P.M. EXPLAINS HELP FOR VIETNAM

Press, Volume CIV, Issue 30803, 15 July 1965, Page 3

P.M. EXPLAINS HELP FOR VIETNAM

(New Zealand Press Association)

WELLINGTON, July 14.

New Zealand was helping the people of South Vietnam to fight Communist agression because of her obligations under the S.E.A.T.O. Treaty , the Prime Minister (Mr Holyoake) told Parliament tonight.

He was replying at the conclusion of a two-day foreign affairs debate which has been dominated by the issues of the war in South Vietnam. Mr Holyoake said that only three weeks ago did United States troops go into action in Vietnam for the first time.

“The people there have been defending themselves against the Viet Cong for years, at terriffic cost,” Mr Holyoake said.

He said they had been helped by United States advice, material, air support and latterly by United States bombing of supply lines in North Vietnam. There was an angry exchange between the Prime Minister and Mr J. Mathison (Opp., Avon), who interjected: “We have no obligation under the treaty at all.” Mr Holyoake: If that is the case, then we have no obligation under any treaty we have put our signature to. and no-one else has any obligation to us. “South Vietnam has the right to ask for assistance from any member of S.E.A.T.O. Sir Walter Nash: Has the South Vietnam Government at any time applied for help? Mr Holyoake: Any state, whether a protocol state or not, has the right if attacked to apply to the members collectively or individually. Mr Holyoake said that four S E.A.T.O. members—the United States, Australia, New Zealand and Thailand—made a collective statement agreeing to increase their aid to Vietnam.

He said there was a proposal before the Parliament of the Philippines for a considerable military force to be sent to Vietnam New Zealand knew where France and Pakistan stood, said Mr Holyoake. New Zealand also knew that Britain was involved elsewhere. The Prime Minister confirmed that New Zealand was considering making a further contribution to the United Nations to make up for the refusal of the Communist members to pay their share of the United Nations peacekeening operations.. He asked, however, whether the democracies could carry on paying defalcations of other countries. China And U.N. Replying to a suggestion that mainland China should be admitted to the United Nations. Mr Holyoake asked whether the Opposition would like to see the 10 million or 11 million people of Formosa thrown to th-- wolves. Opposition members: No. No. Mr Holyoake: That is what it would mean. China would not join the United Nations if Formosa was also a member. “1 am not prepared to do that.” said Mr Holyoake. When the Chinese used peaceful methods to settle differences, then the attitude of the Government would change, he said. “Why does Labour always advocate the things that the Communists want?” asked Mr Holyoake. “They are continuously arguing the Communist side.” Mr N. E. Kirk (Opp., Lyttelton): The Prime Minister knows that is out of order.

Mr Holyoake: That is all rubbish. Public opinion has moved against the demonstrators and the pacifists in New Zealand and tha is why Labour is now so restrained The deputy Leader of the

.Oppposition (Mr H. Watt) said all possible steps should be taken to reinforce the effectiveness of the United ! Nations. “At the moment it is not able to deal with some of the ‘ problems it was formed to deal with.” Mr Watt asked the Prime Minister (Mr Holyoake) whether the 21 representatives at the Prime Ministers' conference in London agreed that China should not be invited to join the United Nations

“Because the time is past when we can afford to have a nation China’s size outside this organisation.

! “I want to know when we iare going to take a reasonable i attitude in this matter. “If China became a member it does not mean we have to accept the Chinese form of government or have Formosa become a part of China. “1 hope Mr Holyoake can tell us whether he was in the minority or the majority in expressing the opinion that this country did not want China admitted.” said Mr Watt. Mr R. E. Jack (Govt.. Waimarino) said the United Nations was determined to stem the advance of communism in Asia. Aid Secondary To this end. economic aid to Asia was essentially a secondary consideration to political stability and security. But behind the immediate threat of communism was another great threat—the appaling growth of world population. “It is extremely important all nations should cease pretending the population problem does not exist.” said Mr Jack. He said at the present rate of growth there would be. in a few centuries, only a square yard of habitable land available to eight people. Mr Jack said the Communist creed called for the overthrowing of democracy and replacing it with a dictatorship of a self-elected elite. “Terror, deceit and blackmail are approved methods of spreading this creed,” he said.

Mr Jack challenged the validity of a statement in the debate last night of Mr A. J Faulkner (Opp., Roskill), who said that Labour had swept communism from New Zealand by ending poverty.

“Communism wa., never a major menace in New Zealand.” said Mr Jack. “But the Communists are very active in New Zealand right now Their two-fold aim is to create confusion wherever Communist interests are involved, especially in Vietnam. Second Aim “Their second aim s to impair the image of the United States, which has the newer and the guts to provide an outstanding bulwark against Communist totalitarianism and dictatorship in the world today.” :aid Mr Jack. The claim that communism was the child of po”erty was naive, he said.

“Our memories are short •in our gratitude slight if we forget American achievements in Europe, without which Europe would, have largely or entirely fallen to communism." said Mr Jack. Dr. A. M. Finlay (Opp.. Waitakere) said the statement of the Prime Minister (Mr Holyoake) on Vietn-m last night had been “curiously rambling.” and suggested his remarks may have caused de-

spondency among his own ranks. Dr. Finlay said he respected the Prime Minister for saying the Viet Cong ought to be present at peace negotiations. He said it had been quite unfair to be presented at 3 p.m. with a White Paper and asked to debate it that same evening. Dr. Finlay said it was clear Mr Holyoake had not read the paper, as it ansivered the question of who represented the National Liberation Front. He commented also on the “restraint” with which the Prime Minister reported on the situation, and suggested he might be holding himself ready to leap on the Commonwealth peace mission bandwaggon if it were successful. Dr. Finlay said, however, ’he Prime Minister would understandably be entitled to take credit for having particioated in advocating the mission. Referring to last night's debate, Dr. Finlay said the Minister of Defence (Mr Eyre) had said he would personally support any freely elected Government of South Vietnam, but this was a view somewhat dissented from by the member for Waipa (Sir Leslie Munro). Manila Treaty Mr J. H. George (Govt.. Central Otago) commented on a question by Sir Walter Nash (Opp., Hutt) the night before. “Is it right we should use their country (Vietnam) to defend ourselves?” Mr George insisted that New Zealand troops were there under the Manila Treaty. Sir Walter Nash: That is not correct. Mr George: We are in South Vietnam at the invitation of the South Vietnam Government. Sir Walter Nash: That is not correct. There has been no appeal to S.E.A.T.O. Dr. Finlay said he wondered if Mr Eyre’s view reflected that of the Government, and hoped the Government could s»y if this were representa-. tive also of United States thinking, in view of American intervention in the Dom inican Republic. The White Paper statement that in 1955 North Vietnam called for consultations in the terms of the final declaration of the Geneva Con ference, but the Republic of Vietnam said it was not bound in any way by the Geneva Agreements, “came as something of a surprise,” Dr. Finlay said. He wondered if this was known to the United States. He said a memorandum distributed to members of Par liament today had pointed out the difference between the cease-fire agreement of 1954 and the Geneva Agreement French Mistakes Dr. Finlay told the House it was quite clear many of the mistakes the French had made were being repeated today. The man in the street, he said, was alarmed by the terrifying future. South Vietnam was not fighting for an idea, as the Viet Cong were. Dr. Finlay said. It was not even fighting against an idea, as New Zealand and the United States appeared to be fighting.

The notion that communism must be stopped was much more petrifying to us than to them.

Dr. Finlay asked if we were just concerned with the welfare of the South Vietnamese peasant. “If so, we should find out what he wants. If our ideas were unpalatable, then we would have to learn to live with what he wanted.” Both sides were implying ’hat conditions for negotiating a settlement were unacceptable.” Dr. Finlay said. He emphasised that containment, and not an extension of activities in Vietnam, should be concentrated upon, and suggested that the Arneri cans had possibly been moved by “quixotic idealism.” Mr J. Mathison (Opp., Avon) said he wondered why two nights have been devoted to a foreign affairs debate. He suggested one reason was because neither The committees nor the House had sufficient work to keep going He said there had not been a word in the communique issued at the conclusion of the Commonwealth Prime Ministers meeting about what the Prime Ministers thought regarding New Zealand and Australian involvement in Vietnam. “There was no criticism whatsoever,” interjected Mr Holyoake.

Mr Mathison said New Zealand’s policy on Malaysia had been endorsed, but not its policy on Vietnam. Mr Mathison said it was most unfortunate the decision to send troops to Vietnam had been taken so quickly and not submitted first to the Commonwealth Prime Ministers’ conference. Mr Mathison said Senator Gruening told the United States Senate on April 9 that continued United States assistance to 4 South Vietnam disregarded the Geneva Convention of 1954, which provided for free elections designed to unify the two parts of Vietnam.

The deputy Prime Minister (Mr Marshall) said New Zealand was in Vietnam to defend herself and her way of life but also at the invitation of the Government and people of Vietnam.

He said a S.E.A.T.O. Council meeting in London urged members to help Vietnam. It was better to hold aggression there, he said, rather than wait until it arrived in New Zealand. When it reached New Zealand shores it might be too late, said Mr Marshall.