MENZIES DEFENDS HIS VIEWS ON VIETNAM

Press, Volume CIV, Issue 30725, 14 April 1965, Page 17

MENZIES DEFENDS HIS VIEWS ON VIETNAM

(N.Z. Press Association—Copyright) CANBERRA, April 13. The Prime Minister (Sir Robert Menzies) last night denied that his statement on Vietnam conflicted with President Johnson’s offer of “unconditional discussion.”

Denying he had made a “gaffe,” Sir Robert Menzies said: “I see nothing in that I would want to withdraw or qualify for half a minute.”

He said President Johnson’s statement last week was “almost word for word with what the External Affairs Minister, Mr Paul Hasluck, said and what I had said.” Sir Robert Menzies affirmed the key points in his Parliamentary statement of last Tuesday denouncing proposals that the Americans, instead of fighting in Vietnam, should negotiate.

He was addressing delegates at the annual conference of the. Federal Council of the Liberal Party of Australia. Sir Robert Menzies repeated most of his Parliamentary statement in which he denounced proposals for immediate negotiations on Vietnam. Omitted Sentence However, he omitted the last sentence in his statement: “That seems to me to be a fantasy, and if I am the only Prime Minister left to denounce it, I denounce it.” Sir Robert Menzies said he had referred on a number of occasions to suggestions some people had made that the United States instead of fighting should negotiate. “I emphasised these words ‘negotiate with an enemy which has violated its obligations in relation to a ceasefire; negotiate with a country that has ignored its international obligations; and negotiate with people who will keep on shooting when the Americans have stopped shooting,' ” Sir Robert Menzies said. “I see nothing in that I would want to withdraw or qualify for half a minute. “Well then, of course, the fat was in the fire because they said the President (Johnson), three or four days later, said: ‘Yes, I will negotiate.’ “Headlines—and misleading headlines. In case you have been beguiled by them I think I ought to teU you what the President said. “What the President said . . ■ was almost word for word what Paul Hasluck had said and what I had said in the speeches I made.”

Sir Robert Menzies quoted parts of President Johnson’s speech and said he declared the Americans were in South Vietnam because they had a promise to keep. Sir Robert Menzies said: “So far from running for cover as some critics though he should, President Johnson said, ‘I intend to keep that promise. To dishonour that pledge, to abandon this small and brave nation to its enemies and the terror that must follow would be an unforgivable wrong.’

“Someone would need genius, almost ingenuity for falsification, to find any difference between that and what we have been saying.” Referring to the question of negotiating. Sir Robert Menzies said: “Having regard to what he (President Johnson) said. To negotiate in the sense

of abandoning the position would have been unthinkable and he knew perfectly well the one condition put forward by North Vietnam and its Communist echo is that they won’t talk about anything un-

less the Americans get out

“Therefore he said: ‘We have stated this position over and over again 50 times and more—and we remain ready with this purpose—for unconditional discussions.’

“That is to say, for discussions which do not involve the condition which has been put forward and this has been violently rejected.”

Sir Robert Menzies said President Johnson had said in effect: “We are there to do our job and will do it but under some circumstances discussions can occur which mean we do not abandon South Vietnam and they are not left exposed to violent attack from the north. We have no ambition to have our men killed, we are ready to discuss.”

Sir Robert Menzies referred only briefly to a letter from 10 Anglican bishops which asked him to support moves for negotiation in the Vietnamese war.

“I have received another letter and in the next day or two I will no doubt compile another answer,” he said.