Nuclear Issue Stirs Up Fire in New Zealanders : Dispute Over Access of U.S. Navy Ships Inspires Nationalist Passion, Imperils Shaky Economy

Sheep, not ships, are normally the focus of attention here, but a dispute over American naval access to the country’s ports has fired nationalist passions, imperiled the shaky economy and irritated military strategists in Washington.

In refusing docking rights to the American destroyer Buchanan because it is capable of carrying nuclear weapons, the Labor Party government of Prime Minister David Lange has precipitated what may prove to be a fatal rift in the 34-year-old military alliance known as ANZUS (Australia-New Zealand-United States).

However, Lange (pronounced LONG-ee)--who was elevated to his post in a Labor election sweep only last July--has, for the time being at least, consolidated his grip on power by appeasing the powerful left wing of his party and taking a popular stand against the potential introduction of nuclear weapons into New Zealand.

Holding to that principle may prove costly to the debt-ridden, farm-based economy, however. Besides canceling joint ANZUS naval exercises over the Buchanan incident, U.S. officials have hinted at possible retaliation against New Zealand’s agricultural exports to the United States as a way of sending a message to the Wellington government and other recalcitrant allies that they must shoulder what Washington considers a fair share of the common defense burden.

New Zealand, isolated and strategically insignificant, might seem an odd spot for such a confrontation. Roughly the size of Japan, the country boasts some of the world’s most fertile farmland and spectacular scenery; it is populated by 70 million sheep and only 3 million people. The national military roster includes only 12,600 servicemen, while naval hardware is limited to six patrol boats, four frigates and seven helicopters.

The Soviet navy rarely patrols in the area, and some analysts say the very sense of remoteness has led to a broadly held notion that if New Zealand steers clear of big-power conflicts, it might be the one of the few places on earth to escape the ravages of a global war.

No Fear of Attack

“We’re unique,” declared a government spokesman who asked to remain anonymous. “Call it naive if you like, but there is just no perception in this country of an attack from a nuclear power.”

Public opinion polls bear out this perception. One recent survey, conducted for the government’s Television New Zealand, indicated that about two-thirds of those questioned supported the government’s policy of barring entry to naval vessels that might be nuclear-armed or nuclear-powered. At the same time, however, about the same number of people said they supported the country’s continued membership in the ANZUS alliance.

While the nuclear issue was not the main one in the July elections, 64% of those voting cast ballots for parties that had strong anti-nuclear platforms, and almost one-fifth voted for parties that favored pulling out of ANZUS.

A Vague Document

Signed in San Francisco in 1951, the ANZUS pact is a vague document that links the three nations militarily but does not automatically oblige them to come to each other’s aid if attacked. It makes no specific mention of nuclear weapons, nuclear-powered craft or the necessity of accommodating port calls by allied ships.

New Zealand officials acknowledge that the ANZUS security blanket over the years has enabled the island nation to get its security on the cheap. Because of its ties to the United States and Australia, New Zealand has been able to buy arms at attractive prices, and it has been supplied with military intelligence that it otherwise would have been denied.

A New Zealand Defense Department briefing paper prepared last July for the incoming Labor defense minister underscored the country’s dependence on the United States and spelled out a wide range of vital security services that the country lacks.

“The ANZUS connection . . . fosters a high degree of understanding and confidence which it would be difficult if not impossible to achieve by any other means,” the report said.

Although New Zealand’s role in ANZUS is seen here as largely symbolic, the country has been perceived as a stabilizing influence in the South Pacific. Indirectly, it has shared the benefits of the strategic treaty with smaller islands in the region.

The Labor Party has long been opposed to port visits here by nuclear-powered or nuclear-armed ships, but the controversy appears to be rooted as much in politics as principle.

When Labor came to power last July after nine years of rule by the conservative National Party, which did not oppose port calls by nuclear vessels, the Australian and U.S. governments gave Lange a six-month grace period in which to consolidate his control before pressing the issue of port calls.

So deeply grounded is the anti-nuclear sentiment in both the moderate and left-wing factions of the party, however, that many diplomatic and political analysts feel that party members in Parliament might have deposed Lange as prime minister had he tried to change his position. He was already under fire for proposing an unpopular tax on some pensioners despite a campaign pledge to the contrary.

‘Trying a Pirouette’

Lange has insisted that the government’s policy does not preclude American ship visits to New Zealand, but only forbids port calls by those ships that are nuclear-powered or nuclear-armed. In practice, however, all nuclear-capable U.S. naval vessels, whether armed or not, would be barred for entry because the Pentagon has a longstanding policy of refusing to confirm or deny the presence of nuclear weapons on its ships.

“Lange’s trying to do a pirouette,” observed a diplomat who monitors political developments for a Western embassy here. “He’s trying to dance between both positions.”

In Washington, Rep. Stephen J. Solarz (D-N.Y.) said that his House subcommittee on Asian and Pacific affairs will open hearings later this month to consider legislation that would suspend U.S. defense obligations to New Zealand.

“It is difficult to justify the maintenance of U.S. defense commitments to an island nation whose ports are closed to our naval visits,” Solarz said.

Privately, Labor Party officials predict that the United States will eventually soft-pedal criticism of New Zealand and learn to live with the restrictions.

“We see this as bluster,” the government spokesman said. “They will go through a period of loud talking and then learn to live with the policy.”

Could Affect Trade

But Jim McLay, leader of the opposition National Party, warned that the ban on nuclear ships might prompt Congress to eliminate special trade privileges now enjoyed by New Zealand. Some members of Congress have already proposed trade sanctions against New Zealand, and the Reagan Administration, while officially opposing such sanctions, has let it be known that it may no longer argue to continue special concessions that free some New Zealand products from quotas and tariffs.

The United States buys about $500 million in New Zealand agricultural products annually and is the largest market for the country’s beef and casein, a milk byproduct used in a wide variety of goods from artificial coffee creamers to wallpaper paste.

Many New Zealanders doubt that economic sanctions and other strong-arm tactics by the United States are likely to bring about any quick change in the position of their government.

“In spite of this application of pressure, or perhaps because of it, a majority of the New Zealand public have been reluctant to desert the government,” the Dominion, Wellington’s largest daily newspaper, said in a recent editorial.

David and Goliath

“This has turned into a David-and-Goliath issue and stoked up the average Kiwi’s sense of nationalism,” said Richard Long, the paper’s chief political reporter. “People around here just resent what they see as pressure from Big Brother and pull together.”

Lange’s office said it is receiving more than 1,000 telegrams each day over the ship-ban controversy, 95% of which support the government position.

However, there are dissenters, particularly in the press. As the New Zealand Herald, an Auckland daily, observed Friday, the Reagan Administration has cooperated with the Lange government by spurning protectionist demands from U.S. farmers and others but it may now change its position. “New Zealand may be reminded of what it should never have forgotten,” the newspaper said in an editorial. “Cooperation is a two-way street.”