The Australian government has ordered the country's cricket team not to tour Zimbabwe in September. John Howard, the prime minister, said it was not fair to leave the decision up to Cricket Australia and the players.
And with that, John Howard's government has opened a Pandora's box.
My personal distaste of this decision by the Government of Australia is premised on two factors
1.
"I hope the rest of the cricketing world understands that, and it would be a very good idea if the rest of the cricket world adopted the same attitude towards [Robert] Mugabe's regime. I'm not going to stand around and allow some kind of aid and comfort be given to him by the greatest cricketing team in the world visiting his country."Australia continues to maintain diplomatic relations with Zimbabwe in spite of Robert Mugabe's excesses.
Australian trade with Zimbabwe continues in spite of the Zimbabwe governments excesses towards its people and the free fall of Zimbabwe's currency.
Australian companies continue to invest in gold, platinum and diamond mining in Zimbabwe. Australia's government has not issued any sanctions on Australian entities dealing with the Robert Mugabe government. Nor has it put a cap on the the investment volumes between Australian entities and Zimbabwe ( at least I did not come across any mention of this in my hours of searching the Internet).
Given all this, Mr Howard's "I'm not going to stand around and allow some kind of aid and comfort be given to him by the greatest cricketing team in the world visiting his country." comes across as a bit rich.
2. Where does one draw the line on when and where a government can intervene in sporting considerations?
If Australia is opposed to the Mugabe regime, how will it reconcile with its cricketers playing in Pakistan or Bangladesh, military regimes both?
Will Australia desist from sending its athletes to the Olympics next year on count of China's human rights record?
And what of this - the football governing body FIFA had given South Africa permission to allow visiting teams to base themselves in Zimbabwe during the 2010 World Cup ? Will Australia refuse to play those nations based in Zimbabwe as a matter of principle? And if Australia happens to be one of the nations to be based in Zimbabwe, will Australia boycott the 2010 Football World Cup?
And what of Australia's record itself?
Is it acceptable for countries to boycott sporting contacts with Australia on count of its presence in Iraq? Or its immigration policies? Or its continuing treatment of Aborigines?
Where does one draw the line?
An unhealthy precedent has been set by Mr Howard and it is going to get only worse from this point on.
Pandora's Box.