TNAG-0055-FCO40-91-Defence-review-1977 — Page 16

(b) Wond an

not be

Cartuchons

Pecific inlunsts / responsibilities matuid feet in

any

ገ

the proposed for a ben

both an

British base in Austionin

additions reason for was läblishing

I relish contributing

(lottle

16 for the establishment of

argument for

British bose anywhere) and a card

in could play with of Austichains if

I understand they

all heart and the idea?

Tr. all seam

это

red need (n DTD

up li a

representations

not at

chation body is

conimating these plan. But

perhaps this

is cheedy in

mind,

in chicl

I apologize in

Kroubling you.

V.W. Sap

Mr. Moreton

215-4

Pacific Islands Defence and Internal

Security Commitments.

The point raised by Mr. Stacpoole is one which has troubled me for some time. In Mr. Fairclough's absence, I have no one to consult on my side who will know the overall picture. So far as I myself am concerned, since merger I have been consulted (largely by you or your staff, I think) on various papers which have contained passages referring to handling the Pacific Islands internal security commitment from Singapore and similar ideas. But I have never really been brought into any substantial consideration of these matters.

}

1

Looking at the thing from a simpliste' stand- point, if we pull out of Singapore and have not a foot- hold on the Australian mainland, how is it proposed that we shall carry out our defence commitments for the remaining Pacific dependencies and what will presumably be our continued commitment to defend them if they go forward to such solutions as Free Association, etc., or into the kind of treaty relation- ship that Tonga seems now to intend: and how shall

/we

NOTHING TO BE WRITTEN IN THIS MARGIN