HC Deb 17 June 1968 vol 766 cc713-23
The Secretary of State for Defence (Mr. Denis Healey)

With permission, I should like to make a statement on the five-power Conference on Far East Defence, held in Kuala Lumpur on 10th and 11th June, at the invitation of the Prime Minister of Malaysia.

My right hon. Friend the Secretary of State for Commonwealth Affairs and I represented the United Kingdom Government. The Governments of Australia, New Zealand, Malaysia and Singapore were each represented by two senior Ministers.

The conference was held to discuss problems resulting from the withdrawal of British forces from Malaysia and Singapore by the end of 1971. I am glad to be. able to inform the House that agréement was reached and decisions were taken on a number of major issues.

Above all, the Governments of Malaysia and Singapore made it clear that they regarded the defence of their two coun- tries as indivisible, and that it required close and continuing co-operation between them. The whole conference welcomed this declaration and regarded it as an indispensable basis for wider co-operation on defence.

Important specific decisions were reached, affecting defence by sea, land and air. The need for an integrated air defence system covering Malaysia and Singapore was recognised, and the form of its integrated control and management is to be studied further.

Singapore and Malaysia agreed to develop their naval forces in such a way that they can co-operate in coastal defence, and the Royal Malaysian Navy will continue to use the Woodlands Naval Base in Singapore.

Jungle warfare training is to continue in Malaysia on a multi-national basis, and all five countries agreed that it was desirable that there should be joint exercises in the area after 1971.

Australia will contribute to an integrated air defence system by keeping an R.A.A.F. component at Butterworth at least until the end of 1971, and detaching aircraft to Tengah.

Singapore has decided to buy Hunter aircraft as part of its contribution to the air defence system.

Malaysia indicated that she would be prepared to consider making additional contributions to the joint defence of the area over and above the present strength of its forces.

Her Majesty's Government welcome these important steps of positive cooperation. We are confident that the further work which will now be done on specific naval, Army and Air matters, and the desire of all participating Governments to hold a further Ministerial meeting in the first half of next year, will maintain the necessary momentum towards a new pattern for security in the area.

Further information about the agreements reached is contained in the official communiqué issued at the end of the conference, and, with permission, I will circulate this in the OFFICIAL REPORT.

My right hon. Friend the Minister for Overseas Development has already announced the offer of £75 million financial aid we have made to Malaysia and Singapore to assist them to make the adjustments necessary in the economic field as well as that of defence.

My right hon. Friend has also already stated that we shall hand over, without charge, all defence lands and fixed assets required by the two Governments for their defence or economic plans. Major progress has already been made in handing over the Singapore dockyard to civilian management.

We shall also be assisting, as will Australia and New Zealand, in the buildup, equipment and training of the forces of Malaysia and Singapore. We shall be prepared, if necessary and desired to continue to provide British personnel on a loan or contract basis. In some cases, where time is needed to build up expertise, this requirement may extend beyond 1971.

These steps are designed to help the local Governments to establish, before we complete our withdrawal, an effective defence system based on close co-operation between the forces of Malaysia and Singapore, with such assistance as the Australian and New Zealand Governments may decide that they can continue to give.

The four other Governments understand that no British units will be based in the area after 1971, and that we shall, therefore, have to reach a new understanding about the Anglo-Malaysian Defence agréement at the appropriate stage.

We also made it clear that our decision did not mean that we were turning our backs on an area in which we have appreciable economic interests, as well as deep historic ties based on many years of direct association. We explained that we should not maintain a special capability for use outside Europe, but that our forces based in Europe could be rapidly deployed in the area if we judged it necessary.

We offered to take part in a Commonwealth exercise in 1970, and to include in our contribution forces temporarily detached from the European theatre. The other four countries welcomed this, and agreed to take part in such an exercise. The N.A.T.O. Council was informed of this proposal in advance.

My right hon. Friend and I were impressed by the clear demonstration that the other four Governments have accepted the decisions we took last January, and are determined to work out co-operative arrangements for the defence of the area after our withdrawal. The foundation for this has been laid by the declaration by the Governments of Malaysia and Singapore that their defence is indivisible, and by the practical first steps taken towards co-operation in the spheres of naval, land and air defence.

The substantial progress made reflects the friendly and constructive spirit in which this Commonwealth conference was held.

Mr. Maudling

On this side of the House we welcome the co-operation of Malaysia and Singapore, which is very important. May I ask the Secretary of State some questions on two points of British policy? He talked about our forces based in Europe being rapidly deployed in this area. How rapidly and by what route could naval forces be deployed in that area, and what base facilities would be available for them? How could the heavy equipment of land forces be got there, how rapidly and by what route?

Do the Government intend to extend these principles also to the Gulf, where Britain's obligations and interests are no less than they are in South-East Asia?

Mr. Healey

We debated these matters in detail during the defence debates, when I made it clear to the House at the time that we should take longer to reach the area with forces deployed from Europe, as is obviously the case, than with forces permanetly based in Singapore.

With air forces and lightly-equipped Army forces it will be a matter of days. For heavy equipment, and sea forces, it will be a matter of weeks, and for very heavily armed Army forces it could be a matter of months. This is fully understood by all our partners, and they welcome the indication that we were prepared to demonstrate our capability there in an exercise before we leave the area in 1970.

The second question does not arise on this, but we shall consider how far it is possible to adapt the same principles to the very different situation obtaining in the Gulf.

Mr. Dalyell

What exactly will be the nature of the equipment at the Jungle School of Warfare after 1971?

Mr. Healey

We made it clear that we should no longer wish to be in control or in command of this school, but that we should desire to make use of its facilities if other Commonwealth countries wished to. Several of the other Commonwealth countries present at the conference said that they desired that the school should continue to be run on a multi-national basis after 1971.

Mr. James Davidson

I welcome the Secretary of State's statement, and particularly the fact that co-operation and training will continue after 1970 and that there will be a reinforcement exercise in 1970. Is it the intention of the Government to continue to supply staff to the S.E.A.T.O. headquarters in Bangkok? Secondly, are the Malaysia Government prepared to release us from the binding clauses of the Anglo-Malaysian Defence Agreement?

Mr. Healey

I made it clear that we shall have to reach a new understanding on the Anglo-Malaysian Defence Agreement at the appropriate stage. All countries present in Kuala Lumpur agreed that the appropriate stage had not yet been reached.

On the question of British staff at S.E.A.T.O. headquarters, I am responsible, as the hon. Member knows, only for military staff, but it would be our intention at this time to continue to supply some military staff to the headquarters, although we shall be unable to declare forces to the S.E.A.T.O. contingency plans after withdrawal from the area.

Mr. Shinwell

Could the right hon. Gentleman tell us to what extent the United States Government have been in consultation about the revised method of defence in this area? Does he not recall that the United States was a party to the A.N.Z.U.S. Pact and accepted, with Australia and New Zealand, complete responsibility for the defence of that area? Are they now contracting out?

Mr. Healey

With respect, my right hon. Friend, who is a great expert in these matters, will know well that this country is not a member of the AN.Z.U.S. Pact. It is not for me to comment on what arrangements there may be between the United States, Australia and New Zealand in that context. We have been in close consultation with the United States Government throughout these discussions in recent months, but they were not represented at the Kuala Lumpur conference.

Mr. Sandys

The right hon. Gentleman said that it might take weeks or months to despatch help to our friends in the Far East. Surely that amount of delay is totally unacceptable. Will not the right hon. Gentleman consider storing stocks of heavy equipment in the Far East?

Mr. Healey

The purpose of the decisions that we took in January was to make it possible for us drastically to reduce our defence expenditure by the time our withdrawal was complete. To stockpile heavy equipment in the area would require men to look after it, men to look after the men looking after the heavy equipment, and so on. It is quite inconsistent with the economic aims of the Government in this sphere to supply stocks of heavy equipment on the ground in the area after we have left.

Mr. Luard

The right hon. Gentleman mentioned the establishment of an integrated air defence system. Does he believe that by the end of 1971 it will be possible to man this system entirely with indigenous personnel from Malaysia and Singapore, or will there be a need for the secondment of people either from this country or from Australia and New Zealand? Is it the understanding of my right hon. Friend. that, until the Anglo-Malaysian Defence agréement is renegotiated, we have specific obligations towards Singapore, which was a part of Malaysia at the time that the agréement was first negotiated?

Mr. Healey

Singapore is not bound to Britain by any defence treaty, since Singapore seceded in, I think, 1963, from the Malaysia Federation, with which we made the defence agréement. Singapore understands the position well. The position of Singapore would have to be taken into account at the appropriate stage when a new understanding is reached on the Anglo-Malaysian Defence agreement.

On the former question, Singapore, for example, will have her own Singapore Hunter aircraft crews fully trained to take the aircraft over, and her squadron of Hunters will be fully operational in 1971 before we leave. There are, as my hon. Friend will no doubt recognise, certain other spheres of air defence where it may be difficult to train local personnel to a sufficient level in the time available, and, as I said in my statement, in those cases we shall be prepared to consider providing British personnel on load or on contract, whichever is the more appropriate.

Rear-Admiral Morgan Giles

The Secretary of State said that the other Governments concerned accepted these decisions. Is it that they are making the best of a bad job, or is he telling the House that they are thoroughly happy about being left in the lurch?

Mr. Healey

The important thing is that all the Governments represented at this conference, unlike Her Majesty's Opposition, are looking to the future and not to the past.

Mr. John Lee

Can my right hon. Friend say what is the capital value of all the installations which are now to be assigned free of charge to local institutions, and what is the extra current annual cost, if any, consequent upon this agreement over and above the Defence Estimates given last January?

Mr. Healey

The second question is far too complex for me to answer now. This is the first stage of, we hope, continuing consultation over the next 3½ years before an alternative basis for security and stability in the area is reached.

I cannot give the House the details of the value of the assets which may be handed over until we know from the local Governments precisely which assets they wish to receive. I might remind the House that right hon. and hon. Members opposite, when they were in power, abandoned £75 million of fixed assets in Suez without making any attempt whatever to secure stability in the area after their departure.

Sir Ian Orr-Ewing

Has the right hon. Gentleman had discussions with our Commonwealth partners to see whether the facilities in Singapore could not be jointly shared in terms of cost and manning? If that is not so, is he certain that we can go to the help of our Commonwealth partners in that area? Would it not be wiser to spend at least a portion of the £75 million grant in stock-piling heavy equipment out there which might secure the independence and freedom of the nations in which we have such an historic and economic interest?

Mr. Healey

On the second half of that question, I disagree, as I made clear to the right hon. Member for Streatham (Mr. Sandys) earlier. On the first half of it, one of the matters for discussion during the coming months and years is how far some or all of the four Commonwealth countries in the area are prepared to co-operate in running given facilities. Some progress was made on this point at the Kuala Lumpur conference, and I am confident that further progress will be made next year.

Several Hon. Members rose—

Mr. Speaker

Order.

Following is the communiqué:

On 10th and 11th June, 1968, at the invitation of Y. T. M. Tunku Abdul Rahman Putra, Prime Minister of Malaysia, delegations from the Governments of Australia, Malaysia. New Zealand, Singapore and the United Kingdom met in Kuala Lumpur to discuss defence problems arising from the decision to withdraw British forces from Malaysia and Singapore by 31st December, 1971. The following Ministers attended; for Australia, the Rt. Hon. P. M. C. Hasluck and the Hon. A. Fairhall; for Malaysia, the Hon. Tun Abdul Razak, (Chairman of the Conference) and the Hon. Tun Tan Siew Sin; for New Zealand, the Rt. Hon. K. J. Holyoake and the Hon. D. S. Thomson; for Singapore, the Hon. Dr. Goh Keng Swee and the Hon. Mr. Lim Kim San; and for the United Kingdom, the Rt. Hon. D. W. Healey, and the Rt. Hon. G. M. Thomson.

Tunku Abdul Rahman welcomed the visiting delegations and made a general statement on behalf of the Government of Malaysia.

The five countries concerned reaffirmed at the outset their continuing interest in the peace and stability of the area and declared their intention to maintain close co-operation among themselves. The discussions of the Conference proceeded on that basis.

The United Kingdom delegation described the planned programme for the rundown and withdrawal of British forces and drew attention to the substantial defence facilities and surplus non-operational equipment that would be made available free to Malaysia and Singapore for both defence and economic purposes. They also described in outline the form which their continuing interest might take after 1971.

A general exchange of views followed.

The representatives of Singapore and Malaysia declared that the defence of the two countries was indivisible and required close and continuing co-operation between them. This declaration was welcomed by the representatives of the other three Governments. All representatives at the Conference regarded it as an indispensable basis for future defence co-operation. The representatives of Malaysia and Singapore said that their Governments were resolved to do their utmost for their own defence and they would welcome the co-operation and assistance of the other three Governments.

The Conference went on to discuss some of the practical defence problems that would result from the British rundown including the assistance that Malaysia and Singapore would require in developing an effective joint defence system. In doing so they drew upon reports prepared by Advisory Working Groups, set up by the Commander-in-Chief, Far East, in which officers from the five countries had participated.

The Conference recognised that an integrated air defence system covering both Malaysia and Singapore was required and agreed that the Air Defence Advisory Working Group should study the form of the integrated control and management of such a system. They also discussed the elements which the system might comprise and the phasing of the necessary action and authorised further detailed examination by the Air Defence Advisory Working Group. The Singapore delegation outlined their Government's plans to raise an air force which would contribute to a joint air defence system; this would include a squadron of Hunter Mark 9 fighters to become operational prior to the completion of the British withdrawal. The Australian delegation indicated that as a contribution to an integrated air defence system, Australia would be prepared to provide a Royal Australian Air Force component based on Butterworth with elements deployed to Tengah; the arrangements to operate beyond 1971 would depend on decisions to be taken by the Australian Government on the part which Australia would play in the defence of the area after that date. The United Kingdom delegation stated that in addition to the part that would continue to be played by Royal Air Force elements of the system up to the time of their withdrawal, the United Kingdom Government would be prepared to make available the necessary ground facilities, including airfields, radar and communications facilities and ground-to-air defence equipment. They would also assist in the development of the new arrangements by providing training and, to the extent that this proved to be necessary and practicable, by the provision of specialist personnel on loan to the other Commonwealth Service? concerned.

In the sphere of naval defence, the Conference noted the intentions of the Malaysian and Singapore Governments to develop forces which would co-operate effectively in coastal defence; the agreement of the Singapore Government that the Royal Malaysian Navy continue to use the Woodlands Naval Base and such other facilities in Singapore as might be agreed; and the intentions of both Governments to agree on arrangements for controlling after 1971 what are now known as the "Naval Base Waters". The Conference agreed that the Naval Advisory Working Group should make recommendations for the retention and operation of naval facilities in the area after 1971 in the light of the requirements of the Governments concerned.

Turning to army matters, the Conference agreed that it was desirable that there should be joint exercises in the area after 1971, and to facilitate this agreed in principle that there should be joint exercise planning machinery and a jungle warfare training school on a multi-national basis. These matters would be further studied by the Army Advisory Working Group.

In the context of a discussion on the ability of the United Kingdom Government to deploy forces in the area after 1971, the Conference agreed that there should be a major exercise in 1970 in which all five countries would participate. They noted that British participation would include a major reinforcement exercise from the United Kingdom. It was further noted that the United Kingdom Government also intended to continue training and exercising British forces in the area after 1971.

The Malaysian delegation indicated that, in the light of the commitments and contributions by the other Governments, their Government would be prepared to consider additional contributions over and above the present strength of their Armed Forces which were already a substantial contribution to joint defence.

The Conference noted that a new understanding about the Anglo-Malaysian Defence Agreement would be necessary in due course. To this end, there would be joint consultations at a later stage.

The Australian and New Zealand delegations observed that their Governments would take into account the proceedings of the Conference in formulating their longer-term defence policies, and in deciding what part their forces would play in the collective defence and combined training arrangements which the Conference had discussed. Meanwhile they would continue to maintain forces in the area and to assist the Governments of Malaysia and Singapore in the development of their forces by means of assistance in training, personnel and defence aid.

Representatives regarded the Conference as having pointed the way to further co-operation of a practical kind. They reaffirmed their determination to live in harmony with the other countries of the region. They believed that their co-operative efforts in defence arrangements and in promoting economic and social development contributed to security and stability in South-East Asia.

The Ministers considered that the present Conference was only the first of joint Ministerial consultations among them on the questions arising out of British military withdrawal and on the larger questions of their continuing interest in the peace and stability of the area. They felt that their discussions had been extremely useful and agreed that they would meet again in the first half of 1969.