THE PRESS WEDNESDAY, JUNE 11, 1980. Labour and A.N.Z.U.S.

Press, 11 June 1980, Page 16

THE PRESS WEDNESDAY, JUNE 11, 1980. Labour and A.N.Z.U.S.

The Labour Party has avoided painting itself into a corner over defence and foreign policies. A resolution approved by the Labour Party conference last month called for a future Labour Government to withdraw from A.N.Z.U.S. and to become non-al|gned. On Sunday the policy council of the party rejected that proposition and it will not now become part of Labour Party policy nor, unless the decision is reversed next year, become part of the party’s manifesto for the 1981 General Election. The Leader of the Opposition, Mr Rowling, announced the policy council’s decision yesterday and Mr M. A. Connelly, speaking last week-end at a seminar on New Zealand’s defence in the 1980 s. organised by the Christchurch branch of the New Zealand Institute of Internationa] Affairs, must have had an inkling of what would be decided on Sunday. He affirmed Labour Party support for the A.N.Z.U.S. Treaty on Saturday. There was some hesitation about accepting Mr Connelly’s view because he is regarded as having more traditional and conventional views on defence and foreign policy than some people within the Labour Party. Mr Rowling’s announcement disposed of any speculation about that. Although National and Labour Governments have been supporters of the United Nations, Labour is inclined to see A.N.Z.U.S. as lying more within a general approach to foreign affairs in which the United Nations has greater emphasis. The passing of the resolution at the conference was a curious affair as if the delegates almost expected the whole thing to be thrown out in any event and expected traditional support for the United Nations and A.N.Z.U.S. to be reaffirmed. It was, by all measures, a major policy question. For New Zealand to pull out of the treaty and join the so-called non-aligned world would have profound, implications for New Zealand’s place in international affairs. It could hardly be a matter on which. Labour meriibers'of Parliament could be expected to be united. When opinion is strongly divided the Labour Party’s way of deciding the issue is to take a card vote. In this case no card vote was taken. It seemed a casual way to change an outlook that has been with the Labour Party since the A.N.Z.U.S. Treaty came into effect in 1952, and has remained the cornerstone in words and attitudes of New Zealand’s defence policy for both major political parties. The absence of key members of t the Parliamentary party from the conference at the time the resolution was passed cannot wholly explain the absence of a serious debate on such an issue. The suggestion of non-alignment contained in the original resolution seemed badly thought out. Presumably there was some vague notion that New Zealand might join the countries which described themselves as non-aligned. It would not be an easy role for New Zealand to adopt, nor one which would be suited to. New Zealand’s interests. A generous view of the resolution would be to regard it as a way of saying that New Zealand should be more independent. Since New Zealand is aligned with the United States it means that New

Zealand should be more independent of the United States. In such a forum as the United Nations, those who describe themselves as non-aligned usually, show solidarity in voting patterns that is unrivalled by either the Eastern bloc or the Western bloc. If independence is the key, there is a reasonable argument for saying that membership of the Western bloc of countries gives more independence, than membership of any other group. Ask a State Department official about Western unity at present and he is likely to explode. Independence of thought among Western nations is preventing the adoption of a number of policies the United States is advocating. Mr Rowling said that a Labour Government would work to restore a balance between the military and nonmilitary focus of the A.N.Z.U.S. Treaty “to include economic and social consultation on the long-term causes of instability in the Pacific region.” Although A.N.Z.U.S. is a military pact, consideration of such matters has been given by its members in the past. The treaty has required no permanent secretariat and a certain informality among the Ministers who meet allows the discussion of a wide range of matters. One of the questions that must be answered by those who would like to see New Zealand pull out of the treaty is which countries, other than Australia and the United States, they would like to see involved in the Pacific area and how this involvement would affect New Zealand’s relationship with the region. The wishes of the people of the Pacific are also important. Are there countries they would like to see more closely interested in the Pacific? The Labour Party has resolved to keep American nuclear warships out of New Zealand ports. This has come to mean both nuclear-powered and nucleararmed warships. Since the United States refuses to say which of its warships are carrying nuclear arms, any ban on visits to ports effectively means a ban on all United States Navy ships. This policy on its own is tantamount to a rejection of A.N.Z.U.S. Probably the central concern of some Labour Party members—and the concern of some who are not Labour Party members—is that New Zealand should not be seen to be identified with the buildup of nuclear arms and the attendant dangers of a nuclear holocaust. The concern is real. The extent to which New Zealand can influence this is severely limited. It would be even more limited should New Zealand adopt an isolationist policy. The United States listens only a little to what New Zealand or Australia says: but it takes their views into account. The Soviet Union listens not at all. The fear of a nuclear war, which was expressed several times at the defence seminar, is such, that there is an understandable desire to want to see the whole possibility rejected. The world as it is contains that possibility. To decide' on policies that will help to reduce that risk is a responsibility for all policy-makers. It will not help, as some within the Labour Party are wont to do, to reject the world.