Australia's Reaction To War-Talk

From our Canberra Correspondent What did the Indonesian Ambassador, Brigadier-General Saadi, expect when he asked for a personal interview with Australia's Prime Minister, Mr. Menzies, at a time when Australian Government activity was virtually closed down for the Christmas-New Year holidays?

E VENTS suggest that he wanted to probe the Prime Minister’s mind on Australian reaction to the war-talk that had been pouring almost daily from the lips of Indonesian leaders since President Soekarno delivered his “People’s Command” on December 19.

The Indonesian approach obviously had to be made to the Prime Minister personally, rather than to his new Minister for External Affairs, Sir Garfield Barwick.

Mr. Menzies was the man to whom Indonesia had given its solemn assurances that it would not use force to achieve its objectives in West New Guinea.

The assurances had been given to

Mr. Menzies personally in Jakarta by President Soekarno and in Canberra subsequently by the Foreign Minister, Dr. Subandrio, and by the Minister for National Security and Army Chief of Staff, General Abdul Haris Nasution.

So that if those promises were to be repudiated, they must be repudia ted to Mr. Menzies himself, If General Suadi wanted to catch Mr. Menzies unprepared, he timed his request for an interview badly.

Because Mr. Menzies was spending Christmas in Melbourne and several days elapsed before he found h con " venient to be back in Canberra.

Meanwhile, the External Affairs

(Continued on page 130)

Department was preparing a stiff vlote on Australia’s attitude to Indo lesian war threats.

High Australian authorities have issured PIM that General Suadi’s equest for an interview had NOT aused the writing of the Note which At. Menzies handed to him.

The authorities maintain that the would have been presented in ,ny event: the interview merely pro ided a convenient opportunity for [elivering it.

It seems certain that General luadi hardly expected to be handed uch a Note. To Australian news nen who saw him emerge from the nterview, he appeared depressed.

Tie Ambassador refused to discuss le interview with them, but promised statement later in the day.

His statement appeared to have een prepared in some haste—or erhaps the haste was in the trans ition.

Most Indonesian propaganda ulletins are carefully prepared, but i this major statement not one jntence was in idiomatic English.

It broke no new ground and the nly thing of consequence was the ;atement that Indonesia was still repared for a negotiated settlement on the condition of transfer of uthority over West Irian to the idonesians”.

Australia's Strong Words The text of the Australian Note as not been disclosed.

But its substance was announced i a statement issued the same day y Sir Garfield Barwick.

“Australians are shocked and dis layed that Indonesia should openly sclare its intention to resort to force a means of concluding the issue i its own favour,” Sir Garfield iid.

“For any country to resort diberately to bloodshed to gain such i objective could not fail to lose respect and sympathy within the ternational community.”

Then followed a statement which epitomised Australia’s fears the dreadful consequences to the South Pacific if war should break out be tween white and non-white races.

Sir Garfield’s words were carefully chosen.

But they carried the clear implica tion that Indonesia would be respon sible if, by using force, she stirred up race hatreds from which the Pacific has fortunately so far been free.

He said: “To introduce warfare and the abiding animosities which it is prone to generate into this hitherto peaceful region could create intolerable burdens for all the peoples of the area, and for their descendants for generations to come.

"Direct Breach of Faith"

“The threat or use of force is ex pressly forbidden by the UN Charter, “But in this case the use of force would be a direct breach of faith with Australia having regard to the assurances which have been given at the highest level.”

The Minister introduced a new phrase in place of the time-worn expression “self-determination”.

He referred to the “ability of the indigenous people of West New Guinea to have the ultimate choice of their own future, whether it be for integration with Indonesia or for independence—with or without any relationship with the people of East New Guinea”.

This new expression of the senti ment of “self-determination” was clearly designed to allay Indonesian fears.

The Republic of Indonesia already contains several distinct ethnic groups, and Australia clearly could not suggest that existing Indonesian minorities too had the right to self determination.

Hence the Note (and one must assume that it used the same phrase as the Minister’s statement) preferred the unambiguous expression “ultimate choice of their own future”.

Australia's Position The statement said that Australia intended to lead the peoples of Papua and New Guinea (East New Guinea) to the point of exercising their own choice and added: “Australia finds it difficult to be lieve . . . that Indonesia would wish ultimately to deny the people of West New Guinea a like opportunity for national choice”

On Australia’s position, the Note was deliberately vague.

Sir Garfield’s statement said:' “While the path to negotiation is open, it is neither helpful nor appropriate to canvass publicly those courses of action which Australia might pursue in other eventualities. ' “In some, at least, of those eventualities, the interest and course of action of Governments of countries outside the immediate region would have great significance.”

The unnamed “countries outside the immediate region” were obviously the United States and Britain.

And Australia must face up to realities.

There appears to be no prospecd of either the UK or the US embroiling itself in the dispute over West New Guinea.

If they were sufficiently interested to take sides Australia could then take a very different course.

But as matters stand, we are in no position to indulge in sabre rattling, no matter how vigorously our Indonesian neighbours indulge in such tactics.