Isolation ‘no answer’

Press, 23 April 1980, Page 6

Isolation ‘no answer’

PA Wellington Equality for South African blacks depended upon international co-operation rather than trade boycotts, said the South Africa Foundation’s director-general, Mr Peter Sorour, in Wellington yesterday. ■ Failure of ■ countries to trade with South Africa simply meant continued suppression of blacks, while whites would be able to live off the fat of . the land for a long time, he said. ■ Mr Sorour, who met the Prime Minister (Mr Muldoon),- is in New Zealand to advance the foundation, which, aims to distribute unbiased , information about South Africa to influential people throughout the world and to explain to- South Africans why international pressure is put on South Africa. Isolation of South Africa by means of trade bans would not assist the breakdown of apartheid, said Mr Sorour. South Africa was rich enough to survive for a ■'ong time and maintain a 2

per cent to 3 per cent growth rate.

Such a growth rate would maintain the whites in their present comfort but would restrict any hope of black advancement. Unrestricted trade would mean a greater growth rate and continuation of the rapid advancement of black wages and other benefits. Apartheid would also break down quickly, as it was already, Mr Sorour said.

The alternatives showed that non-isolatipn was a better choice. Present controversy as to whether the South African rugby team should be invited to play in New Zealand next year was co-incidental to his visit.

“I did not know about it until I got here,” Mr Sorour said. He believed the tour should go ahead. Sports isolation had had little effect in South Africa. Also, multi-racial teams were now being selected, the requirement originally sought

by the anti-social Africa lobby. ' Mr Sorour said he did not support apartheid—“there is no way I can defend a law which discriminates against people of different colours” —but he was certain that dialouge between countries was a better, method of breaking it down than isolation.