H W / T DEPARTMENT OF FOREIGN AFFAIRS

NEWS RELEASE NO. M/82 29 September 1972

UNITED NATIONS - MINISTER FOR FOREIGN AFFAIRS

PRESS CONFERENCE - 27 SEPTEMBER 1972

Question: You've been speaking today about hijacking and terrorism, etc and

in view of the hijacking in Australia, are there any more specific proposals

or suggestions that you would like to make to counteract this aspect of

terrorism? . .

Answer: First of all, when you speak about hijacking in Australia you are

not referring to the Olympic plane to Singapore are you?

Answer:  Yes.

Mr Bowen:  Which turned out not to be a hijack.

First.of all, we're in the process, or rather, we ratified the

Tokyo Convention.

There is a current Bill before the House on The Hague Convention,

and we have yet to prepare the Bill for the Tokyo Convention. '

Now these are the current Conventions on hijacking.

In point of fact our. laws, by and large, go aÂ«substantial part of the

way towards covering the matters that these Conventions deal with.

Now it may be that this will strengthen these Conventions, in which

case we will go along with, it and this may require further amendment of the

law.

That takes time and you've got to amend the law to do it.

Our ultimate objective is to make sure that there is no sanctuary

-2-

for a man who has commited am act of hijacking to start with and secondly that

as far as possible he is always apprehended - this is the deterrent.

Question; There’s no Bill drawn is there to ratify the Non-Proliferation

Treaty?

Answer; NoÂ»

We have not yet decided to ratify itÂ»

Although the fact that we signed it means that we would have the

ultimate intention to ratify itÂ»

Question; What would the delay beÂ»

Answer; The delay is due to reservations we have about its effectiveness and

some objections we have.

These were listed at the time and put in as reservationsÂ»

One of them concerned the entry of people to make inspections in

Australia.

'^his has become less of a difficulty now with the increasing technology

in supervising these things.

Another objection we had was as to the effectiveness of the Treaty

during such time as France and China remained outside it.

We would have liked to see universality in the Treaty.

Question;.In view of the move to ban nuclear tests in the Pacific would Australia

have a stronger hand if it ratified the Treaty?

Answer; I don't think it would have a stronger hand.

I think it may be a logical subsequent step, but we would like the-steps

to be first of all a much greater adherence to the 1963 Treaty.

We would like to 'see all countries party to that Treaty which bans

not only atmospheric testing, underwater testing .... but not underground testing.

We would then like to see a wider Treaty banning all weapons testing.

(The other one deals with weapons testing too.) In all environments,

which would include underground weapons testing and the other, the Non-ProÂ­

liferation Treaty, deals with the supply of enriched uranium and a lot of

-3-

other things as wellÂ»

Its another stage, and I think I might add that in point of fact,

we do observe its terms in practiceÂ» .

We are likely to become a supplier of uranium and we have concluded

some umbrella agreements, not sale agreements, but umbrella agreements with

France and J a p a n , .under which sales would take placeÂ»

Sales could not take place except under the umbrella of these

agreements which provide the safeguard clauses which are similar to those

required by the Treaty and indeed with Japan following our Treaty, we entered

into a Trilateral Agreement with Japan, and the International Atomic Energy

Commission set up under that Treaty who will supervise the implementation of

the .safeguards if ..w,e supply to JapanÂ» ;  Â·Â»

Questions Has there been any movement at all to try to overcome the obstacle  c of France and China being out of the Treaty?

Are we thinking about it?

Answers YesÂ»

We have put a fair bit of pressure on the French,

Less on the Chinese,

But its early days to get the French and the Chinese,

The French have the view that its essential to their defence plan.

Its part of their defence against the first strike in their viewÂ»

,  This appears to be the view of Pompidou, Messmer and DebreÂ»

They have spent billions of francs over a period of ten years trying

to perfect their nuclear weapons.

Now they have yet to complete these tests.

Its very hard to deflect them at this point of time effectively, unless

a much stronger world opinion goes against them.

We have in fact had a very big impact on them.

They altered the nature of their tests as a result partly of our

pressureÂ»

'  Ã¢ÂÂÂ»Â»A  Ã¢ÂÂ

-imÂ­

probably shortened the number of tests.

I would not like to say that positively, but I have this impression.

Question: Have we had any assurances on when these tests might finish .

altogether?

Answer: No.

They will go on for the next couple of years, as far as they are

concerned.

That's why we're busy at the present time trying to marshall world

opinion and I made an announcement yesterday on this joint Australian/New

Zealand initiative to try to get a big body of co-sponsors surrounding the

Pacific for the start. .

Question: What's the reaction of the other countries?

Answer: First class. ...

Question: What's the attitude of some countries on condemning the French.

Answer: I don't want to discuss the attitude of particular countries.

We made an announcement of who was there.

Broadly speaking, the Latin American countries have been more inclined

to claim scientific damage than our scientists would lead us to believe, and

therefore to use stronger wording;

The Asian countries have got different interests as well.

,  They've got China as well.

.  They've got the Northern and Southern hemisphere testing, so that you

find verbal differences. .

And some governments have reserved the right to look at the final^

Resolution. ;  ,

We are all still meeting together to settle the form of it.

And we hope that we can get a Resolution that will suit everybody.

Question: Does the Australian Government see nothing incongruous in us coÂ­

sponsoring a Treaty like this, and yet at the same time not ratifying a

Treaty that has generally been ratified around the world?

.. ./5

-5-

Answer: You're referring to the Non-Proliferation Treaty?

No that deals with a different topic.

Its the same general field in that its designed to prevent the spread

of nuclear weapons - I agree with that.

But the Nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty goes into the detail of

enriched uranium supply, inspection, all these sort of things.

But it goes much further in many respects and covers a different area,

which raises different interests of ours.

In principle we are in favour of both Treaties because we are against

the proliferation of these weapons.

We think its going to be dangerous to mankind if they should spread

any further than they already are.

Questions But we haven’t ratified the Treaty?

Answers That's right.

Questions How many French tests have there been?

Answers Three this year.

Five last year,

I'm not sure,

I can tell you there have been 14 Chinese atmospheric tests.

It probably adds up to 10,

Questions What do you mean by "altered nature of the tests".

Answers I would not want to put too much on it, but they endeavoured to make

them cleaner than any other tests have ever been, if I can use that kind of

language, .

There are various ways of doing this - putting them higher so that

less contamination and particles are in the atmosphere.

Questions Were there any foreign observers?

Answer: We were not observers, .

Questions Were there any, Ã¢ÂÂ

-6-

Answer: Not as far as I know.

They tried to keep people away this time.

In the early days it used to be customary to invite people to attend

the ceremony.

Now they kept them away.

Question: Could you tell me what you meant in the South-East section.

When you spoke about Viet-Nam and serious negotiations, and you said

that its not impossible for different ideologies eventually to co-exist in peace

and prosperity.

What were you referring to there - different ideologies in North and

South Viet-Nam or within the Saigon Government?

Answer: Well no, that's a,general proposition.

As far as we're concerned, if; anyone wants to iive under Communism,

I think that's their choice.

We wouldn't see any difficulty in dealing with a country that chose

to adopt that form of government.

It's only when they come to export it to someone who does not want

to receive the export that we see any difficulty at all, and we would expect this

to operate also in reverse.

Question:  So, if in fact there were elections and the Government that the Australians

and Americans supported in South Viet-Nam was defeated and the result was a

Communist Government, we would accept it?

Answer: We would accept it.

But what we would try to insist on is that there would be a proper and

a free ascertainment of the wishes of the people.

If that's what they wanted - then that's acceptable.

We're only protesting against the prospect of having it forced upon

them against their will.

Question: You're not putting forth the corollary proposition that the elections

which are being conducted under President Thieu are not the kind to ascertain

fee l i n g s..... ?

-7-

Answer; Well, anyone sitting in an armchair discussing the elections of a newly

emerged country or a country under actual war conditions is like a person sitting

peacefully sipping a.,whisky discussing action in the front linesÂ»

You've got to transpose yourself to the actual situation in order to

use language applicable to the situationÂ»

You can't talk in Westminister terms about whether you are satisfied

about it or notÂ»

You've got to look at their political structure and what suits themÂ»

Now in those terms I would say that both elections of the Assembly -

both the first, which had United Nations observers plus the world's press there,

and the second one which had the world's press - were extraordinarily

effective given the conditionsÂ»

And having been up there I haven't found bitter'' opposition except

in some quarters which are well knownÂ»

Air Vice-Marshall Ky, or General Miiih or some which are supporting

them, or some BuddhistsÂ» ’

But,by and large, one senses a good deal of support for President

Thieu, and. he has in fact effected a good deal of reform, his land for the

tiller programme, his economic reform, and so onÂ»

The standard of living in the South is considerably raised - its

higher than in the NorthÂ»

Now, how do you ascertain the wishes of the people?

I wouldn't write off those elections as worthlessÂ»

Question; When you saw Secretary of State, Rogers, did he brief you on what

is happening in Paris with Dr Kissinger and his talks over there?

Answer; NoÂ»

We didn't discuss that.

Question;  What about the terrorists, for instance, in Australia?

Would this come under a general heading of .this United Nations

eventually moving to pursue that courseÂ»

. Â«Â»/8

-8-

Answers I would say that it was comprehended in the words that I was using.

As a country that has been attracting migrants from all over the

world, we have from time to time been conscious of importing activitists from

other countries, and you can easily think of countries from which they have

come.

.  At one stage we had a person trying to raise funds for the IRA.

We have had troubles, or suggestions of troubles about the Croats.

Now if we found that anyone was trying to train terrorists in our

country and then go from our country to another in which we had friendly

relations, we would stamp on that to the best of our ability.

Question: Could you include the Mafia as terrorists?

Answer: No, Mafia goes across national boundaries.

It's a different thing. ’

That really is a question not for Government but for the criminal law,

in the first instance anyway. .

But when I was Attorney General I was concerned with keeping an"',

eye on them.

Question: Was there any evidence of the Mafia being there?

Answer: There was some then.

Question: What's the distinction of training terrorists for overseas activity

and training them for bombing the streets of Sydney?

.  Answer: Well there are two distinct things: your primary concern is the

safety and protection within your own country - that goes without saying.

.1 wasn't intending to exclude that when I said we would stamp on

people training for overseas.

That would be the primary responsibility to prevent it in your own

country.

It's not always an easy thing to prevent.

The motive is much more elusive for the ordinary police system, the

political motive, and they have the initiative, and they will strike where

. Â· .79

-9-

they willÃÂ¿

At the time when that bomb went off at the Adriatic Travel Agency,

we had some protection for their Embassies and ConsulatesÂ»

But I think the police are well on the road in their enquiries, but

I don’t know whether the results have been made publicÂ»

But that bomb was directed at an area that we didn't have protectedÂ»

They had the initiative, and this is always going to be a problemÂ»

Questions It was only a few weeks ago, or at least a couple of months ago,

that enquiries were made about the Croatians and the Government found no trace

of itÂ»

Answers NoÂ»

What we found though was, that the evidence put to us did not

establish itÂ» Â°

The problem was more a matter for the Attorney General than for me,

but we did follow up evidence that was put to us, not by the Yugoslav

Government, but by private individuals and it didn't substantiate the

allegationsÂ»

The Yugoslav Ambassador has given me an aide memoir with a

substantial dossier in it, naming names and with some areas indicated where

possible actions may take placeÂ»

Question; Does that sort of activity in the streets of Sydney make you feel

that there is more evidence to suggest that Â»Â»Â»Â»Â»

Answers Well, there have been upwards of 20 bomb attacksÂ» .

That certainly puts it on a very intensive enquiryÂ»

But these are in Australia,

The allegation being made by Yugoslav Consulates or Embassies or

representatives in Australia is rather the charge that we were one country,

along with Sweden, Austria and Spain that was being used as a training

ground for terrorists to go backÂ»

Â»Â«Â»/10

-10-

Question: Does it concern the Australian Government apart from the hijacking

and .... but the fact that you have got bombs in Sydney streets and recently...

... bombs.

Does it concern you that this sort of activity is spreading to

Australia? '

Answer: Its a matter of very deep concern.

Its a matter that we would work very closely with other nations to

try to find solutions to.

As I say, one of the most elusive things is that it is so politically

motivated and difficult to control as it passes national boundaries.

We need the cooperation of all nations, and we will be ready to

work with other nations.

Within our own country we would hope to enlist science and

technology to the best of our ability.

Question: The note from the Yugoslav Ambassador.

Did he turn up evidence that our own security forces didn't have,

and if so, how did he get it? Ã¢ÂÂ

Answer: I don't think I can answer that question.

It was a pretty full aide memoire and it is some considerable time

since I have had responsibility for the security service.

I passed it over to the Attorney General and the Commonwealth Police

and Security to investigate and they are still engaged in that.

Question: Would that suggest that the Yugoslavs would have their own police

in their Embassy?

Answer: Not necessarily.

But certainly they would have information from Yugoslav persons in

Australia who would be supplying them with material but whether they would

be just private citizens or whether they would have any other character, I

really wouldn't know.

-11-

Question: Was that when the Yugoslav Ambassador complained the last time,

several days ago?

Answer: Yes.

He called with the dossier.

.  No.

And then he called again subsequently.

The 16th September sticks in my mind.

Question: But didn't he officially complain to you or lodge a complaint

with you several days ago as a result of the bombing.

Did he supply any further material?

Such as names and facts that you said was contained in that dossier?

Answer: He supplied that on the first occasion.

In my mind it's about two or three weeks ago, and that was passed over

for investigation and then subsequently, he called again to express the

concern of his government.

Question: Can you reveal any of the contents of that dossier at all?

Answer: No, only the fact that it contained names and that it made allegations

about training and suggested some evidence as to the types of weapons $nd the

places, and these we'promised to investiage.

And in fact there was, as you saw subsequently, a series of searches

made under warrant, papers were seized and people were interrogated and some of

the matter seized is in the Yugoslav language and has to be interpreted.

There is a substantial body of material, and when I left Australia

no report had yet emerged from it.

Question: Is the Attorney General's Department now investigating these

allegations made by the Yugoslav Government?

Answer: Yes.

Question: Will these be made public, Sir.

Answer: I imagine the results of them would be. Yes.

Question: Any idea when.

o o o / 1 2

-12-

Answer: I just have no knowledge of the nature of them.

It's not being done under my responsibility.

I would think the results of it would be made public.

Question: Is there any other nation these terrorist activities are being

directed from outside of Australia from European headquarters?

Answer: There are allegations.

The ttrouble is that there are so many assertions and when you try

to get the facts they are not easy to get at.

People don't readily talk.

If there is activity it never operates in the same place twice.

It moves.

When you go to inspect or you have been told that there has been

training, you find that its a normal rifle range with a perfectly respectable

Rifle Club.

Either they have just heard these shots or it was being used once,

for training, and you are too late - you haven't got them.

There are'allegations the other way, in the form of statutary

declarations that the Yugoslav Government has agents operating in this area.

We will investigate them.

Now we would not accept bald allegations from any direction.

We would want to know the truth.

Question: Is there a suggestion that the Yugoslavs might be responsible for

any overt terrorist activities? Â·

Answer: Well, again although I have seen the pile of statutary declarations,

its a matter for the Attorney General.

I'm sorry you have got me on someone else's portfolio.

I haven't read it.

I would be interested to do so if I had the time.

Question: The allegations that are being made are they coming from the

Yugoslav Government or Yugoslav sources.

.. ./13

-13-

The Middle East countries are they also involved, such as Lebanon?

Answer: In these particular enquiries that I speak of, its only YugoslaviaÂ»

There is the possibility as you saw in Munich of intentions in the

Middle East being exported even to AustraliaÂ»

That is a reflection of that particular political difficulty, and

one can't rule that out.

We have not received official protestÂ»

(Indistinct question and answer on United Nations Charter Review)Â»

Question: Is there any opposition or any complications to Australia standing

for a seat on the Security CouncilÂ»

Answer: Well it is an election, but there is a kind of understanding that the

Western European and others group would be able to put up to Austria and

ourselvesÂ»

As we are the only two that have been put up we might expect to get

the support, first of all of our own group, and under the general practice

the support also of other groups who would expect to put forward or support

those who were put forward by the Western European and othersÂ»

Question: Mr Bowen, you mentioned the optimistic view in your speech that

Bangladesh might still be admitted this time to .the United NationsÂ» Have

you any reason to believe that the Chinese might withdraw their position

of veto on this matterÂ»

Answer: I wouldn't put it as far ahead as that, if depends on the Chinese

veto in the Security Council, and it may be that the Chinese can be

influenced by a general view of the nations which is.expressed in the

Assembly, if we are strong enough and I was rather hoping to get that kind

of view expressed which might have an influence on China and it may be

that China would not want to persist in it in certain circumstances against

the general tide of opinion if it were shownÂ»

I.

I don't think I can be more specific than that.

Â»Â»Â»/l4

-14-

Question: Does the Australian Government reject the Chinese charge that the

Security Council Resolution has been violated because of Indian troops being

in Pakistan and also Pakistani POW's being now Bangladesh.

Do you reject those charges.

Answer: I didn't see those charges.

But the facts are reasonably clear I think.

Question; China I believe has just ordered 20 million tons of wheat from

Australia.

How would you characterise this in terms of Australian/ Chinese

relations?

Answer: I understand the figure to be 1 million tons.

It was something in excess of Dollars 60 million, depending on the

quality of wheat supplied, but it is not expected to fall below Dollars 60 million.

The terms - 12 months.

I would say that it indicates the Government attitude in stating

clearly that it wished to normalise relations with China as far as possible,

was willing to go on trading, exchanging people, missions, but was not prepared

to abandon Taiwan at this stage which was the price the Peoples Republic

wanted for recognition, is to some extent operative that is to say, there has

been a continuation of exchanges, quite cordial exchanges on many fronts.

After I made that statement in the House to that effect on 9 May, we

have had a ping-pong team subsequently sent down to Australia.

We have had other trade going on.

The question of recognition is a balance of advantage and

disadvantage for Australia.

Now Japan is going.

That's an additional country that will probably have an exchange.

Question: Will this affect us much?

Answer: It's a factor which America has not yet recognised.

.../15

-15-

She is in a very special position.

And we are in an area where Thailand is not exchanging representatives,

Malaysia is notÂ»

Singapore is notÂ»

Philippines is notÂ»

New Zealand is not,

Australia is notÂ»

One of the reasons that the other countries are not is their

particular internal position.

Either subversive movements or Chinese minorities that they are

concerned about, and we are in constant consultation with them.

We don't just regard it as a matter of Australia jumping on the band

wagon or rushing to Peking like a little puppy dog wagging its tail.

We will judge Australia’s interests seriously as to whether we should

move in any further direction at the moment.

We are not prepared to move beyond what I have said on the 9th of May

and I believe that the Chinese understand this position, just as we understand

their position,

I believe we respect each others position, Â·

Questions A New York Times correspondent who reported the recent wheat deal

between the United States and China drew the conclusion that Australia was

being shown by Peking that because it had such a firm commitment to Taiwan,

that it couldn’t expect wheat shipments.

Now that seems to have been negated by what has just happened.

Answers Well that’s a good political line if anyone wants to attack the

Government, .  .

Its been a wonderful political line,

Questions But it’s also been a fact since 1969 hasn't it?

Answer: No it hasn’t.

They had a good harvest

,,Â«/16

-16-

I think they did refuse to buy wheat for political reasons, but partly

because it was made a political issue in Australia and sugar became very close to

becoming a political issue, and I think they wouldn't have bought sugarÂ»

It was raised in the House of Representatives and then dropped.

.  If wheat is made a political issue again on a large scale and is

headlined, we probably won't get a further order for some time.

You can make it a political issue if you want to, but if it is not

a political issue here, I would think then that it would depend on whether

China needed it or not, wanted to buy it or not, and found a seller.

Question: Do you think this is a step back in the door for Australia?

It's fairly significant, since 1969,  to now sell 1 million tons of '

wheat.

Answer: Yes.

I would think so, but I've never held to the validity of this

criticism of Government that has been used all along saying that China just won't

trade with us, or deal with us because of our attitude on recognition.

I just haven't believed that the critics were entirely soundly based,

and I say that, although I would agree with you in your proposition that the

wheat sales were refused and political grounds were assigned by China to their

refusal to buy from us.

Question: Would you say nothing more than that about it Mr Bowen.

Answer: In which?

Question: In this deal, this 1 million tons here.

Answer: We were very close to a sale, last year, but we didn't agree on price.

I think it's been a political ploy and I think that this recent sale

rather demonstrates that.

Question: If it wasn't a political ploy would we be selling more wheat?

Answer: I think the amount of wheat sold, indeed this is part of the

underlying "reason for the drop in sales before was that in that the year

Â»Â» ./17

-17-

the Chinese had a good harvest, and this, year they haven't.

In that year we were able to sell very well elsewhere, and

therefore didn't have to come down in price.

There are a number of commercial factors, as well as political

factors probably,

But one of the difficulties about this is that even if I discuss

this with you and you write about it, that will effect the future course

of events, '

. .  .  This is one of the devilish things about this.

One can't'talk honestly and frankly about the position.

