THE PRESS WEDNESDAY, OCTOBER 12, 1988. Servicing Soviet ships

Press, 12 October 1988, Page 18

THE PRESS WEDNESDAY, OCTOBER 12, 1988. Servicing Soviet ships

The possibility that New Zealand could service Soviet fishing vessels has been winning attention recently. The economic, diplomatic, and security aspects of any deal should be explored thoroughly. An agreement has been signed between a New Plymouth firm, Technic Group, Ltd, and Sovrybflot, the organisation which looks after the Soviet Union’s maritime fleet. Technic Group, Ltd, is a non-public controlling company which has among its enterprises Fitzroy Engineering Ltd, a substantial engineering firm also based in New Plymouth. The agreement seems simply to be to appoint Technic as the agent in Nev; Zealand for Sovrybflot. Presumably, if the Soviet deep-sea fishing fleet in the Pacific area obtains services in New Zealand, Technic will be the company which signs contracts here. A lot has to be settled before then. For one thing, the Government has to decide whether it wants to permit this arrangement. From preliminary information it sounds as if the servicing would be for up to 100 ships a year and the exchange of crews would be by charter flights using the Soviet airline, Aeroflot. The Soviet joint venture ships which fish in New Zealand’s Exclusive Economic Zone have already been serviced and supplied in New Zealand. This would be a much larger exercise entailing the shifting of hundreds of crew and the upkeep of the ships that are fishing in international waters, not in any of the management zones around these coasts. It would require the provision of a large force of skilled people who are capable of dealing with the repair and general upkeep of the ships. The economic advantages to New Zealand are apparent. There is, first of all, the income to be derived from carrying out the servicing and supplying the ships with food, water, and other essentials. Second, and by no means a minor benefit, will be the building up of a work force skilled in the maintenance of fishing vessels. This might lead to further work on the maintenance of' ships from other countries. At present, the Soviet Union is seen to be interested in attaining good relations throughout the world. There need be no doubt about this. The thrust of the changes proposed by Mr Gorbachev, the Soviet leader, require a long -period of peace and international co-operation and trading. Even if many remain suspicious about Soviet attitudes towards continuing peace and cooperation with the West, the internal reforms within the Soviet Union can clearly not be achieved without stability and better relationships abroad.

One implication is that the Soviet approaches may at least be taken at their face value and treated as a reasonable proposition. Although the Soviet Union has not always been inclined this way, sensible co-operation is what the West has wanted and this should be encouraged, however wary

Governments may be at the same time. Experience dictates that it would be prudent to approach the arrangement cautiously. New Zealand would do no harm to its international reputation to accept the proposal. A lot of nonsense was talked in the early stages of the nuclear ships ban about other countries’ not being sure of where New Zealand’s allegiances lay. In 1985, and for at least the early part of 1986, it would have been foolish for the New Zealand Government to have permitted such an arrangement. Such action might have sent the wrong signals to the rest of the West and even to the Soviet Union itself, though the Soviet Union has itself been diplomatically silent on the ship-servicing question for a year or more. This silence was tactically wise. The Government has said time and time again that New Zealand’s allegiances lie with the West and only among the cranky will the doubts about this persist. The United States Embassy in New Zealand will have no doubts that any commercial arrangement such as that envisaged would be a matter for the New Zealand Government to decide. In any event, the international climate has changed since 1985 and 1986 and other countries, including the United States, provide port facilities for Soviet fishing vessels. New Zealand has had about 10 years experience in dealing with the Soviet Union over fishing and the record has been good. From time to time staff have been expelled from the Soviet Embassy in Wellington for improper activities and it would be foolish to believe that New Zealand will be exempt from such problems in the future. This should mean only that the Government should be sensitive and cautious about what it permits; but it does not have to be frightened. The scale of the crew exchanges and the general Soviet presence in New Zealand should not be a matter of worry in any of the centres likely to be used for the servicing of the ships. That would not be the case, for instance, in many of the small island States of the South Pacific. Normal security arrangements such as accounting for those arriving in New Zealand and leaving New Zealand would have to be followed. The Soviet Union is apparently interested in having Aeroflot go to either Auckland or Christchurch because those airports would have the appropriate security arrangements. The New Zealand Customs, immigration and security authorities would need to make an adequate assessment just as they would for other large groups in transit. Much has yet to be considered about the proposal. The Deputy Prime Minister, Mr Palmer, will visit Moscow in the middle of next month and the Soviet Union may raise the idea with him then. A thorough assessment of what the Soviet Union wants out of the arrangement and information on exactly what ships will be involved will be necessary. Given good faith on both sides, the idea seems worth while.