THE INTERNATIONAL
YEAR OF PEACE
AUSTRALIA'S
CONTRIBUTION
An Address to Parliament by the Prime Minister,
the Hon. R. J. L. Hawke, M. P.
28 November 1986
THE INTERNATIONAL YEAR OF PEACE
AUSTRALIA'S CONTRIBUTION
An Address to Parliament by the
Prime Minister
the Hon. R. J. L. Hawke, AC, MP
28 November 1986
Australian Government Publishing Service
Canberra 1986
STATEMENT BY THE PRIME MINISTER
THE INTERNATIONAL YEAR OF PEACE AUSTRALIA'S CONTRIBUTION*
CANBERRA 28 NOVEMBER 1986
As 1986 draws to a close, and as the Parliament prepares to
conclude its deliberations for the year, I take this
j opportunity to review for the House the efforts made by the
Government and the Australian community to advance the
objectives of the International Year of Peace.
it has been a year in which the Australian community has
given vigorous and articulate expression to its desire to
help build a more peaceful world.
At the same time, 1986 has been a year in which Australians
have been given greater grounds.-for-hope than for many years
that the threat of nuclear war will be significantly
diminished. EAST-WEST RELATIONS
Before dealing with our national contribution to the IYP,
let me say something about the international background to
Australia's efforts.
In a speech at the University of New England in September I
said that historic opportunities existed for the restoration
of stability and realistic understanding between the
superpowers. There was the prospect of less suspicion and
tension than had been the case for a decade.
Subsequently, the renewed intensity of negotiations on
nuclear and space arms found dramatic expression at the
meeting in Reykjavik between President Reagan and General
Secretary Gorbachev.
Naturally, there was disappointment in Australia and around
the world at the failure in Reykjavik to reach final
agreement on the truly breathtaking set of proposals which
was discussed there. We should recognise, however, that
during 1986 a fundamental transformation has occurred in the
nature of the superpower dialogue on security issues. The
United States and the Soviet Union have begun to cut through
to the very essence of the profound differences that
separate them in these negotiations.
Significant in this regard was the successful outcome in
Stockholm at the Conference on Confidence and Security
Building measures and Disarmament in Europe. This, the
first East-West accord in security matters in seven * years,
indicated a new determination to restore momentum to the
process of arms control and disarmament after years of
stalemate.
Significantly, the Stockholm agreement also saw the
acceptance for the first time by the Soviet Union and its
allies of-a system of mandatory on-site inspections to
verify compliance with the information-exchange provisions.
Greater openness in such matters is essential if real
progress is to be made in disarmament and arms control.
The road ahead will not be easy. But I have no doubt that
we are on the right road and I believe there are grounds to
be optimistic that the superpowers are determined to stay on
it.
Australia has received regular and detailed briefings from
the United States on progress in these matters and the
Government has taken full advantage of numerous
opportunities to inject our views at the highest levels on
both--sides on how progress-might be further achieved. We
will continue to urge progress with all the force we have.
As I have frequently said, I do not, exaggerate Australia's
role and influence in these matters. But it is our firm
conviction that we have the right and responsibility to be
heard on issues of peace, arms control and disarmament. And
we have been.
Notwithstanding our differences with the United States on
some issues of principle such as the Strategic Defence
Initiative, the very healthy state of our relationship has
enabled us to maintain a close and productive dialogue with
Washington. And, while not seeking to ignore the gulf in
strategic orientation and ideological perception which
separates us from the Soviet Union, we have restored
sensible contact with Moscow, without which any Australian
arms control and disarmament policy would be meaningless.
I have written on several occasions to President Reagan and
General Secretary Gorbachev this year, making clear the
importance that the Australian Government attaches to
continued compliance with the SALT II Treaty. I conveyed
our view that the Soviet Union has a case to answer on
specific compliance issues, but that Australia was no less
concerned at the US announcement in May that future
decisions on the structure of its strategic forces would no
longer be bound by SALT II limitations.
We will continue to make our voice heard.
In a variety of other ways, the Government has been very
active in the pursuit of peace and disarmament in 1986.
SOUTH PACIFIC NUCLEAR FREE ZONE ( SPNFZ-) TREATY
This year marks a historic moment for disarmament in the
South Pacific.
when the Senate passes the South Pacific Nuclear Free Zone
Treaty Bill and related legislation currently before it,
Australia will be in a position to ratify the Treaty of
Rarotonga. Our ratification will be the eighth, and will
bring the Treaty into force.
Not only does the Treaty represent a major disarmament
achievement, it also makes a positive contribution to
regional security.
The countries of the South Pacific Forum have built upon
existing international treaties to make a new treaty that
will help preserve the South Pacific as it is today:
free from nuclear weapons stationed in the countries
and territories of the _ region;
free from nuclear waste dumping; and
with the tragic ( and we hope temporary) exception of
French Polynesia, free from nuclear testing.
All the countries of the region want to preserve these
freedoms and that is the central purpose of the Treaty.
In this context, the Government is very pleased that
countries of the South Pacific, al ' ong with the United States
and France, agreed in principle on 25 November to adopt the
text of a Convention for the Protection and Development of
the Natural Resources and Environment of the South Pacific
Region ( the SPREP Convention).
The Convention complements the Treaty of Rarotongars
prohibition on radioactive waste dumping at sea in the South
Pacific-Nuclear Free Zone.
The Treaty does not seek to undermine the favorable security
environment which the South Pacific enjoys. It does not in
any way conflict with Australia's defence arrangements,
notably ANZUS.
On the contrary, the Treaty of Rarotonga seeks to build on
the factors that have created and sustained the security of
the region to help ensure that the South Pacific, unlike
other parts of the world, does not in the future become a
theatre for nuclear confrontation.
The Pr-otocols to the Treaty adopted in final form by the
South Pacific Forum in August this year will be open for
signature on 1 December. These provide for the United
States, the United Kingdom and France to apply provisions of
the Treaty to their South Pacific Territories and for the
nuclear-weapon states ( the United States, the USSR, the
United Kingdom, France and China) to undertake not to use or
threaten to use nuclear weapons against parties to the
Treaty nor to conduct nuclear testing in the South Pacific.
It. is the Government's strong hope that all the eligible
states, which have major responsibility for international
peace and security, will adhere to the Protocols to the
Treaty of Rarotonga.
The significance of the Bill before the Senate goes further
than clearing the way for the entry into force of the Treaty
of Rarotonga, important though that is. For, in passing the
South Pacific Nuclear Free Zone Treaty Bill, Australia will
become the first independent, sovereign country in the world
to make a commitment by national legislation against the
nuclear weapons option.
The Bill commits this and future Governments to prohibit the
manufacture, acquisition and possession of nuclear explosive
devices and the stationing and testing of such devices
within Australia's territory. We take great pride in this
stand. It is deeply regrettable that the opposition in this House,
and no doubt in the Senate, saw fit to oppose this historic
declaration of principle.
COMPREHENSIVE TEST BAN
During 1986, the Australian Government has continued to
attach the highest priority in our multilateral disarmament
diplomacy to the conclusion of a comprehensive nuclear test
ban ( CTB).
Stich a treaty would ban all kinds of nuclear tests in all
environments by all countries for all time. It is a
feasible and negotiable proposal whose implementation would
be an important step towards preventing horizontal and
vertical proliferation of nuclear weapons.
Earlier this month, the First Committee of the United
Nations General Assembly voted on several resolutions
dealing with nuclear testing. Two of these resolutions were
sponsored by Australia and both received overwhelming
support.
The first was the Australia-New Zealand resolution on a
comprehensive test ban which reaffirms the fundamental
importance of such a treaty and sets out a program of action
. to achieve it. Five CTB resolutions were considered by the
Committee this year. Australia's resolution, which has the
best chances of contributing to a nuclear-free world,
received 117 positive votes, the highest number of any of
the five.
The Australia-New Zealand resolution was co-sponsored by 26
countries including Sweden, Canada and Japan. The United
States and Blritain, who had opposed our resolution in 1985,
abstained this year. Only France voted against. This
excellent result reflected the international community's
acknowledgement of Australia's realistic approach and deep
commitment to the early, conclusion of a CTB Treaty.
The second Australian resolution considered this year calls
on the nuclear testing states to make public each test and
to provide certain data including the size of the test and
the geology of the test site. This was a new initiative and
the resolution received 107 positive votes. Only one
country France opposed the resolution.
CHEMICAL WEAPONS
The abolition of chemical weapons has long been a high
priority objective of the Australian Government's arms
control and disarmament policies. We have made special
efforts during 1986 to facilitate progress on effective
international measures against such abhorrent weapons.
Australia is at the forefront of international action to
this end.
The Australian Government is committed to the early
conclusion of a comprehensive Chemical Weapons Convention
which would ban the production, stockpiling and use of all
chemical weapons and provide for the destruction of all
existing stocks of chemical weapons and their production
facilities.
We have been prominent at both the diplomatic and technical
levels in the negotiations on chemical weapons at the
Conference on Disarmament. During 1986 Australia chaired
one of the Conference's three working groups on chemical
weapons which made considerable progress. We have also
actively supported and participated in investigations by the
UN Secretary-General into reports of the use of chemical
weapons. We have instituted controls on the export of particular
chemicals which could be used in the manufacture of chemical
weapons. In addition, Australia convened consultations
during 1986 with eighteen Western countries ( known as the
' Australia Group') which have adopted similar controls with
a view to co-ordinating such measures internationally.
These outstanding results in the cause of peace and
disarmament were only made possible by the strong and
sustained commitment of the Government to achieving real
progress on arms control, a field in which little can be
done without detailed expertise in the issues, international
acceptance of the contribution we can make and the skills of
sensitive diplomacy and negotiation.
The Government, from the moment it came to office, set about
establishing for the first time in Australia's history, the
necessary credentials for successful work in the field of
disarmament. The highest credit for our success belongs to my colleague,
the Minister for Foreign Affairs, Bill Hayden, whose skill,
initiative and energy have won him worldwide respect and
regard.
I should also acknowledge the efforts of our officials in
the Department of Foreign Affairs, and those of our
Ambassador for Disarmament.
IDEALS OF THE INTERNATIONAL YEAR OF PEACE
So far, I have talked about the international background to
the International Year of Peace and the Government's own
disarmament activities.
In resolving to give its strong support to the United
Nations' designation of 1986 as the International Year of
Peace ( IYP), the Government reaffirmed the high priority it
has consistently placed on arms control and disarmament but,
at the same time, agreed with the view of the United Nations
that IYP activities should not be sponsored only at the
level of national governments.
Accordingly, the Government sought to encourage the wide
range of individuals and community organisations in
Australia who had set high value on the opportunities this
year offered them to express their views and make their own
contribution to the debate.
The search for international peace habitually attracts close
attention from both cynics and utopians. Cynics say that
military confrontation is inevitable and that no generation
in history has been totally free from the threat of war.
For their part, utopians are so eager for peace that they
trust the panaceas of unilateral disarmament and
isolationism, ignoring the unfortunate history of such
policies. The view of this Government, however, is that to work for
real peace is neither to ignore reality nor to neglect
securi tv.
During the ! YP, I have witnessed again and again the
yearning for peace among people in Australia, especially our
young people. I have heard their conviction that there are
better alternatives to the threats under which we live and
that there are better uses for human and material resources
than the accumulation of weapons.
We believe that the IYP has provided a timely opportunity
for people throughout the world to find ways of achieving
progress towards the peace we all seek.
IYP PROGRAM
The planning of the IYP program fell within the portfolio of
the M'inister for Foreign Affairs, Bill Hayden, and, again,
he deserves full credit for his determination that the noble
idea behind the IYP was fully and appropriately celebrated
in Australia.
To assist him in planning and implementing the program Mr
Hayden appointed Mrs Stella Cornelius, the prominent
community activist, as TYP Director. He also established
IYP Committees both at the National level and in each of the
States and Territories with members drawn from a broad range
of community organisations.
I should like to take this opportunity of paying tribute to
Mrs Cornelius' tireless and dedicated work for the
objectives of the IYP and to the members of the various
committees who gave so freely of their time and energy to
make the program a success. I should also like to
acknowledge the generous support given to the IYP by State
Governments. The Government approved a budget of $ 3.15 million for the
IYP Program in Australia. These funds were divided on a
roughly equal basis between three main components of the
program: information and advertising;
. a series of Government projects;
and in recognition of the vital role of the community,
$ 1,050,000 to support non-government projects.
You will have seen the IYP advertisements on radio and
television. Those advertisements were designed to relate to
peace in all its meanings, and to counter despair and apathy
with the message that, while peace is not easy to achieve,
it is not impossible and every attempt at progress is a
" Step in the Right Direction"
The med * ia campaign was complemented by the production and
wide distribution of 20,000 Peace Kits containing detailed
information on Australia's role and achievements in
disarm~ ament and arms control and suggestions as to ways in
which local communities might participate in the program.
In order to encourage better public understanding of the
complexities of international arms control, the Government
sponsored a number of projects, which included a series of
public arms control and disarmament seminars in State
capital cities and an international symposium on Seismic
Verification, a vital technical precondition for a possible
Comprehensive Test Ban Treaty.
The Government's IYP program was officially launched by the
" Overture of Peace", a concert by over 2000 NSW school
students which was televised nationally in February. As an
optimistic, joyful celebration of peace it was a fitting
beginning to the year.
That event also symbolised the strong connection the
Government saw between the International Year of Peace and
the.-immediately preceding International Year of Youth.
The enthusiasm and commitment of our young people for the
goal of peace obvious at that occasion asserted itself again
at His Holiness the Pope's peace rally in Sydney on Tuesday
night. Just over a month ago I presented Australian Peace Awards to
Australians who had made outstanding ' contributions to peace
in many areas of activity. in establishing these Awards
during the IYP, the Government sought to give fitting
recognition to both the quality and diversity of community
achievements in work for a peaceful future.
These same elements were also reflected to an overwhelming
degree in the non-government IYP projects organised and
carried out by individuals and community organisations in
every part of the country. Many of these received financial
support from the Federal Government. I am also aware of
many more community projects which have been mounted quite
independently of any Government assistance.
Non-government projects for the IYP have involved the
Churches, peace groups, academics, the Aboriginal community,
artists, teachers, school students, welfare organisations,
ethnic groups, women's organisations, the RSL, service
clubs, trade unions and many others. The projects have
included conferences and seminars, theatrical performances
and concerts, publications, videos, educational and research
programs. They have taken place in every part of Australia,
from the largest cities to the smallest rural towns.
So impressive was this response to the IYP that the UN
Secretary-General sent a personal message commending
Australian community groups for their enthusiasm and
commitment. Three UN Secretariat officials who visited
Australia to familiarise themselves with our IYP program
were particularly impressed with its unique combination of
Government and non-government activities.
It is clear from this great community response that the IYP
has been a great success in Australia. Not only have
Australians beccme more aware of why they should care about
international events around them but they have also
demonstrated their strong concern to leave the world at
peace for the benefit of future generations.
What has been achieved this year is a firmer basis for
continuing work for peace in the future both by the
Government and the Australian community as a whole. The
heightened awareness of the issues and sense of
responsibility for a world of peace which the IYP has
generated will not end on 31 December 1986.
I would like to address some concluding words to young
Australians, who more than any of us, have made their
concerns about peace felt this year and whose responsibility
it will be in the future to shoulder the burden of securing
-peace.
9.
I have already mentioned that I spoke earlier this year to
an audience at the University of New England in Armidale.
Let me conclude now as I concluded then.
" Do not succumb to the paralysis of despair. It would
be a tragedy if our young people, in particular, were to
be so weighed down at the remote prospect of nuclear war
as not to care adequately about their own self
development or to contribute to our society in a
positive and energetic way.
Seek to decode the often confusing language of arms
control, its acronyms and its technical jargon. Do not
allow the so-called experts to monopolise the debate.
Inform yourselves fully about the difficult
international issues involved. Effective arms control
will only come about through incremental, careful and
patiently negotiated steps. Do not become overwhelmed
by pessimism at the sometimes glacial speed of progress
in disarmament negotiations.
Above all, do not fail to let the political leadership
of this country, and of the international community,
know of your desire for tangible progress towards a
saner, safer world."