SINGAPORE MISSION'S VISIT TO EAST EUROPEAN COUNTRIES (Statement by the Minister for Foreign Affairs)

The Minister for Foreign Affairs (Mr S. Rajaratnam): Mr Speaker, I propose to give a brief report of the recent visit to the East European countries of the Singapore Mission led by the Prime Minister. The countries visited were Poland, Czechoslovakia, Hungary, Rumania and Bulgaria, and the tour itself lasted 18 days. I think no useful purpose will be served by giving a detailed account of our conversations with each of the many Government leaders in every country we visited. What I propose to do, therefore, is to give a general assessment based on our discussions with our East European hosts of the kind of relations we hope to develop over the years between them and ourselves.

I am not suggesting for one moment that, as a result of this one visit, we have mapped out in detail the scope and character of the relations which we hope to develop. This is something which must gradually evolve in the course of our dealings, particularly as this is the first time that Singapore and the East European countries are building up direct contact with one another.

In the past, when Singapore's foreign relations were not in our hands, the East European countries were cut off from us by an iron curtain erected not by the Communists but by those who were then in charge of our foreign relations. It was no doubt felt by them that any contact with Communist countries would be bad for our souls and bring us eternal damnation. Partly as a result of this policy of sheltering us from contact with Communist countries, the Communists too have formed their own image of Singapore as an anti-Communist bastion and as an armed base for the protection and furtherance of British imperialist interest.

So one immediate and positive result of our visit has been to dispel this false image. We went to Eastern Europe as democratic socialists and not as Communists. What has emerged as a result of these personal contacts is that relations between States with different systems of government can be sustained on the basis of mutual respect and non-interference in each other's affairs. For our part, from the free and frank discussions we have had with East European leaders, we are satisfied that trade and other relations with Communist countries impose no greater or lesser trials and tribulations than trade with capitalist countries. In their discussions with us, the East European leaders stressed that ideological differences need not be serious obstacles to friendly political and economic relations between countries.

In this connection, they drew our attention to the many trade agreements they had concluded with the new countries of Afro-Asia. They pointed out that even anti-Communist countries like Western Germany had substantial and growing trade with them. As one East European Foreign Minister said to us, "Trade knows no scent and no colour." The impression we formed was that the East European countries, the bulk of whose foreign trade is with Communist countries, particularly the Soviet Union, have now reached a stage of economic development where they feel it advantageous for them to seek trade outlets outside the Communist bloc. In their discussions with us, their approach to questions of trade with Singapore was couched in very practical and very realistic terms. This may have been in part due to the frank and practical way we approached the economic relationships which we wish to establish with them. We stressed that we were not asking for aid, but trade. We pointed out that Singapore would pay for whatever she gets and that she had lived and prospered for over a century on the basis of buying at the best prices and selling at the lowest. The East Europeans told us that they appreciated not only the business acumen and trading experience that Singapore had gathered over the years as the hub of trade in South-East Asia, but also the sophisticated and delicate entrepot infrastructure that Singapore has built and continues to develop.

I would also like to draw the attention of the House to a point that was stressed by all the East European leaders in our discussions with them. We talked frankly on trade and political matters. In both these matters, there is friendly understanding on different points of view. Understanding does not necessarily mean agreement on every point. It means that there can be differing points of view without there being hostility and suspicion. We explained why Singapore was a non-Communist socialist country committed to a non-aligned policy of wanting to be friendly with all countries. The East European leaders said that given such a policy, satisfactory and fruitful relations could be developed between us and them. As far as they were concerned, their relations with Singapore would be founded on the principle of mutual respect, non-interference in one another's internal affairs and mutual benefit. They enunciated this principle both in our private conversations and in their public statements.

It is our belief that, as a result of the visits and discussions, we have managed to dispel any false image of Singapore as an anti-Communist bastion and as the armed stronghold of British imperialism. I think we have left the East European countries with the impression that Singapore is essentially pro-Singapore, and friendly with any country which does not resent our furthering the legitimate interests of Singapore. The cordiality and respect with which our Mission was received in all the five countries of Poland, Czechoslovakia, Hungary, Rumania and Bulgaria is a good foundation for our growing relationships. They received us as the representatives of a friendly independent country, a friendly non-Communist, socialist country, with which they wish to establish mutually advantageous relations. Two of these countries, Bulgaria and Poland, have already signed trade agreements with us. Czechoslovakia, Hungary and Rumania have agreed to send trade missions to Singapore in the very near future. They have shown an interest not only in trade but also in industrial projects, facilities for their ships and for their airplanes, both of whose operations they hope to expand in this part of the world. For Singapore, these trade and other contacts with East Europe mean a diversification and broadening of our international trade and, therefore, of our international relations. It does not and should not mean abandoning or displacing our older trading partners. It merely means an extension of Singapore's shop-window in Asia by the addition of goods and customers from the Communist world. The Communist world is a fact of life. That world exists. It constitutes a significant part of the world. Its economic and industrial achievements are no less real than those of anti-Communists and the non-Communist world.

We would be naive, Sir, if we believed that trade with East Europeans and other Communists would start on a spectacular scale. The Communists, like capitalists, are quite realistic and hard-headed when it comes to trade. They are not going to trade or participate in industrial activity in Singapore just for the benefit of Singapore. It is up to us to prove to them that there is something for them also.

Sir, the happy position in which we find ourselves only some ten months after independence is due to the practical and matter-of-fact policy we have followed so far. Non-alignment has not meant isolation but instead an expansion of the circle of friendly countries. It means having the maximum of friends and a minimum of enemies from both of the power blocs and from those not aligned to these power blocs.

3.16 p.m.