Oleh/By		:	DATO' SERI DR. MAHATHIR BIN MOHAMAD 
Tempat/Venue 	: 	WASHINGTON DC. 
Tarikh/Date 	: 	19/01/84 
Tajuk/Title  	: 	THE FOREIGN POLICY ASSOCIATION IN 
			WASHINGTON DC., 




 For sometime now I have been wanting to speak to a Washington audience
having heard so much about the political and bureaucratic potency of the
national capital. It is therefore with a certain sense of fulfilment that
I welcome the opportunity presented to me by the Foreign Policy
Association to share with you some thoughts on issues confronting the
Third World and the possible role of the United States. I am conscious
that this Association is dedicated to instilling greater understanding and
awareness amongst the American people, not only of your own government's
foreign policy, but also of the foreign policies of other states. It is my
hope that by giving you a Malaysian perspective I might be able to
contribute to this process. As is befitting any exchange of views between
friendly nations, I propose to be free and frank, even candid at times. I
trust you will accept my comments in the spirit of close friendship that
has been the hallmark of relations between our two countries. Often times
we disagree on methods but that should not blind us to the fact that
essentially we seek the same objectives: a peaceful and stable
international environment based on justice and equality for all
nations. In addition, do not forget that Malaysia, no less than the United
States, is committed to democracy and the free-enterprise system.

2. Malaysia is perhaps unique in that its foreign policy is driven by
several diverse impulses, all of which need to be reconciled and given
expression. For example, Malaysia being a predominantly Islamic country
has always taken a great interest in development in other Islamic
countries. Our people are quite naturally sympathetic with the struggle
particularly of the Palestinian people for their just and inalienable
rights. We are also a member of the Non-Aligned Movement and we fully
share its abhorrence of big-power political and economic bullying and
manipulations. As a small Third World developing country we are united
with other Third World countries as victims of an unjust and inequitable
economic system that seeks to deny us the legitimate rewards of our labour
and natural resources. On the other hand, we also enjoy long-standing
close and cordial relations with the West with which we share a commitment
to democracy and the free enterprise system. While we ourselves benefit
from a modest amount of economic assistance and cooperation, we have
embarked on our own technical cooperation effort with those countries less
fortunate than ourselves. Malaysia's foreign policy is therefore
understandably multi-faceted. We straddle many diverse worlds and we seek
to encourage a workable unity between these differing worlds. The common
denominator however is moderation based on the conviction that justice and
equality for all nations in conformity with the UN Charter is a primary
and fundamental necessity for genuine and enduring international
stability.

3. Malaysia is a small developing country located in one of the most
strategic areas of the world. Our population and our gross national
product, however, is less than that of California. But that is not to say
we can be taken for granted. While we do not expect and have no illusions
about exerting a decisive influence on the global equation, we are
nonetheless conscious of our responsibility to play our role in world
affairs. Small though we may be, we intend to actively participate in the
political and economic life of the comity of nations in an independent
manner. We will not abandon this responsibility to friend or foe. Indeed
we are convinced that in an era of heightened big-power rivalry and
confrontation and with the threat of a nuclear holocaust hanging over us,
the small Third World countries, the silent majority as it were, must no
longer be silent.

4. The international political situation today has progressively worsened
and is a cause of worry and concern to us all. The mechanisms that have
evolved since the end of the War for dialogue and detente, imperfect as
they were, now appear to have been abandoned. One after the other, in
close succession, the major arms limitation talks have been disbanded
amidst much recrimination and accusation. Never before have the prophets
of doom been louder and who can blame them especially since the
super-powers appear to be increasingly confrontative in dealing with each
other. These are all important and pressing issues and quite rightly they
have preoccupied the attention of the major capitals of the
world. However, I would like to address you this afternoon on issues that
are of equal concern to us in the Third World. To my mind the issues
confronting the Third World are interrelated with all those other
issues. As the world community focuses attention on the pressing issues
that confront us and perhaps try to forge new mechanisms and systems to
preserve and enhance security and stability, it is my hope that the Third
World would not be neglected. Accordingly, I have chosen to speak on "The
Problems and Expectations of the Third World" at this forum, not only to
underscore my belief that the United States has a constructive role to
play in this regard, but also share with you my concerns over the
direction of some aspects of United States Foreign Policy.

5. Mr. Chairman, it seems to me to be truly unfortunate that a great
country like the United States all too often stands on the opposite side
against small Third World countries. Over such issues as the New
International Economic Order, the Law of the Sea Treaty, Antarctica,
Multilateral Trade Negotiations and more recently UNESCO, the United
States has been at odds with the Third World. I say this is unfortunate
because to my mind the United States has always had a historic role and
the capacity to truly champion the interests of the Third World. The
institutions and ideals you have evolved since your own war of
independence ought to be an insipiration to struggling Third World
countries. The heirs to the American Revolution, one of the truly great
revolutions in history, ought to be the precursor of change
world-wide. Instead it seems to me that the United States often supports
vested interests and opposes much needed international reforms that would
bring relief to many small Third World countries. In trying to understand
this strange phenomenon, I can only conclude that in your quest for
national security, you have placed too much emphasis on keeping your
adversaries at bay through purely military means, and too little emphasis
on the legitimate hopes and aspirations of the Third World where most of
your rivalry unfolds. I would urge therefore that greater attention be
paid to the legitimate aspirations of the Third World and to help
contribute to the realisation of those aspirations, I am convinced that in
so doing, you will find that there is no incompatibility of interest
between United States security and the legitimate aspirations of the Third
World. On the contrary, I believe that United States security will be
enhanced by the progressive socio-economic and political advancement of
the Third World.

6. I believe that a satisfactory solution to the pressing and often
crippling problems that confront the Third World, problems that are often
compounded either by the big-powers or the industrialised states, is a
major challenge not only for the Third World but for United States Foreign
Policy as well. I have long sensed that increasingly Third World countries
are unable to accept the monopolisation of political and economic power by
a few nations at the expense of the rest. As leaders of our respective
governments, we in the Third World have a duty and responsibility to
secure for our peoples the best possible socio-economic standards in an
environment of peace and stability. I believe that at the present time the
majority of Third World countries do not favour the politics of radicalism
in resolving these problems. All those who cherish peace and progress must
therefore encourage and maintain the momentum towards peaceful
negotiations based on fair give and take. The big-powers, the
industrialised economies, should not look upon this process with
trepidation. It is not meant to deprive them of their legitimate gains,
but rather it would help protect those gains from precisely the sort of
radicalism that prolonged deprivations and exploitation, whether political
or economic, ultimately generates.

7. Mr. Chairman, all too often when leaders of the Third World seek the
assistance of the industrialised countries there is the tendency on the
part of the industrialised countries to adopt a patronising attitude as if
we come to ask for charity. I must stress that charity is not our
objective though sometimes the sheer magnitude of the problems besetting
some Third World countries may make this inevitable. Rather, what we seek
is a fair and equitable international economic system and principled
political behaviour. It must be recognized that all too often, our
economic and political problems are compounded by the policies pursued by
developed nations. Perhaps I can illustrate this point with an example
taken from Malaysian-United States relations. As you are aware, Malaysia
is faced with threats to its national security from both within and
without. My government has placed great emphasis on strenghtening national
resilience to meet these challenges. We expect our friends to appreciate
this and, even if they cannot help, at least we expect that they will not
jeopardised our efforts. And yet this is precisely what is happening. I
refer in particular to the GSA's release of tin from your strategic
reserves without proper consultations with us, the largest tin producer. I
can tell you frankly that this actions, while infinitesimally small in
terms of the United States economy and probably representing a few dollars
to balance your defence budget, had an enormous and substantially negative
impact on Malaysia's economy. Our export earnings and government revenue
were adversely affected. A number of our tin mines were forced to close
and hundreds of people in the tin industry were retrenched. It is actions
such as these that undermine our efforts at stability and cohesiveness. I
submit that apart from its effects on us, it is also not in your interest
to undermine our economic and political stability. Your best defence must
ultimately lie in cohesive and stable states in Asia and not on the last
minute infusion of arms or naval forces.

8. Another Third World concern, in which I believe the United States could
take the lead, is the preservation and defence of the sovereignty and
territorial integrity of Third World countries, and particularly small
countries. The world community has already witnessed military might
trample underfoot Afghanistan and Kampuchea. Resolutions and condemnations
have failed to restore to the people of Afghanistan and Kampuchea their
basic rights. If the small countries of the world that constitute the
majority in our comity of nations cannot count on respect for their
territorial integrity and sovereignty, then I fear the very basis of the
international political system that has evolved is in dire
jeopardy. Already the ramifications of Afghanistan and Kampuchea are being
felt in the Third World. Countries are arming themselves, diverting badly
needed economic resources from development to defence. New power
alignments are taking shape as countries seek to augment their defence
through alignment. This is a dangerous trend which can only result in
polarisation and heightened tension. What is therefore urgently needed is
a comprehensive and workable system for regional peace which is recognised
and respected by the international community, to preserve and protect the
territorial integrity and sovereignty particularly of small states.

9. In mentioning that the United States take the lead in this endeavour, I
am not suggesting that the United States police the Third World, or for
that matter deputise other states to play the role of regional
gendarme. This, I am sure, would be unacceptable both to the American
people and to the people of the Third World. The United States could
however take the lead in working out with the other big-powers an
acceptable code of conduct in dealing with the Third World. Such a code of
conduct must incorporate strict respect for territorial integrity,
sovereignty and non-interference. It would lay the ground-rules, so to
speak, for big-power dealings with the Third World. This should be an
integral part of the agenda of detente between all the big-powers. To my
mind, any framework of detente that is limited in its application only to
Europe or to East-West relations cannot be enduring. Detente in Europe is
inseparable from detente in the Third World. Surely this must be the
lesson of earlier such unsuccessful attempts at detente.

10. Mr. Chairman, thus far I have touched on broad issues where I believe
the United States can play a constructive role in support of the Third
World. I would now like to focus on Southeast Asia which is after all my
corner of the world, and an area wherein the United States is superbly
equipped to contribute meaningfully to the peace process.

11. As you are aware, since the December 25 1978 invasion and occupation
of Kampuchea and the attendant big-power involvement and interference in
Indochina, Southeast Asia has once again become an area of tension and
rivalry. The Vietnamese invasion of Kampuchea represented a severe
set-back to our hopes of forging a new era of peaceful coexistence and
cooperation in the region. Undaunted by this setback, Malaysia and its
partners in ASEAN, convinced that purely military solutions are either
unpractical or unenduring, have sought to find ways to bring the parties
to the conflict to the negotiating table. Several encouraging developments
both external and internal, have taken place. Externally, the United
Nations sponsored International Conference on Kampuchea has given us an
internationally backed political framework for resolving the Kampuchean
issue. Internally, the Kampuchean people have concretised their resistance
to invasion and occupation by the formation of the Coalition Government of
Democratic Kampuchea under the leadership of His Royal Highness Prince
Norodom Sihanouk. But these developments though important are not nearly
enough. While we already have a programme in the ICK Declaration to
realise a political solution, what is sadly lacking is the political will
especially amongst the big-powers to implement it. I believe that it is
here that the United States can contribute meaningfully. The United States
could, in the context of East-West discussions, persuade the Soviet Union
to cooperate in helping to realise a political solution. I am convinced
that once the global strategic underpinings of big-power involvement in
Indochina are removed, a solution to the Kampuchean problem would be that
much nearer. The United States could also hold out the prospects for a
normal relationship with Vietnam and for reconstruction aid if Vietnam
actively participates in a negotiated settlement. In view of the
imperative necessity of a political solution, ASEAN will be intensifying
its efforts for the resolution of the Kampuchean problem. The attitude and
support of the United States to these regional endeavours will be
important. The United States in as much as it is a Pacific power with an
enormous economic and political stake in the region, must act decisively
with wisdom and foresight and help us resolve this long-standing issues.

12. At the same time, we should look ahead to the post-Kampuchean era and
give some thought to the kind of Southeast Asia that we should like to see
emerging. We must learn from past mistakes and seek to evolve a political
system in Southeast Asia that would preclude future Kampucheas from
occuring. This implies that the countries within the region must reach
consensus on acceptable intra-regional behaviour. It also implies that the
big-powers must reach concensus on acceptable behaviour towards the
region. All these elements are contained in the ASEAN concept of the Zone
of Peace, Freedom and Neutrality, or ZOFPAN. We in ASEAN believe that this
concept holds out the best hope for peace and stability in the region,
both in the interests of the countries of the region as well as for the
big-powers. In this respect, the fact that the United States and the
Soviet Union have not come out in support of ZOPFAN is cause for concern
to us in ASEAN. I would urge that you re-examine the ZOPFAN concept within
the context of the changing geopolitical climate in Southeast Asia and
find the political will to help us realise our aspirations for peace and
stability. We appreciate your concerns on this matter but we ask you to
trust our judgement on this. It is after all our future that is first and
foremost at stake.

13. Mr. Chairman, I do not propose to cover all the other issues of
concern to us in the Third World. I fear I will not do justice to them in
the time allotted me. However I feel compelled to raise one other issue,
if only because no other capital city is perhaps more appropriate to
discuss it. That issue is of course Palestine, and in a wider sense the
whole question of peace in the Middle East. This issue is I think too
familiar to you all to warrant further elaboration. What I would like to
say is simply that there can be no peace in the Middle East for the United
States, for the Arabs or for the Israelis, unless and until the basic and
inalienable rights of the Palestinian people are restored to them. Unless
this basic issue is resolved, I fear that no amount of peace-keeping
forces can bring peace to the Middle East. In the meantime this unresolved
problem will provide opportunities for greater outside involvement and
interference. The United States can no longer afford to ignore this basic
fact. I am fully aware that Americans are deeply committed to the security
of Israel. I can aprreciate your sympathy for the horrendous sufferings
that were inflicted on the Jewish people by Nazi Germany and your
determination to ensure that this never happens again. But surely you
cannot ignore the uprooting of an entire people from their homeland and
the denial of their fundamental rights. Surely you cannot turn a blind eye
on Sabra and Shatilla, the countless refugee camps, the persecution and
calculated slaughter of the Palestinian people. Is the systematic
persecution and mass killing of the Palestinian people less objectionable
that the persecution and mass killing of the Jews at the hands of Nazi
Germany? Must the Palestinian people who for decades now have known
nothing but bullets, fear and desperation continue to pay the price for
Adolf Hitler's tyranny? As a friend of the United States, I say with all
regret that your refusal to acknowledge the basic rights of the
Palestinian people greatly undermines your credibility world-wide. There
is already in existence an internationally acceptable programme of action
to resolve the Palestinian problem in a manner that would safeguard the
rights of all parties. I refer specifically to the Geneva Declaration and
Programme of Action. Indeed it provides the long overdue basis for a just
and comprehensive peace in the Middle East in a clear and specified
manner, and within an applicable and realistic framework, one that seeks
peace for the Palestinians within an independent and sovereign state of
their own, coexisting with all other countries in the region within secure
and internationally recognised boundaries. What is now needed is the
political will and the courage to implement it.

14. Mr. Chairman, Ladies and Gentlemen, the Third World is now moving
towards an important cross-roads in deciding the future course it will
take. Under the impact of decades of an unjust international economic
system and political manipulations from outside, old patterns of alignment
and values are changing. It is true that there are problems aplenty for
the United States in the Third World, but there also exist many
opportunities to build a peaceful and cooperative partnership that would
be mutually beneficial. It is my hope that the United States would be more
responsive to the aspirations of the Third World, even championing their
cause. The problems that I have touched upon, respect for sovereignty,
territorial integrity, non-interference, self-determination and a fair and
equitable economic system could be the basis a new "Bill of Rights" for
the Third World with the United States as its most ardent advocate. That I
respectfully submit would be the greatest and most rewarding challenge for
the United States in the Third World.

Thank you.