French pressure on N.Z.

Press, 28 February 1986, Page 10

French pressure on N.Z.

“There are ways of making oneself heard,” said Mr Valery Giscard d’Estaing, a former French President, on the possibility of putting pressure on New Zealand. He was referring to the continued imprisonment of Dominique Prieur and Alain Mafart for their part in the bombing of the Greenpeace craft, the Rainbow Warrior. There is now little reason to doubt that France is stopping some trade with New Zealand as a method of making French views about the imprisonment heard. France has halted the importing of sheep brains and offal to France and of meat and potatoes to New Caledonia. The New Zealand Government is still inquiring; but the point being made is becoming increasingly obvious. France is most unlikely to admit openly that it is taking trade reprisals. To do so would be to expose France to criticism from other countries. In spite of appearances to the contrary from time to time, France is not impervious to criticism. France has, on this issue, little justice on its side. It sent a number of French secret agents to a friendly country where they blew up a ship tied to a wharf, killing one of the crew. Two of the agents were caught, brought to court, pleaded guilty to serious charges, and were sentenced to imprisonment. Now France wants them back and is prepared to stop some imports of New Zealand produce to influence the New Zealand Government on the issue. France would be unwilling to state the case so baldly. An admission of trade sanctions would come close to doing just that.

Mr Giscard is the leader of the centreRight U.D.F. party which, with the Gaullist R.P.R., has hopes of controlling the French Parliament after the elections on March 16. At the moment, the Presidency is held by a Socialist, Mr Mitterrand, and the National Assembly is controlled by the Socialists. The Rainbow Warrior bombing was intended to stop the ship’s being used to protest against French nuclear testing at Mururoa. In French eyes, this was a matter of national defence and resistance to an irritating protest action. The U.D.F. and the R.P.R. tend to view national defence as an issue of greater moment for the Right, and the Socialists feel they have to establish their credentials on defence.

The real difficulty is not to decide

whether what is happening is a retaliation through trade but to decide whether these measures are part of the present election campaign or whether they are warning shots fired to announce further trade retaliation to come. The import clearances for sheep brains and offal might be issued later as mysteriously as they were withheld.

The Socialists have been accused several times by the Right-wing Opposition of not being effective in securing the release of the two agents. There has been a reference on French television to the halting of the imports, which suggests that the Socialist Government wants it to be known that it is doing something to irk New Zealand and that it is not allowing the parties of the Right to make all the play. Just what New Zealand can do about the action by the French is difficult to see. If France admitted that it was taking trade reprisal steps because of the Rainbow Warrior affair, New Zealand might be able to seek a ruling against France because of breaches of the General Agreement on Tariffs and Trade. Some action, not initiated by New Zealand, is going to be taken to the European Court; but that will take a long time and the outcome is not sure.

If the measures are part of the election campaign, greater sense may prevail later, whoever wins in the middle of next month. If France wants to make trade difficult for New Zealand in the European Economic Community, New Zealand is certainly vulnerable; though it is hard to know to what extent France’s E.E.C. partners would allow trade reprisals to go unchallenged. Probably the best thing for New Zealand to do is to register a complaint with G.A.T.T. to make sure that New Zealand’s position is understood among New Zealand’s other trading partners, and to wait until after the French elections.

If France persists, New Zealand will have to make a conspicuous effort to see that France’s action is recognised by others as being unreasonable. In the meantime, there should be no talk of moves by New Zealand to take similar action against French imports. The repercussions from that would be far more disastrous than anything that has happened so far.