Mr Swindells, I for one beg to differ...

Well, it IS the news of the week. Everyone else has had a good crack at it. Even this week’s Listener in another of its moments of prescience, and probably penned three weeks ago, has the issue as its cover story.

It is also, after the (much debated) “...gone by lunchtime...” remark attributed to Brash Donnie going to be one of the “election issues”. To be fair, Brash Donnie is saying that “National’s policy is unchanged”. Apparently that means that they will not change the law without an electoral mandate, either by way of referendum, or by electing the National party with removal of all or part of the anti-nuclear legislation as its policy. That last little piece really begs the question though, doesn’t it? Brash is firm, the anti-nuclear legislation is not policy.

Yet.

Apart from the Listener though, the issue would have muttered on were it not for the retiring U.S. Ambassador Mr Charles Swindell. Within hours of his Independence Day speech, the news, bloggers, political commentators, party supporters and all from Auntie Helen to Mr Chaudhry were having their say. Admittedly, some stupid little reporter got confused and (instead of asking Mr Chaudhry about the anti-nuclear legislation ) pursued some ridiculous line about stoning and the Qu’ran. Why did she not ask Graham Caple about whether he supported crucifixion as a punishment. Well it is in the Bible after all as punishment for those who think themselves above the law. Not, I rush to add, that I think Mr Swindells considers himself above the law, not at all. Mr Caple might but that is also another story.

Coverage of Swindells’ speech is now universal, so I am not going to republish here. There are any number of sources that will have it – try www.nzherald.co.nz and read their Editorial while you are there. Well put.

But there is a discordance here; a wrong note in the music of the spheres.

As I said, the speech was Mr Swindells’ farewell, and made specifically for Independence Day. Does he think that our Nuclear Free legislation in some way makes us LESS independent? Well I concede that there are political barriers that have been the consequence of the legislation. That might be limiting to some freedoms. Like sending nuclear powered ships to NZ for a bit of RnR for example. Or establishing a free trade agreement.

There is also another fact that I believe is fundamental to the genesis of the anti-nuclear legislation and by complete coincidence this past weekend was the anniversary of that event as well. One of the casualties of NZ's law was the ANZUS pact, one of those very popular mutual defence agreements from the Cold War. It, like so many others, stated that an attack on any of the parties would consititute an attack on all three parties.

In July 1985, NZ experienced its first, and so far only, terrorist attack. There was only one life lost, a matter of luck rather than incompetence on the part of the terrorists. The target was an elderly trawler named "Rainbow Warrior" owned by the Greenpeace Foundation. The terrorists were active servicemen (and women) of the French secret service.

I can not say that we won that little battle. We capitulated after France rallied trade sanctions within the EU against all product from this country.

But, what about ANZUS? If ever an American wants to know why I and so many other NZers are so sceptical about the reality of American politics and foreign policy look no further. The thunderous silence from both Australia and the US during the 18 months after July 1985, the endless offers of support and assistance did really make us in NZ feel part of the alliance.

To close that, remember that it was the French nuclear testing that was one of the critical seeds of this country's stand. It was not the attitude of our supposed friends.

But truly, all of this is ignoring the very real issue between this nation of mine and the United States is only evidenced by the nuclear free legislation, the ban on nuclear powered ships.

Mr Swindells himself, in October last year (the same time as the supposed Donnie quote) will recall telling the NZ Government that the United States would not “just get over it”.

It is not an attitude that is limited to the present administration. Over the past twenty years there have been regular reminders by envoys from Congress and the President that NZ’s anti-nuclear legislation “presents real barriers to relationships between our two nations.

It is at this point that I can appreciate the sentiments of those many Americans who support the call for “less government” in their lives. Most of those people are loyal and patriotic Americans. Do they really believe though that their nation has the right to dictate the legislation and law in another country? Well, apparently they do, as my complaint on behalf of lil ol’ NZ is a bagatelle by comparison with others. That, at the same time, does not make the interference either welcome or right.


There is the discord. On the day when Americans celebrate their independence from an oppressive (and mad) King George, there are repeated and official calls for this country to abrogate its right to independence for the convenience of another nation. Except that on this occasion these scarce concealed demands are made with the approval and agreement of President George – not King George.


Mr Swindells, I truly hope that you enjoyed celebrating your Independence Day in our fair country. I trust too that when you return to your own country to retire that you will take back to your President and Congress a very simple message - that the people of New Zealand are free, that they are a fiercely proud nation if small by most measures, and that friendship is to be earned and not dictated.