PRESS OFFICE TRANCRIPT 2 ERAY17
SENATOR WRIEDT INTERVIEWqED ON MR. PEACOCK'S FOREIGN POLICY
STATEMENT IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES.
FROM ABC'S 27/ 2/ 79
Huw Evans:
Senator, to what extent are you in accord with Mr. Peacock's
with Mr. Peacock's analysis, particulary in relation to
South East Asia.
Wriedt: The Chinese themselves of course have said that the reason that
they have invaded Vietnam is in order to punish Vietnam. They
have not said precisely why they what to punish Vietnam. It may
be because of theinvasion of Kampuchea. It may be because of
the treatment of ethnic Chinese by the Vi6tnamese Government.
It may be because of the border dispute between the two countries.
It may be because of the alliance between Vietnam and the Soviet
Union. It is probably a mixture of those things but quite
obviously China has taken it upon itself to exercise its unilateral
judgement to punish Vietnam. I don't think one can isolate any
of those factors.
Huw Evans:
But the Opposition has taken the view, has it not,' that the
Government is taking a pro-Chinese line in this issue?
Wriedt: That was evident from the statement put down by the Prime Minister
back in June of 1976 and this point should be stressed again and
again. The Prime Minister is wanting now to appear as some sort
of mediator on the world scene. He should have thought about
trying to play that role two and a half years ago when he made it
quite clear that the Australian Government would in fact be
taking a pro-China attitude in the Sino-Soviet dispute. One cannot
divorce that dispute from the events which are taking place
now between Vietnam and China, and indeed Kampuchea.
Huw Evans:
What does it have, in terms of an affect in world policy though?
I m~ ean that we have aligned ourselves presumably with the United
States, the western powers, those countries who have sided with
China, presumably, against the Soviet Union?
Wriedt: The operative word, siding with China, of course is the key point.
It is a tendency of course, of nations to take sides in international
disputes and as soon as you do that, particularly when you are
dealing with the major powers, there is a tendency for the world
to polarise into opposite sides. The more nations that do not allow
themselves to become involved in either side, the greater force they
are to acting collectively as mediators between the warring factions.
/ 2
27 FEBRUARY 1979
-2-
Wriedt: Australia opted out of that role two and half years ago.
I'm certain now Mr. Fraser wishes he had not done that.
Huw Evans
Aren't there polarisations within the Labor movement itself
as to who is right and wrong in this dispute?
Wriedt: In every party you will find differences of opinion but we have
taken a firm view, and I think this is substantiated by the
debates which have taken place today in the Parliament, in both
houses, that we are taking an even-handed view. We want'
Australia act in a genuine capacity of a nation that has the
trust of both sides. That is the distinction between our position
and that of the Government.
Huw Evans:
Can we have a look at one of the other major issues that Mr. Peacock
has referred to today, and that is the question of Australia's
assessment and reaction to the change of Government in Iran.
Would Labor have responded any differently to what happened there
than the present Government.
Wriedt: I don't think Chat we are in a position to effect that. The
Iranian people will decide what form of Government evolves from
the present dispute within Iran. It's not the role of us or
the Australian Government to try and dictate the course, or influence
the course of those events.
Huw Evans:
Isn't it fair though, that Iranian exports of oil may well dictate
the res-Donse of western countries to the new Government.
Wriedt: Naturally all the traditional customers of Iran will wish to see
Iranian oil. back on the world markets as soon as possible. But
I would have grave reservations about the comment which is contained
in Mr. Peacock's statement in which he suggests the ' west may need
to take certain action to protect itself in respect of the
Iranian rroblem. I don't know quite what he means by that, but
I cert-ainiv. would disassociate ourselves with any implication, or
any implied remark that any intervention should take place in
Iran by any outside powers whatsoever. 000---