AFTER SADAT

It was not surprising that President Sadat was assassinated; what was surprising was that the man seen as a traitor by practically the whole Moslem world, survived as long as he did after his dramatic announcement that he was going to make an attempt to make peace with Zionist Israel. The late President Sadat has been hailed as "a man of peace" by the Western press and Western political leaders. But the West generally did nothing to ensure that Sadat had some chance of making any genuine peace agreement with Israel except by accepting Israel's inflexible stand on the central issue in the Middle East drama: the Palestinian refugees.
It was nauseating to see the former Zionist terrorist, Menachem Begin, embracing Sadat's successor, Mubarek, on his visit to Cairo to attend the Sadat funeral. It was Begin's blatant refusal to make any genuine concessions on the Palestinian issue, which played a major part in confirming the general Arab view that Sadat had betrayed the Arab world.

From the beginning of Sadat's negotiations with Begin, the Arab nations, including the pro-Western Saudi Arabians, insisted that the Egyptian leader was doomed to failure and that Israel would not make one gesture towards offering the Palestinians a home of their own, not even on the West Bank of the Jordan. The Arab leaders were proved right, but Sadat, backed by the Carter Administration, insisted on pretending that it was possible to make progress with the Israelis. The result was an intensification of hatred for Sadat throughout the Arab world.

As the situation deteriorated, President Sadat knew that unless Begin made some move to soften the Israel stance on the Palestinian issue, his own future would become increasingly precarious. Almost on the eve of his assassination, Sadat sent his Vice President, Mubarek, on a special mission to Washington to urge the Reagan Administration to put sufficient pressure on Israel to start making some concessions on the Palestinian issue. While President Ronald Reagan has made several sharp comments about the Israelis, telling them that they should cease trying to influence American policies, he has as yet not been able to obtain sufficient Congressional support for his policy of providing Saudi Arabia with the type of sophisticated military equipment it desperately requires.

The Sadat assassination, and the subsequent attempt to kill one of his senior Ministers, has dramatised the harsh realities of the Middle East crisis. Growing instability is certain while the basic Middle East problem, the Palestinian refugees, remains unresolved. Events continue to confirm the warnings and predictions of anti-Zionist Jews like Dr. Alfred Lilienthal of the United States. Unless the West is prepared to grasp the Political Zionist nettle, the whole of the Middle East must continue to disintegrate. This is no time for Australians to be involved in any "peacekeeping" operation in the Sinai or any other part of the Middle East.

WHO IS THE REAL MALCOLM FRASER?

Nothing has so dismayed traditional supporters of the Federal Coalition, than Prime Minister Malcolm Fraser's persistent anti-Southern African attitude, starting with his anti-Rhodesian campaign. His attempt to "sell" the murderous Robert Mugabe to the Australian people has shocked many. His vigorous support for the New International Economic Order, openly backed by the Soviet Union, has raised the question of whether or not the Australian Prime Minister is aware that he is supporting the attempted creation of a World State, which of its very nature must be an extension of the Soviet system on a global scale, or is he a shallow opportunist who believes that there could be a special place for him in what is being planned by those wielding real power in the world, the international banking groups and their creature organisations like the Trilateral Commission?

Veteran Australian journalist John Monks, writing in "The Weekend Australian" of October 10-11, attempts to explain Mr. Fraser, and reveals aspects of the Prime Minister's background, which should be considered, even if some of Mr. Monk's comments are misleading. Mr. Monk writes that "the spectacle of a Prime Minister well known for his immaculate big "C" conservatism in the running of his own country, espousing the causes of the Third World and the 'south' to the Commonwealth, became the cynical talking point at several glittering CHOGM functions."

But the description of Mr. Malcolm Fraser as a conservative is false, as is the description of British Prime Minister, Harold Macmillan, with whom Mr. Monks compared Mr. Fraser. It is true that, in the conventional sense, both Macmillan and Fraser "had impeccable Tory pedigrees and a privileged background." It is also true that many others who had the same backgrounds later turned out to be amongst the traitors who have made vital contributions to the plight of the world.

Harold Macmillan's close association with the Fabian Socialists before the Second World War is a matter of record. Macmillan was the man who signalled the retreat of civilised government in Africa, when he gave his notorious winds-of-change" speech in Cape Town in 1960. Like his successor Howard Heath, Macmillan played a decisive role in neutralising traditional conservative policy in favour of the British Commonwealth, in order to support the surrender of British sovereignty in the European Economic Community.

Mr. John Monks claims that he first knew Malcolm Fraser as "a shy, nervous school boy, large for his age and awkward at most activities on the school's compulsory sporting calendar", and that as a "loner" at school with no close friends, he looked forward to joining his shy Aboriginal mates at Nareen, at the end of each term. Mr. Monks makes no reference to the fact that Mr. Fraser is Jewish and was greatly influenced by his Jewish mother, surely a significant fact when it is recalled that he was subsequently awarded a gold medal by the American based B'nai B'rith. The award specifically mentioned his role in ending white rule in Rhodesia.

After pointing out what is reasonably well known, that Mr. Fraser was no great scholar at Oxford University, Mr. Monks says that he gravitated towards African and Asian students, leaving Oxford with only two close friends, a Nigerian and a student from Sri Lanka. This helps to explain how Mr. Fraser has developed friendships with people like Mugabe. Mr. John Monks also writes of the tremendous influence of Mr. Fraser's press secretary David Barnett, an old African hand who in Kenya worked on the "Daily Nation", a paper that was largely staffed by Africans and constantly displayed its anti-white bias. Barnett was a small liberal then and John Monks says he still is, exercising considerable influence on the Prime Minister.

Australians should know that, as Mr. John Monks points out, that their Prime Minister is today a type of hero amongst African leaders with long records of terrorist activities. Even as Mugabe prepares to tear up the constitution and take Zimbabwe into a one party State, Prime Minister Fraser indicates not the slightest concern. But it was the same Prime Minister, the man who is so strong on verbal anti-Communism, who gave a eulogy in the Federal Parliament of one of the greatest mass murderers of this century, Mao Tse-tung. The Monks picture of Malcolm Fraser helps to reveal a man, who because of his background, can apparently make friends with the Kaundas and Mugabes of the world while finding it difficult to make close friends with his own kind. All of which confirms our consistent view that Malcolm Fraser will go down in history as one of the greatest disasters experienced by the Australian people.

BRIEF COMMENTS

Britain's Commission for Racial Equality has ruled that cookery classes that do not include Indian and Chinese recipes are "racist". This provides further evidence of the madness in the world today and the urgent necessity for such madness to be ridiculed in every possible way. Otherwise those responsible for the madness may convince others that they are sane.

Sir Mark Oliphant, one of Australia's most distinguished scientists, and former Governor of South Australia, has again provided a dash of that refreshing realism for which he has become well known. Delivering the 1981 Vancouver lecture in Albany, W.A., Sir Mark said that Australia did not need to import overseas equipment and knowledge to develop its own vast resources. Sir Mark said that Australia must stop "selling itself", warning that "We have been conditioned to depend entirely on loan money for capital works, thereby paying several times over for everything we build."
We do not find ourselves in agreement with Sir Mark on everything he says. But we believe he is a great Australian nationalist providing real leadership.