PRESS OFFICE TRANSCRIPT TUESDAY, JANUARY 22, 1980
PRESS CONFERENCE, 4 TREASURY PLACE, MELBOURNE
Prime Minister
I will say something first and then I will read a text of the
letter that is being delivered to the Olympic Federation later today.
First I would like to remind you all of the significance of
Afghanistan, why we are concerned and why it is different.
It is a watershed. It does represent the first significant use
of Soviet troops outside what had been accepted as the Soviet
sphere of influence. Czechoslovakia and Hungary, tragic and
horrible as they were, were both in the accepted sphere of
influence of the Soviet Union in Eastern Europe.
Afghanistan was a different case. It was a non-aligned country.
But that did not protect Afghanistan from attack, and that, I
believe, says something to all members of the non-aligned movement.
So, it is a new situation. Now, that does not represent a return
to the cold war. That was a different time and that is past. we
do go into the 1980s with the international scene gravely and
seriously troubled with difficulties of a kind that we hoped had
been put behind us a long, long while ago.
It does not help to use the rhetoric, the language of the past.
That is why I say quite specifically, the period ahead of us
does not represent a repetition of something that occurred once before.
It will be different if, for no other reason that it is in a
different decade and time has gone on very significantly. But it
is also different for one or two other reasons. Over all of this
period, the Soviet Union has been spending about 12 per cent of
its Gross National Product on arms and3 armaments, a very large
expenditure indeed, of a kind I believe that has probably not
been matched by any other count3-y 7 certainly not matched by any
of the democracies.
So, they have been improving the quality, the effectiveness and.
the range of their armaments in both conventional and nuclear fields.
That is a different situation where in the past, during what was
called the cold war and what was known as the West our alliescertainly
had nuclear superiority, and much more nearly
conventional quality than might now be the case.
That again means that it involves a different situation, and as
we believe as we have said, a more dangerous situation. So, there is
a clear-need for us to consult with our regional friends and
partners and also a need for us to consult with major party
principals, the principal actors on the stage the United States
and the United Kingdom in particular.
Andrew Peacock is not going to South East Asia, to India and Pakistan,
and I am not going -to the United States and to the United Kingdom
with any grand design or with a plan to put. We are going to
achieve an exchange of ideas and views on a matter of the utmost
seriousness to all of us: to all people who want to support the
independence of nations, the independence of states, free from / 2
co 0/
-2
Prime Minister ( continued)
domination by others. That is really what it is all about.
So it is for consultations, for an exchange of views, helping to
build a consensus amongst all of those who want to support the
independence of states. If Australia can contribute something
to that, then so we ought.
I have already said that the weight a nation of 14 million people
can put into the scales is very obviously limited, against the
weight that the United States or Europe combines, through NATO,
through the Common Market, can put into the scales is obviously
very significantly limited. But that does not remove the obligation
for Australians to do what Australians can on a matter which is of
vast importance and which could be of infinite importance to our
children and to the people who will live and will want to make their
homes and bring up their families in Australia down through
the generations.
So, consultation alone is the purpose of why we are going overseasto
help to build, if we can, that consensus of independentlyminded
nations.
Now, quite plainly in the discussions today there was a-significant
exchange of views, not only in relation to Andrew Peacock's visit.
He is expecting Cabinet's views to be sent to him. There were
preparatory discussions yesterday between the Foreign Minister,
myself and senior officials, the Defence Minister~ also Michael
MacKellar who is accompanying me to the United States and to
the United Kingdom. There will be confimatory advice going to
Andrew Peacock in relation to that. There was obviously a good
deal of discussion about the nature of the talks that will take
place in Washington and later in London.
One of the matters that we discussed considerably, concerned the
Olympic Games, and I want to reaa you. the text of a letter, shortly,
that will be sent to the Australian Olympic Federation. It sets
out the totality of our view, and I believe it does it in clear
and concise terms. But, before doing that, I want to issue a y7arning
and a plea please don't treat the Olympic Games, itself, as the
issue. The issue is the Soviet invasion of Afghanistan. That is
the thing that is important. That is the kind of thing which we
want tosee is not repeated, and cannot be repeated, anywhere else,
anwhere around the world. The Olympic Games, as events have turned,
has a relationship to that. Yet the Olympic Games themselves are
not the issue. The issue is Afghanistan and the invasion. And so,
please, I hope you can remember that.%
Now, the text of the letter that will be sent to the Secretary of
the Australian Olympic Federation:
I am writing to advise you officially of the Government's views on
the holding of the Olympic Games in Moscow. You will be aware that the
Government takes the most serious view of the Russian invasion of
Afghanistan, and regards it as a grave threat to world peace and to
all independent nations. It also believes that the great majority
of Australians would want their Government to express in strong terms'
our complete opposition to the actions of the Soviet Government. ./ 3
-3
The Government considers that one of the most telling
ways in which the opposition of Australia and other independent
nations to the Soviet actions can be expressed, particularly to
the people of the is by an effective boycott of the
1980 Olympic Games in Moscow by the Olympic Committees of
those nations.
President Carter has recently written to the United States
Olympic Committee urging it in consultation with other
National Olympic Committees to advise the International
Olympic Committee that if Soviet troops do not fully withdraw
from Afghanistan within the next month, Moscow will become an
unsuitable site for a festival meant to celebrate peace and
goodwill. In the event that Soviet troops did not withdraw within
that time he urged the U. S. O. C.. to propose that the Games be
transferred or cancelled.
Our Government takes a similar view and I am writing on its
behalf to ask that the Australian Olympic Committee join with
U. S. O. C. and other National Olympic Committees to express to the.
International Olympic Committee the strong view that if Soviet
troops do not withdraw as suggested, Moscow will become unsuitable
as a site and that the Games should be transferred to another
site or sites or be cancelled for this year.
It is the Government's belief that the Australian Olympic
Committee, our Olympic athletes and our people will fully understand
its reluctance to propose such a serious course but it is quite
satisfied that in the event of the continued occupation of
Afghanistan by the U. S. S. R. an effective boycott of the Games
will bring home to the Russian Government and people, perhaps
in a way no other step could, the great seriousness in the eyes
of independent nations of the steps the U. S. S. R. has taken.
I would also like to assure you of the Government's continued
support of the principles underlying the Olympic Games. This year
the Government has agreed to ton tribute $ 700,000 to the Olympic
appeal and a cheque for the balance of $ 500,000 will be handed
over later this week. Whatever happens it is the earnest wish of
the Government that these monies be used to give cur athletes
the opportunity to pursue their excellence in sport and engage in
peaceful competition with the athletes of other countries. It is
difficult to do this in a country where the Government of that
country has so recently violated the basic principles upon
which the peace and goodwill of nations depends.
It is equally our earnest wish that all possible steps be taken
to preserve and enhance the Olympic ideal, and the
Australian Olympic Committee can be sure of the Government's
full support for its endeavours to that end. Olympic Committees
around the world will no doubt be studying with great seriousness
all the options available. One option, particularly for the
longer term, would be a permanent site in Greece for the
Olympic Games. If that were the desired outcome, this Government
would support it, including with an appropriate financial
contribution. / 4
-4
Question* It is very hard to tell exactly whether or not inaudible
any sort of boycott of the Olympic Games?
Prime Minister
Well, this letter will be handed around so you can judge, quite
exactly for yourself. We are taking the view, similar to that
which President Carter took with the American Olympic Comimittee,
and that is; we are saying that if the Russians stay in
Afghanistan, Moscow will become an unsuitable site for the 1980
Olympics and in that event, we would be urging the Australian
Olympic Committee, along with the United States Olympic Committee,
and that of any others that can be so persuaded to seek to transfer
the Olympic Games to another site or sites. We have also said
quite plainly, that an effective boycott of the 1980 Olympics
in the circumstances that have unfolded, could well bring home to
the Soviet Union and people, the seriousness of the action that
they took and the strength of the opposition of independent
nations more clearly than any other single act.
Trade sanctions in all these matters can be very important, but,
the Moscow Olympic Games are going to be highly visible to all
the Russian people. It was clearly the objective of the Soviet
government to have all the Russian people know and understand
that the athletes of all the nations of the world were coming to
Moscow, to Russia to pay homage might be too strong a word
but, by their coming, to pay their respects to the Soviet Union
as hosts to the 1980 Olympics. But if that were not the fact, if
there were to be an effective boycott, then the message would
get home to the Russian people and to the Russian government, very
effectively indeed.
And with the President having announced his decision in relation
to it, and with the Australi~ n government having taken the serious
view that it has of these particular matters, we believe we need
to support that-stand.
Question Supposing Australia's athletes and the Olympic Committee don't agree
with the Government and want to go to Moscow? What would be the
Government's attitude then?
Prime Minister
Well, let's see what happens to the response that has been put.
But I had noticed even on the news screens tonight that some
athletes who are now training and obviously wanting to test their
skills against the athletes of other countries, have been saying
that they believe the appropriate thing would be for the Games
to be transferred to another country in the circumstances that
prevail. I believe that those athletes who have already stated
that kind of view and quite a number have been asked are really
putting matters first which are of great importance to Australia
and to their families; putting them above what must be a
tremendous ambition, a tremendous hope, and a tremendous test for
them of all the time and effort that has gone into becoming
an Olympic athlete.
5
Question Would Canberra withdraw finance?
Prime Minister
No. I said quite plainly that I wouldn't. That is in the letter
that I read out. It could be used for other purposes, but it will
be handed over, it will be in the hands and the responsibility
of the Olympic Committee. 000---