New Zealand's anti nuclear & the US

[ditch]

About 15 years ago the then New Zealand govt. led by PM David Lange, declared the country a nuclear free zone and banned, amoung other things, any ship not declaring whether or not it carried nuclear weapons, from entering NZ waters. A decision at the time that won it a lot of support and a lot of knockers. It hasn't changed it's stance and the US Ambassador today had a few things to say about it.

In the text of a speech issued to the NZ media
He [the US ambassador] said New Zealand's ban on nuclear-powered ships, which prompted the US to cut military relations with Wellington in 1986, "does place limits on our relationship", and urged Prime Minister Helen Clark to rethink the ban. "Friends and allies are not the same thing. Contrary to the views of some, the United States is not going to just 'get over it'. The nuclear issue inevitably colours important policy decisions on both sides, limits the scope for further deepening of co-operation in key areas, and plays an unhelpful role in how we respond to one another." New Zealand is desperate to secure a free-trade deal with the US similar to that being negotiated with Australia, and has sent a team of military engineers to help with Iraqi reconstruction.

Sounds like they haven't just got over it. However, as Australia has found out, when it comes to trade agreements, the US will do what suits it best regardless of whether the country it is dealing with helped out in any small way in Iraq or allows nuclear powered warships into its harbours.

The Australian tells the story this way. (http://www.theaustralian.news.com.au/common/story_page/0,5744,7501863%255E2703,00.html)

[ethics]

What does supporting US in the war have to fo with allowance of nuclear power ships in to its harbor?

Here's another thing, the above quote is not an "attack" as your linked OpEd defines it, it's criticism.

[Steve]

I've always rather admired the Kiwis for taking a practically difficult moral stance like that. Clearly, it has and will continue to cost them. I do believe that parties to this issue have the absolute right to act as they see fit, too. There is, indeed, a huge difference between "friends" and "allies" and I see no reason why the U.S. should not adjust its relations with other nations accordingly.

[Sierra Mike]

Well, the Kiwi's stance certainly put a stake through the heart of the ANZUS pact.

SM

[Steve]

Ain't that the truth?

I was under the impression that Australia and New Zealand have both been trying to create a new regional power in the Pacific, anyway, aligning themselves with some of the Asian "Tigers", creating free trade zones, that sort of thing. I thought the whole purpose was to back away from the U.S., at least a little, and assert more independence.

[ditch]

Originally posted by Leon Keylin
What does supporting US in the war have to fo with allowance of nuclear power ships in to its harbor?


Only that the two aspects are part of the broader foreign policy of the NZ govt with particular reference to the US.


Ain't that the truth? I was under the impression that Australia and New Zealand have both been trying to create a new regional power in the Pacific, anyway, aligning themselves with some of the Asian "Tigers", creating free trade zones, that sort of thing. I thought the whole purpose was to back away from the U.S., at least a little, and assert more independence.

Yes no more ANZUS.

New Zealanders feel isolated in a way that gives them a feeling of security and insulation from world terrorism. Some would say they are living in a fool's paradise. Its wishful thinking on their part to think terrorists will not include them as a trget, as they are as western as OZ and the US. It must be comforting to feel that a militarily independent stance from the mainstream US led policies results in a form of security from current anti western attacks. Perhaps they are right.

This attempt to align with Asia Steve, is a trade based alliance and nothing more. We are trying to force ourselves on countries in the area that in some cases, Malaysia, reject our attempts to become part of the region. Muhatir who has just resigned as Malalysian PM referred to us the other day as attempting to act as the US's deputy sheriff. It has largely been through his efforts that OZ has not been welcomed as part of ASEAN. You could always count on him for some smart arse anti OZ comment whenever he was in the mood. Our ex PM Paul Keating once called him recalcitrant. That dreadful word almost had them cutting diplomatic relationships with us.

Megawati in Indonesia is a puzzling lump of a woman. She recently refused to meet with the leader of the major opposition party Simon Crean or attend the commemorative services for the Bali victims. On both occasions she had sugar coated excuses of course. Unfortunately it is Indonesia that we have on our doorstep.

Australians needed to be dragged kicking and screaming into the any sort of close ties with Asian countries and it was this Paul Keating, former Labor [socialist] PM, who was the one that started calling us part of Asia. Pity he didn't check with the Asians first.

Watch this space for progress reports.

[Coot]

The Kiwi's are more than a bit pissed, over at the other site, at least one is adamant that the U.S. government is 'punishing' them. A bilateral free trade agreement with the U.S. is worth a lot to them...worth much more to them than it is to us.

I guess they need to decide if they can spend and eat moral conviction. In the bigger scheme of things, it is probably of little international consequence whether they choose the lmost 20 year old path of a nuclear free zone or if they opt for a more balanced approach.

[ditch]

Originally posted by Coot
The Kiwi's are more than a bit pissed, over at the other site, at least one is adamant that the U.S. government is 'punishing' them.

In the bigger scheme of things, it is probably of little international consequence whether they choose the lmost 20 year old path of a nuclear free zone or if they opt for a more balanced approach.

Well I guess the US's action is a form of negative reinforcement. Hardly surprising. Why cooperate fully when NZ says no to the US navy using its harbours.
They are beginning to realise that moral conviction doesn't help their trade deficit.

[ditch]

Its worth noting that NZ is lending a hand with the post war peace efforts in Iraq. Its something that has not been given any mention in all the angst regarding the NZ nuclear policy.

Part of the text from the US Ambassador's speech this week.

In the wake of the cowardly attacks of September 11, I personally witnessed the outpouring of heartfelt sympathy from all across New Zealand, and I've repeatedly conveyed our appreciation for your contributions to the liberation of Afghanistan and the fight against terrorism. Even now, New Zealand men and women are actively participating in the war on terrorism, and your Government has sent a team of engineers to help with the reconstruction of Iraq.