BRITAIN AND ANZUS

Press, Volume LXXXVIII, Issue 26857, 9 October 1952, Page 9

BRITAIN AND ANZUS

‘Complete Amity’ On Exclusion (Rec. 11 p.m.) CANBERRA, Oct. 8. The Minister of External Affairs (Mr R. G. Casey) said in the House of Representatives today that question! about the alleged refusal to allow Britain to take part in the Anzus discussions were mischievous and an attempt .to stir up trouble where none existed. Mr E. Ward (Labour, New South Wales) had asked: “Is it a tact that there is no obligation on the part of the United States to use its military power to aid other members of the Anzus Pact if attacked? Would not Britain consider herself automatically at war if any member of the British Commonwealth were attacked and be obliged to render it aid? How then does the Minister justify his persistent opposition to Britain participating in the Anzus discussions when x ßritain is automatically committed to aid members of the pact?” Mr Casey replied: “Mr Ward knows perfectly well the general simple terms of the Anzus Treaty, under which each of the three participants regards itself as attacked if one of the others is attacked.” The Deputy-Leader of the Opposition (Mr A. A. Calwell): That is not so. Mr Casey: I repeat what I say. As to the rest of the question, the facts are simple and have been simply described by the Prime Minister (Mr Menzies) and myself on numerous occasions. “No Trouble on this Matter” Mr Casey said there could be no doubt about the facts of the pact. It had three signatories and any extension of the treaty must inevitably involve a very considerable extension. “It is believed that it is best to confine it to its present membership.” “The clear inference of the questions is that Australia is indifferent to the United Kingdom. I reject that inference completely on behalf of the Government. We are as close, if not closer to Britain, in Uiese matters now than at any other ] eriod in our history. This is a mischievous attempt to stir uo trouble between Great Britain and ourselves. There is no trouble on this matter.” Mr Casey added: “If we are in difficulties, as Mr Ward so mischievously infers, how is it that at this moment representatives of Great Britain, the United States. Australia. New Zealand, and France are conferring in Washington on a wide range of matters which overlap those de,alt with by Anzus? There is complete amity and any suggestion to the contrary is against the general national interest/’