Keep Us Strong WikiLeaks logo

Currently released so far... 97115 / 251,287

Articles

Browse latest releases

Browse by creation date

Browse by origin

A B C D F G H I J K L M N O P Q R S T U V W Y Z

Browse by tag

A B C D E F G H I J K L M N O P Q R S T U V W X Y Z
ETRD EAGR ETTC EAID ECON EFIN ECIN EINV ELAB EAIR ENRG EPET EWWT ECPS EIND EMIN ELTN EC ETMIN EUC EZ ET ELECTIONS ENVR EU EUN EG EINT ER ECONOMICS ES EMS ENIV EEB EN ECE ECOSOC EK ENVIRONMENT EFIS EI EWT ENGRD ECPSN EXIM EIAD ERIN ECPC EDEV ENGY ECTRD EPA ESTH ECCT EINVECON ENGR ERTD EUR EAP EWWC ELTD EL EXIMOPIC EXTERNAL ETRDEC ESCAP ECO EGAD ELNT ECONOMIC ENV ETRN EIAR EUMEM ENRGPARMOTRASENVKGHGPGOVECONTSPLEAID EREL ECOM ECONETRDEAGRJA ETCC ETRG ECONOMY EMED ETR ENERG EITC EFINOECD EURM EENG ERA EXPORT ENRD ECONEINVETRDEFINELABETRDKTDBPGOVOPIC EGEN EBRD EVIN ETRAD ECOWAS EFTA ECONETRDBESPAR EGOVSY EPIN EID ECONENRG EDRC ESENV ETT EB ENER ELTNSNAR ECHEVARRIA ETRC EPIT EDUC ESA EFI ENRGY ESCI EE EAIDXMXAXBXFFR EETC ECIP EIAID EIVN EBEXP ESTN EING EGOV ETRA EPETEIND ELAN ETRDGK EAIDRW ETRDEINVECINPGOVCS EPEC ENVI ELN EAG EPCS EPRT EPTED ETRB EUM EAIDS EFIC EFINECONEAIDUNGAGM EAIDAR ESF EIDN ELAM EDU EV EAIDAF ECN EDA EXBS EINTECPS ENRGTRGYETRDBEXPBTIOSZ EPREL EAC EINVEFIN ETA EAGER EINDIR ECA ECLAC ELAP EITI EUCOM ECONEFINETRDPGOVEAGRPTERKTFNKCRMEAID EARG ELDIN EINVKSCA ENNP EFINECONCS EFINTS ECCP ETC EAIRASECCASCID EINN ETRP EAIDNI EFQ ECOQKPKO EGPHUM EBUD ECONEINVEFINPGOVIZ ENERGY ELB EINDETRD EMI ECONEFIN EIB EURN ETRDEINVTINTCS EIN EFIM ETIO ELAINE EMN EATO EWTR EIPR EINVETC ETTD ETDR EIQ ECONCS EPPD ENRGIZ EISL ESPINOSA ELEC EAIG ESLCO EUREM ENTG ERD EINVECONSENVCSJA EEPET EUNCH ECINECONCS ETRO ETRDECONWTOCS ECUN EFND EPECO EAIRECONRP ERGR ETRDPGOV ECPN ENRGMO EPWR EET EAIS EAGRE EDUARDO EAGRRP EAIDPHUMPRELUG EICN ECONQH EVN EGHG ELBR EINF EAIDHO EENV ETEX ERNG ED
KMDR KPAO KPKO KJUS KCRM KGHG KFRD KWMN KDEM KTFN KHIV KGIC KIDE KSCA KNNP KHUM KIPR KSUM KISL KIRF KCOR KRCM KPAL KWBG KN KS KOMC KSEP KFLU KPWR KTIA KSEO KMPI KHLS KICC KSTH KMCA KVPR KPRM KE KU KZ KFLO KSAF KTIP KTEX KBCT KOCI KOLY KOR KAWC KACT KUNR KTDB KSTC KLIG KSKN KNN KCFE KCIP KGHA KHDP KPOW KUNC KDRL KV KPREL KCRS KPOL KRVC KRIM KGIT KWIR KT KIRC KOMO KRFD KUWAIT KG KFIN KSCI KTFIN KFTN KGOV KPRV KSAC KGIV KCRIM KPIR KSOC KBIO KW KGLB KMWN KPO KFSC KSEAO KSTCPL KSI KPRP KREC KFPC KUNH KCSA KMRS KNDP KR KICCPUR KPPAO KCSY KTBT KCIS KNEP KFRDCVISCMGTCASCKOCIASECPHUMSMIGEG KNNB KGCC KINR KPOP KMFO KENV KNAR KVIR KDRG KDMR KFCE KNAO KDEN KGCN KICA KIMMITT KMCC KLFU KMSG KSEC KUM KCUL KMNP KSMT KCOM KOMCSG KSPR KPMI KRAD KIND KCRP KAUST KWAWC KTER KCHG KRDP KPAS KITA KTSC KPAOPREL KWGB KIRP KJUST KMIG KLAB KTFR KSEI KSTT KAPO KSTS KLSO KWNN KPOA KHSA KNPP KPAONZ KBTS KWWW KY KJRE KPAOKMDRKE KCRCM KSCS KWMNCI KESO KWUN KPLS KIIP KEDEM KPAOY KRIF KGICKS KREF KTRD KFRDSOCIRO KTAO KJU KWMNPHUMPRELKPAOZW KEN KO KNEI KEMR KKIV KEAI KWAC KRCIM KWCI KFIU KWIC KCORR KOMS KNNO KPAI KBWG KTTB KTBD KTIALG KILS KFEM KTDM KESS KNUC KPA KOMCCO KCEM KRCS KWBGSY KNPPIS KNNPMNUC KWN KERG KLTN KALM KCCP KSUMPHUM KREL KGH KLIP KTLA KAWK KWMM KVRP KVRC KAID KSLG KDEMK KX KIF KNPR KCFC KFTFN KTFM KPDD KCERS KMOC KDEMAF KMEPI KEMS KDRM KEPREL KBTR KEDU KNP KIRL KNNR KMPT KISLPINR KTPN KA KJUSTH KPIN KDEV KTDD KAKA KFRP KWNM KTSD KINL KJUSKUNR KWWMN KECF KWBC KPRO KVBL KOM KFRDKIRFCVISCMGTKOCIASECPHUMSMIGEG KEDM KFLD KLPM KRGY KNNF KICR KIFR KM KWMNCS KAWS KLAP KPAK KDDG KCGC KID KNSD KMPF KPFO KDP KCMR KRMS KNPT KNNNP KTIAPARM KDTB KNUP KPGOV KNAP KNNC KUK KSRE KREISLER KIVP KQ KTIAEUN KPALAOIS KRM KISLAO KWM KFLOA
PHUM PINR PTER PGOV PREL PREF PL PM PHSA PE PARM PINS PK PUNE PO PALESTINIAN PU PBTS PROP PTBS POL POLI PA PGOVZI POLMIL POLITICAL PARTIES POLM PD POLITICS POLICY PAS PMIL PINT PNAT PV PKO PPOL PERSONS PING PBIO PH PETR PARMS PRES PCON PETERS PRELBR PT PLAB PP PAK PDEM PKPA PSOCI PF PLO PTERM PJUS PSOE PELOSI PROPERTY PGOVPREL PARP PRL PNIR PHUMKPAL PG PREZ PGIC PBOV PAO PKK PROV PHSAK PHUMPREL PROTECTION PGOVBL PSI PRELPK PGOVENRG PUM PRELKPKO PATTY PSOC PRIVATIZATION PRELSP PGOVEAIDUKNOSWGMHUCANLLHFRSPITNZ PMIG PREC PAIGH PROG PSHA PARK PETER POG PHUS PPREL PS PTERPREL PRELPGOV POV PKPO PGOVECON POUS PGOVPRELPHUMPREFSMIGELABEAIDKCRMKWMN PWBG PMAR PREM PAR PNR PRELPGOVEAIDECONEINVBEXPSCULOIIPBTIO PARMIR PGOVGM PHUH PARTM PN PRE PTE PY POLUN PPEL PDOV PGOVSOCI PIRF PGOVPM PBST PRELEVU PGOR PBTSRU PRM PRELKPAOIZ PGVO PERL PGOC PAGR PMIN PHUMR PVIP PPD PGV PRAM PINL PKPAL PTERE PGOF PINO PHAS PODC PRHUM PHUMA PREO PPA PEPFAR PGO PRGOV PAC PRESL PORG PKFK PEPR PRELP PREFA PNG PGOVPHUMKPAO PRELECON PINOCHET PFOR PGOVLO PHUMBA PRELC PREK PHUME PHJM POLINT PGOVPZ PGOVKCRM PGOVE PHALANAGE PARTY PECON PEACE PROCESS PLN PRELSW PAHO PEDRO PRELA PASS PPAO PGPV PNUM PCUL PGGV PSA PGOVSMIGKCRMKWMNPHUMCVISKFRDCA PGIV PRFE POGOV PEL PBT PAMQ PINF PSEPC POSTS PHUMPGOV PVOV PHSAPREL PROLIFERATION PENA PRELTBIOBA PIN PRELL PGOVPTER PHAM PHYTRP PTEL PTERPGOV PHARM PROTESTS PRELAF PKBL PRELKPAO PKNP PARMP PHUML PFOV PERM PUOS PRELGOV PHUMPTER PARAGRAPH PERURENA PBTSEWWT PCI PETROL PINSO PINSCE PQL PEREZ PBS

Browse by classification

Community resources

courage is contagious

Viewing cable 06WELLINGTON128, NATIONAL CONTEMPLATES CHANGE ON NUCLEAR BAN STANCE

If you are new to these pages, please read an introduction on the structure of a cable as well as how to discuss them with others. See also the FAQs

Understanding cables
Every cable message consists of three parts:
  • The top box shows each cables unique reference number, when and by whom it originally was sent, and what its initial classification was.
  • The middle box contains the header information that is associated with the cable. It includes information about the receiver(s) as well as a general subject.
  • The bottom box presents the body of the cable. The opening can contain a more specific subject, references to other cables (browse by origin to find them) or additional comment. This is followed by the main contents of the cable: a summary, a collection of specific topics and a comment section.
To understand the justification used for the classification of each cable, please use this WikiSource article as reference.

Discussing cables
If you find meaningful or important information in a cable, please link directly to its unique reference number. Linking to a specific paragraph in the body of a cable is also possible by copying the appropriate link (to be found at theparagraph symbol). Please mark messages for social networking services like Twitter with the hash tags #cablegate and a hash containing the reference ID e.g. #06WELLINGTON128.
Reference ID Created Released Classification Origin
06WELLINGTON128 2006-02-17 05:15 2011-04-28 00:00 CONFIDENTIAL//NOFORN Embassy Wellington
VZCZCXYZ0000
PP RUEHWEB

DE RUEHWL #0128/01 0480515
ZNY CCCCC ZZH
P 170515Z FEB 06
FM AMEMBASSY WELLINGTON
TO RUEHC/SECSTATE WASHDC PRIORITY 2399
INFO RUEHBY/AMEMBASSY CANBERRA PRIORITY 4299
RUEKJCS/SECDEF WASHINGTON DC PRIORITY
RHHMUNA/CDR USPACOM HONOLULU HI PRIORITY
RHHJJAA/JICPAC HONOLULU HI PRIORITY
RHEHAAA/NATIONAL SECURITY COUNCIL WASHDC PRIORITY
C O N F I D E N T I A L WELLINGTON 000128 
 
SIPDIS 
 
NOFORN 
SIPDIS 
 
STATE FOR D (FRITZ), EAP/FO, AND EAP/ANP 
NSC FOR VICTOR CHA 
SECDEF FOR OSD/ISA LIZ PHU 
PACOM FOR JO1E/J2/J233/J5/SJFHQ 
 
E.O. 12958: DECL: 02/17/2016 
TAGS: PREL PGOV NZ
SUBJECT: NATIONAL CONTEMPLATES CHANGE ON NUCLEAR BAN STANCE 
 
REF: 05 WELLINGTON 702 
 
Classified By: Acting DCM Katherine B. Hadda, 
for reasons 1.4 (b) and (d) 
 
1.  (C) Summary: The opposition National Party is considering 
changing its policy regarding New Zealand's anti-nuclear ban, 
hoping to thereby remove one of Labour's strongest weapons 
against National. Senior Party officials have explained to us 
behind the scenes that the modification would only clarify 
existing policy by removing any reference to a possible 
referendum on whether to repeal the legislation.  While at 
first glance the potential change seems significant, it 
reality it was always unlikely National could meet the 
current policy's pre-condition of public support for a vote. 
It was even less likely the result would be a majority vote 
in favor of removing what many see as an iconic piece of 
legislation.   End Summary. 
 
2.  (SBU) At a recent National Party caucus retreat held 
prior to the start of the parliamentary year, two issues 
dominated the agenda: a possible challenge to the current 
leadership and a proposed change to the party's anti-nuclear 
policy. Although the eye of the media was fixed upon the 
leadership issue, a more critical issue largely flew beneath 
the radar: During the caucus retreat, National's Foreign 
Affairs spokesman Murray McCully moved that the party drop 
its current nuclear ban policy, which states that a National 
Government would only support a change to the anti-nuclear 
legislation if it had a clear public mandate by means of a 
referendum. 
 
3.  (C) McCully has, at this stage, only sought caucus 
approval for a discussion on the nuclear ban issue at a later 
date. However, he has told DCM and others that he wants 
National's policy to grant unconditional support to the 
status quo, i.e. to say the party supports maintaining the 
anti-nuclear legislation. Despite party leader Don Brash 
refusing to publicly state where he stands on the proposal, 
Post believes that he supports removing the possible 
referendum from the party's policy. 
 
Why the potential change? 
------------------------- 
 
4.  (SBU) National rightly believes that the referendum 
provision has been deliberately misrepresented by Labour to 
create confusion and doubt in the public's mind. The strategy 
of constantly attacking National over the issue was largely 
successful for Labour during the last general election, as it 
repeatedly put Brash on the defensive when he tried to 
explain his party's policy. Although Brash insisted National 
had "no intention of removing the ban," confusion remained as 
to why the party was mooting the possibility of a referendum 
if they did not intend to change the law.  Brash's difficulty 
in mounting a convincing argument was also compounded by 
Labour's repeated (and deliberately misleading) claims that 
Brash told a visiting CODEL that the nuclear ban would be 
"gone by lunchtime" if National were returned to power under 
his premiership. 
 
5.  (C) The resulting confusion over the referendum pledge 
has led much of the public to forget that National's policy 
actually supports maintaining the existing nuclear 
legislation absent a referendum called as a result of public 
demands. Confusion mounted when National also said that it 
would consider it had a mandate to change the legislation if 
elected on a platform to do so.  After Labour made hay from 
that policy as well, National hastily added it had no 
intention of including a proposed nuclear ban change in its 
platform any time soon. 
 
Pragmatic rationale 
-------------------- 
 
6.  (C) The proposal to re-calibrate National's nuclear 
position is part of a broad review of the National's election 
campaign. McCully confided to visiting EAP/ANP Director 
Howard Krawitz that the party's polling shows the nuclear 
issue definitely cost it votes. 
 
7.  (C) McCully says the policy change is not a done deal, 
and apparently the party has not laid down a timetable for 
addressing the issue. But any change to National's nuclear 
policy would probably have to come sooner rather than later. 
Some senior National MPs fear that if this and other policies 
are changed closer to the election year (now scheduled for 
2008) it will look like public pandering rather than 
strategic thinking. McCully has also conceded that a 
protracted delay could create further confusion in the 
public's mind. 
 
National committed to remain pro-US despite policy shift. 
--------------------------------------------- ------------- 
 
8.  (C) McCully has hastened to reassure us that change to 
National's nuclear policy will not dilute National's 
commitment towards improving the bilateral relationship. He 
has argued that despite the move to unreservedly uphold the 
nuclear legislation it is possible to "still have a positive 
view about the United States."  McCully told EAP/ANP Director 
Krawitz that his party wants to focus attention on ways New 
Zealand can advance its relations with the United States in a 
nonpartisan way.  He said if National and Labour both agree 
that the ban should remain in place, National can better 
focus attention on Labour's gratuitous anti-American 
statements and overall failure to improve relations with the 
United States.  McCully claimed that former National PM Jim 
Bolger was encouraging the change in policy, apparently 
arguing that the New Zealand public will only support removal 
of the ban if compelled by a crisis. (Comment: McCully did 
not articulate what this would be, but presumably a natural 
disaster requiring an air carrier to enter New Zealand's 
waters or a terrorist attack.  End Comment.)  Until then, the 
party gains nothing by pushing for a change. 
 
9.  (C) McCully also says that in the short term, National 
will criticize Labour's failure to improve bilateral 
relations and will also seek ways to build on US-NZ 
cooperation in a variety of areas.  In the medium-term, it 
will try to move public opinion to be more supportive of the 
United States.  Although the policy has not yet changed, 
McCully tried out National's new strategy in a radio debate 
last week with Defense Minister Goff, who called National's 
shift a "flip flop" and said the party can't be trusted. 
McCully responded that Labour was unwilling to improve its 
relations with the U.S. because many in Government are 
anti-American. 
 
Labour's response to the proposed change. 
--------------------------------------------- ------------- 
 
10.  (C) Predictably, Labour has tried to capitalize on 
National's plans.  Before the National caucus had even 
discussed McCully's proposition, Defence Minister Phil Goff 
went to the media to turn the issue from being about whether 
National would keep New Zealand nuclear-free into the wider 
question of National's overall credibility. He asserted that 
given that National had made so many reversals on the issue 
of nuclear ship visits, the public would surely not believe 
the party had really changed its mind this time. Goff has 
since repeated this line of attack within the Parliamentary 
debating chamber. 
 
Comment: 
-------- 
 
11.  (C) While on the surface National's possible change in 
policy seems significant, in reality there is less there than 
meets the eye.  Although the party has previously 
commissioned studies questioning the logic of the 
anti-nuclear legislation, and many of its MPs have privately 
told us they support removal of the ban, National's official 
policy always was to retain the law absent a voter referendum 
to repeal it.  Given the strong and widespread support for 
the anti-nuclear legislation, such a referendum would almost 
surely fail. 
 
12.  (C) We know only one National MP -- the newcomer Chris 
Finlayson -- who thought a National Government should change 
the legislation right after winning an election, without a 
referendum.  But he also thought the Government should then 
shelve the issue by not encouraging or allowing any ship 
visits for a number of years.  Significantly, following the 
recent caucus even Finlayson seems resigned to the 
impossibility of changing the legislation any time soon. 
 
13.  (C) As we reported during the election campaign 
(reftel), a National Government would be unable to change the 
nuclear legislation over the shorter term because of strong 
public opinion in favor of the ban and because of the party's 
own reduced credibility on the issue after repeated Labour 
attacks.  But we also continue to believe a National 
Government would be better able to rebuild much of the trust 
that has eroded US-NZ relations over the past years.  For our 
part, Post will continue to tell National and others that we 
welcome the chance to build stronger bilateral relations, 
even if the extent of the improvement will remain constrained 
by the significant "unfinished business" that still remains 
between us. End Comment. 
McCormick