Labour govt may strain U.S. relations, paper says

Press, 22 June 1984, Page 21

Labour govt may strain U.S. relations, paper says

NZPA staff correspondent Washington The election of a Labour government in New Zealand could create “severe strains” with the United States, according to Henry Albinski, professor of political science and director of the Australian Studies Centre at Pennsylvania State University. In a paper prepared for delivery last August and soon to be published, Professor Albinski says that from an American vantage point the Leader of the Opposition, Mr Lange, appears more flexible than his predecessor, Sir Wallace Rowling, “and therefore would be easier to deal with as head of government.” But the Labour Party conference was on record as urging withdrawal from the A.N.Z.U.S. alliance. Although it was the policy council that set authorita-

tive policy, he said, “the importance of conference feeling should not be belittled.”

Nuclear issues and the viability of security ties through A.N.Z.U.S. were more pronounced in New Zealand than in Australia, Professor Albinski said.

“Developments thhere might not only degrade New Zealand’s defence value to the United States, but potentially spill into Australia and fray the alliance at large. “Such a scenario derives from three considerations — the fraility and prospective loss of office by the incumbent National Party Government, New Zealand public sentiment, and the possibility of an alternative government which on present indications would not be as accommodating as its Labour counterpart in Australia has been,” he said.

“A.N.Z.U.S. as such enjoys widespread support,” Professor Albinski said. “But nuclear issues have deeply divided the New Zealand public. “Many New Zealanders have a fear of being unnecessarily caught up in the super-Power rivalry,” he said. “The New Zealand ethos is in general more placid life-quality oriented and inward turning than can be said of Australia.” All this, Professor Albinski said, had resulted in Opposition policies which ran strongly counter to those of the National Party and were opposed in Washington. Mr Lange had not “downplayed” the A.N.Z.U.S. alliance, as Sir Wallace had. He had, in fact, addressed the desirability of synchronising New Zealand Labour Party policy with that of Australia’s Labour Government.

“While his thinking has shifted about,” Professor Albinski said, “he has not been nearly as unconditional on matters affecting American defence priorities and the alliance per se.” The United States was not prepared to change the rule of “no confirmation, no denial” on whether visiting warships were carrying nuclear weapons, Professor Albinski said, “and the United States is otherwise unprepared to change the rules for New Zealand.

“The appearance of a Labour government in Wellington could therefore create severe United StatesNew Zealand strains on a basic issue, one which the United States regards as fundamental to its own strategic freedom of action and to the vitality of the A.N.Z.U.S. alliance. “If there was a serious falling out between New

Zealand and the United States, anti-nuclear and anti-United States opinion in Australia could itself gather force and confidence,” he said.

The United States should be prepared to make allowances for the special interests, and at times political requirements, of the leadership in Canberra and Wellington, Professor Albinski said.

“Allowance in this instance is not condescension,” he said. America should also be ready to move an extra distance in assisting or mollifying Australia and New Zealand t on non-security questions*. “Australia’s and New Zealand’s economic health affects a number of their contributions that the United States finds helpful to its own securrity objectives,” he said.