ELECTORATE TALK
The executive of the Australian Olympic Federation, against
the strongest possible advice of the Government, has decided
by a 6 to 5 vote to send an Olympic team to Moscow.
The executive is plainly uneasy about its own decision.
The way Mr Grange announced the decision pointed to a conflict
of interest duty to Australia against duty to the Olympics.
It is plain that that 6 who voted for Moscow placed their
duty to the Olympics above their duty to Australia. The
Government had said it was a matter of the highest national
importance one that touched the national interest and the
future security of this nation.
The decision is wrong. It remains wrong.
It fills me with great sadness because it is a decision taken
for today regardless of its impact on tomorrow, next year and
the years beyond. It is a decision in the interests of a small
band of Olympic athletes. It is a decision contrary to the interests of
hundreds of thousands of young Australian men and women and of
all other Australians who will not be going to Moscow.
There were many of those who competed in the Berlin Olympics
of 1936, who paid the supreme sacrifice after the World War
began in 1939. In that war, tens df millions of people were
killed. It could soeasily have been stopped in the middle
30s if Britain, France and the United States had understood
what it was all about.
Now, the United States and major countries of Europe are-trying
to avoid making the same tragic mistakes in the eaily part of
the 1980s that were made ndhe latter part of the 1930s.
Determination and support of their own people, courage in the
face of difficultly, and a clear and direct understanding of
what it is all about is essential to the leadership of free
nations. It is essential if the world is to tread a peacefful
path through the interrational dangers tHat lie ahead.
The Australian Olympic Committee could have contributed to this
ove. rall purpose. They could have said to themselves: " What does
playing games in Moscow really mean?". / 2
Z-IRRORV r/ Z4--Iq
2
We have stated repeatedly how the Soviets will use the decision.
Those nations who compete in Moscow will be regarded as not firmly
opposed to Soviet expansion. What athletes and officials think
of that is irrelevant. That is how the Soviets will depict it.
They will therefore be enboldened. They will be encouraged to
say:" We invaded Afghanistan. We moved our armies into that
non-aligned, inoffensive country, and the Western World has not
exacted a price".
How a majority of. the 11 men of the executive of the Olympic
movement could place games in Moscow above this vast and large
national interest, I cannot understand. I fail totally to
comprehend how 11 good Australians, as they are, can take such
a short term view of life, of their future, of their obligations
to this nation.
Perhaps the issues became confused in Australia because Mr Hayden
started supporting an effective boycott and then opposed it.
The governments of the nations of our region, of New Zealand
supported by the Labor opposition in New Zealand were all
strongly in support of the boycott.
It needs to be clearly understood that there is an effective
boycott in place. A boycott must be measured, not by the
numbers of nations who attend, orby the numbers who stay away,
but by the sporting strength of those athletes who attend, or
who stay away.
The. great sporting nations the United States, Canada,
Germany and Japan are staying away. They are supported by other countries
such as Kenya, of notable athletic prowess, a number of others
from Africa and the Islamic world, and by nearly every other nation from
our part of the world China, Japan, South Korea, Thailand, Hong Kong
Singapore, Indonesia, Malaysia, Pakistan and Fiji. That beyond
doubt, constitutes an effective boycott.
Medals won in Moscow will be devalued medals. But again, the
tragedy may be that even those who. win medals, a short time
after the event, may well wish that they had not attended, may
well wish that they. had not won. They will not carry the mark
of pride, excellence, normally associated with the Olympics.
They will be the " 1980 medals", which will carry a connotation
all of their own.
Some people have said thcat if the Government feels so st-rongly
why does it not direct the Olympic Federation. If we had the
forrnal power to so if it had been our responsibility
of course we would have. But Olympic Federations have been
established independent of government. They have been busy
asserting their independence. In Australia, by that very
assertion, they themselves carry that responsibility to act
not only as Olympic administrators, but also as Australians.
They have told Australia which they put first. It is a sad
and tragic decision. Young athletes do not remember of course,
what happened in dte 1930s, it was before their time. That cannot
be said of the majority of the Olympic Federation executive
most of whom lived through that time.;
3-
I think wie all know; that the views I have had of Soviet
explansionism are not new. My concerns and fears about the use towhIich
the Soviet Union might ultimately put its inilit,--nmirTht.
havre been expressed many times over many years. They were often
stated when it was an unpopular view. I regret they havJe all too
titagically been proved right. That gives me no pleasure
at all.
Let me make the point strongly. Australia is not an insignificant
nation. If members of that Olympic executive thought that an
Australian decision did not matter in the wider equation, then
they are wrong. Australia is not only a cireat sportincj nation,
we are a middle ranking power.
We hav'. 2 alw.. ays been a firm ally of t groec; Cat naL. Lons fighting
for world freedom and independence. In this insLanCe, our historyN
and our future placed obligations upon us which should have dema-nded
a. certain decision of the Olympic executive.
That they forgot their history and denied Australia's future,
that they forgot Australia's role, in the taking of this decision
compounds the tragedy, because I know they are all good Australians.
While an acceptance had to be lodged with the Soviets by 24 May,
thE! Olympic Executive could still reverse that decision any
tine until shortly before the Games begin. I would not be
surprised to see the position of additional European sporting
bodies move at a later date to non-attendance in Moscow.
In a number of countries, there is a good deal of disquiet about
the decisions to attend.
In Australia, the passage of time has not diminished the strength
of the Government's view. We never thought we were embarking
on a popular path, trying to persuade a great sporting nation
like Australia to stay away from the Olympic Games.
It was bound to have opponents, but we were impelled lto take
our stand because we believe it to be right because we believe
it to be necessary in the discharge of our responsibilities to
every Australian.
Let me ask one final question. How many7 lives is a medal worth?
How many people have to be killed by Soviet armies before we will
have total unity in this country on whether or not to compete in
Moscow. The Government puts Australia before the Olympics. I ask-all
Australians to do just that. There is still time.