Nuclear-ship view ‘could bruise ties’

Press, 9 May 1979, Page 2

Nuclear-ship view ‘could bruise ties’

NZPA Washington If the Labour Party wins the 1981 General Election in New Zealand and adheres to a policy of opposing visits by American nuclear-pow-ered warships, its stand could bruise relations between the two countries, according to United States officials. They were commenting after a recent visit to Washington by the Leader of the Opposition (Mr Rowling). They see Mr Rowling, a potential Prime Minister again, as an appealing figure. But administration sources said that he could create difficulty for the United States and the A.N.Z.U.S. alliance if he became Prime Minister and maintained his steadfast resistance to American nuclear-powered ships berthing in New Zealand ports. “It likely would lead to an immediate and untreatable irritant in United StatesNew Zealand relations.” said one source. The Americans do not see how a Labour government could put an end to visits of nuclear-powered warships while continuing to support the alliance which binds the United States. New Zealand, and Australia in common defence. They sav that the combatant fleet of the United States Navy already is more than 40 per cent nuclearpowered and that the percentage is growing and will continue to do so. They say it is increasingly more practical to use nu-clear-powered ships during exercises and on training vovages in the long reaches of the Pacific. Conversely it has been more difficult_for

a the United States to send; ageing, conventional ships I s on such missions. i t The retiring United States! o Ambassador to New Zealand s (Mr Armistead Selden, jun.,) - underlined the point at a d‘farewell news conference in i - Wellington on April 17 when ;,the said. “. . . the Navy, s would have difficulty fulfill- | ing its responsibilities in g‘ this region i f unable to oper- - ate all of its ships here. j e “Furthermore, distances are so great in the south-1 J western Pacific region that r some missions vital to joint - defence interests are best i performed by nuclear-pow-i’ered vessels.” One Administration source ®;in Washington asked how ’ the United States could prod tect New Zealand if it could ‘ not use all of its ships. n Mr Rowling himself recog-' "Inises the dilemma he faces 'in opposing visits of j 1f nuclear-warships while back-1 e ing A.N.Z.U.S. He said asl ‘; much in an interview in! on April 12. j But Mr Rowling said the! e ( United States Navy had had!; || nuclear warships for 14 ; ■'years and had only begun to’ t

visit New Zealand in the last three years and only' three or four had been sent. | "That suggests it is more! of a convenience than al necessity,” he said. “No! great claim of necessity has | been advanced for New Zea-j land to harbour nuclear-pow-ered warships.” On his return to Welling-) ton last Sunday Mr Rowling : accused Mr Selden of shoot-j ing from the hip for criticism of Labour's policy on | nuclear ships. He said he had been told) in Washington that Mr Sel-l den’s comments were noti official and that the State. Department had told Mr Selden “his remarks ought to have been restrained.” It is no great secret in Washington that Mr Selden and Mr Rowling did not hit it off. while the American; Ambassador was a close friend and admirer of the Prime Minister (Mr Muldoon) and was enthusiastic in his support of him. Administration officals are. anxious that Mr Selden’s re-1 placement hews a line, "straight up the middle.”