The Iraq War, New War Plans and Nuclear Doctrines
Press Release February 13, 2004
From NZ Nuclear-Free Peacemaking Association
Why New Zealand Should Stay Nuclear-Free, the Iraq War, New War Plans and Nuclear Doctrines
By Larry Ross, Secretary
New Zealand’s Nuclear-Free laws are under attack as being irrelevant, and a cold war relic. It is claimed that: as the cold war is over, and U.S. said it has disarmed nuclear warships, N.Z. should rescind its Nuclear-Free laws. (http://nuclearfree.lynx.co.nz)
However, nuclear warships can be rearmed with nuclear weapons at any time, openly or in secret. New U.S. war doctrines of pre-emption, and for nuclear weapon use in conventional war, make nuclear rearmament much more likely. That makes nuclear war more likely and therefor our Nuclear-Free laws more relevant today.
Although the cold war may be over – superficially – the nuclear threat between the U.S. and Russia is more dangerous today. Both countries have thousands of nuclear missiles on alert status that can be quickly re-programmed to attack each other. This can happen by accident, miscalculation or calculated first strike. This is an important reason for NZ to stay nuclear-free. To remain outside the nuclear loop, means less chance of being drawn into a nuclear conflagration and greater security for N.Z.
New Zealand’s long-term allies, the U.S., U.K., and Australia have shamed and endangered themselves and their populations by waging an illegal war against Iraq and threatening to use nuclear weapons. N.Z. was wise to disassociate itself from this.
The allies have proven that they are willing to unleash nuclear war, and take huge risks – possible leading to a global holocaust, on the basis of lies and false war justifications. This cavalier “devil may care” attitude toward nuclear weapons and their potential to unleash global holocaust is at best, stupefyingly irresponsible and illegal, and at worst, pathologically homicidal. Rescinding our nuclear-free law to join this team and accept nuclear warships and nuclear war mongering, would suggest New Zealand has lost its marbles.
Also, President Bush plans to dominate space with both offensive and defensive weapons. He has withdrawn from various arms control treaties, and is developing new nuclear weapons. This will result in new war risks and a renewed arms race. It provides more reasons for New Zealand to stay Nuclear-Free.
In addition, President Bush has lowered the
barrier against using nuclear weapons.
He has said he could use them against both nuclear and non-nuclear countries if he claims such countries support or aid terrorists and for other reasons. He has named 6 countries Iraq, Iran, North Korea, Libya, China and Russia – and three crisis situations – Korean peninsula, Middle East and China over Taiwan – where the U.S. might use nuclear weapons. The named countries have been given a motive to prepare countermeasures. These new policies make new arms races and war more likely. They increase global insecurity and uncertainty, and provide a strong reason for New Zealand to maintain, if not strengthen its Nuclear-Free laws.
As with the Iraq war, proof of guilt is not required. The claim and suspicion is sufficient for the U.S. to justify massive invasion and bombing. The U.S., U.K and Australia claimed that Iraq had weapons of mass destruction, had links to Al Qaeda, and that Saddam Hussein supported terrorism. None of these accusations were true. The U.S. mass media have spread Bush’s false claims, thereby making it possible for Bush to take the country to war with public support. Giving in to U.S. pressures to rescind New Zealand Nuclear-Free laws would imply that New Zealand accepts, like other allies, the U.S. war lies, new nuclear weapons and greater nuclear war risks.
So far our allies have not been punished for
their criminal actions, although there is a movement to
accuse these people of war crimes before the International
N.Z. should not appear to be condoning international war crimes, even by our allies.
Nelson Mandela and others have called President Bush the most dangerous man of our age. Certainly Dr. Helen Caldicott is right when she says the danger of a nuclear war has never been greater. New Zealand Nuclear-free laws were designed to help the cause of nuclear disarmament, and keep New Zealand out of nuclear war. We should not reverse that, by capitulating to U.S. pressures to rescind our nuclear-free law.
This allied “Mad Max” attitude toward using nuclear weapons and throwing off international treaty constraints is a major reason why New Zealand should retain its Nuclear-Free laws and its opposition to nuclear arms and nuclear warships. New Zealand’s taxpayer-funded politicians, military and bureaucrats, owe their allegiance to safeguarding New Zealand security – not to other nation’s irrational demands.
Rescinding the Nuclear-Free law would be seen as a vote of support for illegal and dangerous U.S. actions and for their new nuclear doctrines of usage against any accused country. It would mean that New Zealand would harbour nuclear warships. That would make NZ a nuclear base, accepting all risks, and giving support to U.S. wars, even nuclear wars, for any reason, however false or unjustified it may be.
This immoral, and potentially suicidal capitulation to U.S. pressure is strongly supported by the ACT party and is being considered by the National Party. If they were better informed about illegal U.S. wars, potential U.S nuclear wars, and the new nuclear threats, they would probably not wish to give up our Nuclear-Free status.
Zealanders worked hard to achieve our nuclear-free laws. The
world admires and appreciates New Zealand’s actions. We are
seen as a beacon of hope in a nuclear-mad world. Our
nuclear-free, clean, green image attracts people to New
Zealand and helps sell our products.
These are some of the major reasons to retain and strengthen New Zealand’s nuclear-free laws.
email: email@example.com website: http://nuclearfree.lynx.co.nz/
From NZ Nuclear-Free Peacemaking Association
P.O. Box 18541, Christchurch, NZ,