Silence Over the Pacific
Until the present Government took office it was compara- tively easy to see the reason why the United Kingdom was not directly associated with the Pacific Defence Pact between Australia, New Zealand and the United States. It was that the Labour Government did not particularly want to be associated with it. Nor is it especially difficult to see why it took that attitude, since the ANZUS pact was essentially a military guarantee given (not very enthusiastically) by the United States to Australia and New Zealand in return for their signa- ture (also given without enthusiasm) to the San Francisco treaty of peace with Japan. It was in essence a Pacific matter, and it remains so. That being the case, it is difficult for the British Government of today, even though it may feel a stronger attachment to the Imperial idea than did its predecessor, to press very violently for inclusion, or for the Australian and New Zealand Governments to badger the United States on the matter. Even if there is something to be said for the view which Mr. Churchill expressed in the Commons on Tuesday— the view that Britain should have been included in the pact from the start—there is little to be said for creating bad feeling in the matter at this stage. Patience and reasonable discussion are much more to the point. It is true that Britain would consider herself automatically involved if either Australia or New Zealand were attacked. It is therefore arguable that she should know as much as possible about the defensive arrangements of those countries—particularly in the naval sphere. It is possible that the resistance to closer association of Britain with the ANZUS pact has an American origin. There are rumours that this is so. There are even rumours that the reasons for the resistance are not particularly good ones—unwillingness to be involved on behalf of Britain in Malaya and an assumption that if Britain came in other Powers interested in the Pacific would have to come in too. But rumours do not provide a foundation for policy. And nothing could justify any wild public excitement over this issue.
Previous page
