PRIME MINISTER
TrRANSCRIPT OF INTERVIEW WITH REGIS FAUCON.. TELEVISION FRANCE CHANNEL
OQNE, ._ 31 January 1967-.__-
E 0 E PROOF ONLY
FAUCON: How bad are the relations now between France and Australia?
PM: You would really have to address that question t~ o Monsieur
Chirac. As far as I am concerned we have done nothing to strain
the relations. My attitude and the attitude of the government
and the people of Australia towards the people of
France is one of very considerable admiration in so many ways.
We share a great deal. We have fought together in two wars the
blood of thousands of Australians is in the soil of France. WE
have the same commitment to the concepts of free parliamentary
democracy, liberty for the individual. WE have a great admiration
for the cultural heritage of France and the great contribution
it has made to the world.--And so--the--things that unite us are
infinitely stronger than those on which we have differences. There
seems to be some inability on the part of this government of France
to understand that two countries can have great respect for one
another, share so many things, but-. in a mature relationship can
differ on particular points of policy.
FAUCON: From your point of view what is the most disturbing problemr.
Is it the nuclear test, the French nuclear or New Caledonia?
PM: We have concern about both. ON the question of testing at
Muroroa we and our fellow nations in the South Pacific have taken
the view that we don't argue with France's right to make a decision
according to its perceptions of its own interests, that it needs
to have an independent nuclear force. That is a decision for France
to make. But if they are going to conduct nuclear testing in support
of that policy and they say it is safe and they assert that it
is then let them conduct the testing in metropolitan France.
It follows as a matter of logic that if it is safe, do it there.
On the question of New Caledonia.. We do have very consideragle
concerns there. WE understand that this is a ' difficult problem
because the Kanaks are in a minority and as. President Mitterand
said to me when I was talking with him in 1983. he said you must
understand that New Caledonia is not Zimbabwe. There it is easy
to transfer power, it is not easy in New Caledonia.
FAUCON: And it is not Algeria.
PM: And it is riot Algeria, correct. I am just using the anal ogy
that tie used. What we were hoping to see and what we thought we
saw in the Mitterand/ Fabius plan was a process whereby there could
PM cont: a gradual constitutional development which would recognise
both the rights of the Kanaks and of the non-Kanaks. And let me
emphasise that we recognise the rights and the interests of the
non-Kanaks as well as the Kanaks. We saw that being able to develop
in a way which coul~ d lead to a constitutional development which
could emcompass an independence in association with France. The
problem we see now is that the Kanaks are going to repudiate the
processes of the present government. They are not going to associate
themselves with the referendum. In that situation, it seems to
us and to our friends in the South Pacific that the likelihood
in those circumstances that the tendencies within the FLNKS whichsee.
mer it in some association wi th Libya -and. that -sortof association
will be strengthened. So we are very concerned about those potential
devel] opments.
FAUCON: Is there a better way than a referendum to get the advice
~ of the population since it is on a one man, one-vote system.
PM: I suppose the answer to that is that the previous government
thought ther-e was a better way of handling the process than Australia
and Australia and the other South Pacific nations saw more merit
in the previous French approach.
FAUCON: You know what the French say, if I may use this expression,
that it is not your business and you make things worse. What do
-you say to that?
PM: If we are going to conduct international relations on the
basis that it is theibusiness of no -othyer country-in terms of what
one country does, I suppose it follows from that that what the
Soviet Union does in Afghanistan -is nobody else's business. I
don't accept that. I think that what happens in other areas is
often the business of others. Let-me make this point. We can
say in respect of ourselves that we are not asking of France a
process that we didn't apply to ourselve. When it came to our
de-colonisation process with Papua New Guinea, Nauru, Cocos Island,
we deliberately invoked the committee of 24. We saw merit in being
assisted in our processes of getting a lasting and peaceable
resolution of that decolonisation by involving others. So we are
not suggesting nor are the South Pacific nations suggesting something
which, as far as we were concerned, we weren't prepared to do
oursevles. FAUCON: If the referendum says no to independence, what are you
going to do. H-ow far are you ready to go yourself?
PM: I wonder whether I could turn the question around to you and
say what are you going to do if the whole of the Kanaks boycott
the referendum as they say are going to and they turn to other
measures, what are you going to do.
FAUCON: Did you find a change of attitude when there was new majority
elected in France last year?
PM: I think I am a reasonably intelligent bloke that is Australian
for person, male person anyway I would have to-go on the evidence
that since there has been the change of government there have been
decisions taken by this French Government that weren't taken by
the previous one. Let me be precise. There has been now the banning
8y g~ jpn86nRjM~ nigterial interchanges. There has been the rejection
n',
FAUCO4: Hlow did you react to that?
PM: In addition to that there has been the colourful language
by your French Prime Minister about my lack of intelligence. I
always thought that the French were elegant, mature, sophisticated
in the handling of their affairs. I would simply say that I wouldn't
regard those actions as consistent with elegance and maturity.
And we-won't be reciprocating.
FAUCON: So how do you react when the French say that you are in
a bad position since you didn't do too well with the aboriginals?
-PM: I would say iti itia loyrav yut aalogy?
We had a colonial relationship with Papua New Guinea. WE didn't
seek to impose an outcome. The characteristics of the de-colonisation
process in which AustrAlia was involved was one of consistent.
patient negotiation and discussion-with-the representatives of
Papua New Guinea including as I say invoking the assistance of
the relevant United Nations agencies. WE thought that we could
be helped by others. And we were. I don't accept the analogy.
If you want to ask me a question about the aborigines. in a relevant
sense I am more than happy to answer.
FAUCON: Personally I know the problem very well.
PM: You accept-that -it-is-not a relevant-. analogy. If--you Want
an analogy-
FAUCON: I am not working for the Chirac Government.-
PM: I am not suggesting that your are.
FAUCON: You are saying that Chirac is anti-Australian
PM: I am not saying that he is. I don'Ik make assertions where
I don't know the facts. All I can say in respect of the facts
that I do know is that he has done things which don't seem to be
consistent with a very cordial relationship towards us.
FAUCON: You disagree, but at least you should talk.
PM: Yes, of course. That is my view domestic, political and
economic affairs and it is my attitude in regard to the relations
between nations. It is much better to talk than impose bans.
If you can.
FAUCON: France says that the truth is that Austrafria wants to
get rid of any French influence in
PM: It is a nonsense and a palpable nonsense'. And I don't know
why people come to stupid conclusions without evidence suggested
that we want to take the place of France. Let me say to you and
if I may. Indirectly through you, to Monsieur Chirac. I and my
Government have our hands completely full in conducting the affairs
of Australia and in handling, within our limit of economic resources
the amount of aid that we were able to make available to the countries
inthe region. We have-neither ambition nor capacity to take the
place of France in the region. And I must say that any view that
we want to do that Is both a misapprehension and if I may say so
borders on the paranoia. I I
4.
FAUCON: Ylou are in Europe and you arc not going to visit France.
And if you are invited tomorrow by Chirac to visit him what would
you do?
PM: I would say the invitation was a bit late.
FAUCON: Next time?
PM: Tomorrow I am with President Mubarak and I am not going to
offend President Mubarak by saying " President I am whipping over
to Paris".
FAUCON: Are you ready to see Chirac?
PM: I would always meet with Prime Minister Chirac.
Let me say I am not prejudging the future.
FAUCON: How do you see the future? Do you think it can-go sofar
as break up the diplomatic relations?
PM: NOt on our part. I would hope that in the light of the things
that I have said that the French Government would understand that
it is non productive to conduct affairs in this way. I simply
don't believe it is appropriate to insult the intelligence of leaders
of other countries. That is not the way Australia-
FAUCON: Do you feel insulted?-
PM: I think I have seen an inaccurate statement when the Prime
Minister of France describes me-as--stupid. I don't feel -terribly
insulted. I just feel I am the object of inaccuracy.
I don't think it is a very elegant, mature, sophisticated way of
conducting relations, any more than I think it is elegant, mature
or sophisticated to demand the withdrawal of the consul on false
grounds the suggestion that they weren't aware of what the consul
was doing when in fact there is written ev-idence of transmission
by the consul to the French authorities of what he was doing.
And in return, written correspondence indicating the acceptance
of that. So this is not the way for intelligent, mature people
to conduct themselves. I hope that they won't go any further.
France will not be finding any reciprocal sort of attitude from
US. FAJJCON: Yes but it is really a dead end street. What can happen
now? PM: It is not really a dead end street. WE are still trading.
Last year we had $ 670 million imports from France, we export $ 710
million worth of Australian goods to France. I think that will
go on. I think Australians will travel to France. I hope French
people will travel to Australia. There is no'better country in
the world for them to travel to. So we hope those things will
go on. And this, if I can describe it as this, hopefully passing
paranoia will disappear and we can have the maturity from France
that we have come to expect from them.
FAUCON: You tend to make a difference between the French and Mr
-Chirac, Your problem is with Mr Chirac?
PM: I haven't got a problem. Do I look as though I have got a
problem. I don't feel problem-ridden in regard to
FAUCON: With Australia, the problem is Mr Chirac?
PM: Again, I wouldn't want to exaggerate a sense of Australian
problems with Mr Chirac. It seems to me that Mr Chirac has a problem
either with me or with Australia. I have tried to explain that
his problems are ill-founded. And there will be nothing that we
will be doing which would be seeking to exacerbate those problems.
I say this to Mr Chirac. as I said at the beginning of this interview,
I, the Government and the people of Australia have enormous admiration
for the people of France, for France. WE have certain differences
of opinion and intelligent, mature people, certainly where those
two people share so much in common, ought to be able to handle
__ differences of opinion in a more mature way.
FAUCON: On the economic side, arenr'tou afrfaid-that Ftrnce~'-hAV
influence the Common Market with more on your agricultural
exports? PM: I don't think they would be silly enough to try and do that
, on the one hand. Nor do I'think the rest of the community would
be unintelligent enough to' respond to those pressures if they were
to be applied.
FAUCON: Will you send somebody to the OECD meeting in Paris, I
think it is in May?
PM: WE have always done it in the past, why would we not do it
now. ENDS
I