Conflict in Australian TV

Press, 2 June 1984, Page 18

Conflict in Australian TV

The row over the screening of an interview with a West Irian rebel leader on Australian television has all the makings of a long-lasting domestic and regional dispute. A reporter of the Australian Broadcasting Corporation, Mr Allan Hogan, recorded an interview with the leader of the West Irian rebels, Mr James Nyaro. The management of the A.B.C. decided not to screen the interview. Then the A.B.C. board of directors overturned the management decision, thereby voting against the declared public position of the board chairman, Mr Ken Myer. The interview was screened last Saturday night in the “Four Corners” programme. As a result, the Government of Papua New Guinea has banned the A.B.C. from reporting there. The West Irian rebel movement seeks independence for the western half of New Guinea island. The former Dutch territory was forced by the United Nations to become a province of Indonesia 20 years ago. It shares a common border with the former Australian colonies that have become independent Papua New Guinea. Within Australia, the dispute seems likely to focus on Mr Myer, who made a number of statements about Australian journalists overseas, the system of government in SouthEast Asian countries, and said that Papua New Guinea was not a democracy in the Australian sense. There was enough in any one of his statements to cause a row. Of journalists overseas he said that they had to play by the rules of the host country. His views on the role of journalists appear to have cost him the support of a number of Australian journalists, some of whom want his resignation as chairman of the board. His position as chairman was considerably weakened when, the board voted against him and a debate is going on in Australia about whether this vote can be interpreted as a vote of no-confidence by the board. The board overturned the management decision not to screen the interview after the Prime Minister of Papua New Guinea, Mr Somare, had said that the A.B.C. office in Papua New Guinea might be closed if the interview were shown. The board took the view that it then became a matter of principle of not bowing to pressure concerning the content of programmes. The sensitive point for the Papua New Guinean Government is that the interview may have been conducted in Papua New Guinean territory and that the A.B.C. team had invited Mr Nyaro across the border for the

interview. Papua New Guinea officially takes the view that it will not allow any rebels from the Free Papua Movement, 0.P.M., on to Papua New Guinean territory. The incident would have been significant at any time, but has assumed considerable importance at the moment because of fighting between O.P.M. rebels and Indonesian troops. In the last few months, 2500 people have crossed the border from West Irian into Papua New Guinea, mainly to escape the fighting between the O.P.M. and the Indonesians. Those crossing the border and those fighting the Indonesian Army attract a lot of sympathy from their fellow Melanesians in Papua New Guinea. However, Indonesia and Papua New Guinea have conducted talks about the border problems and Papua New Guinea has undertaken to stop any use of its territory for attacks on the Indonesian Army. Before the present dispute began, ill-feeling already prevailed between the Indonesian Government and Australian journalists, including those in the A.B.C. One of the main reasons for the bad feeling was the deaths of Australian journalists during the Indonesian invasion of East Timor. Indonesia has said it considers that the Papua New Guinea Government is acting firmly because it has banned the A.B.C. journalists. At least this is something which Indonesia can admire among the actions of the Port Moresby Government. Papua New Guinea still has a close relationship with Australia and receives the greatest share of Australia’s foreign aid. To ban journalists representing the publicly-owned radio and television network of Australia will not be a position that Papua New Guinea will want to sustain for long. It may please its huge Indonesian neighbour, but it could cost Papua New Guinea the sympathy of the Australian public whose taxes help to sustan the Papua New Guinea Budget. On the other side of the argument, the Australian Government must be in a dilemma. It is an apparent friend of Papua New Guinea, yet some of its staff have talked to a political leader whose presence in Papua New Guinea would be an embarrassment for that country’s relations with its closest neighbour, Indonesia. This raises tricky questions for a State-owned broadcasting system, which should be as committed as any to covering the facts of events, and all sides of opinion on them. The A.B.C. board obviously found that it had to make a decision that the Australian Government must live with.