumstances where the Soviet Unionwill believe
that the price they have paid as a result of moving into
Afghanistan is so high that they will not seek to move further...
Willesee So what more needs to be done?
Prime Minister
Well, to the greatest extent possible, that independently-minded
nations, nations that are concerned for their own and for the
ational independence of others, can build a free world consensus
and act upon that, whether it is through reinforcing trade sanctions,
whether it is through reinforcing what the United States, Britain,
Canada and we, have said about the Olympic Gamnes. Now quite
obviously people are talking about peaceful means but at the same
time I believe, and again the United States has already announced
that the countries around the world need to look to their own
defences budgets. The United States is, the President has
already announced that. Because it is not going to be
any one single act but a combination of factors, things that the
United States do, things that are done in Europe amongst the
NATO countries that will build up a confidence. / 4
Willesee On that military side, the President of the United States, of course
has done more than look to his budget. He has an increasing
military presence in the region now. If President Carter asks
Australia, when you talk with him Sir, to assist militarily, what
can you do?
Prime Minister
I doubt if anyone is at the moment considering using military forces.
Quite obviously the presence is being increased and again the
objective is to make sure that military forces do not have to be
used. But we have already said and we volunteered it, that we
would be prepared to participate with a greater degree of patrolling
and surveillance over the Indian Ocean area. Now we have our own
ideas about how that could be done. I will be putting those when
I go to Washington. But that is one thing that we can do, we are
equipped to do and we are prepared to do.
Wil1le see
You've said that you see this as the biggest threat to world peace
in 35 years since World War II. So what do you propose to do with
your own defence budget?
Prime Minister
I think. a-little while will unfold that. We have already asked our
officials to examine the circumstances, I think a month or more
ago, when this first unfolded.. I asked our defence advisors to see
how this affects the strategic assessment, which had been examined
shortly before Christmas. It was a new event and an important event
and therefore how it affects our own defence planning and defence
preparedness. All that work has been going on for some weeks.
Wil1le see
When would you see something eventuating, in the budget, in August?
Prime Minister
It may well be earlier than that.
Will esee
It just * seems to me that if the threat is now then presumably
believing that you take some action now?
Prime minister
Look you are starting to impinge on matters that I do want to put
and discuss first in the United States. So maybe we do not have
to go too far down this particular track tonight.
Will esee
Yes I respect that with defence matters you often can't answer,
but equally the people watching tonight one of the first things
I think they'll have in mind, when you say this is the greatest
threat in 35 years, is what we're going to do about it and how it
will effect them. Can you tell us at least that we will be spending
more money on defence?
Prime minister'
I think I have already said that I am very glad that that increased
oil revenue had not been committed in some area, whether it is by
tax reduction or the rest, because we do need to look to Australia's
defences. I would be surprised if there is not an increased
requirement coming out of that.
Willesee So you'd be looking at that extra billion dollars or so a year from
tax Prime minister
Well look I am not putting a figure on it. But what I am doinglook
we are taking this very seriously. We have already offered
increased facilities or use of facilities and increased patrolling
and surveillance in the Indian Ocean on Australia's account.
Wil1le see
But that's not building our forces.
Prime Minister
Ah but it might well require, depending upon the nature of the
obligation undertaken that could perhaps require, built up over
time, some greater capacity. Because we were not making that offer
against a short term circumstance something that could happen for
a week or a month, or two or three months, but against a long term
chain in Australia's strategic circumstance. So we were looking at,
offering a-long term obligation.
Willesee So you foreshadow a greater expenditure on defence?
Prime Minister
It is inevitable. It really is.
Wil1le see
Well it's inevitable in the normal course of inflation.
Prime Minister
I am not talking about just inflation. I am talking about it in
real terms. Let us not forget that even though we have had one . or
two budgetary problems over the last three or four years, defence
expenditure has been increased in real terms in each of those years.
Willesee. But our defence forces have been rundown over the last couple of
governments haven't they?
Prime Minister
They were run down over a period. We have done some rebuilding.
Prime Minister ( continued)
We have now when we came into office the amount spent on capital
equipment was about 6 or 7 per cent of the vote. We have got that
up to about 15 or 16 per cent of the vote. We want to get it higher.
Wi liese e
What about manpower? Would you rule out looking again at conscription
or even national service?
Prime Minister
I do not see it as being a requirement for that at this point. I
do not imagine that that would be one of the options that the
defence planners would want to put to us when we are considering
these matters. Because I think it is important you have
repeated my remark, that this is the most serious circumstance for
years. can I just take a second to say why that is so.
Willesee ( After commercial break)
Mr. Prime Minister you wanted to explain why you see this threat
to world peace as being the worst since World War II.
Prime Minister
Yes. There have been a number of crises, especially in the Cold
War period Berlin, Korea, Cuba. Now all of those were important
in a regional context. They were also important because they were
a threat or a challenge to the strength , to the determination of
what was known as the free world. Now those elements are present
in this crisis. But there is an additional element that was not
present in the Berlin matter, North Korea or Cuba. And that is,
if the Soviets take the step further we were talking about, if they
do a turn into Iran and start to gain an entrance or a control over
some part of Middle East oil production then they have an addition,
the capacity to vastly damage or even to destroy the economies of
advanced industrial countries. And that is why I believe you have
not only the strategic circum'stances, you have an economic element
that-was-not-present on earlier occasions. And that is why I think
it is more dangerous and more important than those earlier
occurrences. Willesee Mr. Prime Minister you say you believe that and you've had some
criticism of various kinds for saying that. Let me put the most
serious personal criticism bluntly. Has your thinking on this
matter been influenced by the fact that this is an election year?
Prime Minister
No, not at all. And I know one or two people have said that. But
the people who have said that have also indicated as I believe that
this is a very serious occurrence. Look this is the kind of thing
Wi liese e
I'm sorry I wasn't suggesting that even your critics think that
you are blowing up the fact that it was serious when it's not.
I'm sure even they believe that it's quite serious. But you must
take into account things like politicians do tend to be a little
more sensitive in an election year, and you've seen President
Carter's popularity go up over Iran and Afghanistan.
Prime Minister
Oh I have. But I was not worried about events that were going to
occur at the end of this year anyway, because I had a total
confidence in that. But let me only say that nothing will please
me more if there can be a unity and a cohesiveness within Australia
on this particular issue. I do not want it to be a matter of
division. It is far too important for that. And when I spoke to
Premier Lowe in Tasmania about the fishing matter and said that
we had knocked that off and said that I was sorry because I know
how important he regarded it, he said: look, I don't quarrel with the
decision. In the circumstances he could not have done anything
else. I had gone through the range of the decisions with him and
he supported. I think ' that shows a bipartisan attitude which I
hope on this issue can be echoed right around Australia, because
it is of vast importance to all of us.
Willesee I think the question is not so much the seriousness of it but
whether you might be overreacting. The Labor Leader Mr. Hayden
I think was quoted today as saying that you were being hysterical
about it.
Prime Minister
Well all right. You know he said on one account that it was
overreacting but on another account he said he did not want us to
say anything about the Olympic Games unless a whole lot of countries
were going to, so that we wo~ ild ' know it would be an effective
boycott. So that seems to be not'really very important.
Willesee Even if you want to leave political matters out of this, they can
still come into it of course, even as a by-product, did you say
as somebody alleged in a written commentary, to some of your
colleagues, that this Russian aggression was electorally useful to
your party?
Prime Minister
No. Of course I would not have said that. Because it is too
important. It is not a matter to be dealt with on a partisan basis.
It is a matter to be dealt with, and especially from my position,
above all as Prime minister of this nation, as one of the greatest
possible seriousness and one in which there is only one thought in
my mind and only one thought in the mind of this Government the
wellbeing and security of all the Australian people.
8
Willesee Mr. Prime Minister did President Carter's decision on the boycott
of the Moscow Games, dependent on the Russians not getting out by
February 20 did his decision jam you into an early decision?
Prime Minister
obviously we were influenced by his decision. Because it is necessary
to understand in matters of this kind where we believe that
basically the United States President is-taking a proper course,
is acting from firmness and strength and that he is right it is
important for countries such as Australia to lend what support they
can. He has got the loneliest job in the world the President of
the most powerful free world country. It is important from his
point of view and from the point of view of the United States people
and the support that they give their President, to know that there
are people in other parts of the world with a similar view, a
similar concern. I make no apologies for that.
Willesee I understand that logic. But on the question of timing obviously
there would be some wisdom in waiting a little longer to see if it
was going to be an effective boycott.
Prime Minister
Oh look you could have argued that. That is a legitimate point of
view. But if every country is going to stand back and wait till
they know the boycott is effective there will never be a boycott.
Somebody has to be amongst the first half dozen. If it was
Australia's lot to be that then so be it. Quite a number of
countries, on the advice we have at this moment, seem to be moving
in that direction. It is early days yet but time will show us.
Willesee on the question of our own athletes going to Moscow if they-still
wish to. You were not specific in saying how far you would go in
not supporting them. For example the $ 500,000 cheque which is due:
would you hand that cheque over on condition that it is not used
to send athletes to Moscow?
Prime Minister
It is going to be handed over. Mr. Ellicott is going to do that.
I said in the letter to the Olympic Committee that no matter what
happened we wanted that money to be used to provide opportunities
for Australian sportsmen and sportswomen. There is no question of
the Government seeking or wanting to take that money back.
Willesee
Will you allow that money to be used to send athletes to Moscow?
Prime Minister
It is still on one scenario. The Games in Moscow could even have
our support. But if the Russians are still in Afghanistan we would
not want that money used for that particular purpose. We would
want the Olympic Committee to use it for other purposes to advance
Prime minister ( continued)
the interests of Australian sportsmen and women.
Wi lies ee
So at this stage you are not freeing that money for athletes to go
to Moscow with it.
Prime Minister
No. Not for Moscow, no.
Wilies ee
And could you be even firmer and take some action to stop athletes
going? Prime Minister
We have not considered that and it is too early. We believe, well
I certainly hope, belief at this stage might be too strong, but I
hope very strongly that the Olympic Committee will support the
Government in these particular matters. I know they have got a
serious and a hard decision to make and I know how much it can mean
to an athlete who has trained and been in competitions, internationals
competitions, wanting to get to the pinnacle at the Olympic Games.
But I had immense respect for that young Australian on one of the
Melbourne channels last night, a swimmer, who got up and made it
plain that he said that he believed a gesture had to be made. And
no matter what it meant to him, he thought that the Games should not
be held in Moscow. That must have taken a great deal of saying.
Because I can understand the hard work and the ambition and the
hopes that lie within an Olympic athlete's heart.
Wi liessee
Mr. Prime Minister thanks foi your time tonight.--
Prime minister
Thank you very much. 000---