TUGGING THE FORELOCK TO JAPAN

Australia's Treasurer, John Dawkins, while backing P.M. Keating's condemnation of 'forelock-tugging' to Britain, does not extend the same attitude to Japan. The Financial Review (March 12th) reported: "The Treasurer, Mr. Dawkins, yesterday reaffirmed the Government's view that Australia's future is its ties with Asia, emphasising the nation's key ties with Japan ... Although the economic importance of the relationship was apparent - due largely to trade and tourism - Mr. Dawkins said over time the relationship would become more sophisticated, extending to cultural and other matters. ..."
Mr. Dawkins was speaking at a business outlook conference in Sydney, organised by the Australia-Japan Economic Institute. Any hope that the Opposition parties may check the progressive 'internationalising' of Australia is futile.

One day earlier, on March 12th, The Australian reported: "Australia and New Zealand should devise a joint strategy to achieve economic integration with Asia, as the logical extension of their moves towards a single domestic market, the Federal Opposition said yesterday." The spokesman was the Coalition's spokesman on Trade, Alexander Downer, who seems blissfully unaware of the genesis behind the policy of establishing regional trade blocs.

Mr. Downer, irrespective of his depth of knowledge, is not going to let the facts interfere with his zeal for APEC (Asia Pacific Economic Community). On January 30th, 1992, Mr. Downer issued a Memorandum, as Shadow Minister for Trade and Trade Negotiations, to all Coalition Members and Senators, reading as follows:
"A number of Senators and Members have received a pamphlet from Grey Power enclosing a cassette tape of a lecture by Mr. Jeremy Lee about a conspiracy by international financiers to create a single world government. "The tape and the pamphlet suggest that the so-called "Lima Declaration" is a key component in this conspiracy and that the Lima Declaration is bringing this about by handing control of world commodities trade to the United Nations Conference on Trade and Development (UNCTAD).
"According to the tape, the Lima Declaration has forced the Australian Government to admit a level playing field policy which has led to the import of over $2 billion worth of food products which is destroying our rural sector.
"Attached is a standard letter you can use to reply to Grey Power and a copy of the Lima Declaration you can send to your constituents interested in reading it ...."

Attached was a Press Statement, issued by Mr. Downer on January 27th, which included the following paragraph:
"... Mr. Downer said that these groups were circulating audiotapes and pamphlets which alleged that Federal Members of Parliament were involved in an unholy conspiracy to destroy Australian industries and establish a one world government in the interest of 'Jewish Bankers'…"

It must be asked how long M.P's. of Mr. Downer's ilk can be allowed to get away with such blatant misrepresentation? Mr. Downer's knowledge of events occurring during his Party's term of office during the Fraser years is abysmal. In a Press Statement dated July 20th, 1978, the then Minister for Foreign Affairs, Andrew Peacock, stated:
"The transfer of technology to developing countries is another basic concern. We are participating actively in the work of the United Nations system aimed at drawing up a code of conduct for the transfer of technology ... In the field of industrialisation Australia has broadly accepted the Lima Declaration and plan of action on industrial development and cooperation. ..."

In numerous other Press Statements, Mr. Peacock and his successor Tony Street confirmed that the Common Fund and the Lima Declaration were part of Australia's international policy. That policy has been continued through the years of the Hawke Government, under Foreign Minister Gareth Evans, as confirmed in Senator Evans' Address to the Trilateral Commission, Tokyo, on April 20th, 1991, and his Address "The New World Order and the United Nations", made to the U.N. Association of Australia on May 13th, 1991.

Mr. Downer may or may not know of this material. It is safe to say, however, that he cannot challenge the programme for a New World Order without embarrassing his own Party, with its long history of complicity, and jeopardising his own party ambitions. Nowhere in Jeremy Lee's taped address - which now has a circulation in the thousands all over Australia - is there any mention of "conspiracies" and "Jewish bankers". It is simply a pathetic attempt by Mr. Downer to placate his Party colleagues and cloud any discussion of a well-documented policy, which threatens Australia's constitutional sovereignty.

BREATH OF FRESH AIR FROM ASIAN EXPERT

The Bulletin, March 17th, carried an article by veteran foreign affairs adviser James Dunn, on ".... the notion that it is time for us to shift our traditional alignment from Britain and Europe to Asia…" Mr. Dunn went on: "... The debate is rapidly becoming shrouded in a new nationalism with the implication that we will somehow become a culturally different country as we shrug off traditional links and take on some kind of Asian identity. The arguments are an extension of the new economic rationalism that has influenced major political parties since the 80s ... Our political leaders tend by nature to be shortsighted, their visions seldom extending beyond the next budget or election ... Whatever the laudable qualities of the Westminster parliamentary democracy, the two party system has implanted permanent divisions in society ... Australians are at risk of being deluded as to national identity in a debate largely about scoring political points.
Australia is not part of Asia. The most useful definition is of a predominantly European nation on the periphery of Asia. And the tantalising view of Asia as an economic powerhouse is a flawed generalisation. Fewer than 10% of its people enjoy standards of living commensurate with ours. Most of the rest of the 2,800 million people between Pakistan and Japan live in conditions our poorest would find unacceptable. Half endure abject poverty while most live under the stifling weight of authoritarian rule. In our ASEAN neighbours we are looking at a region largely run by military regimes, most with poor human rights records. The Europe we are drifting away from has highly developed standards of human rights and social justice…"

Comment: If only Mr. Dunn could have a fatherly talk with the ill informed Alexander Downer.

THE CAMPAIGN AGAINST TRADITIONAL AUSTRALIA

from David Thompson
The private video depicting off duty police officers dressed up as Aborigines who died in contentious circumstances has been roundly condemned from all quarters, the Prime Minister accusing the young policemen of being "disloyal to Australia". In the light of Keating's recent comments on Australia's relationship with Britain and the future of the Monarchy, his outrage rings distinctly hollow. He also passed comments about Australians "debasing our values in this way", a charge of which he is personally guilty in seeking to turn Australians from a constitutional heritage that is beyond comparison with anything Asia can offer us.
The common law heritage is under sustained attack, with those such as Keating keen to introduce new U.N. conventions, covenants and treaties.

The behaviour of the two policemen was undoubtedly thoughtless, heartless and tasteless, but to compare simple bad taste with a programme of betrayal of national sovereignty is a gross case of "the pot calling the kettle black". However, this unfortunate fancy dress incident will itself be used to drive Australia further towards an internationalist state.
The chairman of the Aboriginal Legal Service, Mr. Paul Coe, claimed that blaming a couple of police officers with racism was to make them scapegoats for "the evil and sickness" inherent in every institution in the nation: "This is a colonial regime as evil and as racist as the South African regime, and it is you people who have to accept responsibility..."

According to Mr. Coe, who has a long history of activism in "Aboriginal" movements, there is only one answer. The Weekend Australian (14/3/1992) wrote: "Both Mr. Coe and Mr. (Lyle) Munroe (also of the ALS) said the Prime Minister, Mr. Keating, could make good his gesture by joining Aborigines in applying to the International Court of Justice to determine the legal and true owners of Australia". Mr. Coe has a record of demanding that the UN intervene in Australian affairs to redress "institutionalised discrimination" against Aborigines. In 1983, Mr. Coe led an Aboriginal delegation to the UN Commission on Human Rights, demanding that Australia ratify "UN Convention 107" guaranteeing land rights, and self-determination to indigenous peoples. This is clearly a continuing programme.

Last week, former Prime Minister Whitlam urged Keating's Government to stand up to "separatist and obscurantist" State Governments whose legislation was inconsistent with international human rights treaties, adding (as did Coe) that Australia must submit itself to the scrutiny of "international law". This is a reference to recent WA legislation for stiff penalties for juvenile crime.
Labor Premier Carmel Lawrence has agreed that international treaties are important, but points out that the victims of juvenile crime are a higher priority.

Whitlam urges Attorney General Duffy to over ride such State obstructionism, and enforce UN conventions, such as that on the Rights of the Child. It now appears that the product of this "new" UN sponsored legislation is about to be tested on the two young policemen who were videoed dressed as dead Aborigines. NSW Premier Greiner said he is prepared to use the racial vilification amendment to the State's Anti Discrimination Act, which came into force on October 1st, 1989, even though the video incident occurred before this date. This will inevitably create further friction between police and Aborigines, merely serving to intensify demands for UN intervention. The "race relations industry" appears to have been captured by people who are determined to foster further friction, rather than reconciliation.

DOES JAPAN 'DISCRIMINATE'?

from David Thompson
In his Australia Day address, the Prime Minister Mr. Keating addressed himself to the multicultural future of Australia. "Where for so long we were notorious for the White Australia Policy, we now enjoy a large measure of respect for the tolerance manifest in our immigration and multicultural policies..."
He believes this is important, in order for Australia to position itself for a "great leap forward" into Asia; we cannot afford to carry racist baggage offensive to Asians. However, it is more likely that Asian countries hold us in quiet contempt for a distinct lack of national pride and racial identity. For example, the Japanese immigration policy is unashamedly exclusive; Japan is for the Japanese.

Back in 1955, when Australia first began to feel self-conscious about the White Australia Policy, Japan was moving in the opposite direction - tightening up immigration procedures. Any visitor to Japan who proposes to stay for longer than one year must still register under the Alien Registration Law. Not only must he register, but he must carry at all times the Alien Registration Card complete with fingerprints.

While Mr. Keating congratulates himself upon racial 'tolerance', the Japanese are much more realistic. It might be noted that Japan does not suffer any problems with Cambodian 'boat people' turning up on Japanese coasts. The message has gone back to Indo-China that the Japanese exercise a serious, homogenous immigration policy, and is quite prepared to "discriminate" against fellow Asians. The White Australia Policy was never as strict as present Japanese immigration policy.

As pressure intensifies upon South Africa to commit some form of national suicide - beginning with "power sharing" (an unknown concept for revolutionaries like the ANC) - the attention begins to shift to the next country that has yet to capitulate to the internationalists. There is every indication, for reasons of strategy and natural wealth, that Australia will be next. Mr. Coe laments that in the relationship between European and Aboriginal Australians, "There is no sharing of power, and there is no respect..." We can expect any incident - no matter how trivial - to be magnified, and bent to serve the purpose of demanding that the "international community" over ride Australian Constitutional processes.

FOOD FOR THOUGHT

from Port Lincoln Times (South Australia), March 10th
"The proposal by Eyre Peninsula Action Group Secretary Jim Cronin that this State's farmers form a union gives rise to some fascinating speculation. "While the organisation would not be an industrial one, and neither would it be part of the United Trades and Labor Council, it would provide the basis for establishing some links between the two organisations.
"According to UTLC Secretary John Lesses, it would be possible for the two to recognise that while their interests do diverge, there is potential to work together on a middle ground. "That middle ground involves combating the economic rationalists, calling for caring government and administration.

"According to Mr. Lesses, there is no difference between the need for child care in Wudinna and Munno Para, no difference between the need for more social workers in the country and in some areas of the city. "While farmers and unions have traditionally regarded one another with suspicion and even contempt, this proposal would seem to deserve more consideration than simple rejection on the grounds that the two have never seen eye to eye before. "The plight of Australia's rural sector is well known to those who live and work there; it is not so well known to the majority of Australians who live in our major cities. "Bringing it to the urgent attention of the decision makers in government is yet another matter.

"Any help that large and powerful organisations such as the UTLC may be able to offer should be constructively considered. "In the long term there could be further benefits. "The need for value added industry to maximise the export income from Australian produce is a common catch cry - however that sort of enterprise can only be established through cooperation from those in the primary and secondary stages of industry. "If farmers and rural people can find common ground with the union movement in a bid to pursue sensible and worthwhile goals, the benefits could be far-reaching in both the social and economic spheres…"