Nuclear stance

Press, 25 February 1987, Page 18

Nuclear stance

Sir,—Countless red herrings are being dangled before the electorate. Gay/lesbian rights, Maori rights, the loan issue, violence, sexual abuse, abortion, law and order, etc., take the focus off our major right — the right to a nuclear weapon-free world, without which all other rights are meaningless. But we busy ourselves with storms in teacups while the nuclear cauldron broodingly bubbles. To preserve a world in which we can address ourselves to the lesser evils, our first priority is to rid it of nuclear weapons, the greatest evil of all. The thrust of our moral stand on this issue is a brilliance of hope filtering into the darkest recesses of ignorance and despair. The urgent responsibility of those who see this priority is to make their knowledge and understanding available to all people in this country in the most tangible, comprehensible manner. In September the brilliance could be clouded over. — Yours, etc., ERICA HELSING. Wadestown, February 20, 1987.

Sir,—D. P. K. Rennick (February 23) comments that "... she (Britain) did at the time fight a successful war in Borneo on behalf of the integrity of Malaysia.” This begs the question: “What were the New Zealand, Australian, Gurkha and Malaysian battalions doing in Borneo at the same time as British units? Playing tiddlywinks?” There are plenty of serving and retired servicemen in Canterbury area alone who will assert otherwise. And would D. P. K. Rennick care to comment on what actually brought the war to a conclusion: British armed forces (with a little help from their friends) or diplomatic discussion between U Thant’s representative, Indonesia’s Adam Malik and Malaysia’s Abdul Razak? — Yours, etc., J. STOREY. February 24, 1987. Sir, —Since he has chosen World War I for his counterattack, I reply to D. P. K. Rennick (February 23) using the same . illustration. To this long saga of incompetent generalship and vast, useless slaughter. New Zealand sent almost half its available manpower — over 100,000 men, or 9.3 per cent of its population. Fifty-six per cent were either killed or wounded — the third highest sacrifice behind Austria-Hungary and Russia (Britain was sixth). The attack on the Dardanelles in 1915 was conceived by Churchill and bungled right from the start by British generals. New Zealand’s part, at Anzac Cove, Gallipoli, lasted eight months and exacted a 72 per cent casualty rate — the highest of all the participants. When Japan threatened" us with invasion 27 years later, Britain refused permission for our Middle East forces to return for home defence, offering no help to reward our past loyalty. Fortyfive years on, we are at last dismantling our dubious American military attachment. —Yours, etc., M. T. MOORE. February 24, 1987.