“The Sydney Morning Herald” June 22

Press, 25 June 1981, Page 16

“The Sydney Morning Herald” June 22

New Zealand's intransigence on the South African Springbok rugby tour has raised'a spectre of a lily-white, 11-nation ' “Commonwealth” Games in Brisbane in 1982. Just as alarming is the prospect of a black-white fight at Mr Fraser's cherished Commonwealth Heads of Government Meeting in Melbourne later this year. That matters have reached such impasse is no fault of the Australian Government. But a solution is within reach if Mr Fraser and the Foreign Minister, Mr Street, act boldly and now.

The New Zealand ' Prime Minister, Mr Muldoon, must be told in the most forthright terms that the special Tasman relationship will be impaired if he does not step in and deny visas to the South African touring side. There should also be a veiled hint that, for the sake of our international reputation, we might have to ban New Zealand from competing in Brisbane.

Despite the fact that Australia could be accused of a certain hypocrisy in the matter — having opposed participation in the Moscow Olympics but leaving sports bodies to make their own decision, a mirror of Mr Muldoon's position — there is a special case for opposing Mr Muldoon's stance this time and insisting that he change it. As a matter of firm, bipartisan policy Australia rejects sporting links with South Africa and — by the same token — apartheid, with its inherent notion . of white supremacy and the consequent oppression of black people. Australia aims through this policy to deny South Africa a means of promoting itself and frustrate the large sports-lov-ing community of that country to a degree they will seek change in order to prove themselves again in international competition.

It is not an impossible hope. If Australia’s cricketers were to be suddenly boycotted by England there would be out:

rage and an initial attitude of “to hell with them.” But if we were to be boycotted for the decades South Africa has moves would be made to correct the cause.

For a sporting boycott of South Africa to show dividends, then no country should break the line. It is not enough for New Zealand to argue that France, Ireland and Britain have done so. New Zealand has. repeatedly, and it must realise it cannot do so with impunity. Mr Fraser has a deservedly high reputation in Africa and the Third World countries for his successful mediation on Zimbabwe. He is seen as fair, strong and high-principled and through his efforts Australia is seen in the same light. All that goodwill, along with Mr Fraser's plans for an important “north-south” initiative at the Commonwealth Heads of Government Meeting, will be lost unless we can somehow persuade New Zealand to call off the Springbok tour.

Mr Muldoon left himself without options with his promise at the last election that he would not let politics interfere in sport. Now, with another election coming up, he must either break that promise or see New Zealand as ostracised and reviled as South Africa. It is not for Australia to interfere in New Zealand's internal affairs but the Springbok tour transcends domestic politics. There is more at stake than the concept of non-inter-ference by governments in sport. There is the higher principle that one race should not oppress another. And there is the reality that New Zealand's attitudes are damaging to Australia's diplomatic thrust not only in Africa, but equally in the Pacific, where the Commonwealth island States have already found common cause with Africa and the Caribbean on economic matters, and now may find an equal opportunity to join them in attitudes to racism.