Nuclear stance

Press, 12 June 1986, Page 20

Nuclear stance

Sir, —Hitler’s war is the real reason Eastern Europe is today communist-governed and Western Europe is Americanoriented. Britain became yet another satellite by compliantly hosting over 100 American (including nuclear) bases. Until the Reagan Administration coerced Britain and Western Europe into stationing cruise and Pershing missiles on their soil, the Soviets had no nuclear weapons in Eastern Europe. Now they have, except in Rumania, which has shown spirited independence since 1968, refusing transit or host exerciser Soviet forces. L. D. Reife (June 9) ignores Soviet repudiation of world conquest since 1930, to rebuild economically. Hitler’s aggression tragically changed history, yet significantly, two of his allies invading Russia in 1941-44 — Austria and Finland — were later released by the victorious Soviets, provided they both signed nonaggression pledges. L. D. Reife’s repetition of Khrushchev’s alleged hostility toward Britain, and his/her misplaced trust in America’s military so-called deterrent, illustrates how effective some propaganda is.—Yours, etc M. T. MOORE. June 9, 1986.

Sir, —The United States Secretary of Defence, Mr Weinberger, is either very thick or very arrogant when he says (June 7) that New Zealand is repudiating obligations that are required under a mutual treaty. The terms of the A.N.Z.U.S. Treaty do not require nuclear weapons to be brought here. They seem to us to be a greater threat to our safety than we can otherwise perceive. It is likely that both Australia and New Zealand will shift to defence schemes similar to those of the Dibb report. Neither nuclear weapons nor far-distant troop commitments should be part of the defence plan. Will the United States then put us under even greater pressure? The best hope for a genuine world peace accord at present would seem to be political change in the United States or the death of the ageing hawks who presently administer that country. — Yours, etc., COLIN BURROWS. June 8, 1986.

Sir, —I have heard of all the events to which L. D. Reife refers (June 9). At least the Kremlin made no secret of its ambitions. With reference to history, the U.S.S.R. is not alone in its desire to dominate. For that matter, KhruShchev spoke simple truth when he referred to Britain as a premier target. It is still so because the islands are a floating launch platform for United States missiles designed for the U.S.S.R. Fortress America? The Pentagon has no intention of allowing that, by its own declaration. I have also seen positive moves by the U.S.S.R. under Gorbachev to encourage nuclear

disarmament. Meanwhile, the Pentagon has been persisting in aggressive posturing, in the Mediterrean. So far, that behaviour has not initiated a nuclear exchange. I rephrase my original statement. I believe that the world has more to fear from the Pentagon than from the Kremlin at this time. — Yours, etc., (Mrs) A. J. FLANAGAN. June 9, 1986.