Kuala Lumpur, 17 July 1963
Top Secret Personal
You sent me a copy of your letter to Mick Shann of the 2nd July asking for comments on the suggestion that we might try to link our defence association with Malaysia with the defence and preservation of peace in South East Asia.1
2. Unfortunately the situation has changed radically since you wrote and I presume you will agree that we now have to wait and see whether the Summit Meeting is held and what comes out of it. If the meeting reaches a fairly successful conclusion I can see considerable merit in the proposal you are canvassing.2
3. Since I had destroyed the draft Cabinet submission3 before I received your letter it is impossible for me to propose precise wording. However, the following general ideas are submitted for what they are worth.
4. I assume that you have in mind some declaration or statement that could be made public. It seems to me that the disadvantages would outweigh the advantages if such a statement were linked too closely with the language and intent of the Manila Tripartite Agreement. The most appropriate paragraph in the Manila Agreement gives primary responsibility for security to Malaya, Indonesia and the Philippines. It would be unfortunate if we were stuck with a form of words which, while ostensibly directed against China, might be used by more extreme propagandists in the area to suggest that the United Kingdom is overplaying its role.
5. On the other hand, Sir Garfield Barwick’s statement on the 12th June at the end of the Manila Meeting4 seems to provide a good basis on which to build. It mentioned the ‘close and positive interest of Australia in the efforts they were making for closer regional cooperation among themselves on matters of security, stability and economic, social and cultural development’. Perhaps the same sort of language could be used to say that our association with the Defence Agreement is evidence of our concern with the preservation of peace and security of all countries in the area in their defence plans and of our interest in exploring further with the countries in the area, either singly or multilaterally, problems associated with the preservation of our mutual security.
6. I also believe that we could make reference to the importance of regional defence of an area of considerable strategic importance which if unprotected would attract the ambitions of expansionist outside powers. In doing so I believe we should stress the importance of good neighbour protection of our mutual interests in the region. I would especially recommend the phrase ‘good neighbour’ as an approach most likely to find a common appeal in both Malaysia and Indonesia.
[NAA: A1838, TS682/21/1 part 13]
1 Not published. As background for Shann’s consideration of this request, Jockel had enclosed a copy of Cabinet Submission No. 552 which Cabinet had considered in March, and deferred until after the establishment of Malaysia (see Document 43).
2 In seeking to link Australia’s presence in Malaysia with the defence and preservation of peace in Southeast Asia, DEA wanted a formula which would: ‘(a) not merely be coextensive with the United Kingdom agreement; (b) will clarify our obligation to Malaysia; (c) can be explained to Indonesia as not being directed against them and will enable us to discuss questions of mutual defence with them’.
3 Cabinet papers sent to post were to be treated with particular care over and above the normal precautions of their classification (in this case TOP SECRET) and destroyed once there was no further need for them. The submission had been sent to Critchley on 5 April for comment.
4 See CNIA, vol. 34, no. 6, p. 44.