ANZUS treaty

[King Oropher]

As a child this was always mentioned in the NEWS especially when NZ wouldn't allow American warships into NZ ports. From there it escalated, what I am asking is; was this a good decision by NZ to deny American ships into their ports or has their fear as New Zealanders concerning nuclear energy got the better of them? Sometimes it feels like the U.S.A bullies other countries to change their point of view so that it will help keep their dominance in the World. Now I am not anti-American but I feel if a countries policy does not follow the U.S.A, then why are they punished for it? Their defence force has felt the brunt of this. Is it an act of disobidience on NZ 's behalf? If so why hasn't Australia cut defence ties with New Zealand? The word New Zealand gets from Washington is " New Zealand is a friend but not an ally!" Whats the difference? In the end I hope New Zealand, the U.S.A and Australia can work out their differences and find a common ground to work out a deal that will satisfy the 3 nations politically, defensively and morally. Maybe Australia will be their middle man in this situation. How ironic

Quick history of the ANZUS treaty.


Treaty structure
The treaty was previously a full three-way defence pact, but following a dispute between New Zealand and the United States in 1984 over visiting rights for nuclear-armed or nuclear-powered ships of the U.S. Navy in New Zealand ports, the treaty no longer applies between the United States and New Zealand, but is still in force between either country and Australia, separately.

The US-Australia alliance under the ANZUS Treaty remains in full force. Heads of defence of one or both nations often have joined the annual ministerial meetings, which are supplemented by consultations between the U.S. Commander in Chief Pacific and the Australian Chief of Defence Force. There also are regular civilian and military consultations between the two governments at lower levels. Annual meetings to discuss ANZUS defence matters take place between the United States Secretary of State and the Australian Minister for Foreign Affairs (AUSMIN). The 17th AUSMIN meeting took place in Adelaide in November 2005.

Unlike NATO, ANZUS has no integrated defence structure or dedicated forces. However, in fulfillment of ANZUS obligations, Australia and the United States conduct a variety of joint activities. These include military exercises ranging from naval and landing exercises at the task-group level to battalion-level special forces training, assigning officers to each other's armed services, and standardizing equipment and operational doctrine. The two countries also operate several joint defence facilities in Australia, mainly ground stations for early warning satellites, and signals intelligence gathering in South-East Asia and East Asia as part of the ECHELON network.



The treaty came about following the close cooperation of the United States, Australia and New Zealand during World War II, during which time Australia had come perilously close to invasion by Japan. Following the end of World War II, the United States was eager to normalize relations with Japan, particularly as the Korean War was still raging a short distance from Japan. With the involvement of China and possibly the Soviet Union in Korea, the Cold War was threatening to become a full-scale war. However, Australia and New Zealand in particular were extremely reluctant to finalize a peace treaty with Japan which would allow for Japanese rearmament. Both countries relented only when an Australian and New Zealand proposal for a three-way security treaty was accepted by the United States.

The resulting treaty was concluded at San Francisco on 1 September 1951, and entered into force on 29 April 1952. The treaty bound the signatories to recognize that an armed attack in the Pacific area on any of them would endanger the peace and safety of the others. It stated 'The Parties will consult together whenever in the opinion of any of them the territorial integrity, political independence or security of any of the Parties is threatened in the Pacific'. The three nations also pledged to maintain and develop individual and collective capabilities to resist attack.

New Zealand and Australia had earlier fought alongside the United States in the Korean War, and later New Zealand sent transport aircraft, maritime patrol aircraft and frigates to the Gulf, as well as a very small number of soldiers, SAS soldiers, medical and assorted and peace-keeping forces in Afghanistan — and despite Prime Minister Helen Clark being openly critical of American justifications for the war, New Zealand did send engineers and troops to protect them to Iraq.

New Zealand bans nuclear ships
In 1985, the nature of the ANZUS alliance changed significantly. Tensions had long been present between Australia, New Zealand and the declared nuclear powers the United States and France which had conducted nuclear tests on South Pacific islands. Following the victory of the New Zealand Labour Party in elections in 1984, Prime Minister David Lange created policy which barred nuclear-powered or nuclear-armed ships from using New Zealand ports, citing the dangers of nuclear weapons, continued nuclear testing in the South Pacific, and opposition to US President Ronald Reagan's policy of aggressively confronting the Soviet Union. Given that the United States Navy refused to confirm or deny the presence of nuclear weapons aboard ships, these laws in effect refused access to New Zealand ports for all ships of the United States Navy. In February 1985, a port-visit request by the United States for the USS Buchanan was refused by New Zealand, as the Buchanan was capable of launching nuclear depth bombs.


The United States suspends ANZUS obligations to New Zealand
After consultations with Australia and after negotiations with New Zealand broke down, the United States announced that it was suspending its treaty obligations to New Zealand until United States Navy ships were re-admitted to New Zealand ports, citing that New Zealand was "a friend, but not an ally". The crisis made front-page headlines for weeks in many American newspapers, while many American cabinet members were quoted as expressing a deep sense of "betrayal". It is still often incorrectly stated that David Lange withdrew New Zealand from ANZUS — he had however done no such thing; his government's policy led to the US's decision to suspend its treaty obligations to New Zealand.

On 10 July 1985, the French DGSE bombed the Greenpeace protest vessel Rainbow Warrior in Auckland. This event strengthened the nation's resolution to oppose in any form the military application of nuclear technology. The failure of Western leaders to condemn what could be considered an act of war on New Zealand by France caused a great deal of change in foreign and defence policy.[2] New Zealand distanced itself from its traditional ally, the United States, and built relationships with small South Pacific nations, while retaining its excellent relations with Australia, and to a lesser extent, the United Kingdom.[3]

While the crisis with navy visits was prominent, the United States proved to be more forgiving of Australia's refusal to assist with the Peacekeeper missile. Fearing the total collapse of the ANZUS treaty, the US government decided to accommodate Australian domestic politics, particularly after NATO countries and other allies such as Japan showed little interest in taking a similar stance against nuclear weapons such as the Pershing missile.

The Alliance today
Annual bilateral meetings between the US Secretary of State and the Australian Foreign Minister replaced annual meetings of the ANZUS Council of Foreign Ministers. The first bilateral meeting was held in Canberra in 1985. At the second, in San Francisco in 1986, the United States and Australia announced that the United States was suspending its treaty security obligations to New Zealand pending the restoration of port access. Subsequent bilateral Australia-US Ministerial (AUSMIN) meetings have alternated between Australia and the United States.

The alliance engenders some political controversy in Australia. Particularly after Australian involvement in the 2003 Iraq war, some quarters of Australian society have called for a re-evaluation of the relationship between the two nations. Nonetheless the alliance enjoyed broad support during the Cold War[4] and continues to enjoy broad support in Australia.[5][6] One commentator in Australia has argued that the treaty should be re-negotiated in the context of terrorism, the modern role of the United Nations and as a purely US-Australian alliance.[7]

Australia is also a contributor to the National Missile Defense system.[8][9]

The value of the alliance was again questioned when a new US Ambassador arrived to take up his post in Wellington, New Zealand, in 2005. In his first speech on the topic of NZ-US relations the Ambassador referred to the ANZUS treaty repeatedly as "Anzoo". Some commentators questioned how the Ambassador might know much about the alliance if he couldn't name it properly.

In May 2006, US Assistant Secretary of State for East Asia and Pacific Affairs, Christopher Hill, described New Zealand's anti-nuclear legislation as "a relic" but also signalled that the US wanted a closer defence relationship with New Zealand and praising New Zealand’s involvement in Afghanistan and reconstruction in Iraq. "Rather than trying to change each other's minds on the nuclear issue, which is a bit of a relic, I think we should focus on things we can make work" he told an Australian newspaper.[10]

In July 2006, US Senator John McCain stated his belief that New Zealand and the US should resume joint military exercises during a press conference with the New Zealand Foreign Minister Winston Peters.

[Chase]

I think you're reading a bit too into it. I think the U.S. sees the treaty as partially void following the prevention of American nuclear ships in New Zealand harbors. ANZUS is a defense pact and our nuclear ships are a vital part of our defense force... so it appears that New Zealand isn't in coordinance with Austalia and the United States in this aspect.

As for the whole "a friend, but not an ally" statement, I think the best way to sum it up is that they're using "ally" in a more military context. Of course New Zealand is a friend... Americans probably like New Zealanders more than Austalians do sometimes and we don't give you a hard time for saying "fush and chups" instead of "fish and chips."

[eusebioCBR]

Politicians are good at making things look more complicated than they really are.
I believe New Zealanders can count on the USA as a military friend and ally.
In the case of a natural disaster or military threat would New Zealand refuse the support/assistance of an American nuclear powered vessel

[King Oropher]

Quote:

Americans probably like New Zealanders more than Austalians do sometimes and we don't give you a hard time for saying "fush and chups" instead of "fish and chips."

lol so true

[King Oropher]

I believe New Zealand would never deny any help from America, although, would there be a condition on that? Would America ask for a place to put a military base in NZ in return for help, from what I have seen, the U.S.A has a lot of military bases in foreign countries. I think a lot of countries should be thankful that the U.S will be there to help them when they need it. Sometimes we overlook that. I am curious why the ANZUS treaty hasn't been put into practice, especially in the last few weeks, I always thought it was put in place to defend Democracy in the Pacific??? So why haven't New Zealand, Australia or the U.S.A done anything about the coup in Fiji? Are they scared? Cutting off trade with Fiji can only do so much and in the end it hurts their people more then the new Government!

[eusebioCBR]

^Fiji, good point.