THE BALING TALKS (Statement by the Chief Minister)

The Chief Minister: If it please you, Sir, on the question of our visit to Baling, today sees the end of the five months' amnesty offer to members of the Communist Party which we made in conjunction with the Federation and which we, in conjunction with the Federation, are withdrawing now. Sir, we gave notice of this decision on the 31st of December last and the reason for it is tied up with our talks in Baling on the 28th and 29th of December, when the Chief Minister of the Federation and I, as his guest, and Dato Sir Cheng-lock Tan met the Secretary-General of the Malayan Communist Party and two of his colleagues. Sir, the House may wish to know some of the details, some of which are known and some of which were not published. I will be very brief.

The Communist representatives sought strenuously to obtain recognition of the Malayan Communist Party. This was firmly rejected, but I must confess that on the evening of the first day I gathered the impression that they seemed to be prepared to accept the statement of the Chief Minister of the Federation that he would not recognise the M.C.P. but that he would permit members of the Malayan Communist Party, who, after a loyalty check, were freed and allowed to rejoin their families, freely to join any political Party or to form their own political Party so long as that political Party was not Communist. However, that was a mistaken impression, and the next morning we learned that there was no question whatsoever but that the Malayan Communist Party was not prepared to accept the term of the amnesty which required a loyalty check of those who surrendered. The Communist representatives did indicate, Sir, that an appreciable number of their people may wish to be repatriated to China and the Tunku and I agreed that we would not insist on the investigation of those who would be leaving the country under official supervision.

The Chief Minister of the Federation, Sir, went even further in his sincere desire to put an end to this regime of violence which is causing unnecessary suffering to the people. He said to them that if a majority of their leaders and a large number of their followers were prepared to opt for repatriation to China, then he might reconsider the question of limiting investigation by requiring of the remainder, who stayed in Malaya, an investigation which amounted to periodical visits to the police for report. The answer from the representatives of the Communists was that to report to the police was to imply surrender. "We will never surrender!" Sir, the Communist representatives had the grace to say openly that, despite their Freedom News and their underground propaganda, they did realise that neither the Tunku nor I was a British stooge, a running dog, or, what you may call it, - [Interruption.]

Mr Speaker: Order.

The Chief Minister: You see, Sir, how close my hon. Friend is - [Interruption.]

Mr Speaker: Order.

The Chief Minister: They did admit freely - they had the grace to admit - that the Tunku and I represented the elected government of the people. They did admit, surprisingly, that their activities of violence were causing suffering to the people. They seemed inclined to admit, Sir, that we may be achieving independence - only may - by democratic processes, but they could not answer the question why, in those circumstances, they were continuing the struggle. They said, "We will not discuss that now."

Sir, during the discussions at the second session on the 29th, it seemed as though the Communist representatives were prepared to cease their activities of violence unconditionally in the near future. Chen Tian, who was the interpreter, said:

"As soon as you obtain...". Then it was clarified. He said he would not even wait for Singapore. He was quite prepared not to wait for Singapore, in case the Tunku thought that Singapore might be slower. He said:

"As soon as the Federation obtains complete control of internal security and local armed forces, we will end hostilities, lay down our arms and disband our forces."

Sir, that seems to be rather important. It is true it gave no hope for today but it gave hope for tomorrow and it was unconditional surrender. So I asked him to repeat it. I wrote it down verbatim, and in order that there should be no question about its accuracy, I sent that paper across and I said:

"Chin Peng, you read English. Is this it?"

It then transpired that there was no question of unconditional surrender and they added:

"This does not amount to acceptance of the amnesty terms."

However, we promised that that would go to the Press. It went to the Press as emanating from the Communist Party. Then, Sir, we went down to what they meant. They meant the same as they mean now. They meant that even if the Tunku obtains independence, before they would cease their activities of violence, they would expect recognition of the Malayan Communist Party, no loyalty check, no detention, unconditional amnesty, complete freedom, and facilities for those who wished to go overseas.

Then, Sir, one more thing transpired which rocked even the placid Tunku - and quite surprisingly. They said:

"Of course, when we speak of laying down arms, it does not mean to surrender the arms to the Government. That is in the amnesty terms which just say 'Lay down arms'. To 'lay down arms' means to cease activities of violence. But we expect, when we are free, to have the right to retain our arms."

Said the Tunku:

"So you can start shooting me when next you disagree with me?"

He made it quite clear that there would be never any question at all of the right to retain arms by those free to rejoin society.

Sir, I did try to bring the question round to a clarification of a possible time-limit of loyalty checks and of conditions that might be acceptable in respect of the loyalty checks. That was what they objected to, but they would not discuss the question in detail, nor would they seek conditions which might be acceptable. They said flatly - the words were:

"I have no authority to accept amnesty terms which include a loyalty check."

I did plead, Sir, that hatred and violence produces nothing constructive. I appealed to them to think of the welfare of the people as a whole - more than seven million. I asked them not to set the question of face, pride and the mild humiliation of their small group in the path of the welfare of the people which they pretended to seek. I seemed to be talking to deaf ears. The reply I got was:

"We have said we have no authority whatever to accept loyalty investigations."

Sir, in so far as Singapore is concerned, the representatives made it quite clear that they were in complete control of the Communist Party and Communist sympathisers in Singapore. Before the meeting ended, Sir, and with the concurrence of the Chief Minister of the Federation, I stated that if they would sink their pride and the matter of mild humiliation in the name of the welfare of the people, if they could see their way to a change of heart, the Tunku and I would be prepared to meet them again.

I must inform this House that I went to these talks believing that there was an element amongst those in the jungle who were genuine, frustrated nationalists; believing that we might reach them because we are about to achieve independence through the democratic process and we need all honest citizens, all sincere nationalists, to pull together at this period; believing that some of them might respond to an appeal to their decent instincts not to hamper the economic and political advance of the people of the country by their activities of violence. Maybe I was flattering myself, Sir - it looks as though I was, but I did hope to persuade some of them. I would like to say this: I have come away from this meeting - and I do not say this for propaganda purposes in respect of those who are not here to defend themselves, but because I think it is my duty that the people of this country should know of this, whatever some hon. Members opposite may think; I want them to know, those who believe in me will believe I am speaking the truth, Sir - I have come away from this meeting believing with all my heart and absolutely convinced in my own mind that neither the independence of these territories nor the welfare of the people matters in the slightest to the Malayan Communist Party. They do not care a hoot! All they want is to obtain control of the country. All they want is the expansion of their own imperialist Communism and their own foreign ideology. They have more contempt for the people than Colonel Blimp!

I would like to say this, Sir. There we have an appeal to the Members of the Assembly, to the responsible Press and to the people. I am satisfied that the Malayan Communist Party and their sympathisers will only cease their activities of brutality against the people and against their governments, against their economic and political welfare, by means of violence, only when the Malayan Communist Party is convinced that it is losing the sympathy of the people by continuation of these foul tactics. It is for the people and for the Press of this country to make it clear that under the democratic process we are achieving freedom and prosperity, and we want none of the brutality which is the hallmark of the Communist Party. You can smile, Sir. We will not tolerate - and I do not care what Press it is - the violence and intimidation which is being perpetrated upon the people of this country by those who call themselves Communists. In this connection and in fairness to my outburst against that person sitting in the Strangers' Gallery, I would like to say this: I was very pleased to read editorials in the Chinese Press condemning, in the strongest terms, the recent grenade outrage against innocent members of a force that seeks to protect the peace of the people. I say let us have more of those editorials. Let us have open, public, spontaneous expressions of the disgust of the people at this Communist regime of brutality. That is the only way, Sir, if we are ever to have an end to Communist violence.

At the conclusion of the Baling talks, Sir, the Chief Minister of the Federation indicated to the Communist representatives that since they, in the name of the Malayan Communist Party, rejected the amnesty terms, he could see no further purpose in continuing them and he asked them whether they concurred, and in those circumstances, Sir, the Chief Minister and I agreed that the amnesty terms should be withdrawn after reasonable notice. The Chief Minister fixed the date after informing the Government of Singapore, and the date is today - five months after its inauguration.

May I, Sir, take this opportunity to express, on behalf of the Government and, I hope, the people of Singapore, our appreciation and thanks to the Chief Minister and the Government of the Federation for their courtesy in inviting us to be represented at these talks, and for the hospitality and excellent arrangements they made for the comfort of my assistants and myself.

Mr Lee Kuan Yew: Was the Hon. the Chief Minister present at these talks as a guest?

The Chief Minister: Sir, I do not understand these constant jibes. The hon. Member is fully aware that I was present at these talks as the guest of the Chief Minister of the Federation on his invitation. That has been repeatedly said here. It is simple single-syllable English.

Mr Lee Kuan Yew: Was it proper for a guest to have done so much talking at these talks?

Mr Speaker: Order, that is not a proper question. Mr Chew Swee Kee, I believe you have a statement to make?