//r m

PRIME MINISTER

CHECK AGAINST DELIVERY EMBARGOED UNTIL DELIVERY

AUSTRALIA'S ROLE IN INTERNATIONAL PEACE INITIATIVES Â·   AN ADDRESS BY THE PRIME MINISTER, BOB HAWKE  EARLE PAGE COLLEGE - UNIVERSITY OF NEW ENGLAND  ARMIDALE - 11 SEPTEMBER 1986

Sir Earle Page,  first Chancellor of this University,  completed his memoirs just before his death a quarter of a   century ago next December. Cryptically - but quite  characteristically - he called his book "Truant Surgeon".

He meant by that title that his 40 years service in politics  had taken him away from his real job - the practice of  medicine.

But there was another point Earle Page wanted to make about  his "truancy", as he called it. It was the fact that his  political career took him away, all too much, from the place  in the world he loved best - this great region, the New  England and,  below, the Northern Rivers, and most of all,

the Clarence, as he described it - "the broad Clarence,   sweeping in majestic curves towards the sea." .

Earle Page believed, quite simply, that this was the best  place on earth,  in the best country on earth.  And who here  shall presume to say that he was wrong?

And the remarkable career of Earle Page cannot be fully  understood without understanding the two great motivating  passions of his life :  his intense local' loyalties and his  Ã¢ÂÂ   intense Australianism.

This was the combination,  together with his sheer political  skill and guile, which made Earle Page uniquely significant  in our political history.

And let me say this - as a mere Labor outsider :  the  Australian politician who got the better of both Billy  Hughes and Bob Menzies was, indeed, uniquely significant and  uniquely successful.

r

2 .

From his regional roots,  Earle Page created the most  successful pressure group in our history. Yet,  at the end  of twenty of our most turbulent and bitterly partisan years,   during which he had played always a dominant and sometimes a   disruptive role,  he was able to become an authentic national

leader - the chosen bipartisan representative of his country  in London and Washington. '

Thus Page could write in his memoirs:

"I reached Australia on 15th August 1942. Curtin drove  from Canberra to see me. We had much to talk about.  I   gave him the story of my mission and my thoughts on the  British and American situations.  He thanked me for my  work and invited me to join the Labor War Cabinet and to

become,  as his personal nominee,  a member of the  Advisory War Council.  This he announced to the House on  2nd September,  saying that he had co-opted me to attend  meetings of the War Cabinet when my advice would be of

value,  in order that my knowledge and experience might  Ã¢ÂÂ   be available in the conduct of the war."

That is a passage which, I think,  says a great deal about  both Curtin and Page. And it says a great deal about the  capacity of Australians,  with deeply opposed views,  to work  together in a time of crisis.

That historic meeting between Page and Curtin took place at  a time when Australians had joined together to meet the  challenge of war.

Tonight I wish to speak about a different challenge which  faces our generation. In terms of human civilisation, it is  an even greater challenge - the challenge of peace.

On 16 September, the world community will celebrate the  International Day of Peace, one of the highlights of the  International Year of Peace.  It will be an important day  for all Australians who think seriously about peace,  disarmament and arms control. '.Ã¢ÂÂ  '

I want to talk to you tonight about the Government's  policies and initiatives in this vital area and about the  scope for action by concerned Australian citizens.

INTERNATIONAL OUTLOOK

First let me say something about the international  environment.

No one should be in any doubt that the world is at a  historically critical juncture in the relations between the  United States and the Soviet Union and,  consequently, in  the struggle to contain the arms race.

3.

For much of the past decade the lack of progress in  US-Soviet arms control has led to a widespread atmosphere of  uncertainty, indeed profound anxiety, throughout the world

community.

I believe that there are now historic opportunities for the  restoration of stability and realistic understanding between  the super powers on nuclear weapons. If these are seized,  we can look forward to an international environment marked

by less suspicion and tension than has been the case for the  past decade. .

If they are not taken,  however,  there is the prospect of  even greater uncertainties ahead of us.

Let me first spell out the risks,  if the current Geneva  negotiations fail.

The fabric of existing agreements - and never let their  importance be under-estimated - could collapse, setting off  a new round of strategic competition and instability.

Understandings reached under SALT II - which although  unratified has been generally observed by both sides - would  come under threat. There would be further pressures on the  ABM Treaty, which plays a vital role in controlling

strategic competition in space.

In that sort of environment,  nuclear arsenals would  increase. So would the tensions between East and West.

These darker possibilities should not be discounted. .

Nobody should underestimate the possibility for unexpected  complications and tensions in superpower relations.  The  current difficulty over the arrest of Nicholas Daniloff  testifies to that.

Nevertheless,  I hope it is not wishful thinking to suggest  that there are now greater grounds for optimism than for  some time.

I was encouraged by the account of the Geneva talks given to  me recently by Mr Max Kampelman, the Head of the US  negotiating team in Geneva.  In his words,  the parties are  now within a negotiating framework.

It is our profound hope that this framework will lead to an  agreement on strategic nuclear arms which President Reagan  and General Secretary Gorbachev will be able to sign at  their Third Summit Meeting in Moscow in 1987.

From President Reagan's point of view, such an achievement  would crown eight years in the White House.

4.

For Mr Gorbachev,  who clearly wishes to establish a new  style of leadership, it would help to consolidate his  authority not only within the Soviet Union but among his  allies.

AUSTRALIA'S PHILOSOPHICAL APPROACH

I do not wish to exaggerate Australia's role and influence  in the search for peace.  But neither should any of us seek  to minimise them.

Soon after our Government was first elected in 1983,  I   addressed the Australian Institute of International Affairs  on the issue of 'Australia's Place in the World'.  I said on  that occasion:

"The big global issues of the day will not and should  not be allowed to pass us by. We want to deal with the  world as it really is not as we might prefer it or want  it to be. We shall not shirk our responsibilities. We  will where appropriate seek to register as effectively

as we are able Australian views and concerns.  We are  working both deliberately and self-confidently to  establish a respected Australian identity in the  international arena".

They were, by any measure,  high standards for the conduct of  our foreign policy. I can say tonight,  more than three  years later,  that I am proud of the record of my Government  in meeting them.

Much of the credit for our achievements must go to our.  Foreign Minister Bill Hayden.  He has been both tireless and  effective in explaining our policies at home and in putting  Australia's views to foreign governments and international

forums.

Tonight, I want to draw your particular attention to these  words from that address: "We want to deal with the world as  it really is, not as we might prefer or want it to be".

The search for peace attracts the attention of both cynics  and Utopians. Cynics say that military confrontation is  inevitable, that no generation in history has been totally  free of the threat of war; that there is nothing that can

calm international tensions or promote a more peaceful  world.  By contrast Utopians trust in panaceas of unilateral  disarmament and isolationism.

There is a paradox here,  because ultimately the cynics and  the Utopians meet on common ground - the common ground of  despair. The cynics say we might as well throw up our hands  in despair and do nothing; the wishful thinkers say we would  be better to throw up our hands in surrender and hope for  the best.

5.

Clearly my Government does not accept either counsel.  We  will not compromise Australia's security in the belief,  or  the hope,  that the major players will abandon entrenched  positions.

Let me first dispose of the notion that unilateral  disarmament would produce effective arms control or lead' to  a lasting peace.  We believe that a stable deterrent  relationship between the United States and the Soviet Union

is the best means currently available of averting war  between the nuclear powers,  and of providing the necessary  confidence for them to engage in negotiations to reduce  their nuclear arsenals.

This is not the same as arguing that deterrence should be  seen as either a desirable or a permanent solution.  But it  exists and is the only available system of nuclear  restraint. For the time being we have to work within its

framework.

AUSTRALIA'S INITIATIVES

I would now like to outline the steps which my Government  has been taking in pursuit of the goal of peace.

The comment is often made - by both the cynics and the  wishful thinkers - that a country the size of Australia can  do nothing to advance the cause of peace. Underlying that  observation is the view that only the nuclear superpowers,

the United States and the Soviet Union,  can materially  affect the pursuit of peace.

For the rest of us that view implies things are out of our  hands; that Australia lacks the stature,  resources or will  to influence events and that therefore we need not try.

These assumptions are mistaken, since they overlook both our  right and our responsibility to be involved in the quest for  peace. The catastrophic potential of war,  including nuclear  war,  makes its prevention a priority for'all the world.

My Government shares entirely the worldwide concern at the  build-up of nuclear arsenals.  With the troubled history of  uncertainty in East-West relationships,  and with the added  prospect of the militarisation of space,  we understand and

endorse the worldwide aspirations for stability and arms  reductions.  We would be ignoring the responsibility we have  as a member of the community of nations if we failed to make  our voice heard on a matter of such fundamental importance.

6 .

Further,  the view that a country the size of Australia can  do nothing in the quest for peace ignores our  self-interested need to be involved in that quest. Our  security is best preserved through peace,  and the road to  peace lies in the construction of workable arms control

agreements and the creation of mutual trust between the  superpowers.  We see our security interests as served by the  conclusion of, and continued compliance with, balanced and  verifiable agreements leading to substantial reduction in

the present level of armaments,  both nuclear and  conventional.  Â·

With these perceptions guiding us, we have played a positive  and creative role in the quest for peace.  This Government  is committed, on a scale never before attempted by an  Australian Government,  to encourage and participate

realistically in the work to cap and control the world's  nuclear and conventional arsenals.

Underlying this commitment is a recognition both of the  difficulties of the task before us and of the limits to our  capacity to bring about change.  Yet we are determined to  maximise whatever influence we can exert and to overcome

those difficulties if we can.  We must be realists with  hope. We must deal with the world as it is, but play our  part in making it more like the world we want it to become.

The Government has involved Australia constructively in the  process of international negotiations. In this complex and  frequently slow and difficult process, the Government has  been determined to put in the hard and unremitting work  necessary for success.  Â·

We have built up Australia's resources to handle this work  through the appointment of Australia's first Ambassador for  Disarmament and through a stronger Department of Foreign  Affairs.

COMPREHENSIVE TEST BAN

In this context we place great emphasis on the work  currently underway in the United Nations Conference on  Disarmament aimed at creating a Comprehensive Nuclear Test  Ban Treaty. If we are serious about placing a lid on the

growth of the arsenals of the superpowers, then a verifiable  CTB would be a substantial step in that direction. The  Treaty is a feasible,  negotiable proposal, which would not  get bogged down by the intricate alterations to the  existing balance of power or force structures.

7 .

It would quickly inhibit the deployments of new weapons and  the modernisation of existing ones. It would place  international pressure on the French to cease their testing  programme in the Pacific. A CTB would be an additional  obstacle to the acquisition of nuclear weapons by countries  which do not have them and it would provide valuable support

to the Nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty. '

One of the key conditions for a_ CTB is confidence that any  violation could be accurately monitored.  Australia has been  actively involved in working at the UN Conference on Â·   Disarmament on steps towards a CTB and in particular on this

issue of verification arrangements such as seismic  monitoring.

CHEMICAL WEAPONS .  Â·

Australia has also been making special efforts to develop  international sanctions against chemical weapons. Again,   the UN Conference on Disarmament has been the principal  venue for work in support of negotiations aimed at a

comprehensive convention banning the use,  possession and  manufacture of chemical weapons. The proposed convention  would also ensure the destruction of existing stockpiles of  chemical weapons and of their means of production.

At home,  we have introduced controls on the export of  particular chemicals which could be used in the manufacture  of certain weapons,  and we have convened discussions with  other countries which have introduced such controls with a   view to improving their effectiveness.

NON-PROLIFERATION TREATY

Australia also played a vital and influential role in the  Third Review Conference of the Nuclear Non-Proliferation  Treaty, in 1985. The NPT brings together those nations such  as Australia which have voluntarily agreed not to become  nuclear weapons states and as such it provides an important  means of exerting international pressure .on the United

States and the Soviet Union to negotiate for nuclear arms  control.

The Third Review conference placed considerable pressure on  the superpowers to pursue their negotiations in good faith.  Australia also supports the International Atomic Energy  Agency as a key instrument in preventing the proliferation

of nuclear weapons.

We contribute to the UN Institute for Disarmament Research  and to the World Disarmament Campaign which seeks to foster  informed public support for the UN's disarmament objectives.  At home,  we are providing funds over seven years for the

Peace Research Centre which was established at the  Australian National University in 1984.

1

8.

RELATIONS WITH WASHINGTON AND MOSCOW

In all,  Australia has made a substantial contribution to the  various negotiations underway aimed at arms control. I have  so far described only the multilateral forums,  but it should  not be forgotten that we strenuously push our concerns on a   bilateral basis as well.  '

As an ally of the United States and through our hosting of  the joint facilities which contribute to both deterrence and  to arms control verification, we have access to the top Â·   leadership of the US. We have used that access to put our  views on this and other issues frankly and constructively.

Ambassador Kampelman confirmed at the National Press Club in  Canberra last month that Australia plays a significant role  in influencing United States policy on nuclear arms control.

We have also restored dialogue with the leadership of the  Soviet Union.  We acknowledge that there are great  differences in strategic perspective and interest between  ourselves and the USSR. But we also recognise that a

credible peace policy requires sensible discourse with  Moscow.  We now have this.

In our dialogue with the superpowers we have made it clear  that we are opposed to an escalation of the arms race in  outer space and that we support neither the US Strategic  Defence Initiative nor its Soviet counterpart.  We have told

the Americans that we will not be accepting their invitation  to participate in the SDI program.

We view these American and Soviet research programs as  threats to the framework of mutual deterrence on which the  world's security relies. They also threaten to undermine  existing arms control agreements,  in particular the  Anti-Ballistic Missile Treaty which remains the principal

achievement of arms control negotiations between the  superpowers. And they hold the promise of yet more spending  on yet more weapons in an accelerating arms race of both  offensive and defensive weapons.  ' '

What we want to see is the balanced and verifiable reduction  in the level of all armaments,  not the continued lavish  spending on weapons whose strategic value is questionable  and whose impact on the arms control process can only be  harmful.

9 .

SOUTH PACIFIC NUCLEAR FREE ZONE

The Government is particularly proud of pur initiative which  led to the conclusion of the South Pacific Nuclear Free Zone  Treaty. Australia and 10 other members of the South Pacific  Forum have already signed this treaty,  which we view as a

significant arms control measure and a positive contribution  to regional security.

It addresses itself to the common concerns of South Pacific  "nations on nuclear testing,  the proliferation of nuclearÂ·  weapons and the dumping of nuclear waste.

On 21 August,  the House of.Representatives passed the  legislation which will allow Australia to ratify the South  Pacific Nuclear Free Zone Treaty. In fact,  our legislation  goes beyond the minimum that is technically required for

this purpose,  for as well as covering all the substantive  provisions of the treaty it also reflects our policy of  opposition to the manufacture,  testing and stationing of  nuclear weapons in or by Australia.

Australia remains absolutely opposed to French nuclear  testing.  We will continue to take every opportunity to  convey to the French Government our strong opposition to  this testing program.  This fundamental truth remains:  if  the tests are as safe as the French claim, then they should  be conducted within metropolitan France,  not on our own  backdoor step.

Over recent weeks there have been some claims that our  budget decision to renew the sale of uranium to France under  the normal strict safeguards somehow diminishes our  opposition to the French Nuclear testing program or  questions our commitment to the South Pacific Nuclear Free

Zone Treaty. I understand the emotion which has been  generated on this issue and respect the integrity of many  who are critical of our decision. But these claims are  wrong.

The Government's decision was made on the basis that the ban  had had no effect in persuading France to cease the tests at  Mururoa Atoll. Indeed,  by freeing France from its  contractual obligations, our decision not to sell had in

fact advantaged France by allowing it to buy uranium cheaper  on the spot market.

The decision was also, of course,  taken in the context of  the goals for the budget deficit which the Government had  set itself. We had to ask ourselves :  should there be cuts  in social welfare spending to accommodate a policy of only  symbolic significance.

10.

Let me reiterate: Australian uranium exports are covered by  the most stringent safeguards requirements in the world.   Safeguards on Australian origin nuclear material in France

are applied under the Australia-France and the  Australia-European Atomic Energy Community Safeguards  Agreements.  Under these agreements,  Australian uranium has  not been,  is not now, and will not in the future be used in

any French nuclear weapons program, at Mururoa Atoll or  anywhere else.

Let me also stress that our decision is totally consistent  with our international treaty obligations including the  Non-Proliferation Treaty and the South Pacific Nuclear Free  Zone Treaty. The ban which the SPNFZ Treaty imposes on the

export of uranium for bomb-making is unprecedented  internationally. The Treaty establishes an international  legal obligation that any uranium exported by any signatory  country is used only for peaceful purposes, and that is the  case with any and all exports of Australian uranium.

INTERNATIONAL YEAR OF PEACE

1986 as I have mentioned, has been designated by the United  Nations as the International Year of Peace - a year during  which international attention can be focused on action to  promote peace,  international security and co-operation, and

the resolution of conflict by peaceful means. The  Government has allocated over $3 million for activities  within Australia to observe the International Year of Peace

But in designating this year as the IYP, the United Nations  made it clear that it was not for Governments alone to  sponsor these activities. The United Nations sensibly  envisaged the need for local communities, educational

institutions and other non-government groups to be involved

All Australians will, I hope,  be involved in Year of Peace  activities so that 1986 will see real progress towards the  goal of a just and lasting peace throughout the world.

In particular,  young people have an important role to play.  We want you to continue to make your views on peace and  disarmament clearly known so that the Government can take  them into account in determining our policies.

ECONOMIC CONSIDERATIONS

Unfortunately, 1986 will also be remembered as the year in  which the trade war broke out. Paradoxically this war has  occurred not between East and West, North or South - but  among the major industrial countries of the Western

community. Its battleground includes, in major part,   Australia's own international agricultural markets.

11.

This conflict,  I might add,  has broken out despite  concentrated efforts by Australia and other like-minded  countries to see negotiated multilateral solutions to  international trade problems.

In this great agricultural centre of New England,  I should  like to offer a few observations on this issue,  and its ‘   implications for our security policies.

I have indicated that,  in our pursuit of peace and  disarmament, the Government has consistently emphasisedÃ¢ÂÂ    Australia's commitment to the West and to the alliance with  the United States. In this, we have the traditional support

of the great majority of the Australian community and of  none more than the nation's farmers.

These long-standing attitudes are being sorely tested by the  senseless subsidy competition instigated by Europe and now  joined by the United States. Australia's primary producers,  among the most efficient in the world,  find themselves the  unwitting and unwilling victims of it.

Australia's commitment to securing international peace in  the real world situation means that we will most effectively  do so, by maintaining a strong and healthy alliance with the  United States. But healthy alliances require healthy  attitudes in both directions. That is also the real world.

It is simply unjust that countries with which we have had  close friendships for as long as we have been a nation  should damage us in this way.  Many Australians may  reasonably feel confused and irritated to find ourselves the  victim of a kind of international hit-and-run perpetrated by

friends.

It is no wonder that, in these circumstances, the most  conservative forces in Australia are finding common cause  with the extreme Left in questioning our long-standing  security and alliance posture.  Something rather significant

has happened when my office receives a call from a farmers'  group suggesting they will mobilise one thousand farmers to  march on Pine Gap.

The Government has resisted calls to play any security  cards.  We have taken advantage of our alliance relationship  to make forceful economic representations to our friends in  Washington. We have sought to develop solidarity and

co-operation among like-minded producers,  through the  recent,  and very successful, Cairns Conference.  We will  continue along this path.

12.

I want,  however,  to make this point earnestly to our  European friends and American ally :  this Government is in  no doubt about the appropriate direction of Australia's  policy. But continued insensitivity in trading policies  must run the risk of solidifying a perception that  Australia's strategic orientation is in conflict with our

economic interests. ‘

In the longer term - and I am not necessarily talking about  the life of this Government or the next Hawke Government -  whatever the conscious calculation of the government inÂ­  power, that perception could gain ground and indeed force

the pace. In a situation of chronic difficulty for our  nation, for which the corruption of our overseas markets  would bear a heavy responsibility, economic pressures from  our people could take this issue out of the hands of

government.

THE ROLE OF AUSTRALIAN YOUTH

The explosion of the first atomic bomb in July 1945 in the  New Mexico desert let the nuclear genie out of its bottle.  We should understand that the nature of human kind makes it  unreasonable to expect that the genie will ever be put back

in its dormant receptacle.

The generation raised in the nuclear age has therefore been  called upon to face an unprecedented challenge. The genius  of the human mind has unleashed a power that can massively  transform the energy equation in a way that can accelerate  the peaceable betterment of people throughout the world. Or  it can, as we know, for the first time in history provide  the means of eliminating human life from our planet.

The task therefore is twofold. First to have the courage to  accept the intellectual challenge of working to harness the  great new source of power for the benefit of all nations.

Nothing in history has ever been uninvented, nor will it be  now.

The second task for all of us - the task for future  generations - is to control these weapons, to freeze their  development, to pursue deep cuts in nuclear arsenals, to  ensure that by accident or design, they are never employed,

to see their ultimate elimination.

This is an obligation of unparalleled complexity and risk.

I often hear the question, "What can a concerned citizen do  about the problem of nuclear weapons?"

May I in conclusion suggest the following to those among  you, particularly young people, who ask the same question.

13.

First, do not succumb to the paralysis of despair.  It would  be a tragedy if our young people,  in particular,  were to be  so weighed down at the remote prospect of nuclear war as not

to care adequately about their own self development or to  contribute to our society in a positive and energetic way.

Seek to decode the often confusing language of arms control,  its acronyms and its technical jargon.  Do not allow the  so-called experts to monopolise the debate.  .

Inform yourselves fully about the difficult international  issues involved.  Effective arms control will only come  about through incremental, careful and patiently negotiated  steps.  Do not become overwhelmed by pessimism at the

sometimes glacial speed of progress in disarmament  negotiations.

Above all,  do not fail to let the political leadership of  this country, and of the international community, know of  your desire for tangible progress towards a saner, safer  world.

It is my hope that you will all lend the strength of your  talents and learning and the energy of your commitment  towards achieving that goal.

**********************************

