THE PRESS THURSDAY, JULY 24, 1986. The end of I’affaire?

Press, 24 July 1986, Page 24

THE PRESS THURSDAY, JULY 24, 1986. The end of I’affaire?

If the events of Tuesday night really mark the end of I’affaire Rainbow Warrior, most New Zealanders will surely heave a sigh of relief. The only heroes in this strange little sabotage story are surely the members of the New Zealand police who, a year ago, unscrambled a tangled net of clues quickly enough to arrest two of the French agents responsible for the attack on the protest ship in Auckland.

The imprisoned agents appear to have acted with a resigned detachment, accepting long sentences and an uncertain fate as simply part of their job. For them, at least, there was the sustaining knowledge that many of their countrymen saw them as patriots and heroes. It remains to be seen if their curious tropical reward will run its full three years.

A small cheer should be reserved for the United Nations Secretary-General who helped promote the settlement between France and New Zealand. The basis for such a settlement was always there from the time the two agents were convicted. As industrial negotiators, for instance, know only too well, it helps if parties in dispute can appear to accept an independent arbitration, even if they are only doing what the circumstances dictate they must, however unpalatable it may be. Any successful settlement of an international dispute by the United Nations is rare enough to deserve notice. Neither Government emerges with credit. The French were caught out badly, although, from Paris, their intention — to frustrate an

action against a vital French interest — probably looked reasonable enough. Their final mistakes were in being found out and then, if only briefly, in attempting to deny responsibility. The New Zealand Government was put in an awkward position. In yielding up the agents, after repeated assertions, by the Prime Minister that this would not be done, it has demonstrated that economic blackmail — sanctions — can work against a small country. The sale of primary products in Europe can upset the course of justice. For a small State to yield to the power of one much larger is not surprising; that does not improve the taste. The blackmailer, when found out, looks the bad party, especially when the victim has not sinned. Nor is the flavour much improved by a terse note of apology, or by $l3 million.

What happens to that money should be settled quickly and without acrimony. The Prime Minister has said some of it should be used to meet the costs of the investigation of the bombing. That is a small gain for the taxpayers. He has added that part of it should be used to help small States in the South Pacific. That is good sense, for the hint that the agents’ release has been bought is uncomfortable. The money arises out of South Pacific concerns and, even if it has a grubby feel, it might well be spent there to good purpose. If there is to be a lasting improvement in New Zealand’s relations with France — and that is the only justification for handing over the jailed agents — the episode has to be officially buried, even if it is not publicly forgotten.