TRANSCRIPT OF RADIO INTERVIEW, GOA, 27 NOVEMBER 1983
LOMBARD: INAUDIBLE
PM: I don't want to overstate it, we've had some relaxation
aind we've had some tennis and an attempt at windsurfing,
but there has been a lot of work involved, John, yes.
LOMBARD: This is the first international gathering that
you've attended at such level as Prime Minister. How do
you find the contacts you've made here?
PM: Very useful. Very wide ranging and they have been, if you
I-1ke, in two sorts of categories. One, we have to deal with
particular issues and problems as I did with Mr. Lee and
Ghazali Shaffie, the Malaysian Foreign Minister. Other particular
issues, where I've talked with Robert Mugabe of Zimbabwe,
Kenneth Kuanda of Zambia and Nyere of Tanzania on the issue
of their domestic economy suffering from drought and in that
context I have offered additional wheat aid to them
there has been the more general opportunity of just getting to
know people like Mrs. Thatcher, Mrs. Gandhi and so on. That
has been extremely useful and it will be very useful for
Australia into the future.
MILLS: Mr. Hawke, why is Australia taking part in the group
action on Cyprus?
PM: Basically because we were asked to. Secondly, because
we do believe that we have got a contribution that we can make
and thirdly, there are particular reasons why we should and
amongst those particular reasons are two first, we have a
very large community in Australia of Cypriot origin, as you
know. Secondly, we have continuously had an involvement in the
police force in Cyprus. So have the reason to be involved.
We have the capacity to make a contribution and we were
nominated as one of the five to be in the group.
MILLS: You said that the Commonwealth group would work with
the United Nations. What would the Commonwealth group be able
to do that the United Nations alone wouldn't be able to achieve?
PM: Well, Cyprus is a member of the Commonwealth and I believe
Eiiat that of itself means that the Cypriot authorities would
have a greater degree of confidence in knowing that they were
working with a group from their own international brotherhood,
if you like to put it that way. And the further point I would
make is that in the discussions that have taken place before
the CHQGM meeting, when Mr. Ramphal, the Secretary-General of
the Commonwealth and de Cuel. lar, the United National Secretary-
General, there had been apparently a view expressed from the
United Nations that this sort of approach could be of assistance. / 2
LOMBARD: Prime Minister, there has been a tremendous amount
of work done at the CHOGM. H-as this altered your view of
the Commonwealth as a useful instrument for getting things done?
PM: Well, I've always thought it was a useful body. I've
niever been one to be overtaken by the mysticism of this
organisation and I would always caution those who tend to get
carried away by that element of it. There would seem to me
to be sufficient evidence in the past of concrete achievements
for it to be worthwhile continuing and yes, this involvement
has confirmed that view because if you look firstly at Cyprus,
I think we can with a considerable degree of justification
say that we had made a decision here which could lead to the
processes of resolution being more sharply defined and
perhaps the resolution may be achieved more quickly as a
result of what we ' ye done.
LOMBARD: On the question of Grenada.
PM: I'm just coming to Grenada. If you look there, when we'
sitarted off in New Delhi it was a very bitter debate. People
who had been here a long time said amongst the most bitter
that there has been in the history of the Commonwealth. Now,
from that we came down here to Goa to the retreat, a pretty
torrid debate still continuing, then a working group
which contained representatives of the Organisation of Eastern
Caribbean States which had supported the action in Grenada,
one or two that hadn't and a representative of Africa which
had taken a strong line against. They came up with an agreed
document which, when it came back into the full meeting of
the Heads of Commonwealth, was debated at length and somewhat
amended, but now we have a common document. Now, it seems to
me that that is a greater significance for the international
debate. It has a great significance, I think, for the debate
with any country because what has now come out is an
understanding that your solid arguments in the minds of the
Caribbean states some of them for the actions that were
taken and what has been said now, well let's not indulge in
recriminations,* let's look to the future and all heads of state
welcomed the emergence of the interim administration. All of
them. And they're saying, now, let's work with that and
hopefully there will be the withdrawal of foreign troops, the
states of the area will provide, it is hoped, forces to
assist in the maintenance of law and order and from that
situation the Commonwealth leaders have indicated a readiness to
give sympathetic consideration in any requests for help not
forces, but help that would be relevant to the needs of the
state in that area. Now, that seemed to me to be a very
significant achievement.
MILLS: Mr. Hawke, on the economic front. What support have
you received to your contribution on Friday that the
international monetary system, the international financial
institutions, don't need changing, they simply need
strengthening and being put into the position where they are
better able to help the developing countries? / 3
PM: Well, may I say modest, I've received very widespread
and strong support for the contribution that I made on
Australia's behalf and I make the judgement now. It's early,
of course, because the debate is going to go on, but I make
the judgement now that the sort of thrust which I injected
into the debate is likely to be the one that is reflected.
That is that you have got to recognise that firstly, the
elements are that you've got to recognise that the
significant dimensions of the problems confronting the
international community. Secondly, as I was trying to say,
we've got to recognise in the dimensions of the problem
then be realistic in our proposal and by that I mean
particularly, that anything that was done has got to be able
to attract the support of the major industrialised countries
who provide the main sinew for any international institutions
that are going to operate and from that I went to the third
point that we should recognise that the existing
international institutions have done a good job in not only
handling the financial relations between the debtor countries
and creditor nations, but also in facilitating the line with
the private financial institutions and it makes sense to try
and get a situation in which those institutions are going to
be strengthened and so I emphasised in that context the
importance of IMF, general arrangements to buyers and in
regard to the international development.... that we get a
position where the replenishments would have to be fixed by
July of next year, are in fact fixed by that time because that
is very important because that is the area of concessional
finance. What I've been trying to say is let's concentrate
on the existing institutions, see that their lines are filled
according to the timetables that are there now. If we then
find that those existing institutions require some supplementation,
then let's examine the track in regard to the IMF, there are
a range of options and the concept of special drawing rights,
the opportunity of getting correct lines through to the central
banking system of various countries or the opportunity of going
onto the private market. Those are alternatives that are
available and it may be that we will have to look at that down
the track. But, first of all, try and make sure the existing
institutions under their existing provisions are equipped
to do the job even better than they have to this point. Now, on
that sort of thrust, I think, is correct. It is realistic and,
as I say, the evidence seems to me to be there to suggest that
that sort of thrust, which I have suggested, does recommend
itself to the majority of people present.