FOR PRESS P. m. No. _ 34/ 1965
BISHOPS'I LETTER ON VIETNAM
Statement by the Prime Ministers the Rt. Hon. $ ir Roateze
On March 12, a letter signed by a number of bishops
of the Anglican Church was received by the Prime Minister.
It dealt with events in Vietnam.
Yesterday, the Prime Minister replied to the letter
in the following terms
" I have given careful thought to your letter
of March 12th, relating to events in Vietnam. As your
letter was published in the press, 1 shall give publicity
to my reply, when you have received it.
You urge that my Government should be seen
to be taking ' positive steps towardis an honourable and
peaceful settlement of the fighting in Vietnam.'
Now~ t hat all of us in our country want
peace is axiomatic, The whole strength of Australia's
diplomatic forces in countries to which they are
accredited is directed almuost daily to the removal of
difficulties and the promotion of peace. But before any
nation such as the U. S. A. " negotiates" for peace,
realism requires
that thie other party or parties to the conflict
should be willing to negotiate; and
that there should be a genuine cease-fire,
strictly and honourably observed; and
that there should be some reasonable assurance
that aggression and subversion will come to an
end, It is at this point that your letter surprises
and distresses me. Although you are urging some form of
political action upon me and my colleagues in relation to
the fighting in Vietnam, you go on to say that you are
' not concerned here to canvass the merits of the respective
attitudes of the North and South Vietnamese Government, or
the Governments of the United States and China,,'
Well, all I can say is that the Government is
and must be concerned. Indeed, it seems elementary to me
that unless we have some ideas on the merits of these
matters our actions will be those of expediency a nd not
those o01 principle. I therefore address myself to the merits,
to which, I fear, you attach little significance,
You refer to the Geneva agreements of 1951+.
These provided a military demarcation line at the 17th
parallel, separating North and South Vietnam with a
demilitarised zone of five kilometres on each side. Each
side was to ' order and enforce the complete cessation of
all hostilities in Vietnam by all armed forces under
their control'. / 2
North Vietnam is under Communist rule, The
political views of Hanoi are not to be distinguished from
those of Peking, There can, in our opinion be no doubt that
the Geneva Accords have been consistently violated by the
Communists, partly by direct attacks across the line partly
by infiltr~ ation and supply, and partly by the establishment
and maintenance of the Communist insurgents know , n as the Viet
Cong, whose activities are directed to the overthrow of
government in South Vietnam and to the ultimate establishment
there of a Communist regime. These facts are not seriously
denied, In 1960 they were expressly conceded by the Government
and Communist Party in North Vietnam. At the request of the
Government of South Vietnam the United States has deployed
forces in that country, to aid in its defence and we, under
similar circumstances, have given military ana material aid.
These steps are denounced by the Communists as ' Luperialismt,
though it is quite clear that they have been taken in the
defence of local freedom and self-government against an
imperialist aggression which if not restricted by deeds, will
lead to the over-running of Louth-East Asia by aggressive
Communism and a complete loss of the existing freedom of non-
Communist countries. Are there no merits here to be considered by
Church leaders? There can be no true composition between
atheistic and materialistic Communism and countries with deep
religious beliefs, True, there can be, given good faith on
both sides, peaceful co-existence and mutual tolerance. But
these cannot continue if aggression continues and grows and
is unchecked except by fine words.
We have considered the merits, as any Government
must. We believe as do all those who have been prepared to
consider the merits, that the United States policies and
actions in relation to South Vietnam are right, and should be
supported; that they derive from a courageous and generous
acceptance of responsibilities for the protection of human
freedom. You urge that we join with some other authorities
' in bringing to a close a war that is costing so many lives
and reducing the economy of Vietnam to chaos. t
I agree that the war is costing many lives and
is damaging Vietnam. But how is it to be brought to a close?
The Viet Cong and the forces of Hanoi are backed by Communist
China, a country which rejects peaceful co-existence and
practises, as it has already shown in India and Tibet an
aggressive imperialism. Is the United States to withdraw,
and abandon South Vietnam? This would no doubt lead: to a
conquest which would end the armed conflict by conceding
victory to the Communists.
Or is the United States without withdrawal or
abandonment, to negotiate for peace With whom? About what?
These are two vital questions.
How would they negotiate with the Viet Cong, well
organised but hidden, practising the night attack upon
villages, determined upon revolution by violence? How would
they negotiate with North Vietnam, a country which has shown
that it will be bound by no agreement? a / 3
How could they negotiate with Communist China,
the home of aggression, except upon a basis of assured
independence and freedom for South Vietnam and those other
countries of South-East Asia which are now threatened by
Communist expansionism? Sir, the change of heart that is needed to lay
a good foundation for a fruitful negotiation and a lasting
peace must occur in the Communist bodies. It will occur all
the sooner if aggression is met by resistance, if we remain
clear about what it is that we are defending and if we, and
all our allies, can make it well understood that we are not
concerned to conquer others, but that we will do our part to
preserve freedom where it now exists4 Freedom is, in this
world, not expendable. And free people are not aggressors."
CANBERRA March, 1965