Washington, 4 March 1964
634. Confidential Priority
Indonesia/Malaysia
The Tunku’s reported announcement yesterday of his intention to have recourse to the U.N.1 leads us to suggest for consideration that Australia should perhaps seek the right to be heard by the Security Council if and when the Malaysian question comes up there.
2. We have not had time to think this suggestion out thoroughly but our first feelings are that the presence of Australia at the Security Council table would have the following advantages:—
(a) It could usefully back up the case presented by Malaysia which might not otherwise be as effective as possible, especially if there should develop impromptu exchanges across the table.
(b) It would give us a better chance of influencing the direction of developments in the Council. In particular it would help us maintain pressure on the Americans.
(c) It should be helpful to the U.K. upon whom Malaysia might otherwise have to rely a little too much.
(d) It should gain Australia marks with Malaysia.
(e) It would graphically illustrate the strong and consistent support Australia has given to Malaysia.
(f) It would demonstrate that Malaysia was a partner within the Commonwealth rather than a neo-colonial creation of the British.
3. The only disadvantage we can see at first sight is that a clash between Indonesia and Australia across the Security Council table would be inevitable. On the other hand it would be another restrained and graduated diplomatic step short of armed intervention.
4. We have not mentioned the above suggestion outside this Embassy.
[NAA: A1838, 3006/4/9 part 5]
1 The Tunku issued a statement on 4 March, following the breakdown of the foreign ministers’ talks in Bangkok (see editorial note, 1964 Tripartite Talks ). In regard to presenting Malaysia’s case to the UN, he said: ‘Let us try and do all we can to invoke the sympathies of the United Nations and the support of the free world to respond to our call for fair play and justice’.