PM Transcripts

Transcripts from the Prime Ministers of Australia

Keating, Paul

Period of Service: 20/12/1991 - 11/03/1996
Release Date:
14/12/1995
Release Type:
Press Conference
Transcript ID:
9888
Document:
00009888.pdf 9 Page(s)
Released by:
  • Keating, Paul John
TRANSCRIPT OF THE PRIME MINISTER, THE HON P J KEATING MP PRESS CONFERENCE, PARLIAMENT HOUSE, CANBERRA, 14 DECEMBER 1995

I
K'
PRIME MINISTER
TRANSCRIPT OF THE PRIME MINISTER, THE HON P J KEATING MP
PRESS CONFERENCE, PARLIAMENT HOUSE, CANBERRA,
14 DECEMBER 1995
E& OE PROOF COPY
PM: Well I would like to tell you that the Cabinet has today decided that
Australia will enter into a security agreement with Indonesia. The text
has been agreed over a number of meetings between President
Soeharto and myself over the past 18 months and after it goes through
Executive Council the agreement will be signed next Monday in
Jakarta. The agreement asserts, in formal terms, for the first time that Australia
and Indonesia have common interests in the peace and security of the
region and that we intend to cooperate in support of those interests.
The agreement is intended to make an enduring and powerful
assertion within the region and outside it that the long term strategic
interests of Australia and Indonesia coincide.
This is a major strategic development for Australia and for the region
and a development of fundamental importance in our bilateral
relationship with Indonesia, it is about providing for Australia's future
and creating greater certainty about that future.
The agreement, which is of treaty status, commits the two
Governments to the following things: consult at Ministerial level on
a regular basis about matters affecting their common security and to
develop such cooperation as would benefit their own security and that
of the region; ( ii) consult each other in the case of adverse challenges
to either party or to their common security interests and, if appropriate,
consider measures which might be taken by them individually and
jointly and in accordance with the processes of each Government; and,
( iii) promote, in accordance with the policies and priorities of each,
cooperative activities in the security field.

As is the case and usual practice, the full text will be released after the
signing on Monday.
Now this is a significant and natural extension of the cooperation we
have built up with Indonesia in recent years. It demonstrates that each
of us has confidence in the security intentions of the other. In other
words, we are putting on the table and we are saying formally that the
things that we are saying and doing to and with one another, the
agreements that have been entered recently between our defence
forces, the discussions we have between Foreign Ministers and at
Heads of Government. It is there to demonstrate that each of us has
the confidence in the security intentions of the other.
I have said before that Australia is no threat to Indonesia and
Indonesia is no threat to Australia. This has been the basis of our
defence planning for many years. But it is important that it is
understood by the people of each country. You also remember me
saying that the emergence of President Soeharto's new order
Government in the 1960s was the event of most positive strategic
significance to Australia in the post-war years.
The consequences for Australia of having a hostile or even unfriendly
Government in Indonesia over that period would have been
incalculable including for the percentage of our national resources we
would have spent, or would be spending, on defence.
The agreement builds on all the work that both sides have put into
building up the depth and diversity of the relationship between the two
countries. The interests we now have between us are varied and,
of course, they are not new. You will know about the things we have
done together on the Cambodia peace settlement where Australia and
Indonesian diplomats and our armed forces worked closely together.
You know of our collaborative work on the ASEAN Regional Forum
and, of course, more recently on APEC.
The agreement is, essentially, about building a structure for the future
of Australia, to reduce uncertainties over the next 10 to 20 years and
with it Indonesia is offering us the opportunity to shape the region.
The agreement will reinforce the security of the region as a whole by
demonstrating to our friends and neighbours that Australia and
Indonesia will continue to build a close and cooperative relationship.
There are several things, though, that the agreement does not do. It is
not an assertion that we have common internal policies or
philosophies, or that we endorse everything that Indonesia does
internally or vice versa. It does not involve us in the internal affairs of
Indonesia, or compromise our approach on human rights. There is a
reference in the text to adverse challenges in the agreement and

this has application only to external challenges, not those that might
arise from internal developments.
The agreement does not cut across Australia's commitments under
ANZUS, or the Five Power Defence Arrangements, or our Joint
Declaration of Principles with Papua New Guinea, or indeed
Indonesia's membership of ASEAN and the non-aligned movement. It
does not cut, or undermine, or contradict, our regional and multilateral
approaches to building up security dialogue and confidence, such as
our joint support for the ASEAN Regional Forum.
It is not a defence pact or alliance with an automatic agreement on
support in the event of attack. It is couched in simple terms, simple
and unambiguous terms, and means what it says.
Now I said earlier that the discussions on the agreement have been
running now for about 18 months. The proposal was first discussed by
the Security Committee of Cabinet in February 1994. In the
1993 Strategic Review, we stated that more than with any other
regional nation, a sound strategic relationship with Indonesia would do
most for Australian security.
I first raised the matter with President Soeharto in 1994. He took it up
with me again at our meeting in Bali and we, more or less, completed
negotiations during our bilateral discussions in Osaka. During those
meetings, I had a personal emissary representing me. That person
has been General Peter Gration and he, accompanied by
Allan Gyngell ( PM's Senior Adviser International), had made visits to
Indonesia to settle some of the discussion, terms and sense of the
agreement. The agreement will be signed in Jakarta by Gareth Evans and the
Indonesian Foreign Minister, Mr Ali Alatas, in the presence of
President Soeharto and myself. The two Defence Ministers Senator
Ray and Mr Sudradjat will be present as will the Australian Chief of
the Defence Force, General Baker and the Indonesian Defence Force
Commander, General Feisal Tanjung.
The agreement, of course, is not a promise that Indonesia and
Australia will never disagree on issues. We have the Five Power
Defence Agreement with Malaysia and Singapore and we found on
various matters, trade matters and the like, we have had
disagreements from time to-time. We have got, of course, an
agreement of a different variety with ANZUS and, of course, you know
we had disagreements with the United States from time to time.
No relationship, with as much substance as ours, will ever be free of
disagreement and I don't think either of us will be inhibited from
expressing such differences frankly and arguing out our case as we

have done, obviously, with Indonesia. But those policy disagreements
come and go and, of course, over time as the political leadership of the
countries will change.
So I believe the agreement represents another stage in the
development of Australia's relationship with Indonesia. Indonesia is
our largest neighbour, the world's fourth most populous country, the
largest Muslim country in the world, the immediate past Chair of the
non-aligned movement, and on some measures, based on purchasing
power parity already the tenth largest economy in the world.
On the other hand, of course, we are a modern, technologically and
scientifically advanced society, with a huge resource base we enjoy
in a Continent in a country we share without borders and, of course,
we are as we all know a rich and dynamic multi-cultural society.
I think I am convinced that Australia and Indonesia have much to
contribute in partnership. I think we have a great opportunity here to
shape the security environment of the region.
This is, as I said earlier, a chance to say that in an enduring powerful
way, within the region and outside it, that the long-term strategic
interests of Australia and Indonesia coincide. And our first chance to
put down in formal terms that Australia and Indonesia have common
interests in the peace and security of the region, and that we intend to
cooperate in support of those interests. Thank you.
J: Prime Minister, have you discussed this with any other regional
nations, or with the United States, as we said we would do in that
strategic review?
PM: I have discussed this with the United States Ambassador, and we will
be moving around... in fact, General Gration will be visiting as will
other representatives of Australia a number of countries to make
clear what it means. In fact, General Gration will be travelling early
next week to a number of capitals Washington, Tokyo and Beijing,
Kuala Lumpur, Singapore, Wellington, Port Moresby to explain the
background of the agreement in person.
J: Prime Minister, does this make Indonesia the next closest nation to us
after the United States?
PM: Well, I have said before that no nation is more important to us than
Indonesia. It's our largest nearest neighbour, and the clarity and the
integrity of this agreement makes very clear their importance to us.
Of course, in defence and security terms, ANZUS and our relationship
with the United States has always been central to Australian defence
and foreign policy, and it remains so.

J: Mr Keating, does this agreement mean a practical increase in defence
cooperation and possible exchanges of intelligence information?
PM: Well, I think it might be worth reminding you in August 1995, the
Vice CDF and his Indonesian counterpart co-signed a letter outlining
the principles along which bi-lateral defence relations will be
developed, and that letter was endorsed by the Defence Ministers of
our inaugural meeting in Perth in August of this year. Now in that, our
Defence Ministers agreed to meet annually, Indonesia presented it's
White Paper on Defence, Ministers agreed on the need to develop
inter-operability and commonality between our regional defence forces,
and they endorsed the following objectives in the following fields:
operations and exercises, training, communications and electronic
warfare, logistics, intelligence, strategic consultations, and contacts
and visits. They also agreed a new management a structure to
co-ordinate all cooperative activities, comprising a defence policy
committee headed at the three-star level, and a defence co-ordination
committee at it's executive arm. And you might remember of course,
that in terms of co-operative activities, Indonesia has participated in
the Kangaroo 95 exercises, port visits by ships of each Navy, annual
special force troop exchange exercises, and we are increasing, of
course, the number of trained people from ABRI here in Australia.
So, there is now a real formal structure there in place, and this just
provides, I think, a better setting for the development of that structure.
J: What will you say to those Australians of East Timorese background
and their supporters who will be undoubtably critical of this?
PM: Well, I think this is not an either-or issue. The Austral ia-I ndonesia
relationship is a relationship, I think, of many parts and great depth.
And I think what we have seen both over time in the development of
this issue by the Foreign Minister, by the Defence Minister and their
counterparts there, by the relationship I have had with President
Soeharto, by those collaborative things we have done that we have
mentioned Cambodia, the development of the ASEAN regional forum,
APEC that we now have a broad relationship with Indonesia.
It's a relationship of substance, and it is I think within that
relationship of substance that human rights are an integral part of our
dialogue, and that they are very much at the core of our sense of
ourselves. And I have told you a number of times now that
whenever we feel a desire or a wish to make clear where we stand on
human rights, or any human rights issue including Timor we make
that clear. I have put my views to President Soeharto forthrightly, as
I know the Foreign Minister does regularly with his counterpart etc.
None of that is changed by this agreement none of that is changed by
this agreement. You know, it is inevitable that we are going to agree
on some issues, and disagree on others. But when we do so, we will
do it directly. But we will do no service to Australian interests, or the
interests of the people of Indonesia were this to become a single-issue

relationship, and I don't think any service to the people of East Timor,
either.
J: Prime Minister, to get a fix on this is this more than a non-aggression
pact, but less than a Treaty?
PM: It has Treaty status, but it is not a defence pact which implies a military
response. What it makes clear is that each country will consult the
other in the case of challenges to either one of us, or our common
security interests, and if appropriate, consider measures which might
be taken by them either individually or jointly in accordance with their
national processes.
J: So it could involve Australian troops, or Australian defence forces,
being involved in defence of Indonesia?
PM: Yes, but it doesn't have automaticity it doesn't have auotomaticity.
Can I say, the agreement is squarely in the same family of agreements
as the Five Power Defence Agreement, and our Joint Declaration of
Principles with Papua New Guinea. I mean, for instance, the
Five Power Defence Agreement has words like this: " that their
Governments would immediately consult together for the purpose of
deciding what measures should be taken jointly or separately in
relation to such attack or threat".
In the Joint Declaration of Principles with Papua New Guinea it says
' the two governments will consult at the request of either about matters
affecting their common security interests in the event of external armed
attack threatening the national sovereignty of either country. Such.
consultation would be conducted for the purpose of each government
deciding what measures should be taken, jointly or separately, in
relation to that attack.'
So, it is in the genre or the family of those agreements. Whereas
ANZUS says things like this ' for the purpose of article 4, an armed
attack on any of the parties is deemed to include an armed attack on
the metropolitan territory of any of the parties or on island territories
under its jurisdiction in the Pacific on its armed forces, public vessels or
aircraft in the Pacific. It declares ' it would act to meet a common
danger in accordance with the Constitutional processes under article 4.
Under article 3 it says ' the parties will consult together whenever in the
opinion of any of them territory integrity, political independence or
security of any of the parties is threatened. There is other language
in the ANZUS agreement which has much more clear and automatic
responses whereas this is very much an agreement in the family of the
agreements that we have under the FPDA and with Papua New
Guinea.

Can I also say that Indonesia has no such agreement with any other
country. This is the first agreement of its kind. It has made clear its
non-aligned status, but that said, this is the first agreement of its kind
with any country and as I say, it is an agreement in the genre or in the
family of those we now have with Malaysia and Singapore and Papua
New Guinea.
J: .( inaudible) Coalition support for this? Is this a bipartisan issue?
PM: I would hope so. I think that there has been a strong degree of
bipartisanship about issues relating to the security of Australia. We
have seen that around ANZUS. We have seen it around other treaties
and I expect we will see it around this.
J: Are you interested in pursuing more bilateral agreements with other
regional countries?
PM: Not necessarily, no. I think, if you look at our immediate area we have
the Declaration of Principles with Papua New Guinea. We have this
agreement of treaty status with Indonesia and then with Malaysia and
Singapore we have the five power defence agreement which includes,
of course, New Zealand.
J: Prime Minister, you said in the Financial Review that East Timor does
remain a problem for Australia and for Indonesia and you think it
should be dealt with. What do you mean by that, are you simply
raising a point whenever these discussions come up or..
PM: Indonesia has come from, in a post colonial period, a country virtually
destitute in terms of resources and wealth to a country growing at eight
or nine per cent a year now, which has got a substantial economy,
where the distribution of wealth is widening, where prosperity is
becoming obvious for anybody who visits and now it is playing a larger
role, of course, with APEC, with the ASEAN Regional Forum and to
some substantial extent in international terms that is marred by the
difficulties it has had with Timor. I think this is a problem for Indonesia,
but I think the Indonesian government thinks this too and I'm sure it is
thinking about ways in which this matter can be accommodated within
the plurality of that sprawling archipelago of ethic groupings and
religious groupings.
J: What can you do?
PM: That is, principally, for Indonesia to think of. I mean, we have all got
ideas of what they can do, but it is not, I think, my place here to be
telling Indonesia what it might do about it. But, it certainly has been
my place in the past to say that we believe respect for human rights
and the liberties of individuals is upper most in any society.

J: Prime Minister, could Indonesia improve its agreement standing with
us and others by being more frank in its acknowledgment of its
mistakes in East Timor such as the Diii massacre.
PM: Well, I think, there is a great, you know, if you look at the
contradictions of Indonesia, you have had debate about the closures of
newspapers last year and yet AlVI Australia television a lot of ABC
content, items of television content which go to our values, the rights of
individuals, Timor, all these issues, are beamed into Indonesia every
day of the week. The growth of satellite television received material,
there are satellite dishes popping up all over the country. This is a
place which doesn't have that tightness that you see in authoritarian
regimes. It is a country that is growing. President Soeharto is opening
the economy up by one successive deregulatory package after
another, he has signed up and is, of course, the founding person in the
APEC declaration at Bogor. So, any leader in any government which
is opening its economy up, growing its private sector, trading with the
rest of the world can't hope, as I'm sure the President doesn't for a
moment, that Indonesia's political society and polity is in some way
constrained or perpetually constrained.
So, I think, we need to understand that contradiction. Yes, you will see
examples of what we believe are incursions against free speech, but
what you are also seeing is a massive opening up of the economy and
a huge deluging of that society with news and views and information
from all around the world. We can all nominate some exceptionally,
tightly run societies, this is not one of them.
J: Do you believe this move will have the support of Australian public
opinion?
PM: I think so and when ever we have seen polling on this, when asked the
question whether a serious and important relationship with Indonesia
is in Australia's best interest, it is always answered in an overwhelming
way. I think, Australians have got a very mature view about this. This
is our largest nearest neighbour, we are bound to them by our
geography in perpetuity and we have to build the structures that
provide the trust and the integrity of developing our relations together
and having our impact upon the region.
J: Prime Minister, does this agreement puts in a position where Australia
might have to choose between Indonesia and one of its other friends in
a situation where, for example, of a contretemp between Indonesia and
say Papua New Guinea, in the past Indonesia and Malaysia..
( inaudible)..
PM: Indonesia and Papua New Guinea have a document themselves about
lessening tensions, about doing things each party undertaking
things to lessen tensions. None of our friends in the region are likely,

in any way, to threaten Indonesia and I believe that Indonesia has no
territorial designs on Papua New Guinea and they have made clear in
their official text how important it is to keep those issues down. So, I
don't see this as a real possibility.
J: from the Australian side, was part of it a concern within the
government about Indonesia's part in the post-Soeharto period?
PM: No, it is just that we have gone on for too long saying to one another
privately that President Soeharto's government has held this sprawling
archipelago together, of diverse ethnic and religious groupings, but we
have never made in any formal way or put together in any formal way
the gestures which make this clear. In many respects the Australia-
Indonesia debate has been, in a sense, compromised by the sole
issue of Timor and it is the responsibility of every Australian
government, certainly this is my view, that it is the responsibility of the
government to have a proper broad relationship with our largest
nearest neighbour. You might remember, in 1991, just before I had the
first Caucus vote on the leadership, I said then, that Indonesia was the
country with which we are yet to put the full constellation of foreign
policy instruments in place and relationships in place. And while we
have got a good and, I think, enduring relationship now which has
come from the work of Gareth Evans and Robert Ray and others and, I
hope, my own, I think, this anneals those efforts, polishes those efforts,
provides a framework for those efforts which makes clear that the
government of Australia regards a relationship with Indonesia as
central to its view of the region.
J: Is part of your reason for going to Malaysia to speak with Dr Mahathir
about this matter..
PM: I would be very surprised if Malaysia, like Singapore, wouldn't regard
this as a completely healthy sign for stability in the region, in the area,
and I had thought in fact I had discussed going to Malaysia with Prime
Minister Mahathir during the Commonwealth Heads of Government
Meeting in New Zealand and my firming up of the dates of a visit is one
I am going to make now in conjunction with delivering the Singapore
Lecture in Singapore. You might recall that the Commonwealth Heads
of Government Meeting was a meeting held before the APEC meeting
in Osaka and it was at the APEC meeting in Osaka that final
substantial agreements were arranged between President Soeharto
and myself. So, my visit to Malaysia was really set before this was set
in place.
ends

9888