Labour policy on A.N.Z.U.S.

Press, 16 April 1979, Page 12

Labour policy on A.N.Z.U.S.

After his visit to Washington last week, the Leader of the Opposition, Mr Rowling, must be aware that his party will have to have a close look at its policy on defence. In particular, it will have to review its attitude towards New Zealand’s only effective defence treaty, the A.N.Z.U.S. Treaty.

in its popular summary of policy for the electorate last year, the Labour Party delivered its “international affairs” statement in 107 words: half of these were given to saying that New Zealand defence forces would be prepared to play a “full part” in world peace-keeping efforts and to saying that Pacific island countries would be helped economically to reduce their need to send migrants to this country for jobs. The only other points were that the party would return to the position of the last Labour Government in “strong stands” against apartheid and against the use of nuclear weapons in the South Pacific.

All who object to the use of nuclear weapons in any part of the world will have no difficulty in accepting the party’s opposition to the use of such weapons in the South Pacific; they might, however, wonder why the policy should be limited in its application. While he was talking to Mr Warren Christopher, the Deputy Secretary of State in the United States, Mr Rowling discussed his party’s policy favouring a South Pacific zone free of nuclear weapons and its opposition to visits by nuclear-powered warships to New Zealand ports. Mr Rowling found the State Department “obviously unhappy” with his policy. American logic on these questions must have driven Mr Christopher to put the obvious question to Mr Rowling: Is the New Zealand Labour Party wanting to take the N and Z out of A.N.Z U.S. or does it have no use for the United States in the treaty? The question is both logical and legitimate. If all naval vessels of all countries were to be excluded from the South

Pacific—with the exception of a few, such as New Zealand’s own, because they obviously do not carry nuclear weapons—the nuclear-free-zone idea might begin to make sense. Assuming that all navies and air forces which have the potential to carry nuclear weapons were dedicated to staying out of the area or were prepared to open their craft to inspection, the nuclearfree zone might even be free of nuclear weapons.

So long as the naval Powers are not prepared to disclose how a craft is armed the nuclear-free-zone idea simply means excluding all military craft. In that event the proponents of the idea must also be prepared to say that the A.N.Z.U.S. treaty could be forgotten. In achieving a nuclear-free zone the temptation to abolish the treaty would be strong, though this would assume that the countries of the South Pacific faced no threat from any country employing only conventional weapons. In the event of this assumption proving wrong, New Zealand’s main A.N.Z.U.S. ally would be far away and virtually powerless if it were to observe the agreement on the zone. Until this policy is effected the question of nuclear-powered vessels remains. A large number of American warships are now powered by nuclear reactors and the Labour Party policy amounts to directing which allied vessels may enter New Zealand ports. A party to a treaty may well elect what kind of defence it would like if the need arose: it may well choose what kind of assistance it would offer if called upon The A.N.Z.U.S. treaty in fact requires the signatories to do no more than consider what help shall be given. It is, however, a promise to consider a call for help. Labour’s policy is coming close to a declaration that a Labour Government would not be interested in either aspect of A.N.Z.U.S. It is close to a declaration that New Zealand forces are for keeping the peace in almost any part of the world except our own.