No Nordic nuclear weapons

Press, 23 October 1984, Page 12

No Nordic nuclear weapons

By NZPA staff correspondent Hugh Nevill, in Washington

The Nordic countries — on the cutting 'edge of east and west — have essentially established their region as a nuclear weapons-free zone, in peacetime. Public opinion is strongly antinuclear. Denmark, Norway and Iceland are members of N.A.T.0., the North Atlantic Treaty Organisation; Finland and Sweden are neutral. Denmark and Norway, although full N.A.T.O. members, have gone so far as to ban the stationing of allied troops on their soil in peacetime. All the Nordic countries have signed the nuclear non-prolifera-tion treaty, and have renounced the acquisition or possession of nuclear weapons, although they have the technical capability to sreduce5 reduce them, according to Johan orgen Holst, of the Norwegian Institute of International Affairs.

Nordic leaders, though, are divided on any formal declaration of the region as a perpetually nuclear weapons-free zone. Some are wary that such a declaration might shred their N.A.T.O. umbrella, and encourage adventurism by the Soviet Union. During his visit to New York last month, the New Zealand Prime Minister, Mr Lange, explored the “Nordic option” with Sweden’s foreign Minister. Observers took it that he was looking into whether any Nordic formula could be applied to New Zealand to allow continuation of the ban on nuclear-armed and powered vessels while New Zealand remained a full member of A.N.Z.U.S. One of the key points of Nordic decisions on nuclear weapons — nuclear propulsion is much less of an issue, and seldom comes up —

is the differentiation the Nordic N.A.T.O. members make between their peacetime and wartime policies. This is a long-standing formula that has won acceptance from the United States and the other N.A.T.O. nuclear powers. The significance for' New Zealand is that the N.A.T.O. powers, including the United States, have allowed these options to be set up even though the Nordic countries would be in the front line in any east-west confrontation. In view of New Zealand’s remoteness from the hot points, defence analysts in Washington are questioning the American “moral domino” theory being used to argue for the continuation of American ship visits to New Zealand. The Domino theory is that frontline countries such as The Netherlands and West Germany, both

with strong anti-nuclear movements, might follow New Zealand’s example. The Nordic formula has not prompted any such reaction in western Europe. Tapani Vaahtoranta, of the Finnish Institute of International Affairs, says that one implication of any absolute ban on the stationing of nuclear weapons in the Nordic countries is that a formal Nordic nuclear weapons-free zone could start a chain-reaction leading to the weakening of N.A.T.O. nuclear strategy. The United States would strongly oppose formalising the de facto nuclear weapon-free status of the Nordic countries. The Nordic countries are a buffer between the U.S.S.R. and western Europe. The Soviet union encourages the idea of the region as nuclear-free, because it has heavy concentrations of its own nuclear missiles close by. It has offered to spare the Nordic countries in the event of an all-out east-west nuclear war if they formally declare the region nuclear-free even in war-time. In 1981, the then Soviet president Leonid Brezhnev told the Finnish newspaper “Suomen Sosialidemokraati” that “the Soviet Union for its is prepared to assume not to use ..jclear weapons against those countries of northern Europe that will participate in the non-nuclear-weapon zone” and added that “this does not preclude the possibility of considering some

other measure applicable to our own territory in the region” - a remark believed to mean that he was offering that some neighbouring Soviet territory could be included in such a zone. Last year Yuri Andropov said such measures could be -substantial.” Declaration of the Nordic region as nuclear-free in perpetuity is the step those couuntnes have refused to take though Paul Cole, a specialist on Nordic defence and nuclear policy with Georgetown University’s centre for strategic and international studies in Washington, says the Soviet overtures have won considerable public support. The differentiation between peace and war policies gives the N.A.T.O. command the possibility of moving nuclear missiles into the Nordic countries in war-time. It would take only a few hours. The Governments concerned would have to make a spot decision to allow that, and could refuse. Western warships do not call at Nordic ports except Iceland, and there only occasionally. Because of that, there are essentially no specific policies on nuclear-armed ship visits except in Denmark, where they are formally banned. Cole says the other Nordic countries would have to make a decision at the time if a proposal for such a visit came up, but it is clear that no country would welcome one.