Will NZ support nuclear proliferation?

August 14th, 2008 at 9:06 am by David Farrar

A interesting test is coming of ’s rhetoric on nuclear issues? They campaign relentlessly against all things nuclear. They say they want the world to go .

Yet strangely, they appear to be on the verge of granting an exemption from the Nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty to , due to pressure from the US and .

himself says this will weaken the Nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty, yet this is under active consideration.

Now imagine if this was a National Government in office. Labour would probably be denouncing the Government for its lust for uranium and demanding we veto any waiver.

So this will be an interesting test for Labour – will its anti-nuclear rhetoric be as hollow as its carbon neutrality rhetoric?

Tags: , , , , ,

28 Responses to “Will NZ support nuclear proliferation?”

  1. Glutaemus Maximus (2,207 comments) says:

    You can never let pragmatism get in the way of idealism, especially when your ideals are a moveable feast.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  2. Murray (8,847 comments) says:

    David could you give me a call please.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  3. Sushi Goblin (419 comments) says:

    And in other totally unrelated news, New Zealand inches closely to getting US Dept of State Approval for sale of the mothballed Skyhawks.

    A New Zealand free trade agreement with India also might be totally unrelated to the granting of the uranium waver.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  4. GPT1 (2,122 comments) says:

    There is a certain irony in a number of things that Labour has done that it would have screamed blue murder about if National did it. Toll roads another classic. The reality is that Labour is finding out that whilst the non proliferation treaty is gerat for domestic consumption it is not always so practical in real life.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  5. Glutaemus Maximus (2,207 comments) says:

    Just can’t understand why the Skyhawks that were bought, and have been mothballed for nearly a decade can’t be sold or used for ‘Thrill Trips’

    We buy them off the Yanks decades ago and then have to ask for permission to sell them? Better to trade them in against some new Boeings.

    That’s why I am uncomfortable with suffocating US Policy. They always want to control everything.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  6. JC (956 comments) says:

    I suspect (hope) Goff is election posturing before giving assent. We need India a damn sight more than it needs us in terms of trade and general friendship in the years ahead. Also, there are too many damn twists and turns over Kyoto, European trade and our own need for more reliable power for us to play politics on civilian nuclear power use.

    JC

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  7. Murray (8,847 comments) says:

    Glutaemus Heather Roy actually took the trouble to find out what the story is there. Firstly all military hardwear requires an “end user” certificate when resold to ensure it doesn’t go the nearest power mad maniac of the day. (Unless you’re China in which case you just sell direct to mugabe).

    The actual issue with our Skyhawkes is that the sales contract requires them to be in a particular condition with particular levels of maintainence having been carried out. Since Helen Clark broke the standard 20 year year contracts of the ground crews that maintainence has not been carried out therefore the planes are not in the required condition of the sale and they will be recieved.

    If you have a burning interest in the fines details I sugest you contact Heather Roy. she at least is an example of an MP doing her job.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  8. Glutaemus Maximus (2,207 comments) says:

    OK Murray, thanks for the heads up!

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  9. Murray (8,847 comments) says:

    Welcome.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  10. toad (3,674 comments) says:

    And could the nice Mr Key please tell us what National’s position would be on this issue?

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  11. toad (3,674 comments) says:

    And then the nice Mr English could tell us what National’s position will be on it “not now, but eventually”.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  12. PhilBest (5,121 comments) says:

    Bob Jones made a very very valid point in a recent NZCPR guest column, to the effect that Leftist governments are the ONLY governments that can actually get away with things that are cryingly needed for the benefit of the country, because conservative governments are frozen in fear of the beatup they will get from the MSM, while Leftwing governments get a lot more benefit of the doubt…..”well, if THIS government (David Lange’s; Helen Clark’s) is doing THIS, it MUST be a necessity”….

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  13. GPT1 (2,122 comments) says:

    Toad – I asked Nicky Hager. Apparently National has a secret agenda to use the Skyhawks to take over the world. He knows this b/c John Key has never ruled this out and he overheard someone who knows someone who once shook hands with someone who had slept with John Key’s rubbish collector talking about world eugenics – or was it economics? Still, more than enough information for another book.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  14. goodgod (1,348 comments) says:

    “Now imagine if this was a National Government in office. Labour would probably be denouncing the Government for its lust for uranium and demanding we veto any waiver.”

    A gross display of bias from the MSM. They call it “pondering”, when a left government throws out their ideals in favour of practicality and “heartless neo-con conspiracy” when the right face up to reality from the get go.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  15. Grant Michael McKenna (1,160 comments) says:

    The more fuss that is made on this, the more votes the Greens get- and the left will fall into a fratricidal conflict to be resolved only by the emergence of a Blair or Rudd- all posture and no substance; a revival will occur, fail, and then socialism will become part of the ash-heap of history.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  16. David Farrar (1,898 comments) says:

    Toad: So what is the Greens position? I suspect National would be to allow it, but they don’t brand themselves as stridently anti-nuclear.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  17. goodgod (1,348 comments) says:

    I’m pretty sure that this time round was supposed to be the revival. Only place left for Labour to go is Facism. Just another game with a different uniform for them. Can’t wait to see how they’ll sell that.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  18. Grant Michael McKenna (1,160 comments) says:

    It is so hard to keep track of these promised utopias gg; you may well be correct, in which case next time it will be jackboots…

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  19. toad (3,674 comments) says:

    DPF asked: Toad: So what is the Greens position?

    The Greens’ haven’t made a specific statement on it, but given the Greens position on nuclear non-proliferation:

    Vote on all resolutions at the UN General Assembly concerning nuclear weapons and nuclear military strategy in a manner that is strictly consistent with its national nuclear-free policy, its abhorrence of nuclear deterrence and the NPT objective of the elimination of nuclear weapons from national arsenals.

    , and given this media release by Jeanette Fitzsimons, admitttedly 8 years ago, I think it is highly unlikely they would support granting any exemption to India.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  20. big bruv (13,904 comments) says:

    Toad

    “Highly unlikely”

    The question demands an answer Toad not a “Highly unlikely”, you expect the Nat’s to give a specific answer to your questions yet once again when somebody asks for the Green position we are fobbed off with a “maybe or maybe not” answer.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  21. toad (3,674 comments) says:

    I’m not an official Green Party spokesperson, so I can’t give a definitive answer bruv. How is this any different from DPF replying “I suspect National would be to allow it…”

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  22. RRM (9,924 comments) says:

    Sushi Goblin – the Douglas A4 Skyhawks were originally designed to carry (among other things) baby atom bombs. So maybe the Indians would be interested in the planes too, if the price was right?

    “Now imagine if this was a National Government in office. Labour would probably be denouncing the Government for its lust for uranium and demanding we veto any waiver.”
    Yeah, because clearly it is only ever the National party whose opponents caricature them with straw-man type arguments and criticisms…

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  23. adamsmith1922 (890 comments) says:

    In my view approval should be given.

    India is another emerging power. They are the only viable counter balance to China in this region and they are a democracy.

    Failure to give assent and failure of the US deal may well drive them back into their formerly close relationship with Russia.

    We need strong relationships with India and USA far more than they need us.

    The NZ stance on nuclear issues is outmoded and takes no account of the fact there are valid civilian uses.

    In any event India has the bomb, so sticking it to them stops nothing and merely pisses people off.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  24. RRM (9,924 comments) says:

    adamsmith – I thought we had all established that the Liarbore (or other spellings) Gummint are power-crazed idiots when they stick to their stated ideologies, and hypocrites whenever they depart from them.

    Are you suggesting there should be some sort of pragmatic approach, where people ACTUALLY THINK ABOUT THE PROS AND CONS OF THE PARTICULAR SITUATION?

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  25. reid (16,472 comments) says:

    “Mr Goff rejected a suggestion that New Zealand’s hopes for free trade agreements with both the US and India would be harmed if it did not back a waiver.”

    Yeah, right.

    On another note, if India is granted an exception then that opens the door to Russia and China supporting Iran and Pakistan. Pakistan especially is likely to become rather energetic in seeking to expand its program which is a huge worry for all of us given the precarious nature of Musharrif and the people waiting in the background to replace him.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  26. dave strings (608 comments) says:

    Hi Frog

    I can’t see how the policy:

    >
    >>Vote on all resolutions at the UN General Assembly concerning nuclear weapons and nuclear military strategy in a manner that is strictly consistent with its national nuclear-free policy, its abhorrence of nuclear deterrence and the NPT objective of the elimination of nuclear weapons from national arsenals.

    Can lead to the conclusion that
    >
    >>” I think it is highly unlikely they would support granting any exemption to India.

    The exemption has nothing to do with nuclear weapons or a nuclear military strategy, India already has these. What this policy does (on the face of it) is allow New Zealand to agree to any country, other than New Zealand, having a nuclear energy policy.

    Strange methinks – but perhaps I am not reading it write!

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  27. reid (16,472 comments) says:

    Have a look at this article Dave, it explains the issues and dangers quite well.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  28. cha (4,020 comments) says:

    Thanks for the link Reid, I doubt we’d agree politically but I do appreciate your sane and well reasoned take on things global.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote