The Press TUESDAY, JULY 23, 1963. Commitments To Malaysia

Press, Volume CII, Issue 30190, 23 July 1963, Page 14

The Press TUESDAY, JULY 23, 1963. Commitments To Malaysia

The Australian Prime Minister (Sir Robert Menzies), on his return from talks in Britain and with President Kennedy in Washington, left the Indonesian Government in no doubt about Australia’s reaction to its renewed hostility to the Federation of Malaysia. Commenting on the Prime Minister’s remarks, the "Sydney Morn- “ ing Herald ” said his direct criticism of President Soekarno “ was in welcome “ contrast to the temporising “ and placatory attitude “ previously favoured by “ Canberra ”, The Prime Minister was thought to have been strengthened by first-hand knowledge that the United States was firmly behind the setting up of the new federation and would make a strong declaration to that effect if necessary. Sir Robert Menzies’s strong stand now is in sharp contrast to the Australian Government’s attitude at the time of the Indonesian take-over of West New Guinea; the Government then found it necessary to retreat once the United States had made it clear it would not support the Netherlands Government.

On the question of Australia’s defence commitments to Malaysia, Sir Robert Menzies was a good deal less positive than in his warning to Indonesia and President Soekarno. This is a delicate political question in Australia. The Australian Labour Party’s official policy, laid down in 1955 and reaffirmed in 1961. calls for the withdrawal of Australian troops (which are part of the Commonwealth Strategic Reserve) from Malayan soil. Though as recently as last March the Leader of the Opposition (Mr Calwell) said the A.L.P. would oppose a commitment to defend Malaysia, the party has a chance to revise its attitude at its biennial conference in Perth this month: and it is thought the chance will be taken. Mr Calwell will have seen President Kennedy and Mr Rusk before he returns to Australia for the conference. The Labour Party might be satisfied by the Menzies Government’s committing Australia as a direct signatory to a new agreement that would extend Britain’s defence obligations in Malaya to the new Malaysian federation. Such a treaty would meet the demand of a section of the A.LJ*. for “ a clear " and public treaty which • gives Australia an effec- • tive voice in the common

“ decisions of the treaty “Powers”. The A.L.P. may well feel that if its conference leaves it with ambiguous policies on external affairs and defence, Sir Robert Menzies might be presented with an opportunity to call—and probably win—a snap election. Both the Government and the Opposition need to clarify their policies towards Malaysia. Like New Zealand's, Australia’s defence relations with Malaya have been indirect, through the British - Malayan defence agreement. As Sir Robert Menzies has put it, “We’ve “ not ourselves had direct “ obligations to Malaya in “ that field, but we have “come in, so to speak, on “ the side of Great Britain The question would have been simplified had Malaya chosen to join S.E.A.T.O. Malaya’s refusal to do so produced the anomalous situation of a Commonwealth Strategic Reserve of British, Australian, and New Zealand troops stationed in Malaya, but with only some of those troops (the British) committed by their Governments to the external defence of Malaya. Furthermore, from time to time, there have been hints of reservations held by the Government of Malaya about movements of the Commonwealth Strategic Reserve from Malayan territory. These things obviously must become the subject of a clearly-defined agreement when Malaya becomes merely one of a number of federated territories. As the establishment of the new Commonwealth State is now less than six weeks distant, it is as necessary for New Zealand as for Australia to define its policy and commitments. During the recent foreign affairs debate in the House of Representatives, the Prime Minister (Mr Holyi oake) said New Zealand’s position was in no doubt: “it was one of full and “ unqualified support for i “ Malaysia ”. Military sup- ’ port? Such a broad inter- ' pretation of policy does not say. The “Sydney Morning “ Herald ” Jias pointed out ■ that, given the present temper of the Indonesian Government, “ there may at “ any time be a clash “in Borneo which will lead “Tunku Abdul Rahman to “ invoke the defence agree- “ ment with Britain. Austra- ” lia would then be in a ■ •• very embarrassing position “if her policy was still “ undefined ”. The same could be said of New Zealand. \