ITO0. 3 TV REICORDING. " 1TAL. K TO TY2 NATTG~ IV~
BY THE PT1: 1 1 TbT. HON R G ,13
Ladies and gentlemen, I appear to be back once more at the schoolmaster's
desk but I hope you'll forgive me. But there are various
aspects of the election that I want to cover, so far as I can,
in these little talks.
Now in my Policy Speech, if you were enthusiastic
enough to listen to it, I said something about Foreign Policy
and the Treaties tha. t we've made with other countries. This
time I though' I might say something to ycu about four outstanding
problems in the international situation in the world.
The first of them is Di. sarm! ament. I have a map
here and I'll refer to it a little later on, but for the purpose
of talking about disarmament perhaps I don't need a map very
much, because there can be no disarmament in the true sense
unless you ca-a have the Great Powers of the world, facing up
to the realities and agreeing to something that is practical.
Now the Commonwealth Prime 1inisters, of whom I was one, earlier
this year met in London and we passed unanimously a resolution
about disarmament, indicating the broad terms on which we thought
it might be achieved and, in particular, we said that the
beginning should be a suspension of nuclear tests. In other
words, that none of the great Nuclear Powers and there are
three of them four of them including Frahco
should make any further tests, until arrangements had been made
to suspend them altogether, with proper inspection, with some
feeling of assurance on both sides that the other side wouldn't
be playing a ' rick. That's fair enough. ell the discussions
went on about the suspension of nuclear testing. The Western
Powers held up; Great Britain didn't make another test; the
United States didn't make another test; and after months of this,
all of a sudden, Khrushchev announced that the Soviet Union was
going to resume testing and since that day they've " fouped off',
I think the expression is, about 30 bombs including some bombs
of a size unparalled in modern history.
Now thut is a tremendously serious problem. Vwhat
are we to do about it? I for one would like to say to you, that
I see no reason why the United States of America should consent
to sit quietly while the Soviet Union goes on, and on, and on,
testing weapons. The time comes when the United States of
America, our powerful friend, will have to say, " Well we must
defend ourselves. We must not fall behind." Otherwise the
great deterrent of the bomb will cease to be a deterrent. But
I think the important thing, is that the Great Powers should once
more meet. They ought to meet before the end of this month in
Geneva, and get back into the Conference Room, because so long
as nations are testing these horrible weapons, so long wi]. l there
be a great tendency to provide them for other powers and the
more nations who have these weapons, the greater will be the
risk of an explosion. Nowi that broadly represents our approach
to this matter. Nowi the next matter that I want to mention to you is
one of the " hot spots", as they call it, of the world, and that
is the problem of Berlin and West Germany. If you can see this
__ A
map, it shows in hatched lines here, West G'ermany; East Germany
is here; Berlin is inside the area of East Germany,, like an island,
with an air passage from it to the Western world, and with railway
access to the Western world. But in itself, it's an island in
the middle of what is now called East Germany.
Now I don't want to go into the history of this matter,
but I do want to say this to you, that the Western Powers have
precisely the same rights, and for precisely the same reasons,
in Berlin, as has the Soviet Union. They were the victorious
allies in the war, each of them assumed responsibility for a
Sector of Berlin with the right to have troops, with the right
to maintain contact and access. This is beyond argument.
Khrashchev himself doesn't endeavour to argue about it. But
of course, what has happened is that the Soviet Union has, in
effect, incc.-pora-Ged East Germany in the Soviet Union. They
pretend it's an independent country. Of course it isn't. It's
a satellite country. The best proof of that is that i~ n these
recent disturbances.. there have been Soviet troops to the nuamber
of many thousands, on the porimeter of Berlin, md now, fortifications
between one part of the city and the other, are being set
up. If Khrushchev If Khrushchev wants peace, as so many of his friends
in Australia pretend they want peace, he can get it quite easily.
He can say to the West " All right we will leave Berlin as it is.
Each of us with his ovm rights. Each of us with his own access.,
We will not prevent the people of East Germany from leaving East
Germany if they want to, because this is their right under the
Treaty of Human Rights." ( Under any conception of humanity a
man ought to be allowed to leave his own country). " And therefore
wea will agrce to free emigr'ation from East Germany into
West Germany", an emigration which you know has been going on,
until stopped by him recently, at a tremendous rate. And above
all, he can say 11' 1jo can settle the question as to whether Germa. ny
ought to be re-united. We'll agree to an election. A free
election, in which both West and East Germans will vote."
Now this may seem to you, or to me, pretty simple.
Those are the conditions of peace. He won't have one of them.
I tell you quite plainly, that in my view, in the view of my
Government, the responsibility for the tension in relation to
Ber-lin in Germany lies squarely at the doors of the Soviet Union.
And if you want our position summed up I'll say we are completely
on the side of the Wecstern Powers, on this matter.
Nov! in the meantime, down here in the south -ast of Asi",
in L-A-0-most of us call it Laos, but I believe correctly
it ought -6o be called " Louse", but anyhow there it is, and this
country is a peaceful rur! r'l country. Only wanting to live
by itself, and yet it is bedevilled today by civil war, by
Communist pressure from the north, by all kinds of agitations,
which I've no doubt are designed to make that country a satellLV. t,-
of the Communists, whether of the Soviet Union, or of Communist
China, perhaps is no great matter. VWe of the West, if I may
so dscrie us bu we include we of the South East because if
we include the SEATO the South East Asian Treaty Nations,
Pakistann, Thailand and thu Philippines and Australia and New
Zealand-to say nothing of Great Britain and Ame rica, and France-.
we have said that we don't want Laos to'be a satellite of any
group in the world. I.-le wiant that country to be free, to be
completely independent, to be neutral -and not to be aligned with
any other Piwer. Tho-L again, that's pretty simplc, isn't it?
That's pretty straight forward. You couldn't find any fault
with that. But for months at Geneva the Soviet Union has
prolonged the negotiations and after all this time we now are
not much nearer to achieving that peaceable result than we were
three or four or five months ago,
The same kind of trouble arises in relation to South
Vietnam. A very gallant little country. An outpost:-of defence
against Communism. While nearer to us we have our other problem,
I hope that it's one that will be fixed up, and that's the problem
of our attitude towards West New Guinea and the position of
Indonesia in relation to it.
Now I just want to make it clear to you you'll read
some heate. statements occasionally we are on friendly terms
with Indonesia. We ought to bel We want to bel There is a
country which has development in front of us; a country that we
can help; a country, thousands of whose students we take into
Australia, we have every reason to be friendly with Indonesia,
but we have one difference of opinion, and that's about West
New Guinea, which Indonesia claims, and the soverignty over
which is at present in the Netherlands.
Now I'll make a long story short you've heard
politicians say that before today, but I have to because the
clock is moving on.-Our attitude towards the rost New Guinea
problem is exactly the same as our attitude towards our own
section of New Guinea. We believethat it is the duty of the
occupying power to bring the people, the native, indigenous
people of this island up to a state where they can govern themselves.
We want none of this Congo business in New Guinea.
We as kustralians are paying many millions a year to build up
Papua and New Guinea on our side of the island. The Dutch have
agreed that they are all for self-determination in the West, but
Indonesia has said this is not a case for self-determination,
" this part of New Guinea ought to belong to us and we are not
offering self-determination to the local inhabitants."
That's our difference. And you would think very
poorly of me, or of my Government, if I didn't take the
opportunity of making it quite clear that this business of
self-determination, of bringing people to a point where they
arc capable of governing themselves and then letting them
make their own choice as to where they are going, ts is
vital to us, because in a strange and rather democratic world,
we Australians are democrats. We believe in democracy, and we
believe that in due course, not too soon and not too late, but
at the right time when we've brought education to the right point.
health services to the right point; some understanding of local
self-government to the right point; when the day comes after all
those things, when the people of th-. t island, or our section of
it, are able to detrmnino t+ hr fntur-we say they must and
they should, and that's our view in relation to West New CGinea.
And all I need say is that, so far as we understand the position,
the Government of the Netherlands has exactly the same attitude
towards that problem in West New Guinea as we have in thl East.
And so you see in brief, peace, peace, the problem of
peace. Wve are on the side of peace, The little survey that
I've given you will, I hope, indicate to you that if there is any
desire to break the peace, it resides outside this country, and
outside those other great countries whose friend we are,