POST-WAR VIETNAM WILL NEED NEW EFFORTS—P.M.

Press, Volume CVIII, Issue 31830, 7 November 1968, Page 1

POST-WAR VIETNAM WILL NEED NEW EFFORTS—P.M.

(New Zealand Press Association) WELLINGTON, November 6. Parliament was told tonight that it would be disastrous for Vietnam if the hardwon achievements of the battlefields and conference rooms were to be dissipated through diminished international interest in this crucial area of the world.

The Prime Minister (Mr Holyoake) said: “We must do everything we can to rally international _ support to ensure that a settlement on Vietnam is respected and is given time to bring about reconciliation in Vietnam itself. “And in this respect New Zealand’s influence is not without significance,” he said when he launched a foreign affairs debate. “It may be that there will

be a role for the United Nations to play in this endeavour."

Mr Holyoake said: “The ending of the war in Vietnam will not in itself bring peace, stability and progress to Asia. We must be prepared for new efforts to meet the demands for improved living conditions for the peoples of Asia. “We shall need to look afresh at the security problems of Asia,” said the Prime Minister. “There is no doubt in my mind that the free countries of Asia must take the leading role themselves.

“We in New Zealand will want to co-operate with our

Aslan neighbours—but the initiative must come from them,” he said. “The ending Of the war in Vietnam will release energies and resources needed to deal with the wider problems of Asia.” Close Consultation

The Prime Minister said his discussions on the Vietnam war in Washington, Seoul and Saigon were part of the process of close consultation among allied leaders which preceded the announcement of a cessation of American bombing in North Vietnam.

“We all agreed that indications both In Paris and South Vietnam warranted undertaking this calculated risk in the interests of peace. “The Communist aggressors have achieved nothing in return for the appalling number of lives they have sacrificed,” he said.

The Leader of the Opposition (Mr Kirk) said that, as had been the case in other external affairs debates in Parliament during the last four years, the question of Vietnam was uppermost in everyone’s mind. “This occasion is unlike others—at long last it is possible to consider the Vietnam question in an atmosphere of hope and rising expectations and a degree of unanimity which was lacking before.’’ “Domestic Policy”

He said the Opposition welcomed the prospect of peace talks and a negotiated settlement in Vietnam.

Mr Kirk said that the fact that President Johnson’s announcement on the bombing pause was made so close to the American Presidential elections gave rise to the thought that his decision was more a question of domestic policy than international strategy. This example, he said, could be applied to New Zealand’s defence relations with the United States; and he said some reassurance would be warmly welcomed that Implementation of the A.N.Z.U.S. Treaty would not be set aside in the United States by considerations of domestic expediency. Major Decisions

Referring to earlier Government statements that New Zealand's commitment in Vietnam was based on S.E.A.T.O. obligations, Mr Kirk said the two major decisions instrumental to the change of circumstances in Vietnam—the partial bombing pause in April and this month’s total bombing pause —were made unilaterally by the United States and not by S.E.A.T.O. This fact, he said, demonstrated two things: that New Zealand’s case for involvement in Vietnam had been nullified, and that S.E.A.T.O. was ineffective in a military sense.

In view of the possibility of peace in Vietnam a complete, review of New Zealand’s defence posture would have to be taken.