VIETNAM TROOPS ARE VOLUNTEERS

Throughout this year large numbers of stickers have been displayed on motorcars and elsewhere, bearing the slogan "No conscripts for Vietnam". This slogan will be used extensively during the coming Federal Election campaign. But the slogan is dangerously misleading, and the fact that even supporters of the Government have not attempted to stress this, indicates how a slogan repeated often enough, can become accepted as true.

The case for or against compulsorily sending Australian troops overseas is not being argued here. But the truth about Australian troops in Vietnam is as follows:
Under the provisions of the National Service Act 1951-1965, any young Australian liable for National Service training can ensure that he is not compulsorily sent overseas. When he registers for National Service he has a free choice of either joining the Regular Army Supplement (providing he is selected by the ballot), which means initially two years of full training during which he may be sent overseas - to Vietnam or elsewhere - OR of offering his services in any one of the three arms of the Citizens Military Forces.
A young man offering his services to the CMF is not then liable for the ballot.

As the alternatives are made clear to every young man when he registers (as witnessed by the Form NSla), it is a logical conclusion that any national serviceman in Vietnam is in fact a volunteer, not a conscript. Those who claim that there should be no compulsory National Service training of any description are supporting the type of policy, which resulted in large numbers of young Australians, with no real training behind them, paying a heavy price as they met the Japanese advance in New Guinea during the Pacific War.

The present plight of the world demands that as far as it is practical, every citizen bears a share of the effort necessary to ensure the nation's security and future. Those who stress that it is tragic that it is the young men who have to make the biggest contribution, and who may be called upon to risk their lives should ponder on the fact that the present perilous plight of the world, which makes military training necessary is the result of the policies of the International Communist Conspiracy.
They will be helping to minimise the risk of young lives being lost in the future by making a contribution to the struggle against Communism NOW.

A LIBERAL PARTY CANDIDATE AND ROBERT RESHA

In the last two issues of "On Target" we have dealt with the visit to Australia by Mr. Robert Resha, pro-Communist leader of the banned African National Congress (South Africa). While it was only to be expected that Mr. Resha would be closely associated with well-known Leftists during his Australian tour, there has been surprise and concern that Mr. Edward St. John QC. endorsed Liberal Party candidate for the "blue ribbon" Liberal electorate of Warringali, Sydney, should be supporting the Resha project as President of the South African Defence and Aid Fund.
Debate concerning Mr. St John's support for Mr. Resha has reached the stage where there is widespread alarm inside the Federal Liberal Party.

As we go to press there is widespread speculation in the Warringah electorate about the possibility of an Independent Liberal candidate standing against Mr. St. John. There are also reports of a most threatening letter from Mr. St. John to the local paper which has carried a large number of letters criticising his endorsement of Mr. Resha, demanding that correspondence on the issue should cease.
Needless to say, some of the accusations against Mr. St John have tended to be extreme.

It is no help to have Mr. St. John labeled as a "secret Communist". But it is alarming that a Liberal Party candidate, who unless effectively opposed, is certain to be a Member of the next Federal Parliament, sees nothing wrong in welcoming Mr. Resha. Mr. St John actually met Mr. Resha at the Sydney airport when he arrived. After a long conversation with Mr. Resha, Mr. St John South African Defence and Aid Fund publicly stated that they accepted Mr. Resha's explanations about his numerous pro-Communist activities.
We do not accept Mr. Resha's explanations.

We showed the brazen falsity of Mr. Resha's claim that the African National Congress "is not Communist influenced at all".
The Rivonia trial in South Africa proved just how extensively the ANC was Communist influenced. Our understanding is that Mr. St John was an observer at the Rivonia trial. If this is so, then he must be aware of the admissions made by leading South African Communists concerning their relationships with the ANC. Mr. St. John claims that he is a strong anti-Communist. But much of his public activity has been devoted to opposing the internal policies of the South African Government.
Mr. St John is also opposed to the policies of the Rhodesian Government.

Southern Africa is becoming of increasing importance to the survival of the Free World against the global strategy of International Communism. Mr. St John is entitled to advocate that Australia should interfere in the internal affairs of friendly, anti-Communist Governments in Southern Africa. And if wishes to place himself on the same side as Australian Communists, Leftist politicians like Dr. J. Cairns, and similar people, in supporting an African revolutionary, that is his business.
But when he seeks to enter the Federal Parliament, then this is another matter.
The Liberal Party owes the Australian electors an explanation about Mr. St John and his support for Mr. Robert Resha.

In answer to the many requests for information about Mr. Resha's Australian tour, we can only say that since we first exposed Mr. Resha's background we have found it difficult to obtain any details of Mr. Resha's Australian programme. But in an interview on the Labor Hour, Melbourne, on Sunday, 9th October, Mr. Resha said that he was visiting Canberra and Sydney, also Perth, and then Brisbane. He leaves Australia for New Zealand on the 26th October.

A DANGEROUS "PEACEFUL ENGAGEMENT"

An Australian Associated press report of 9th October, carried by all Australian dailies, makes ominous reading. It outlines a changed policy of the Johnson Administration towards the Soviet Union. President Johnson, or one of his advisers, has coined the term "peaceful engagement" to replace "peaceful 'co-existence". Five steps are proposed:

1. Moves for the establishment of consular offices in the Soviet Union and the U.S.A., and for an extension of most-favoured nation treatment to East European nations.

2. The guaranteeing of USA export-import banks commercial credits to Poland, Hungary, Bulgaria and Czechoslovakia.

3. Plans to ease Poland's foreign exchange burden of having to pay back with dollars. Polish currency used to buy surplus American agricultural products.

4. Willingness to finance export of USA goods and services needed for building the Fiat motorcar factory in the Soviet Union.

5. Suggestion of a mutual reduction by East and West of armed forces in Europe "to help gradually to shape a new political environment."

It would appear that in order to bolster up the over-extended and staggering Soviet economy, L.B.J. is apparently determined to go "all the way". In the meantime Soviet bloc planes and ground to air missiles continue to shoot down American plains in Vietnam. The port of Haiphong in North Vietnam remains open to Soviet shipping, bringing in military supplies for the Viet Cong. President Johnson's advisers insist it would be dangerous to blockade the port, as this would mean direct confrontation with the Soviet Union. Appeasement and bribery are being tried in a desperate attempt to get the criminals of the Kremlin to help halt the conflict in Vietnam. The Communist criminals have never been impressed with this type of approach. It only helps to convince them that victory for Communism is inevitable.

RHODESIA STANDS FIRM

Rhodesian Prime Minister Ian Smith is not impressed by the "last chance" proposals by Mr. Harold Wilson. In reaction to the British version of what allegedly took place at the recent talks in Salisbury between Mr. Smith and the British Commonwealth Secretary, Mr. Bowden, Salisbury has "leaked" out what really happened.
It was the British who came pleading for help. Mr. Bowden's case was that the Afro-Asian group had pushed Britain into a corner at the recent Commonwealth Conference, and that the British wanted Mr. Smith to help them by being reasonable. But Mr. Smith regarded the terms of agreement outlined by the British as "tantamount to a demand for unconditional surrender". The Rhodesian Prime Minister told Mr. Bowden that he had as much hope of flying to Mars as he had of persuading the Rhodesians to accept unconditional surrender.

The way is being cleared for Mr. Wilson to take the Rhodesian issue to the UN where the Communists are waiting in keen anticipation to exploit the situation. And Australia and New Zealand will be forced into the front line. They will have to choose whether they will back Mr. Wilson any further or not.

NOTE THIS DATE