The ghost at the Non-Aligned banquet

Press, 9 February 1983, Page 22

The ghost at the Non-Aligned banquet

By

STUART McMILLAN

Amid its other preparations for the summit meeting of the Non-Aligned Movement in March. India is struggling to keep the lid on the Kampuchean can of worms. The three members of the Association of South-East Asian Nations that are members of the Non-Aligned Movement — Indonesia. Malaysia, and Singapore — want to see the representatives of the coalition forming Democratic Kampuchea invited to the summit meeting. India is one of the few countries which recognises the Heng Samrin Government installed by Vietnam in Kampuchea. It plans not to invite either the Democratic Kampuchean representatives or the Heng Samrin representatives.

A.S.E.A.N. has mounted international campaigns to stop the Heng Samrin Government being recognised internationally. The A.S.E.A.N. argument is that it is unacceptable for one country to invade another, install a government of its own choosing and see that government gain international recognition. In 1979. 1980, and 1981, Democratic Kampuchea (as the Pol Pot, Government was known) was recognised in the United Nations as the legitimate representative of Kampuchea. Some countries, including Australia, have withdrawn recognition because of the appalling record of Democratic Kampuchea in slaughtering its own people. During 1982 a coalition was

formed of the three main groups resisting the Viet-namese-Phnom Penh forces — the Khmer Rouge (with Pol Pot tidily moved slightly to one side to avoid world criticism). the non-communist Khmer People's National Liberation Front, and the followers of the former Head of State. Prince Sihanouk. The Khmer Rouge remain the most powerful militarily of the three groups. Once again, in the United Nations, the vote was overwhelmingly for Democratic Kampuchea to occupy the Kampuchean seat.

A.S.E.A.N. considers that Democratic Kampuchea should have international recognition, not just within the United Nations. The pressure that is being brought on India is an attempt to have the question resolved in another international forum. If A.S.E.A.N. had its way it would be a significant victory for the cause of Democratic Kampuchea and a significant defeat for Vietnam — one of the members of the Non-Aligned Movement and a country feared greatly by some members of A.S.E.A.N. The establishment of the coalition itself was something of a blow to Vietnam. In a roundabout way it was meant as something of a reassurance to Vietnam. The A.S.E.A.N. countries, in seeing that the coalition was accepted by China, demonstrated to Vietnam that it could “deliver" China.

The point is important be-

cause of the big-Power relationships in the area. China was sympathetic to the Khmer Rouge and saw in its defeat byVietnam the hand of its old enemy, the Soviet Union, working through Vietnam.

For all that, it is doubtful whether Vietnam would be prepared to take part in the same conference as the representatives of Democratic Kampuchea.

Indonesia, Malaysia, and Singapore are firmly backed up bv the other two members of A.S.E.A.N. - the Philippines. which has observer status at the meeting, and Thailand, which has never applied to join.

India offered to become host to the Non-Aligned Movement summit meeting when Iraq became too dangerous a venue last year because of the war with Iran.

The question of whose credentials should be recognised came up at the last NonAligned Movement meeting in Cuba, in 1979. At that time there was no coalition.

Delegations from both the Heng Samrin Government and from Democratic Kampuchea turned up in Cuba. Mr Khieu Samphan, who led the Democratic Kampuchean delegation, complained that he was virtually ignored by the Cuban Government and housed far away from the delegations who were arriving to attend the meeting. Mr Heng Samrin arrived in Cuba for a State visit which happened to coincide with the arrival of many of the delegations planning to attend the meeting.

The subject of who should occupy the Kampuchean seat at Cuba was discussed at length but no agreement could be reached. In the end the seat was left vacant.

India is following that precedent in not inviting a delegation from either Democratic Kampuchea or from the Heng Samrin Government.

A quasi-legal question is involved. How was the decision to leave the seat vacant arrived at? Most accounts say that President Castro, as chairman of the meeting, decided that the seat should be left vacant because a consensus could not be reached. The A.S.E.A.N. countries say that no decision was taken by the Non-Aligned Movement and that the question cannot be considered closed for the new meeting — because President Castro’s decision was a personal one.

India considers that the decision to leave the seat vacant was one taken by the meeting in Cuba and that it therefore is a genuine precedent.

Indonesia, Malaysia, and Singapore are using other arguments as well. One is that since the overwhelming majority of the countries in the United Nations support Democratic Kampuchea as the rightful occupant of the Kampuchean seat in the United Nations, the Non-Aligned Movement ought to accept Democratic Kampuchea as well. The Indian reply is that while the United Nations can act on a majority, the NonAligned Movement acts on con-

sensus and that there is no consensus over Kampuchea. The A.S.E.A.N. countries are arguing that even if India, for its own foreign policy reasons of opposing its neighbour China, wanted to recognise the Heng Samrin Government, then, as host to the NonAligned Movement conference, it should be impartial and accept the decision of the United Nations of which most of the members of the NonAligned Movement are also members. The three members of A.S.E.A.N. are also arguing that even if Democratic Kampuchea does not take a seat at the meeting, then Prince Sihanouk should be invited to speak in his own right. The argument for this is that Prince Sihanouk is one of the few surviving Heads of State who attended the Belgrade Conference in 1961. This was really the first summit meeting of non-aligned countries although a conference which established the movement had been held in Bandung six years before. Prince Sihanouk,’ the argument goes, is the only Head of State to attend the Belgrade Conference who is still Head of State. As Head of State of the Kampuchean coalition. Prince Sihanouk may not be accepted so readily by some countries as a Head of State, but the main counter argument from India is that it is host to the NonAligned Movement, not there to provide a platform for leaders of yore. If Prince Sihanouk should be invited in a personal capacity, India says.

then several other formerly prominent people should also be invited. That is not really what the Non-Aligned Movement’s summit meeting is about.

The extent to which Indonesia. Malaysia and Singapore will have influence in the Non-Aligned Movement is hard to say. Both Malaysia and Singapore have foreign troops on their soil and may be considered as being somewhat suspect. Their general allegiance to the West is not nearly as marked as the allegiance of countries such as Cuba, also in the Non-Aligned Movement, to the East, but they will not wish to push their luck too far.

The chances that the three A.S.E.A.N. members will get India to change its mind and invite Democratic Kampuchea or Prince Sihanouk seem remote. India would probably find it intolerable to invite the representatives of a regime while it recognises an alternative regime. Vietnam would also find the position intolerable. The interesting aspect of Vietnams approach is that it has not been pressing India to invite Heng Samrin. but will be content if the seat is left vacant. If the A.S.E.A.N. countries have their way. it will demonstrate their ability to influence events in what is probably a tougher forum than the United Nations. If they do not have their way then it is likely to have an effect on relations between India and the A.S.E.A.N. countries, perhaps even with South Asia as a whole.