Interview - 7.30 Report

Subjects: Zimbabwe, International Whaling Commission, India

KERRY O'BRIEN: Zimbabwe was back in the headlines today with the withdrawal from a tainted election process by Opposition leader Morgan Tsvangirai. Prime Minister Kevin Rudd told the Australian Parliament President Robert Mugabe was now a dictator, but that begs the question even further what does Australia and the rest of the world do about it?

Foreign Minister Stephen Smith, wasn't just grappling with Zimbabwe today. His meeting in Canberra with India's Foreign Minister Pranab Mukherjee also put the tricky issue of uranium sales to the would be nuclear power back in the spotlight.

And at the same time Environment Minister Peter Garrett was preparing for a showdown with the Japanese at the International Whaling Commission meeting in Chile over their determination to continue to hunt whales in the Great Southern Ocean. The question that continues to dog the Rudd Government on that score is at what point do they give up on diplomacy and take legal address against Japan that they've previously threatened?

I spoke with Stephen Smith earlier tonight in Canberra.

Stephen Smith I see the Prime Minister has downgraded Robert Mugabe to the status of dictator, but what exactly does that mean in terms of actions by Australia rather than words?

STEPHEN SMITH: Well we will continue what we've been doing. Kerry we've come to the conclusion some time ago that the brutal Mugabe regime would not allow a full, free or fair election. That's crystallised and been reflected by Mr Tsvangirai's decision to effectively not go to the second round contest.

Australia has had sanctions in place for some time. I've made it clear we're reviewing those sanctions, we're also urging other countries to adopt sanctions to the same level as Australia, and today I've instructed our relevant posts both in Africa and elsewhere to put our very strong view to the Southern African Development Community nation states to ascertain from them what they're now proposing to do so far as Zimbabwe is concerned, but also to put our view that Mr Mugabe has no electoral legitimacy or democratic legitimacy. And I've also indicated to officials here to make those same points to relevant African Embassies and Commissions in Australia.

Our starting point remains that the Southern African Development Community states, the African Union states have to in the first instance be responsible for trying to bring some pressure to bear on Mr Mugabe and his regime.

O'BRIEN: But why are they going to do it now when they haven't done it up to this point? Every time you've been asked this question as Minister you've said pretty much the same thing, that you're talking to the frontline states etc etc etc. The only thing that's changed is that the situation has continued to deteriorate?

SMITH: Well in Zimbabwe, yes, there's no doubt - and I've not just acknowledged this point, I've been advertising it - there has been a climate of oppression, a climate of intimidation, a climate of fear, deliberately waged by Mr Mugabe who tried to steal the first round of elections through rorting the count, and now he's trying to steal the second round by violence.

But there has been I think, Kerry a couple of glimmers of hope: firstly the UN Secretary General dispatched Mr Menkerios to Zimbabwe. Finally the UN Security Council overnight will have a discussion about Zimbabwe. That will be a briefing from officials. We hope that extends to a wider conversation. That is certainly the Australian view. And it has been the case that in the last couple of days even South Africa has been making more pointed remarks about the need for the violence to stop and the need for some solution here which might reflect the diplomatic will of the Zimbabwe people.

O'BRIEN: But more pointed remarks, Mr Smith, that sounds pretty lame I would suggest. The South African President Thabo Mbeki has been ineffectual clearly as the regional mediator, hasn't he lost all credibility on this?

SMITH: Well I haven't been shy about expressing my disappointment so far as the South African leader has been concerned. Having said that, the Tanzanians and the Zambians who head up SADC and the AU respectively have been much more robust, and we've been encouraging this.

O'BRIEN: Well in fact the Zambian President who chairs the Southern African Development Community has said the election should be postponed, quote 'to avert a catastrophe in the region'. Is that fear well-founded, a catastrophe in the region?

SMITH: Absolutely. Absolutely it's well-founded.

O'BRIEN: Can sanctions by the African states make any difference to Mugabe in reality?

SMITH: In my view they can. But in my view it's also the case that both behind the scenes and publicly the Southern African Development Community states and the relevant African Union states have to be making the same points that Australia's been making, that the United Kingdom's been making, that the United States has been making.

O'BRIEN: Switching regions as the International Whaling Conference gets underway, the Japanese have made clear again they want whaling. If Australia fails to stop Japan through these five days of talks will you resort to international legal action against Japan?

SMITH: Well we don't see the IWC discussions, which my colleague Mr Garrett will head to on behalf of Australia as being the last diplomatic efforts that we will pursue. When I spoke to my counterpart Mr Koumura in Japan recently we agreed that Australia and Japan would pursue both bilateral and multilateral discussions in an endeavour to seek to find a solution. And that approach was reflected by the meeting between the two Prime Ministers in Tokyo recently.

So we will continue our efforts. We've made it clear that we continue to hold the question of legal action in reserve. We continue to give the question of taking international legal action either before the International Court of Justice or before the International Tribunal for the Law of the Sea, we continue to hold that as an option.

O'BRIEN: What is the trigger point at which you move from diplomacy to legal action?

SMITH: Well when we think diplomacy's failed. That's when we'll make that judgment.

O'BRIEN: That could be a year from now or three years or five years which would make a mockery of it all wouldn't it? When?

SMITH: Well people will make their own judgments about whether when we come to a conclusion that diplomatic efforts have either been successful or a failure. But our objective, Kerry, whether it's by pursuing bilateral diplomatic means or multilateral diplomatic means or ultimately if it comes to international legal action, our objective remains to persuade the Japanese to cease whaling in the Great Southern Ocean.

That's the argument that I've put on a number of occasions to Mr Koumura my counterpart. That's the argument that Mr Garrett will put before the IWC including a range of reform proposals for the IWC to try and make the IWC a genuine conservation forum, not just a whale count or a cull.

But when we've come to the conclusion, if we do come to this conclusion, that diplomatic efforts have failed then we'll move to further consideration of the legal action.

O'BRIEN: On the sale of uranium to India, Mr Smith, Labor's policy is clear - no sales to India unless they're a signatory to the Nuclear Non-proliferation Treaty. One of your predecessors as Foreign Minister, Gareth Evans, who will now head the Prime Minister's new international commission on nuclear non-proliferation, has signalled that India could be brought into the NPT tent via the Evans Commission. Now is that your hope or is Mr Evans whistling Dixie on that one?

SMITH: Well the Indian Minister, Minister Mukherjee made it clear that he understands and respects Australia's position. A long-standing party policy decision about not exporting uranium to non-nuclear non-proliferation treaty countries.

I made it clear that Australia understands and respects India's long-standing reasons why it won't join the NPT. Now whether in the future India changes or moves its position is a matter for India. I'm not holding my breath for that. But there are a range of things that we agreed about which go beyond the export of uranium by Australia to India.

O'BRIEN: Yes but focusing on uranium which is the issue I'm talking about, is the Evans Commission a backdoor way potentially into opening up the possibility that Australia one day can sell uranium to India?

SMITH: That's not how I see it, Kerry. I mean we have had a long-standing party policy position which has been there for a considerable period of time, a policy position which the Indian Government understands and respects that we don't export uranium to a country who is not a member to the Nuclear Non-proliferation Treaty.

O'BRIEN: Stephen Smith we're out of time but thanks for talking with us.

SMITH: Thanks, Kerry. Thank you.

Media Inquiries: Foreign Minister's office (02) 6277 7500