Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

New Zealand Nuclear Ship Ban: Press, Greenpeace stuck in cold war mentality
www.stuff.co.nz ^ | 12-08-03 NZST | NZPA

Posted on 08/11/2003 6:05:26 PM PDT by New Zealander

Pressure on over nuclear ship ban 12 August 2003

The United States wants New Zealand to relax its ban on nuclear-propelled warships, saying US ships need the freedom to use New Zealand ports as part of the "war on terror".

Top-ranking US Government official Grant Aldonas, who is Under-Secretary of Commerce (International Trade), yesterday described the nuclear issue as an "artefact of another age".

"We need to recognise the concerns that motivated our thoughts about the actions in the mid-1980s, which came at a time when we were very much focused on the Cold War," he told an Auckland business lunch.

Although New Zealand's anti-nuclear ban did not appear to have had a "cascading effect" elsewhere, that was no longer the issue, "given that what we now confront is a war on terror, not a cold war".

Former US President George Bush had spelt out that US warships no longer carried nuclear arms.

Mr Aldonas later said the US regarded its Navy as "our forward defence".

"We look at the freedom of the seas and the ability to project power off our shores as being integrally related to a policy of trying to take on terrorism wherever it starts," he said.

"So the idea that there be some limitations on our freedom to protect that power - in defence of what we think are both New Zealand and US interests - is something where you can appreciate the reaction in our defence quarters and in Congress.

"Our ability to go after the bad guys, as it were, really is linked to a lot of what we do with our Navy."

Prime Minister Helen Clark refused to comment directly on Mr Aldonas' statements.

Her spokesman, David Lewis, said the US administration and the New Zealand Government's views on the nuclear issue were well-known.

"We know that the US regards it as unfinished business," Mr Lewis said. "But New Zealand has no plans to change its current policy."

Mr Aldonas made it clear in his speech that there was a strong sensitivity within the US Defence Department and other parts of the administration on the nuclear issue.

"There is also a recognition that in many respects it is an artefact of another age and we both need to be working hard at our relationship.

"The notion that American ships, because of their nuclear propulsion systems, can't stop at the port of a friendly country seems untoward, particularly when we share common values."

No part of the world was safe from terrorism, he said.

"The idea that young Kiwis could be targeted in a place like Bali by terrorists simply because they went there to exercise their freedoms and see a wider world is something that certainly has the same impact on people in Auckland and Wellington as September 11 had for us."

Mr Aldonas also met Trade Negotiations Minister Jim Sutton in Wellington to plan a joint strategy for the World Trade Organisation meeting in Cancun, Mexico.

He praised New Zealand's leadership role in trade liberalisation, but indicated a bilateral free trade deal with the US was not on the Bush administration's negotiating list.

Nuclear ship ban more relevant than ever - Greenpeace 12 August 2003

UPDATED REPORT

Continued pressure on New Zealand by the United States over its ban on nuclear-propelled warships shows the ban is still relevant and important, Greenpeace said today.

Top-ranking US Government official Grant Aldonas, who is Under-Secretary of Commerce (International Trade), yesterday said the nuclear issue was an "artefact of another age" and said the US needed the freedom of our waters to fight terrorism.

He said the ban arose out of cold war concerns that were no longer a focus.

However, Greenpeace spokeswoman Bunny McDiarmid said today the ban was more important than ever.

"New Zealand's ban is more relevant today that it was in 1986 when it came into being."

She said the US had developed more small, "more usable" nuclear weapons.

"It makes the whole issue of nuclear arms even more dangerous today than it was in 1986 despite the cold war having gone away."

Mr Aldonas said New Zealand's anti-nuclear ban did not appear to have had a "cascading effect" elsewhere, but said that was no longer the issue, "given that what we now confront is a war on terror, not a cold war".

Ms McDiarmid said there was more to the issue than simply a ban on nuclear powered or armed ships.

"It's also a statement about New Zealand sees the whole issue of disarmament... To the United States that's a real challenge. I think they are worried that other countries would also see that as a relevant and serious commitment to disarmament and that's why the keep challenging it.

"If they really think it's had no effect why do they continue to keep challenging it?"

Ms McDiarmid said the argument that US ships needed free access to New Zealand waters to fight terrorism did not stand up.

"To say that they want to come into our harbours with their nuclear-powered, nuclear-armed ships because they are interested in extending their fight on terrorism I think is patently ridiculous.

Prime Minister Helen Clark's spokesman, David Lewis, yesterday said the US administration and the New Zealand Government's views on the nuclear issue were well-known.

"We know that the US regards it as unfinished business but New Zealand has no plans to change its current policy."

Mr Aldonas met Trade Negotiations Minister Jim Sutton in Wellington recently to plan a joint strategy for the World Trade Organisation meeting in Cancun, Mexico.

A potential free trade deal with the US has in the past been used as a reason to get rid of the ban, but Ms McDiarmid said it was not justified.

"Nuclear weapons and nuclear power have not become safe overnight because we want a free trade deal... there's no guarantee we'd even get a trade deal with the US anyway."


TOPICS: Foreign Affairs
KEYWORDS: anzus; newzealand; nuclear
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-2021-4041-6061-8081-92 next last
Crazy - anti-nuclear stance in protest to cold war, concerning nuclear weapons on ships (and therfore targeting by the USSR) is extended to cover nuclear propulsion, thanks in part to pressures by the current PM when she was an MP. Now there are no nuclear weapons on ships, and only a handful of nuclear powered ships, greenpeace, and much worse, THE PRESS have to sell a deliberate and obvious lie.
1 posted on 08/11/2003 6:05:26 PM PDT by New Zealander
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | View Replies]

To: New Zealander
It seems carriers wouldn't be visiting as they are both nuclear powered and also carry nuclear bombs.

I just wonder what the point is of wanting to make ports of call in New Zealand. It's pretty much out of the way of anything, except maybe attacking Antarctica, but I heard that the gray aliens that had their secret bases down there with the Nazi remnants have long since left the continent.

2 posted on 08/11/2003 6:09:15 PM PDT by xrp
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: xrp
Yeah - the only importance that I can gleem is a normalisation of US/NZ millitary relations. The irony in that this appears to be of minor importance to the US - since the New Zealand government has given an apperance of support for the war on terror without repealing the ban, while NZ armed forces suffer from poor funding and cannot train in major exercises with other US allies.
3 posted on 08/11/2003 6:17:15 PM PDT by New Zealander
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: New Zealander
Time to quit buying N.Z. lamb and sheep products. Most of the lamb in our stores here are from N.Z.
4 posted on 08/11/2003 6:17:20 PM PDT by fish hawk
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: xrp
My understanding - Carriers carry nuclear weapons - but warships do not - is that correct?
5 posted on 08/11/2003 6:19:19 PM PDT by New Zealander
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: shaggy eel
Ping
6 posted on 08/11/2003 6:20:42 PM PDT by New Zealander
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: New Zealander
A carrier is a warship.

I believe destroyers, frigates and cruisers no longer carry nukes.

7 posted on 08/11/2003 6:35:54 PM PDT by xrp
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 5 | View Replies]

To: New Zealander
ACT party press release
New Zealand Safer Without Nuclear Ban

Tuesday 12 Aug 2003
Ken Shirley
Press Releases -- Foreign Affairs & Defence
(view HTML version at: http://www.act.org.nz/item.jsp?id=24491 )

ACT New Zealand Deputy Leader Ken Shirley today reiterated his call
for the Government to indicate support for his Members Bill proposing
the removal of the ban on nuclear-propelled vessels, following the
comments of senior US official Grant Aldonas in Auckland yesterday.

"Access to New Zealand ports by US naval vessels is now of strategic
importance in the war on terror," Mr Shirley said.

"The South West Pacific is no longer a benign region - with worrying
levels of instability emerging in several Pacific Island nations - and
perpetrators of international terror are known to take advantage of
chaotic situations in unstable nations.

"The US administration has identified the policies banning US naval
vessels from New Zealand ports as an impediment to their - and our -
campaign on terror.

"The nonsense of this obstructive policy is highlighted by the fact
that there is no significant safety or environmental risks to justify
continuation of the ban, as stated in the 1992 report of the Special
Committee on Nuclear Propulsion chaired by retired High Court Judge
Sir Edward Somers," Mr Shirley said.

ENDS
8 posted on 08/11/2003 6:37:14 PM PDT by New Zealander
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: xrp
A carrier is a warship.

er - yeah. My error. :)

9 posted on 08/11/2003 6:38:45 PM PDT by New Zealander
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 7 | View Replies]

To: New Zealander
If your weapons are lies, your enemy is truth.
10 posted on 08/11/2003 6:41:41 PM PDT by polemikos (If your weapons are lies, your enemy is truth)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: New Zealander
your = their (Greenpreace, press, DimDumbDems, etc.
11 posted on 08/11/2003 6:42:39 PM PDT by polemikos (If your weapons are lies, your enemy is truth)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: New Zealander
,,, good one Mate! Heard this on this morning's news. Good to see you've posted it. Now, let's see how our globe trotting Prime Minister handles this.
12 posted on 08/11/2003 6:44:14 PM PDT by shaggy eel (Checking in from 41º 18'S 174º 47'E)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: New Zealander
Maybe when the government of New Zealand is not run by Greenpeace, some intelligent agreements can be made regarding nuclear powered ships stopping there. Don't feel bad...Greenpeace is slowly taking over the government of Australia too. It's obvious she thinks the US is more of a threat than homocide bombing maniacs using airliners as WMD.
13 posted on 08/11/2003 6:46:56 PM PDT by cake_crumb (UN Resolutions = Very Expensive, Very SCRATCHY Toilet Paper)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: fish hawk
Time to quit buying N.Z. lamb and sheep products. Most of the lamb in our stores here are from N.Z.

Please keep buying New Zealand agricutural products - especally farmed livestock. The current anti-nuclear govenment (which was resposable for imposing the ban over a decade ago) has recently imposed a 'fart tax'.

This unpopular idea penalises farmers for their important part in our economy, while offering them no practical solution to reducing so-called greenhouse gas emissions. You'll find that they'll be voting for parties that support a repeal of the anti-nuclear stance at the next election. New Zealand farmers are your allies.

14 posted on 08/11/2003 6:47:00 PM PDT by New Zealander
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 4 | View Replies]

To: New Zealander
"The irony in that this appears to be of minor importance to the US - since the New Zealand government has given an apperance of support for the war on terror without repealing the ban, while NZ armed forces suffer from poor funding and cannot train in major exercises with other US allies."

Is she an admirer of Chrétien's? She seems willing to follow the Canadian example of destroying her country's military. Shame.

15 posted on 08/11/2003 6:50:44 PM PDT by cake_crumb (UN Resolutions = Very Expensive, Very SCRATCHY Toilet Paper)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 3 | View Replies]

To: Brian Allen; AMNZ; ErnBatavia; cynicom; norton; kstewskis; stanz; expots; curiouskiwi; Neophyte; ...
FYI
16 posted on 08/11/2003 6:52:02 PM PDT by shaggy eel (Checking in from 41º 18'S 174º 47'E)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 12 | View Replies]

To: shaggy eel
Cheers mate.

The original headline is bollocks isn't it? How do you exert pressure by talking in a moderate way at a business lunch?

17 posted on 08/11/2003 6:52:39 PM PDT by New Zealander
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 12 | View Replies]

To: New Zealander
Prime Minister Helen Clark refused to comment directly on Mr Aldonas' statements.

,,, whoop, whoop, whoop, whoop - election issue!!!!

18 posted on 08/11/2003 6:54:56 PM PDT by shaggy eel (Checking in from 41º 18'S 174º 47'E)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: New Zealander
"This unpopular idea penalises farmers for their important part in our economy, while offering them no practical solution to reducing so-called greenhouse gas emissions"

Algore is a big subscriber to that. He tried to get support for his fart tax while he was still VP. The media changed "cow flatulence" to "cow burps" so as not to shock the sensitive sensitivities of the lefties. I sympathize.

On the other hand, looks as though one of Algor's OTHER pet projects, the fat tax (tax on meat, sugar, dairy, junk food, etc) will soon become reality here. Soon we won't be able to buy NZ farm products. Or American farm products for that matter.

19 posted on 08/11/2003 6:57:10 PM PDT by cake_crumb (UN Resolutions = Very Expensive, Very SCRATCHY Toilet Paper)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 14 | View Replies]

To: shaggy eel
It's going to be a much better election that the last one eh? You can detect a change in the press too...
20 posted on 08/11/2003 6:58:09 PM PDT by New Zealander
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 18 | View Replies]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-2021-4041-6061-8081-92 next last

Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson