PRIME MINISTER1
TRANSCRIPT OF PRESS CONFERENCE, SHERATON HOTEL, NEW DELHIj
E 0 E PROOF ONLY
JOURNALIST: Last night Prime Minister Gandhi in his speech
at the dinner called on Australia to play it's part with
India in assuring a return to democracy in Fiji. What is
your Government's thinking at this stage in regard to Fiji's
re-entry to the Commonwealth and what more could or should
Australia be doing in regard to Fiji.
* PM: On the first past of the question, obviously we would
share a view with India, and I think a lot of other members:
of the Commonwealth that we would like to see Fiji back in
the Commonwealth, but that is not something that can be
achieved, other than on conditions which are universally
acceptable. At this point, I can't see that the present
condition in Fiji would recommend itself to all members of
the Commonwealth and certainly including India as suitable
for re-entry. The draft constitution which has been
circulated, still contains the entrenchment within it of an
ensured majority within the proposed parliament for the
indigenous Fijian population. I can't imagine that out of
the processes of the consultation, the draft constitution as
it stands would remain acceptable. If that were the case, it
doesn't seem to me possible that any application from Fiji
for readmission at the latter part of this year when the next
Heads of Government meeting will ble held would entertain
universal support. Now, what can Australia do? I have
explained there are limits to what Australia and other
friends can do. We have made it quite clear that the present
situation is not an acceptable one. We have taken action,
we'ye cut off defence aid, we have resumed that aid which we
can identify as going to people, not to institutions. We
think that that is sensible, but we can't impose an
acceptable outcome upon Fiji. The matter has to be worked
out within Fiji.
JOURNALIST: Mr Hawke, have you persuaded Rajiv Gandhi to
sign the NPT.
PM: I didn't believe that I would be able to persuade Mr
Gandhi to sign the NPT. What I have done in what is already
more than 2 hours of one on one discussions with Rajiv and
myself, which will be extended further today, and then ove-r a
long private dinner tomorrow night, we have already had
suitable discussions about the question of global disarmament
and of the developments within this region. We have
agreement between us that it would indeed be a tragedy and a
PM ( cont: paradox if at a time when there is a lessening of
global tension, when there is already significant achievement
in the reduction of nuclear arsenals at the global level with
the elimination of the ILNF class of weapon, significant
progress towards the achievement of a Sl0 per cent reduction
in the strategic weapons area, that i that context, if there
were to be a further buildup of nuclear capacity and tension
in this region. Now we agree on that. As you know, when I
was in Pakistan we achieved agreement there that there would
be regular consultations at the officials' level between
Pakistan and Australia on disarmament matters. 1 indicated
to my friend, Rajiv Gandhi, that we had ihat agreement with
Pakistan and that we would like to have the same agreement
with India. I am very pleased to sa~ y that Mr Gandhi
respornded fully and positively to tnat suggestion. So we
will now establish a continuing ongoinq disCussion at our
officials' level between our two countries on the overall
question of disarmament, and obviously within that overall
level of discussion, there wi. ll be some consideration of
regional matters. Now I want to make it clear that that
* doesn't mean that Australia is acting as some go between In
regard to Pakistan and India. But I do believe that there is
an acceptance of Australia's legitimate interest.
involvement, expertise, commitment, in the whole area of
disarmament, and I believe it will be usefu. that we are able
to talk with both India and Pakistan on these general issues.
I[ think it is important to note, and it certainly came
through to me in my discussions with the Prime Minister, that
he shares the view expressed to me by the Prime Minister of
Pakistan, that there is now a new basis for better relations
between Pakistan and India. Prime Minister Gandhi
reciprocates the warmth, feeling, the attitude expressed to
me by Prime Minister Bhutto. They accept one anothars
commitment and integrity to the creat~. on of a new, more
productive friendly relationship. Now we must be realistic
about this because this new opportunity comes after
generations of hostility in which there have been three
and it would be unrealistic to expect overnight a
* transformation of attitudes and positions formed through that
long period of time. But I must say this, that out of my
discussions with Mr Gandhi, I am very much reassured about
his commitment, the commitment of India, to work for a more
productive relationship, which goes not only to the issue of
the nuclear question, which was the main point of this
question, but also on the other issues of the frontier
problem in the glacier area, and also on the question of
terrorists in the Punjab. There have been discussions about
these three issues. There is an intention to address these
issues, and therefore our concern about the nonproliferation
treaty and our differences of emphasis that we've had with
India on that seem to me now to be able to be approached
within this actual new consultative framework that I referred
to, but more importantly as far as the region is concerned,
we are I believe entering a time of greater optimism in
relations between these two important neighbours of ours than
at any time over the recent past. C in sorry it is a rather
long answer, but I've tried to comprehend a number of the
matters which I know would be ot interest to you.
3
JOURNALIST: Last night at your banquet speech when you
promised recent developments in the Maldives you seem to
have carefully avoided the Sri Lankin situation. Do we take
it that you have your reservations about India's operation in
their presence in Sri Lanka Whlat do you think your
Government's India's peace keeping operations in Sri
Lanka? PM: Nothing was avoided, carefully or otherwise. it was a
reasonably long speech as it was and it' one had qone to all
the issues in which we have an interest and India has an
interest, we might be leaving there now. The approval of ray
Government for India's role is known, it is publicly s. tated
and I have had no reason, having publicly stated our support
for India's role, our appreciation of what they've done
there, and knowing that the government, the Prime Minister,
and the people of India are aware of that public statement of
my position and of the people of Australia, there is no
reason to reinforce it. We share the hope of Prime Minister
Gandhi, and I talked about thi~ s matter with him, and others
here, we share the hope that the timae will come in -, he not
too distant future, when the government of Sri Lanka tinds
itself in a position of contidence to say to India we believe
now the situation is such that we are able to handle it,
control it, and we don't need the further presence of the
Indian troops. Now that's a matter which on the evidence
will be amicably and sensibly handled between the governments
of Sri Lanka and India. And we are satisfied with the
position. JOURNALIST: Mr Gandhi in his speech last night, gave a very
strong defensive naval buildup in the Indian Ocean. What
is Australia's position on this question?
PM: The question was, " in this speech last night, Mr Gandhi
gave a strong defence of the Indian naval buildup in this
region. What is Australia's position in regard to this."
I don't often interpret for Michelle. She usually interprets
for me. I've had the opportunity already Michelle of having
some discussions with Prime Minister Gandhi about this, and
there will be further discussions between us on this issue.
Let me say this, that in the private discussion the Prime
Minister put to me the exposition in some more detail than he
did in his speech, which indicated the concern that India
has about the incursions that have taken place in what for
them is a vast EEZ ( Exclusive Economic Zone) and I don't go
to the countries he named, but he naimed countries that have
intruded into the EEZ, and in a way which India does not find
acceptable, and they are committed to having a capacity to
cover this concern. I must say that some of the issues that
I discussed with the Prime Minister in this regard are the
type that I'm not in a position to talk publicly about. But
let me say this, in the light of the earlier comments that. I
made about the commitment that I know that the Prime Minister
and the Government of India has to a reduction of tension in
the region, and in particular with Pakistan, that as far as I
am concerned I expressed to the Prime Minister my
understanding of his explanation and I believe that there is
reason for confidence about the future on this issue.
JOURNALIST: Mr Prime Minister, when India had its nuclear
submarine built from Soviet Union there were problems
concerning your country including a rather
Minister of Defence in Perth. Has your position
changed on India's naval or do you see it asthreat
to Australia, as far as you may be?
PM: I discussed this matter with the Prime Minister in some
detail last night, there will be some further discussions on
it. As I said, and I don't want to elaborate on this, there
is some aspect of our discussions which it's not appropriate
for me to go to, but on the basis of che discussions I've
had, my answer to you is that I'm not concerned, and as far
as the future is concerned on the issue that you talk about,
I have reasons for optimism.
JOURNALIST: Mr Prime Minister, this compulsion for
Australian and Dutch companies to build this $ 2 billion
naval base off Kabal. In your pre-visiting.......
journalists you have said that you are going to take up this
Wwith the Indian Prime Minister, and that you are going to
come up with an interestinq offer which the Indians cannot:
possibly refuse. Would you like to tell us whether this has
with the Indian Prime Minister and what kind of package
are you coming up with?
PM: I don't know whether I used the language that I'm going
to make them an offer that they can't refuse. That has
overtones that I don't entirely embrace but I think I can be
quite definite about it. The consortium offer of which
Australia is a part, will I understand, be accepted. And
this will mean that there will be the injection into this
important enterprise of, and you must understand that this
contract at this stage is a $ 7 million contract. This is the
consultancy, the major consultancy contract, but this will
enable the injection into this important area of Australian
expertise, and it will be indecitive to the government, the
industry, and the people of India of the very considerable
capacity that Australian industry has in a whole range of
construction and infrastructure development which is going to
be important in the future development of India. So it has
an importance, both intrinsically for the project itself and
is a pointer of the general capacity of Australian firms in
this area.
JOURNALIST: Did you discuss with Mr Gandhi, the current
operation of the trade sanctions against South Africa, and
did you talk about the prospect of any further action at
CHOGM later this year.
PM: No, we've only had the briefest mention about this
subject. This is on the agenda for later today and tomorrow
night.
JOURNALIST: Mr Prime Minister, there is an impression here
among the Defence experts that..... build up in India is
being used or being blown out of proportion by the Defence
establishment to get more money from you. Is that
correct? Why is it that in Australia there is no better
understanding or appreciation of India's naval
aspirations, since this country, unlike Australia has no
links with any other country on defence.
PM: When you say, has no other links with any other country,
it depends how you use the word " links" doesn't it. I mean,
if you mean that it doesn't have a formal alliance
relationship as we do with the United States that is correct.
Hardly correct to say that in regard your naval buildup that
you don't have links with another country. I mean the
nuclear submarine didn't come from Mars. So it's a question
of a definition of links isn't it. Now I don't think that on
this issue there has been any manipulation attempts as far as
I can see, to get more money or support in this way. I think
you've just to understand that the buildup and aspects of the
buildup of the Indian naval capacity have historical bases,
and we are now living in a world which if you had to
characterise in any one way, is the type of most rapid
change, where the assumptions and attitudes of the past are
being shown not to be necessarily valid to the present or the
foreseeable future. So, in the judgements that I make about
present positions, whether it be naval buildup of India or
the intentions of other nations to create a capacity to
project forces, I see those present positions as being a
product of the past. I ask myself whether the changes that
are taking place globally and regionally are likely to
produce changes for the better in the future. And my answer
to that question is yes. So I don't mean, speaking for my
own country say well I will determine the view I have, for
instance about India's present position and say that
necessarily means what their position is going to be next.
year and the year after. They are where they are because of
how they felt in the light of relations as they existed, they
had to make decisions. Now I think that, as I say, there is
a consciousness on the part of India as there is on the partof
Pakistan. For instance, just to take the relations
between those two countries, that there is now the
possibility of a significant change for the better, and I'
hope that as that knowledge and assurance grows then that
will be reflected in decisions that are taken, for instance,
by both India and Pakistan. I mean, lets take the question
of the relations between India and China. If you look at the
present, you have a disposition of forces on the frontier,
you have attitudes which reflect now a generation going back
to the events of 1962 in particular. Now, as a result of the
discussions that have taken place between your Prime Minister
and the Chinese leadership and in respect of which Prime
Minister Gandhi was good enough to give me the most detailed
exposition, then it is clear that there is considerable
ground for optomism now for believing that there will be a
change for the better in the relationship. Prime Minister
Gandhi told me in detail, of the discussions that took place
between him and the Chinese leadership on the border issue.
He told me of the processes, detailed processes that are
PM ( cont): going to be followed through between China and
India, to try to come to a resolution of that issue. Now, as
those things are done, it will be therefore legitimate to
hope and expect that there will be changes in the decisions
that are taken in the defence field and the disposition of
forces and so on. In other words, what we do have to
understand is that both globally and regionally we are
priviledged to live in a time where there is greater cause
for optimism than at any point, I believe, in the whole of
the nuclear age and that will be reflected in this region as
well as other ones.
JOURNALIST: You've obviously been briefed by now on
the ACTU executive wages decision. Do you think this
is an economically responsible one and one the Government
PM: Yes, I think it is an economically responsible outcome.
What's been done there is to come to a and I'm not
Is going to as you'll appreciate. I'm not going to go
in to great detail on this issue. I will be back in Australia
in a couple of days. Let me broadly make the point that
as I confidently predicted, as you know I confidently
predicted, I've said it all along, I had a belief in
the good sense of the trade union movement, in the capacity
of Bill Kelty and the leadership of the ACTU to deliver
a sensible outcome. That confidence and trust and good
faith that I had in them has been vindicated. I think
a framework exists now and I'm very pleased to see that
generally there has been a supportive reaction to it
outside the trade union movement. What now needs to'
be done is for detailed discussions to take place between
government and the trade unions and employers to see
that we get a meshing of wages and tax and associated
outcomes which will mean these things, that I've said
before and I repeat. There will be a satisfaction of
O stthaen dlaergdist iomna tet hed espiarret toof mAauisnttraailni anan dw orgkreardsua lalnyd ithmepirrove
dependents. Within a framework of wage and tax movements
which enable a maintenance of our competitive position
and an achievement of a gradual lowering of the inflationary
context. I think the decision of the ACTU is one which
is going to enable those outcomes to be achieved.
JOURNALIST: How do you plan to assist India in sports?
PM: We don't plan to assist you on the cricket fielJ
we want to beat you there. No, seriously, what I have
my relevant ministries doing at the moment in this area
is to have a look at the concept of creating a sports
foundation, an overseas sports foundation which will
look at the ways in which we may be able to assist the
development of sporting relations between Australia and
countries in our region. This will not be something
that involves a great deal of money but there will be
ways I believe in which we can enhance sporting contacts
between our countries, not necessarily only at the top
competitive level. There may be ways also in which we
can make some of the excellent facilities we have in
Australia available to people from India an elsewhere.
I expect to have some proposals on this issue available
to me in the relatively near future and out of those
proposals I am sure there will come specific ways in
which we can enhance the sporting relationships between
our two countries.
JOURNALIST: You are an avid golfer with an 18 handicap
I'm told. How many holes will you play on Sunday and
with whom will you play?
PM: That's the most difficult question I've had so far.
I don't know how many holes. I always start off with
the intention of playing 18 and I hope I'll get 18 in.
With whom I'll be playing I'm not sure at this stage.
The only thing I can say is I don't think it will be
the Prime Minister. I don't think Rajiv is a golfer.
JOURNALIST: Bilateral trade between the two countries
you acknowledged is of a very modest scale. Have you
S been able to identify any new scales in your discussions
and also identify the areas in which you can step up
the bilateral trade?
PM: You're right that at this stage it is relatively
modest, the order of three quarters of a billion dollars
and with a significant imbalance in our favour, Australia's
favour. Yes, we have identified areas. Let me look
first of all at specifically what we intend to do to
enhance the opportunity for an increase of Indian exports
to Australia. During this year we in Australia will
be expending funds in two areas to assit specific Indian
exports. There will be firstly a display of Indian engineering
products which Australia will fund. That will be about
the middle of this year and then later this year we will
also be funding a visit by Indian manufacturers of automobile
components. We believe in those two areas of engineering:
products and automobile components there is the opportunity
for the expansion of trade.
PM ( cont): We had out of Alast meeting in 1986 set a
target for Indian engineering products of at least one
per cent of Australia's imports of goods in that area.
If that was achieved that would mean a lift of itself
up to about $ 130 million worth of products in that area.
So you can see that as far as we're concerned, it's not
just words when we say we recognise the imbalance. We
have addressed specific areas, sort of niche type areas
where Indian products should be available because like
Australia India is proud of the fact that it is no longer
simply a producer and exporter of primary products.
We are both of us becoming more sophisticated in the
range of our production and our export capacities. So
we are identifying areas where from the Indian side there
will be more opportunites in Australia. From the point
of view of Australian exports to India, yes we have very
definitely identified areas. Without being exhaustive
let me go to some of them. We will be completing the
contract for Australian involvement in the Piparwar coal
project. That will be done very shortly, I think before
the end of this month. That will involve a significant
amount of Australian concessional finance involvement
and will represent a demonstration of what is the
indisputable fact. That is that in the area of coal
Australia is second to none in the world. When I say
coal I don't simply mean the export of coking and steaming
coal. Now of course we provide about 90% of your requirements.
overwhelmingly that's coking coal with only about
_ less than half a million tons of steaming coal. But
it's not only the export of coal as such, but we have
an expertise and experience second to none in all aspects
of coal, that is coal handling, transport facilities
and in the building of coal-fired power generating stations.
So that is an area in which we have the experience and
in which I believe there will be significant developments
between us. In the area of mining more generally, Australia
Ois second to none I believe. We will see, I believe,
further developments there. We have recently seen the
conclusion of a contract in which our major company BHP
is involved with your steel industry which is going to
involve our planning in the environmental and pollution
area for your steel industry. In the area of telecommunications
we have a significant experience capacity there. Our
telecommunications Australia International has an outstanding
record. It has already in 22 different countries got
86 contracts ranging to rather small to very large ones,
including recently a major contract in Saudi Arabia.
We have both the technology at the top international
level. We are as good or better than anyone else in
the world. What's important for a country like India
is that Telecom is itself the installer and user of the
type of equipment and services which it's recommending
for India. We have the similar geographic and climactic
experience which makes the technical capacity and know
how of Australia most relevant in those sorts of areas.
In the area of agro based business every area of agriculture
development which is going to be at the forefront of
your next five year plan starting in 1990. in every area
of ag'-o business Australia is at. the forefrPntnf~ wnrld
experr.. nce ans capacity.
PM ( cont): Also I should mention railways. You know
how important railways are in India. It's important
that one of the Memoranda of Understandings that was
being signed here during my visit is in the area of railways.
So there will be co-operation between the Australian
railway industry and your own which will be I suggest
of importance not only for developments within India
but I believe that combining your experience and ours
we will be able to look at the possibility of joint ventures
into third countries. I make the overall point in conclusion
that wh n we're talking about trade India and Australia
it nogAas that dimension, the bilateral dimension, but
increasingly we are also talking about the opportunities
for establishing joint ventures here in India as a base
for exports into the eastern block countries and into
this region.
JOURNALIST: the end of a long what do you count
as big gains in the economic sphere and what do you count
Oas areas of disappointment?
PM: The gains. Obviously the gains have been the opportunity
now in four countries to establish very close and warm
personal relationships at the top level. It's just impossible
I believe to overestimate the significance of that close
personal contact. I've been able to do that now in
the Republic of Korea, in Thailand, in Pakistan with
its new leader, and of course to renew what is well known
as an extraordinary close warm friendly relationship
I have with your Prime Minister. Out of the renewal
and strengthening of those contacts that will come in each
country, and certainly here in India. a renewed impetus
to economic relations between our countries. Further
in the economic field we have been able to share in each
of those countries and certainly it's true here, our
commitment to the cause of pursuing a freer international
trading environment. I think I have succeeded, and I
* will be saying it again today in the Indira Gandhi Memorial
Lecture, I think I have succeeded in each country I've
been in establishing what I refer to as the paradox of
our time. That paradox is one that we should be very
conscious of. It is that at no point in post war history
has there been more ground for optimism that the super
powers have entered a period of sane, intelligent, forwardlooking
inter-relationships in the way they go about
their affairs. There is now more cause for optimism
that we can live in a world at peace. The paradox is
that at the very time when they are displaying that sort
of intelligence the major market based economic super
powers are engaging in economic insanity, which if pursued
will have the capacity to undo all the good work that's
been done in the political field. Because if the world
is allowed to degenerate into a series of protectionist
trading blocs then, as I've said, history shows that
that sort of economic ) 4UT# 1rOy is the precursor of political
conflict. That is the great paradox and in a sense potential
tragedy of our time. I believe that in this trip we
have been able to have the opportunity in these countries
of talking about this issue, understanding the reality
of it, and agreeing that we should harness not only our
PM ( cont): own capacities but use our best endeavours
with like minded countries to make the economic super
powers, which really we're talking then about Europe.
North America and Japan, but particularly the United
States and Europe, that we've got to make them see sense.
The time is critically short. The Montreal mid-term
review was in December, it was disastrously inadequate.
The talks in a formal sense resume in April in Geneva.
So we are now in a critical point of time where all the
best efforts of our countries and those with whom we
deal need to be focussed on making sure that that MT
round is rescued. That I think has been one of the major
benefits of the trip. I've said in terms of the bilateral
relationships we've also been able to enhance those in
each of the countries I visited. You asked what have
been the minuses. I must say it's very difficult to
find any and I say that not in credit to myself but I
say it most particularly in tribute to the attitude of
the countries I visited and of course, not least, the
attitude I've received in this country from your Prime
Minister through to your minister, your bureaucrats.
everyone with whom I and my party have had to deal.
There's been an attitude of positive, constructive cooperation
and friendship which well for the future.
JOURNALIST: You have just returned from Pakistan. The
situation in Afghanistan is getting worse and worse every
day despite the Soviet Union of the withdrawal of
forces. Arms are being continuously given to the rebels
of what is normally called Mujaheddin. What is your
view, what talks you had with Ms Bhutto and what hope
do you seen for Afghanistan now?
PM: Let me briefly put it this way. Obviously I had
talks with Ms Bhutto and her ministers about this issue.
They are optimistic that there can be an outcome which
will involve they say a form of government not, as they
put it, including the elements of the existing regime
in Kabul but people that they describe as good Muslims
if I could put it that way, it's their description.
They have a degree of optimism that out of the processes
of discussions that are going on at this stage that
there will be able to emerge a government that will be
effective and that that can be achieved without significant
bloodshed. I hope they're right but as you say on the
evidence that exists at the present time there must be
some considerable cause for concern. The real tragedy
of course for not merely Afghanistan but the region would
be if having seen the end of the conflict in terms of
the presence of the Soviet troops and the conflict between
Soviet troops and the regime which they backed and the
Mujaheddin on the one hand. If you now have that replaced
by another form of internecine conflict, as far as Australia
is concerned, we don't exaggerate what we're able to
do about that. Our commitment, which I'm proud to
I I
PM ( cont): reiterate, is that already we've given some
million in Australian dollar termsfin humanitarian
assistance we've committed ourselves to a further
million to the United Nations humanitarian relief program.
So as far as we ' re concerned we're going to do everything
we can to address the issue of trying to develop the
people who have been displaced and hopefully are going
to be able to return to Afghanistan. There is now a
very great obligation we believe upon the super powers,
upon the signatories to the Geneva accords to make that
work in a way which is going to minimise conflict. I
think it would be totally unrealistic to expect that
there's going to be an outcome totally devoid of conflict.
The obligation~ s upon all of us to try and reduce that
to a minimum.
PM: You have a liberal immigration policy but you are
Oimplementing it you are not very liberal in that
way. PM: On what do you base that?
JOURNALIST: Taking immigrants from India, what is Australia's
policy? you don't want the coloured ones
PM: You've been listening to the wrong people. This
is a very good question and I'm glad that it's one on
which I can conclude. It's a very important question.
It is the truth, it is the fact that Australia for a
very long period had an immigration policy which was
based upon racial discrimination. It was appropriately
described as the White Australia Policy. It was in my
judgement and fortunately increasingly in the judgement
of Australians as we came to the latter part of the 1960s
it was a morally unacceptable policy. And to the great
credit of both sides of Australian politics in that period
of . the 1960s we put the White Australia Policy behind
US. romthat point immigration into Australia was not
based on race, there was no discrimination in it. That's
remained a feature, a bipartisan feature of Australian
politics. Unfortunately last year there was some deviation
from that view on the part of the conservative side of
politics in our country but my Government has remained
and will remain totally committed to a non-discriminatory
policy. You can rest assured that as far as Australia
is concerned the White Australia Policy is part of the
history books. There will be no discrimination on the
basis of race and no discrimination on any other basis.
So we set an intake figure which is the order of $ 150,000
for this annual period, and within that, as I say, no
discrimination either against Indians or anyone else.
That is the Australian position and will remain the Australian
position. ends