FOREIGN AFFAIRS DEBATE Appeal To Labour On Vietnam Policy

Press, Volume CIX, Issue 32275, 18 April 1970, Page 46

FOREIGN AFFAIRS DEBATE Appeal To Labour On Vietnam Policy

(Aew Zealand Press Association)

WELLINGTON, April 17.

The Minister of Defence (Mr Thomson) today appealed to the Labour Party not to “run down or undervalue” New Zealand’s defence of Vietnam. Mr Thomson, speaking in the foreign affairs debate in Parliament, said that South Vietnam was becoming more secure.

In collective security the burden must be shared, and in the strains and stresses of the present time New Zealand could not hide and expect all things to be well, he said.

“New Zealand could find Itself cut off from our re gional hinterland unless we make a real effort in regional co-operation,” he said. Security and developmenl were inter-related and until governments had control of events on the ground develop i ment efforts would come to nothing. “We are seen in Asia as aj country that can be counted] on in good times and bad,"! he said. “Our contribution] must be to joint and inter ! dependent programmes.” The Under-Secretary to the] Minister of Education (Mr: Gair) said during the debate that any policy towards 1 South-East Asia and the Pici-I fic which did not include a] large degree of United States participation was unworkable.

There was no alternative in foreign policy to a link between Australia, New Zealand and the United States, he said. New Zealand must do nothing to suggest that it would brook the bullying tactics adopted by the Communists in South-East Asia. New Zealand must also do

[nothing to encourage the isolationism of some sectors of ■ United States society, he said. Winding up the debate, the Minister of Foreign Affairs (Mr Holyoake) said Labour ' Party statements on Vietnam had given comfort to Communist aggressors.

He said statements in line 'with Labour Party policy, made in America, Australia and New Zealand, had over the years encouraged Communists to hope, even at tremendous cost to themselves, that they would be able to impose a military dictatorship in Vietnam. Policy Plan

I He said it was not possible to recognise both Communist China and Taiwan. Although Britain recognised China and had a consulate in Taiwan, the consulate was not recognised by the Government of the Republic of China. A plant for New Zealand’s foreign policies in the 1970 s was outlined by the Labour Party member for New Lynn (Mr J. L. Hunt). He called on the Government to: Maintain the A.N.Z.U.S. Alliance. Withdraw from S.E.A.T.O. Qualify membership of alliances with an independent stance. Strengthen the United Nations, and look towards providing forces for an

- eventual United Nations f peace-keeping force. ; Recognise China while, at the ; same time, preserving ’ Taiwan’s independence. i Encourage regional movements such as Maphilindo. - Increase foreign aid to 1 per • cent of the G.N.P. . Abandon the concept of forward defence in MalaysiaSingapore. , Take a strong stand against ; nuclear testing. 1 Take a more active role in the South Pacific. Oppose Britain’s proposed membership of the European Economic Community. Mr Hunt questioned the value of what he said were two fundamental assumptions of past foreign policy collective security and foreward defence. Of two other “fundamentals”—the containment of Communism and the support of freedom and democracy in Asia—he said that the first was based on the myth of monolithic Communist expansion and the second had not been assisted in any substantial way by ! New Zealand forces.

The emphasis in New Zealand’s past foreign policies had been on military action, he said.

Mr H. C. Templeton (Nat., Awarua) emphasised the importance of the Pacific Basin to New Zealand. “We have now to turn to the affairs of Pacific islands other than those with whom we have been associated . . as they become new voices in the Commonwealth,” he said.

“New Zealand has a great opportunity for offering partnership leadership with the area. The whole Pacific Basin must concern New Zealand, and our foreign policy must reflect this.”

Mr W. A. Fraser (Lab., St Kilda) said New Zealand was not making an adequate contribution to helping underdeveloped peoples. New Zealand’s capital aid programme was miserable in comparison to. the aid of some other countries, he said. Mr C. J. Moyle (Lab., Mangere) said New Zealand had a duty towards the people of Polynesia, and in this decade could transform the living standards of the South Pacific. “By using our resources, capacity and expertise we would exploit our unique position to raise the quality of living standards of the South Pacific,” he said. He described France’s island territories as festering sores. He also criticised that nation’s “nose-thumbing to world opinion” by proceeding with nuclear testing. France had done little for the indigenous peoples of its territories and New Zealand should speak out at the “paucity of development.” “We have every right to speak out on behalf of the people of Polynesia,” he said. “It is our duty. The voice of self-determination in these territories has been pretty effectively stifled.” Mr G. A. Walsh (Nat., Tauranga) said New Zealand’s relations with Europe were an urgent matter. He expressed his confidence in the abilities of the Deputy Prime Minister (Mr Marshall) to plead New Zealand’s special position in regard to the European Economic Com-1 munity.