Apartheid And Nauru's Obligations

Sir, —Now that Ken McGregor has let the bird out of the cage (“Australian companies discover Nauru” PIM, Jan., p. 25), and because I do not hold any official position in my country, I feel I should comment upon the deeper implications of Mr. McGregor’s article and in so doing make a protest against the intended action of the government of Nauru.

Mr. McGregor’s article seems in nocuous at first sight. It dealt with the unorthodox way in which Nauru hopes to put its miraculous economic “take-off” into one of “sustained” economic growth by a policy of “get ting rich without really sweating”.

I do not object to the general outline of this policy but I strongly object to the means whereby such ends are obtained. In particular I object to the government’s choice of clients.

According to Mr. McGregor the company is a South African sub sidiary company and the first trans action of the Nauru-based company will be a large loan to a South African company which is a “big contractor to the South African government”. Here is the rub.

The present South African govern ment and any white-owned South African companies are inextricably linked with the practice of apartheid (racial segregation of blacks and whites in all spheres of life). While I do not expect many Nauruans to be familiar with the practices of apar theid, this cannot be said of the personnel of the government, most of whom have represented Nauru at the forums of the United Nations where the policy of apartheid has been vigorously attacked by member nations. The same applies to the expatriate advisers to the govern ment.

For the benefit of the people of Nauru I would like to point out some of the practices associated with apartheid, their effects on the Africans, and what is being done on the international level to induce the present South African government to change its policy of apartheid.

It is inherent in colonialism that there is an element of racism. But nowhere in the world has racism taken forms so violent, so virulent, or so odious as in South Africa.

Institutionalised and codified under the word “apartheid”, it remains the shame of our humanity. About II million Africans, dispossessed of their lands and their wealth, dis possessed of their own country, live in torment and in terror. Put in reserves, they are separated from the world in to a universe of night

mare and horror. A white minority controls the country, administers it for its own convenience and exploits it for its exclusive profit.

The policy of apartheid has been codified into a system of laws which are anachronistic. To cheek a white man is a crime. To live in the “wrong” area —areas declared white, or Indian or coloured—can be a crime for the Africans. Beaches, cafes, ambulances and blood supplies are similarly labelled white and black.

Mixed-marriages, or even cohabita tion, is illegal under the despicable Immorality Act.

In the spheres of sport, drama and entertainment, the laws of apartheid prevail. The 180 days detention law denies the right of habeas corpus to political detainees and it is indiscrimi nately used. The effect of these laws is to turn innumerable innocent people into “criminals”.

Violates UN charter

A dispassionate study by UNESCO on “Apartheid, its effects on educa tion, science, culture and informa tion” (1967) concludes that in these spheres of life, “apartheid violates, both in principle and practice, the UN Charter, ... the UN Declaration of Human Rights, as well as the stan dards which have been set by the international community”.

While Nauruans were not strangers to some form of racial segregation in the early days of European rule, we were fortunate to have had a colonial master who was quick tc see the writing on the wall and to have felt the winds of change blow ing on that little colonial outpost ol empire.

Moreover, we were fortunate to m under the Trusteeship Council which sends its periodic visiting missions tc report on the conditions on the islanc and to ascertain at first hand the views of the people.

I can still remember, as a boy how the “Europeans Only” sign a the lavatories at the boat-harboir disappeared overnight when the visit ing missions were due on the island and how, after they left, the par tition which once segregated th< counter of the British Phosphat<

Commissioners’ trade store dis appeared. But these are now things of the past.

Unlike the situation on Nauru, agitators for reform in South Africa (both blacks and whites), have come up against the most powerful ad versary in South Africa: a highly industrialised, well - armed State, manned by a fanatical group of white men determined to defend their privileges and their prejudices, and aided by the complicity of the giant American, British, West German, Japanese and (I dare say) Nauruan investment companies in the most profitable system of oppression on the African continent.

Mr. McGregor’s article did not tell us anything about the products of the South African company (except that is a “big contractor of heavy equipment to the South African government”), which will be the re cipient of a large loan from the Nauru-based company. The possi bility that the company is producing the weapons of oppression (arms, ammunition and military vehicles) to be used against the black Africans in their struggles for freedom cannot be discounted.

This thought makes me shudder when I realise that the people of Nauru (through their government), people who believe in Christian prin ciples, could be guilty by complicity and association of a crime against humanity. It will certainly be against the spirit of the UN Security Council recommendation of August, 1963, which asked all freedom - loving countries to stop shipment of weapons to South Africa.

The recommendation followed a more comprehensive resolution by the UN General Assembly asking mem ber States to take specific measures, such as breaking diplomatic relations and the boycott of all South African goods. Most African and Asian States have complied. But some, because

of their dependence on land routes through South Africa, have under standably not done so.

But for Nauru, thousands of miles away and perhaps unknown and un heard of by many in South Africa, there is no dire economic necessity to maintain such indirect relation with South Africa.

In 1961 South Africa, due to pressures from the Afro-Asian mem bers of the British Commonwealth, had to leave the Commonwealth be cause it was not willing to drop its apartheid policies.

The same reason compelled it to leave the World Council of Churches and apartheid policies have been condemned by the Vatican. World sporting bodies have boycotted South Africa’s participation in the Olympics.

As a result South Africa was not represented at the Tokyo and Mexico Games. It is ironic that Nauru, which owes its existence to world opinion, should now do something which is very much against that opinion.

Owes much to UN

It is irrelevant to argue that Nauru is not obliged to comply with the resolution of the UN because it is not a member State. Such resolutions have never been mandatory on mem ber States, yet many have complied with the word and spirit of such resolutions.

Nauru, of all countries, owes it to the UN for its present position and prosperity. In particular, to the representatives of the Afro-Asian countries in the Trusteeship Council and the Fourth Committee of the General Assembly.

I am sure that Mr. Nathaniel East man and Miss Angie Brooks (the latter was a former President of the Trusteeship Council and is currently President of the General Assembly) both of Liberia, and who at the UN actively promoted the interests of the Nauruan people, would now show great displeasure at the pro posed activity of the Nauruan govern ment towards South Africa because, however indirect that relation may be, once we deal with South Africa we are condoning the apartheid policies of the present government.

To deregister the Nauru - based company now may not bring a change of heart of the present regime, but it will at least show that the people of Nauru do not support the apartheid policies.

Nauru owes to the people of Africa to dissociate itself from the label that it is a “lackey of imperialists and international capitalism”. The choice for the people of Nauru is a moral

one and nothing else. Should we, through our government, associate ourselves with a regime that com mits a crime against humanity?

How can we, a freedom-loving people who abide by Christian prin ciples, reconcile our conscience when we realise that our fortune is some one else’s misery?

Is it worth it?

Is that registration fee worth the opprobrium that Nauru will bring unto itself by its action? It is irrele vant to say that politics and economics should be dissociated or that comercial deals with the South African government will induce the government to follow a softer line.

In the first case, politics and economics are not polar opposites but are inextricably linked. The ex perience of Nauru supports this view.

Political independence without the control of the phosphate industry would have been meaningless.

Secondly, commercial deals will only strengthen the power of the white minority vis-a-vis the blacks.

In the first case, the situation is analogous if we morally condemn the politics of South Africa yet provide cheap capital for a big contractor to the government. Such moral con demnation is meaningless without direct action.

My plea to my fellow countrymen is not motivated by student idealism, it is not an empty act of arrogance, or even of righteous indignation, but rather a plea to halt the moral de generation of our government. The action of students overseas in demon strating against their government’s participation in the Vietnam war is also calculated towards the same end.

In both cases the principle is the same.

I am writing this letter to com municate my displeasure at a specific political act. I am not suggesting an alternative policy; I only wish to indicate my moral disapproval of any dealings with the present regime in South Africa, and hope it will be taken note of.

I am a young man, my country is young, the revolution is young: with youth there is vigour, life and

Hope. Kinza Clodumar.

Aiwo District, Nauru. • Kinza Clodumar until recently was a post-graduate student with the Australian National University , Can berra, where 12 months ago he gained his BA. We can put his mind at rest on one score: the South African com pany referred to does not make arms or ammunition.