ASEAN SOLIDARITY

Mr Yeo Choo Kok asked the Minister for Foreign Affairs (a) whether ASEAN's political solidarity hitherto demonstrated and its pace of responding to sudden events such as the Australian air fare policy and the recent flare-ups among the Asian communist countries are satisfactory; (b) what is the best way to preserve the neutrality, peace and the territorial integrity of ASEAN; and (c) whether the recent events and developments in Indochina have created the need for a defence pact among ASEAN member countries to deter outside threats and to enhance the sense of stability within ASEAN.

The Acting Minister for Foreign Affairs (Mr S. Dhanabalan): Sir, ASEAN's response to the various developments in Indochina has demonstrated the solidarity of the group. The Vietnamese believed that ASEAN was a western imperialist creation and expected the group to fall into disarray with the withdrawal of United States military troops from Indochina. Instead of falling into disarray, ASEAN has become more united in its reaction to the turbulent political developments in the region.

ASEAN solidarity was demonstrated by the unity of the ASEAN response to the Vietnamese invasion of Kampuchea. In fact, many non-aligned nations and members of the UN Security Council responded with the ASEAN line in their reaction to events in Kampuchea. The Sino-Vietnamese conflict has shown again the common ASEAN response and attitude to such events, Members would have noted from press reports that the ASEAN draft resolution, which was to be presented to the Security Council, commanded the most support and would have been presented and adopted by the Security Council were it not for USSR opposition.

The Australian International Civil Aviation Policy is yet another example where ASEAN unity of purpose and solidarity were underestimated. Approaches were made, unsuccessfully, to ASEAN states individually with offers aimed at breaking rank. Statements were also made by some Australian officials that ASEAN solidarity was a fragile facade that would crack easily. Events so far have shown, while the coming meeting in Jakarta with the Australian Ministers will confirm, the grave error of such views.

It is possible, indeed natural, that when five countries get together, there will be occasions when they will have disagreements, when each may have different ideas about particular regional or bilateral endeavours and questions. These occasional differences are often over less fundamental issues but they may be seen by others quite erroneously as lack of solidarity. The acid test of ASEAN solidarity is what ASEAN does when major issues affecting the vital interest of the region arise. The identity of purpose and swiftness of response to events that I have mentioned have amply demonstrated ASEAN solidarity. This has in fact become so clear that nations in other parts of the world have begun to look to ASEAN for a lead in matters affecting this region.

As to the second part of the question, we have a region which has traditionally been an arena of great power rivalry and conflict. We can expect that subversion, insurgency and limited proxy wars will continue as part of great power rivalry. It is therefore only prudent for ASEAN to recognise this reality. We in ASEAN will have to make a conscious effort to resist being drawn into these rivalries and conflicts. If we are not careful, we may find ourselves as proxies of the contending great powers. Non-involvement however does not mean that we turn a blind eye to regional and international issues which have serious political, economic ind security implications for ASEAN. We have to make known our position quite clearly. This we have done. The reaction of the ASEAN countries to each crisis in Southeast Asia has established clearly that ASEAN has a common and united position on major issues. Further we have shown that ASEAN's collective interest comes first and that we are not going to be drawn into taking sides in any great power rivalry. I can assure the hon. Member that this is the best way to preserve the neutrality, peace and territorial integrity of ASEAN.

Coming to the third and final part of the question, when ASEAN was formed in 1967, it was clearly aimed at cooperation in economic, social and political fields. A military pact was never considered. In the 12 years since, there has never been any keen interest or effort in that direction.

The threat of Communism cannot be contested by military pacts. It has to be fought through successful political, social and economic policies. Defence pacts are not geared to tackle the social and economic problems which provide fertile ground for Communist exploitation. Communist insurgencies and subversion thrive on poverty, class differences, uneven distribution of wealth, lack of economic opportunities and ignorance. The best method to combat the communist threat is through rapid social and economic development and by providing a better life for the people so that the people will find their society worth defending against the Communists.

Economic cooperation within ASEAN can assist in solving these socio-economic problems. The conflicts among the Communist countries in Indochina provide ASEAN time to consolidate and to expand its efforts in economic development. We have to seize the opportunity presented to us now and use it to the fullest. More efforts have to be put into economic cooperation within ASEAN than has been the case in the past.

The current conflicts in Indochina have introduced new forms of intervention in addition to subversion and externally supported insurgencies. The threat of a similar military intervention in ASEAN countries in the immediate future is small. As matters stand today, a military defence pact is not called for. But it is clear that the integrity of any partner in ASEAN is vital to the security of all partners. Any ASEAN response to events will therefore be guided by this principle.