PRESS OFFICE TRANSCRIPT OF INTERVIEW WITH CHANNEL 2 MELBOURNE
WEDNESDAY 13 FEBRUARY 1980
Question Sir on what basis was yesterday's Cabinet decision taken?
Prime Minister
Well which one do you mean? There were many decisions yesterday,
which part of it?
Question Not to impose trade sanctions against the USSR.
Prime Minister
Well we do have trade sanctions and there was a particular aspect
of yesterday's decision referred to. I think you need to remember
that scientific and cultural exchanges have ceased, that there are
sanctions in relation to the grains, that fisheries
arrangements have been cancelled. Some of those obviously involve
considerable costs~ in different ways. Now one of the things that
I sought to do ove~ rseas and there were senior officials from the
Trade Department with me, which enabled them to have consultations
in the United Stat~ s and in the United Kingdom about the kind of
sanctions and emba ' rgoes that other countries, specifically the
United States and the United Kingdom, believe necessary in the
present circumstances. There is a list of high technology items
called a ' Cocom' list in the jargon which broadly the European
countries adhered to and also Britain and the United States. Now
in our discussions we found quite plainly that broadly in relation
to commodities, there are not on the list. They are not embargoed
by others. There is no point in Australia maintaining an embargo
or a sanction which is not supported by other significant trading
nations. Because that would then be placing the cost on our people
and no cost at all; on the Soviet Union.
Question Well our major dollar earning commodities aren't under a
sanction. Doesn't' that contradict the situation.. Olympic boycott.
Prime minister
No not at all. No because if you want to talk about the Olympic
boycott the important point is, is that this is very evident to the
Soviet people. Trade sanctions can be hidden, especially if they
can buy their commodities somewhere else. But it is the Soviet
Union that has said that the awarding of the Olympic Games to Moscow
in 1980 is a mark of support, a mark indicating the correctness of
the Soviet Union's foreign policy. Now in those terms the Soviet
Union is saying that it is a great social and political event, not
a sporting event. The Soviet Union therefore is
claiming a credit because the Games are in Moscow, which they
certainly do not deserve in the face of their invasion of Afghanistan.
If all our athletes and athletes in the United States and Britain
and Europe go to Moscow, it is not what those athletes say which is
going to be important, it is what the Soviet Union will say to
their own people, because of their presence. And they will say that
2
that because of their presence those athletes are repudiating the
leadership of the West and supporting the activities, which
includes the foreign policy activities of the Soviet Union. Now.
in the face of Afghanistan, and assuming that their forces are
still in Afghanistan, I really do not see how people can allow
themselves to be put in that position.
Question Well do you think Australia's athletes individually will be
prepared to bear the brunt of Australia's protest by not going...
Prime Minister
It is not the brunt of. Scientific and cultural exchanges have
ceased. That is very important to scientists. It is very important
for artists. It is just as important as the Olympic Games are for
athletes. But it is the Olympic Games which happens once in four
years, the greatest sporting event in the world meant to be nonpolitical.
But le me put it again in another way. How many
Olympic Committees, how many athletes would have gone to Berlin in
1936 if they had known the use to which their presence was going
to be put by Nazi Germany in 1936. These are the sorts of questions
that need to be asked. How importantly does the average person
regard the invasion of Afghanistan? If it was an invasion closer
to us, of Indonesia, of Papua New Guinea, would there then be any
doubt? Does that say that an Afghan life is less important than
another life? How many people have to be killed? How many tens
of thousands of Soviet military people have to be invading in a
country before it is of sufficient importance for people to say
universally, the Olympic Charter has been defied. -The objective of
the Olympic ideal has been despoiled by the host nation.
Question The International Olympic Committee has rejected that idea.
Prime Minister
I know they have. And I believe they are placing sport before the
freedom and indeper~ dence of peoples. And that is not the kind of
priority that governments we have not got the licence to have
that kind of priority.
Question You've said you won't take the passports of Australian athletes.
Will you be embarrassed if they decide to go individually?
Prime Minister
Well our own Olympic Committee has to make a decision finally.
As to other Olympic Committees, I will be in discussions with them.
Ellico~ tt will be. And we will have to see what comes out of that. But we
have said basically that we will be putting our views and persuading
as strongly as we possibly can. But we do not want to use the
tactics of the Soviet Union and deny our citizens passports. That
would be using Soviet tactics to achieve our objectives. Obviously
under present circumstances those troops are in A-fghanistan, the
Australian Government will be vastly disappointed if our Olympic
Committee or athletes go to Moscow. We certainly would not do
Prime Minister ( continued)
anything to assist them to go to Moscow. But the arbitrary Soviet
type measures would not be taken. It is designed to keep them away.
Question Do you believe there is any possibility of a Soviet withdrawal by
February Prime Minister
Not really no. They are starting to speak of withdrawal. And the
very fact that they are starting to speak of withdrawal indicates
that the worldwide condemnation of what they have done is starting
to bite. And that is all the more reason to maintain the strength
of that combination and not say because it happened so many weeks
ago, because we are getting used to it, because there is not quite
so much on the television screen, it is therefore less important.
A life lost seven weeks ago remains just as important as it was
seven weeks ago. And we ought not to allow ourselves to diminish
its importance because we get used to the idea and because more
lives have been lost and because the invasion continues.
Question Do you believe continued opposition will be able to retrieve
detente? Prime Minister
I believe it is the only way ultimately of securing integrity and
the peace of the world. Detente, whatever it meant, applied much
more to Europe than in other parts of the world. Over the last
decade the Soviet Union has pressed, either directly or indirectly
through Cuban mercenaries in Africa. In South West Asia, as we
have seen, it has always been their support for Vietnam that has
given Vietnam the military strength to do what it did to do what
it has done. So all of history tells us that if only the democracies,
if only independent minded nations will affirm their position
and support their position early enough, then peace can and will be
secured. But if they say this is not important, we don't have to
worry about this, it doesn't require a reaction, they will get
moved closer and closer to the ultimatedalger-And as I understand it
what President Carter is seeking to do, what major European leaders
in France and Germany and the United Kingdom are seeking to do is
to establish the circumstances in which the world is not moved to
that ultimate danger to prevent it, so that we can secure respect
for the integrity and independence of people.
Question Has your trip convinced you that Australia should adopt a stronger
attitude to Soviet aggression than it has already?
Prime Minister
I think the attitudes that we have taken and the attitudes that we
have expressed have been responsible. I think they are in accord
with the kinds of measures that the United States and many countries
of Europe have taken. We have made some adjustments in the
Prime minister ( continued)
commodities areas as a result of what we learned that other
countries are doing or not doing. That was necessary. But by and
large, what we have done to this point I think is responsible and
I believe it is about right. Over the longer term when I make a
statement to Parliament we will be announcing other measures of a
long term kind in relation to aid to the South Pacific and
increasing defence preparedness. Now these are long term matters.
That will be with us, as I believe, not for a matter of weeks or
months but for years.
Ques tion
So were you disappointed that in certain areas France and West
Germany adopted slightly less hawkish stands than you and President
Carter? Prime minister
I do not think that they have. If you read that communique that
was issued and in reading communiques and looking at words, you
have got to understand the historical perspective with which nations
says things, the way in which they say them and geography imposes
its own differences, history imposes its own differences but
that joint communique between France and Germany was a very strongly
worded communique indeed. It made it perfectly plain, as did
President Carter's State of the Union Message, that if there was
any further move by the Soviets, then obviously France and Germany
stand as one with the United States. It also made it perfectly
plain that all their commitments under the Western alliance would be
met in the discharge of their own responsibilities. That document
was a very severe warning to Moscow. ( end of interview)
CHANNEL 7 MELBOURNE
Question The IOC seems certain to go ahead with the Moscow Olympics. Can
and will Australia modify her stand?
Prime Minister
The Australian Government has stated the view very strongly and we
adhere to that view. Because we believe that the Soviet Union is
not only defying principles on international behaviour. We also
believe that the Soviet Union is defying the basic principles of
the Olympic movement. It is the Soviet Union which has said that
the holding of the Games in Moscow is a great social and political
event. It is the Soviet Union that has said ( and I am not taking
your words) the awarding of the Games to Moscow is a mark of the
correctness of their foreign policy. Against that background I
think it places olympic committees and athletes in enormous
difficulty, but it is not a question of what they say. When you
look at what the Soviet media will be saying to their own people
they will be saying, because these people are here in Moscow, they
are affirming support for our foreign policy and repudiating those
terrible people in the West whether it is Europe, America or
Australia. So in that sense the Soviet Union have politicised the
Games very greatly.
Question But it we go ahead and sell rutile on the basis that if we don't
sell it to them somebody else will doesn't the same argument
apply to the Olympics?
Prime Minister
I think it needs to be understood that decisions we have made in
cultural areas, scientific exchanges, in grains embargoes, in the
ending of fisheries arrangements these represent a very
considerable degree of support for international sanctions where
those sanctions are also getting support of other nations. There
is, what's called in the jargon, a 46ocon-) list, which is a European
list of things that will not be traded with the Soviet Union. Now
one of the things that I was doinq is to establish close consultations
especially with Britain and the United States in these particular
matters. We would want to be basically supporting that general
position. But there is no point, no point at all in Australia's
taking a position in relation to other matters which are not going
to be supported by the wider trading community. That would be an
exercise in futility. But the Olympic Games against the background
of the politicisation of the Games by the Soviet Union is a very
obvious thing, it can not be hidden from the Soviet people. One
of the newspaper columnists this morning referred to the fact that
an earlier Olympic Committee had taken the Games away from Tokyo
because of invasions in another place. How many troops have to be
involved? How many people of a foreign country have to be killed
by the host nation before it is inappropriate for that host nation
still to be host. If I could be hypothetical for a
minute if it was Indonesia that had been invaded or Papua New
Guinea I don't think there would be any doubt. But is there a
qualitative difference between an invasion of Afghanistan and the
invasion of a country closer to home? One has happened and the
other has not and it is a hypothetical circumstance I know. But
I do not think there is any qualitative difference. A life is a life
whose ever it was. And one life is not really more important than
another. But if it was an event closer to home, I do not think any
one in this nation would want to go to Moscow.
Question Fourteen nations boycotted the Melbourne Olympics over Hungary.
Can you expect that many nations to boycott Moscow?
Prime Minister
Well let me only say that while I am not at all surprised at the
decision of the International Olympic Committee, I found, not only
in the United States but in the United Kingdom, but also in Europe,
a much greater strength for the opposition to the Olympics than I
think one might gain from reading the newspapers. There are certain
things that have been said about France and Germany. But the
German Foreign Minister has said in very-plain terms if we want
American support over Berlin we are not going to be divided from
the United States ultimately over matters such as the Olympic Gamnes.
Now that seems to me a pointer for an ultimate German position.
Question Bluntly, do you expect as many as 14 nations to boycott.
6
Prime Minister So far as nations are concerned there are upwards
of about forty who have spoken in favour of boycott or movement of
some of the sports. I would hope ultimately that many more than
the 14 would boycott. Because these are matters of great
significance. The invasion of a small non-aligned country which
was offering no threat to anyone, is a really significant event
and I really do not believe we should give the Soviets the triumph of
having our people ignore that. 000---