Nuclear-free zones

Press, 3 July 1985, Page 16

Nuclear-free zones

Sir,—lnternationally-useful neutrality will work far better than Mr Bateman’s polarised, distrustful, nuclear-intensive zones. For instance, super-Powers themselves negotiate in neutral Geneva and Vienna, and the Swiss have mooted a “neutral satellite” to verify, and encourage trust in, arms limitation treaties (“The Press,” February 20, page 40). Even in a nuclear war, a neutral New Zealand would suffer the least; nuclear-alignment calls in direct nuclear retaliation. Mr Bateman can be absolutely assured that for its proponents, the establishment of a nuclear-free zone will not mean the nuclear issue “is finished”: a highly active “peacemaker-nation” is their goal. Forty years of super-

power rivalry has brought them to within 10 minutes nuclear striking distance of each other, registering hundreds of false attacks on their computerised warning-systems each year. Mr Bateman’s proposed “prolonged thought, planning and work,” “through alliances,” demonstrates an astonishing inability so far to grasp the urgency of this situation, and the need for positive neutrality if it is to be resolved. — Yours, etc., J. GALLAGHER. July 1, 1985.