Whitlam’s warning of threat of war

Press, Volume CXIV, Issue 33654, 2 October 1974, Page 17

Whitlam’s warning of threat of war

(New Zealand Press Association—Copyright) NEW YORK, October 1. “The threat of war for the possession of resources — one of the oldest causes of war,” was the warning given to the United Nations General Assembly yesterday by the Australian Prime Minister (Mr Whitlam). “Huge population increases, the revolution of rising expectations, the enormous — and often wasteful — demands our technological civilisation makes upon the world’s resources, have increased the pressures on our world civilisation to the very threshold of the tolerable,” Mr Whitlam said.

“For countries which lack resources, the situation has become critical. The developing countries have been grossly placed at a disadvantage. Last year’s oil crisis brought this sharply home to all of us — developed and undeveloped alike.” Spelling out Australia’s attitude towards the use and development of her own resources, Mr Whitlam said that there was no place in his Government’s thinking for “economic nationalism in its crudest sense.” He continued: “We do, of course, wish to ensure steady markets at fair prices for what we produce. We recognise the great scope for increased co-operation between producers of raw materials and for groups of exporting countries to associate with one another to build a better framework for orderly and rational development of production and trade. “As a relatively developed and thriving nation which also produces many resources shared by the developing and poorer nations, Australia recognises her duty to cooperate with such nations in obtaining a fair and reasonable return for her products. And we are co-operating. “Equally, however, we in Australia accept our responsibility to reassure countries which depend on our resources that they will have steady, secure access to those resources at fair prices.” Nuclear power Mr Whitlam gave a warning that the United Nations had only a year or two to prevent “a nightmare world” in which 15 or 20 countries could possess nuclear weapons by the early 1980 s. “For our part, the Australian Government pledges that it will neither develop nor acquire nuclear weapons,” he said. “Australia sees with the deepest anxiety the continuing. and new, testing of nuclear devices, the prospect of an ever-increasing number of nations possessing nuclear weapons, and an even greater number possessing the capability of exploding nuclear devices. “All of us face a nightmare world in which as many as 15 or 20 nations may possess nuclear weapons by the early 1980 s. There is time to prevent it. We have perhaps about a year, two years at the most, in which to prevent it. Now is the time—it may be our last chance. The Australian leader called for a strengthening of the Nuclear Non-proliferation Treaty, which, he said, some States had still not ratified — six years after it was concluded and four years after it had gone into force. He also urged the conclusion of a comprehensive test-ban treaty as a matter of priority. Mr Whitlam also said that effective international arrangements were needed to control nuclear experiments for peaceful purposes. “The world cannot afford the risks that lie in the prospect of an increasing number of countries possessing nuclear devices — even if they profess to have them for peacefuj purposes only,” he said. Peace zones Australia supported the idea of establishing zones of peace in various parts of the world, Mr Whitlam said, citing the Antarctic Treaty, the Indian Ocean peace zone proposal, the Declaration of the Association of SouthEast Asian Nations, the treaty declaring Latin America a nuclear-free zone, and the Iranian proposal to establish a similar zone in the Middle East. Mr Whitlam condemneo the failure of the international community to halt the use of force in regional disputes, and criticised the large-scale traffic in conventional arms. “It is equally bad that some members of the international

have made possible — for profit — massive (recourse to arms and the i means of waging wars about Ito start or already begun,” i he said, adding: “We now ask (that the major weaponsI producing countries should (set an example by imposing the strictest restrictions on the export of arms abroad to areas where there is a clear risk of conflict.” Mr Whitlam called for greater use of the International Court of Justice in the ’Hague, the jurisdiction of

which, he said, should become compulsory and universal.

Welcoming the decolonisation policy of the new Portuguese Government, the Australian leader noted that Papua New Guinea, which became self-governing last December, would soon become fully independent. “There is to me, I must say, a most satisfying symmetry in the march of events by which Portugal, the oldest, and Australia, the newest, of the colonial powers are acting at the same time towards the liquidation of colonialism,” he said. Rhodesia criticised Mr Whitlam also called for unremitting efforts “to break the illegal regime in Rhodesia,” and urged “an end to South Africa’s unlawful control over Namibia (South-West Africa), and to its policy of racial apartheid.” He said that his own Government, “conscious that Australia’s own record is seriously flawed, is determined to remove all forms of racial discrimination within our own shores . . . notably against our own Aborigines.” Latvians protest About 100 Latvian demonstrators had earlier protested outside the United Nations building against Australia’s recognition of Soviet control of the Baltic States. Some of the protesters’. 80 slogans held aloft read: “Australia-Soviet Friendship Bought by Baltic Freedom,” “Whitlam, Master of Deceit,” “Whitlam is a Fascist,” and “Kangaroo and Russian Bear Equals a Boomerang.” The demonstration lasted about two hours, but was peaceful and orderly. The protesters hope to present to Mr Whitlam a petition, and to deliver hundreds of petitions to the Australian Mission at the United Nations. The executive chairman of the United Baltic Appeal to the United Nations, Mr Kestutis Miklas, a Lithuanian, asked: “What right does the Australian Government have to decide for the people of the Baltic States? Australia is the first Western country to recognise Soviet control of those States, and it is an injustice to the peoples who are staging a fight for their freedom.”