incorporating

The Prime Minister didn't want Waihopai either (see page 2)

Ken Manso11 of the Australian Anti-Bases Campaign speaks to the crowd :::it -:he
iT ebruary Waihopai OemoDstratio, near Blenheim. ( see page 4)

In This Issue:
i>'" Lang8 didn � t want W:.'li,hopai ei ther!
** DemonstrCltion :·;tt Waihopai Spy Dish Site
·
** �lying Tigers in Auckland
'* * Golger � s Liaison wi th a. U. S � SpooK and Other Agents
** Snow Job by Media for Marshall ,}reen
"'*" USIA Country Plan New Zealand
lI- � U. S. Centre to Prc�b�� NZ for weak spots
** Philippines Peace Brigade
2

Off lJlISII
LAN3E DIDN'T WANT WAIHOPAI EITHER!

by Nicky Hager

While announcing plans for a new satellite spying base at Waihopai in

December last year, David Lange said it was an entirely New Zealand initiative
which demonstrated a new and independent approach by New Zealand to
intelligence.

From the facts that have emerged to date it seems that these fine words
are really just more of the officia l lies which are the stock in trade of the
intel1igence� business�

Only nine months before the plans for Waihopai were announced (with
reluctance), Mr Lange had declared himself firmly against wasting money on
such a base. At a press conference in March last year Mr Lange, who as Prime
Minister is in charge of intelligence, dismissed proposals for satellite
spying as inappropriate, uneconomic and generally unnecessary for New
Zealand.

Yet between the March press conference and December of the same year -by
which time land for the base had been selected and purchased and engineers and
architects were at work on the project - Mr Lan ..e had changed his mind.

We have confirmation from a very high 30vernment source that the

}overnment was indeed originally oppose'd to building the base and for a long
time resisted giving approval for the pro ject. Our source says the government
was under strong pressure from a foreign power (unspecified) and eventually
gave in.

Mr Lange 's views on New Zealand participation in satel lite spying were
first made public in a post-Cabinet press conference on 2 March 1997. Frank
O'Flynn, who at the time was Defence Minister and a member of the Cabinet
Committee which oversees intelligence matters, had raised the possibility of
New Zealand " joining" in satellite spying the week before on the radio
programme '}ood Morning New Zea land' and Lange was asked to elaborate.

The main subject for this press conference was Lange's release of details
about a major restructuring of New Zealand's intelligence setup. At the end
of a year-long intensive review of New Zealand's intel ligence needs and
capabilities, when the main decisions had been made, Lange was emphatic that
satelli te spying was only one of the proposals which had "been put forward"
and that it was still "at the utterly speculative, undecided stage".

At the same time he made it clear that he had thought through the pros
and cons of the proposal and was in no doubt what he thought of it:

"It is no secret from pub licity from abroad and in particular from the
United Kingdom that it is possible for some technology to be used to
absolutely saturate one's computers with details which are then triggered
out by certain key words . I don't conceive that New Zealand should have
• •

a role for that. It's trying to get a cup of water from the Niagar�
Falls," (emphasis added)
 3

Here Mr Lange is describing a system - presumably what he had been told

would be at the NZ base - in which enormous numbers of messages are spied upon
and recorded, and then a computer sorts out interesting ones by searching for
certain key words. He went on to concede that this satellite technology had
the capacity to intercept telecommunications traffic (i.e., tolls, fax, telox,
etc. )
.

The decisions announced in the intelligence review m'l-ke it clear that Mr

Lange believed that the most sensible form of intelligence gathering for New
Zealand's needs involves people 'on the ground' sending back reports from
countries of interest. He went to great pains to contrast this approach with
using a lI'aihopai -type facility:

"The question really for New Zealand's purposes is whether we even purport
to be capable of gathering intelligence from a huge well, or whether we 're
selective• • I tend to the view that we should be selective."
. .

He attacked the usefulness of satellite spying in the South Pacif:c.

saying it would probably reveal "a vast amount of chatter about certain
festive and social occasions" and nab �olutelY nothing relevant to security
considerations"§

In comparison, he believed it would be llinfinitely more economi�" to have

lIintelligence capacity at source" (i.e�� intelligence officers on the
ground).

f?rom the above quotes it is obvious that only a year ago Mr Lange was
firmly opposed to wasting money on a base like that planned for Waihopai.
Then the pressure came on.

It is interesting that this is not the first time that a country has been
pushed against its wishes into spying on satellite commun ications. According
to James Bamford in his book "The Puzzle Palace", Britain was originally ver"
reluctant to establish a satellite spying base and it was only under strong
pressure from the United States (who wanted the intelligence) that ';he 8ri tish
government eventually gave in (and built the Menwith Hill station; see cover
of 'Peace Researcher' Nc. 17).

Why would outside powers (which presumably means our traditional

intelligence partners the US, Britain, Canada, and Australia) bother to
pressure New Zealand into establishing a base for spying on Pacific satellite
communications? Obviously because they want the politicE�l and economic
intell tha t would be produced.

There is currently a concerted campaign by outside pcwers to increase

their influence in the South Pacific. By providing them with intelligence we
increase their ability to gain political and economic influence over our South
Pacific neighbours (and possibly us too) and to undermine independence and
nuclear free initiatives in the region.

Our research has shown that on legal, ethical and moral grounds we are in
a strong position to stop this base ever being completed, The ]overnment
doesn't really believe in what it is doing, the base obviously isn't required
for New Zealand's security, and news of the base has leaked out early so that
oppOSition is growing before construction has even begun. We now must rapidly
build up public opposition before the base can be built.

We must make it clear to David Lange that if he can change his mind once
in response to overseas pressure he can change it again in response to the
wishes of the New Zealand public,
4
D EMONSTRATION AT WAIHOPAI SPY DISH SITE

The weekend of February 19-21 saw the first, but certainly not the last,
action protesting the proposed satellite dish in the Waihopai Valley near
Blenheim. The camp and demonstration were organised by Wellington peace
workers, complete with delicious vegetarian meals.

Unfortunately, we were unable to camp on or near the site for reasons

that were not entirely clear. in the planning it seemed that the
demonstrators would be welcome to camp in the Waihopai Valley. But apparently
some pressure was applied either antagonistic locals or by the government
to exclude us from campsites there. So we put up our numerous tents beside
the Wairau River about 15 km distant.

There were two main purposes to the weekend. The protest action was
clearly in order � But we also j,l1anted to use the occasion, with about lJO
activists from all over the gathered in one spot, to discuss the
broader issues of a national anU"bases campaign - a campaign which began at
the Harewoodl Alice Springs action the previous October.

The demonstration took ()n S:;.lturday morning and afternoon. Numbers

swelled to over 150 with many local l>Jsidents joining us to hear speakers
explain the issues andp in some GaSeB� to support us. There was no obvious
opposition to our presence. The never did show up and we were allowed
unfettered access to the newly Ministry of Defence paddocks. The
only evidence of proposed const:ruc·':i.on was scattered survey stakes which
probably outlined the future locatJ.on of a security fence and possibly an
access road.

A peace symbol with a diametsr of 13 metres was marked with white chalk
in the paddock. This was the focal point of the action and also served to
delimi t a miniature housing development which sprung up during the afternoc:.
There were 366 "houses", brightly decorated for the occasion, provided by the
Wellington women" s group LIMI'L symbolised the hOUSing that could be
built w1 th the estimated funds that will be required to build the Waihopai
facility ($30 million).
 5

The valley is very flat bu': wIth attractive mountain backdrops in every
direction. It's easy tc understand local opposition based on aesthetics: the
ISm dish and pedastal will stand out like a sore thumb. And increased traffic
due to construct.ion� technical staff and sightseers will bring unwanted
changes to the now quiet valley. Construction will probably begin soon. An
advertisement for tender offers for an 'earthworks and site preparation
contract' in the Waihopai appeared in the 'Dominion" on 4 March.
Interest in tendering had to be registered within 4 days with a Wellington
engineering and architectural fi..rm.

The apparent urgency may indicate that the Ministry of Defence is in a

hurry to get the job started brcJiore protests, legal challenges and public
concern force the government to delay or abandon this ill-conceived project.

In a recent development. the .Unister of Defence, Mr Tizard, has

apparently embarrassed his Australian counterpart. Mr Kim Beazley, by letting
the cat out of the off icial concerning possible links between Waihopai and
a similar facility at Geraldton in Western Australia. Prior to Mr Tizard"s
revelations. the Australian had revealed nothing about the
functions of the :leraldtofl • as yet unbuilt. "Mr Tizard told
journalists New Zealand wae; bui 'satellite interception equipment" which
he believed would be 'compatible with the Geraldton facility " ("The Press",
26 March 1938). . This handy by our Minister provides solid
confirmation of linkS between the two stati<;Ds as suggested �Y Owen Wilkes in
recent media reports and i"r) h:ls a,'{'ticle in Peace Researcher No 17. �8"urther
confirmation of th('l,t the W':1ihopai dish would be used to intercept iirt<2rif\,(d\c..�\..(Zj
civilian toll calls ca;n.e i1'1 an i.nterview 1Nl th Des Ball � Australian defence
analyst f on'" Eyewitnes8 '" � 28 Marc.h. Ball also stated that Waihopai and
Jeraldton would be ·-f�;tanding and iDcreasingly important
programme of shared l)otween the two countries.

FLYING TIGERS IN AUCKLAND

A small article in the Pr·ecs' (10 March 1983) described the inauguration
of scheduled Flyibg Tiger 747 flights between New York and Auckland.
The freight link will Includes " at L08 Angeles and Hawaii.

The new link with New Zealand by the world's largest international cargo
carrier was described a.s Han important step forward for importers and
exporter8J1�

This Dew service to New Zealand is interesting from another perspective:

Flying TIger Is now the second cargo carrier that visits both New Zealand and
the CIA at Pine }"p. Tbe othi)T' is well known to readers of this journal - it
is the Mili tary Airlift Command which regularly visits Operation Deep Freeze
with its C-L41B Starlifters.

Flying Tiger Line had an early h istory of involvement with the CIA.
According to Denis Frsney (in his booklet "Get Gough". 1985, p. 17) and
Barbal-a Tuchman ("StillweU and the American Experience in China", 1971) the
famous ,'lying Tigers of World ¥lar II were a daring lot who ferried
supplies from Burma to kai -shek in close cooperation with the Office of
Strategic Services (OSS). The OSS evolved into the CIA in 1947. Founded by
::leneral Clairs Chennault, the Tigers were transformed into his
privately-owned air carrier after ";he war. The CIA bought him out and the
Flying Tigers became the first airlin8 of Taiwan under Chiang.

The present day Flying deny links to the CIA, except for the one
6

to Pine Gap, according to Freney. But the link to Pine Gap is enough for 'Off
Base' to raise a few questions about the cargo giant's new involvement with
New Zealand:

.* Will Flying Tiger be stopping at Auckland on its way to Pine Gap?

•• What sort of security measures, if any. will be used for the 747s if they
are carrying secret cargoes for the CIA?

•• Will New Zealand authorities have rights of inspection of all "lying Tiger
cargos? Customs and MAF cannot inspect MAC Starlifters with the exception of
off-loaded passenger baggage and pest spraying?

•• Is the new Flying Tiger service a contingency backup in civilian guise for

the military channel flights at Harewood?

•• Will Flying Tiger eventually extend its service to Christchurch?

PEACE

BOLGER'S LIAISON WITH A U.S. SPOOK AND OTHER AGENTS

by Nuclear Free Kiwis

In March the leader of the Opposition, Mr Jim Bolger, met with the US
Secretary of Defence, Mr Frank Carlucci. This meeting caused concern to the
Prime Minister.

David Lange had good reason to be concerned that Mr Bolger was able to
have a private meeting with Carlucci without taking a New Zealand official
with him. Carlucci has had a long career involving close work with the CIA.
During 1973-81 Carlucci was actually CIA Deputy Director.

As a long-time US diplomat Carlucci has been persistently associated with

US dirty work. He was involved in US activity in : the Congo (now Zaire) in
1960 when the CIA overthrew and murdered Prime Min ister Patrice Lumu�ba. He
later helped put the corrupt and repressive Mobutu into power in 1966. Once
installed Mobutu has been a loyal US ally ever since. In 1964 CarluGci became
the us's "principal officer in Zanzibar. He was ordered out after evidence
emerged that he was plotting to overthrow President Nyerere of Tanzania.
Carlucci was then sent to Brazil just after the elected }oulart government had
been overthrown in 1964 by a CIA-backed coup. Carlucci was later openly to
acknowledge working in "close cooperation" with the CIA station in Brazil
(Confirmation Hearing of �rank Carlucci lIT to be Deputy Director of the CIA,
Senate Select Committee on Intelligence, 27 January 1978, p. 43).

Later in 1974 Carlucci went to Portugal as US Ambassador. His job was to

undermine the strength of the Portuguese Communist Party. He was inplicated
in the CIA's aborted coup led by rightwing military officers and obliged to
leave the country.

While Deputy Director at the CIA, Carlucci directed a secret CIA

paramilitary sabotage operation against South Yemen. He also lobbied Congress
intenSively for the CIA and bragged about it. He was a campaigner for a
 7
tougher CIA and as Deputy Director got most CIA records exempted from
disclosure under the Freedom of Information Act. He pressed vigorously for a
statutory reduction of limits on CIA operations.

In 1931-82 Carlucci was Deputy Secretary of Defence. At his Senate

confirmation hearing Carlucci said that the US was now committed to a
"nuclear-war-fighting capability", a position that presupposes nuclear war can
be kept limited survivable and winnable ("With Enough Shovels: Reagan Bush
" :
and Nuclear War by Robert SchecJr. p. eJ ) . As Deputy Secretary Carluccl. while
calling for reforms in corrupt \i/eapons procurement procedures, actually
pursued "higher industrial profits� lower risk and closer working ties between
contractors and the Pentagon" ("Washington Post-, 3 1 March 1385). In December
1937 he became Reagan -s ne;;! National Security Adviser and then, with the
resignation of Caspar Weinberger� he took OVer the job of Secretary of
Defence.

Carlucci's intelligence/ccvert action links, as can be inferred from his

career, are wide and varIed. At the Pentagon in the early 19808 he worked
with 1eneral Richard Seccrd. With OliveI' North and two others, Secord WClS
recently indicted for al.leged crimes committed in the Iran-Contra scandal. In
1984 Carlucci became president and chief operating officer of Sears World
Trade Inc. (SWT). 'Fortune' once reported that some international
traders were speculating that SWT 'lerved as a cover for US intelligence
personnel abroad (7 February 1933).

iiven Carlucci-s background what might Mr Bolger have to discuss with

him? In recent years NZ has been shut out of the inner circle in Washington.
Yet Bolger could meet with Carluc::; in a private tete-a-tete. Mr Lange in
fact suggested that Bolger might have struck a secret deal I'd th Carlucci,
promising nuclear-a.rmed ship :':'3.CGOE.j:�" under a National government. Many aspects
of NatIonal-s relations with US intelligen ce would indeed suggest the eminent
plausibili ty of a deal of this sort (e.g., see 'Peace Researcher'. No. 14).
Among many other things there ha" been Bolger's friendliness with Reagan-s
first National Security Adviser, Richard Allen, and also a strange
conversation about the CIA between Bolger and the US Ambassador at the time of
the Honolulu loan scam& Of cour8e� Mr Bo1ger denies any secret deal with
Carlucci. But politicians are not best known for their adherence to truth.

While in the US, Bolger had talks with other senior US officials and it
is most interesting that he met with representatives of the major US banks
which deal with New Zealand. He discussed the state of the N Z economy and the
international scene with the bankers.

Mr Bolger denied attacking the government while in the US (-The star', 16

March 1938). This would be stretching credulity to its limits. After all,
Bolger admitted that he would have to assign to the government indicators of
poor economic performance in response to US questioning. What Seems likely is
that Mr Bolger, wittingly or unwittingly, has given certain cues to US
intelligence and financial interests that could encourage the US to try
further economic pressure on N Z as a means of destabilization. It has even
been suggested that such economic pressure could be designed to force a snap
election, a scenario once deemed likely during Labour's previous 3-year term.
And currently Labour is well down in the opinion polls.

Bolger said himself that the impression he gained from the Americans he
met was that the Douglas experiment in economic policy was now seen to have
failed (-The star'. 16 March 1938). One US banker told him that he was
advising clients they should be :\w;;re the NZ dollar could depreCiate.
National Party spokesman Sir Hobart Muldoon, a man of Moonie associations, has
also warned again that NZ "is heading for slump [sicJ" and that the NZ dollar
should come down. Muldoon is an active member of a Moonie organisation. the
Jlobal Economic Action Institute, and received an award in September 1987 from
this far-right group ('The Star' " 16 Sentember 1987). The Institute has known
-
CIA connections ( Covert Action Information BUlletin': No. 12, p. 19; No. 13,
p. 8; No. 20, pp. 28, 37; No. 22, p. 29; No. 25, p. 38; No. 27. p. 42). Is Mr
8
Muldoon being used somehow to draw a scenario which the US aims to implement?
It should be remembered that the Australian head of Business International, Mr
Alan Carroll, who has been linked to the CIA, once warned that powerful US
interests would punish N Z by kicking the Kiwi dollar around unless the
government caves in on its stance banning nuclear ship visits ( 'N Z Times', 1
September 1935).

During his March visit to the US Bolger visited the Heritage �oundatio
the ultra right lobby group which has been particularly vicious in the past
about New Zealand ('Dominion'. 29 July 1936). He also saw the Assistant
Secretary of state Richard Armitage, who has been accused by the Christic
Institute in Ameri �a of being part of a CIA quasi -official terro;' netwcrk (' In
These Times' Vo11 1 No. 29 3-21 July 1987). Carlucci and Armitage are
close associ�tes, an d Carluc � 1 has his own ties to the secret team (i.e.,
Richard Secord, Theodore Shackley, Thomas Clines, etc.) identified by the
,
Christic Institute and other covert action researchers. To quote Wellingto:.
Pacific Report" (No. 8, February 1983): "There is a rumour around that ought
to be checked out saying that Armitage heads a multi-agency task force
targeting Aotearoa 's nuclear-free policy". Other people seen by Bolger
included Assistant Secretary of Defence 3aston Sigur and powerful US
politicians Stephen Solarz and Richard Lugar.

Apparently Mr Bolger had a very interesting trip to the US. We can 0: ly

speculate for the moment as to any implications for NZ but the National
Party's suspicious US connections evidently continue to deepen and expand.

(Principal source for this article: "�rank Carlucci: Diplomat, Businessman,

Spy" by Louis Wolf and William Vornberger, CAIB No. 27, Spring 1937. The NZ
Nuclear Free Peacemaking Association circulated a media release on Bolger s
meeting with Carlucci but this seems to have been ignored. The media
consistently sanitize National'S relations with US intelligence.)

SNOW JOB BY MEDIA FOR MARSHALL 3REEN

by Nuclear �ree Kiwis

A feature article in 'The Press' (16 March 1938) by reporter Christopher

Moore portrayed the US diplomat, Marshall Green, in terms Orwell would have
characterized as masterly 'doublespeak '.

To quote from the article: "The archetypal New Englander, Marshall

3reen, treats life with flinty personal integrity, a bemused view of human
foibles and a robust no-nonsense approach which has seen him confronting
student mobs in Djakarta and devious politicians in Washington, D.C., with the
manner of a strict but benign headmaster". A similar tone pervades
. the whole
piece.

This is ludicrous stuff to anyone aware of Green's role in certain

episodes of US foreign policy. The intriguing question is whether reporter
Moore is simply ignorant of much of Green's career, or is being consciously
Orwellian. How can a reporter draw such a character portrait of a person he
has just met briefly? The article is yet another example of the
disinformation peddled by the media (see 'Peace Researcher ' No. 13 for more on
'The Press' and the CIA's 1365-67 operation in Indonesia).

Pol Pot, the Khmer Rouge's leader in Cambodia, is an execrated figure in

the Western media. This reputation is well justified. But Pol Pot and
Marshall Green have something in common: they are both implicated in massacres
on a massive scale. Yet while the one is reviled the other is praised and
indeed is quoted approvingly as saying of his car ;er, "I hope that thrO;lghout
it all. I have remained a realistic humanitarian". The epitome of
 9
Orwellianism is surely expressed here. The ultimate reason for this
institutionalized hypocrisy, a hypoorisy that Christopher Moore may not even
be aware his article reflects, is that Marshall Green's terrorism has been
interpreted as beneficial to the West, whereas Pol Pot was seen as an enemy, a
threat to the West.

The massacre for which Marshall Green must bear some responsibility is
the systematic murder in 1965-67 of the Indonesian communists, Chinese and
other groups during the CIA-inspired overthrow of Sukarno. At that time }reen
was US Ambassador to Indonesia. �reen himself has in the past been forthright
on the benefits of this mass murder, estimated to range from half a million to
one million people. He is quoted in William Blum's epic "The CIA: A fi'crgotten
History" (Zed Books, 1986) as saying, "In 1965 I remember, Indonesia was
poised at the razor's edge. I remember people arguing from here that
Indonesia wouldn't go communist. But when Sukarno announced in his August 17
speech that Indonesia wold have a communist government within a year (?)[sic],
then I was almost certain •
�hat we did we had to do, and you'd better be
• ,

glad we did because if we hadn t Asia would a different place today" (Slum, p.
220)•

A lot of documentation of the US inspiration and support for the bloody

Indonesian purge has accumulated over the years. Ex-CIA agent Ralph McJehee
in his book " Deadly Deceits" (Sheridan Square Publ. 1933, pp. 57-53) revealed
that the overthrow of Sukarno and accompanying genocide was a CIA operation.
His revelation is damning despite the legally-enforced deletions in his text
made at CIA insistence.

An important paper on the details of the operation is that by Peter Dale

Scott, "The US and the Overthrow of Sukarno, 1965-67" (in 'Pacific Affairs',
Vol. 53, No. 2, Summer 1985). Among other things, it shows the extent to
which the CIA and US officials even openly promoted the mass murder strategy
prior to the coup.

The Press article is not the only disinformation piece on }reen's

recent visit. Richard Long of 'The Dominion Sunday Times' (18 February 1983)
refers to }reen's participation in Indonesia in 1965 "when moderates managed
to defeat President Sukarno's communist takeover attempt". Mass murderers are
moderates in Long's terminology. Long quotes Green to the effect that
elements throughout the Indonesian bureaucracy and SOCiety, not just the
military, demonstrated great courage in opposing Sukarno.

Long's article also allows �reen plenty of space to 'rebut' allegations

about his associations with dirty work in Indonesia and later in Australia as
US Ambassador during the Whitlam Labour government. The very pro-US Richard
Long, indeed, protrays ]reen as '1far from being an old hawk". In fact, with
an irony Orwell would have keenly appreciated, Jreen comes over as an old
dove.

Perhaps the ultimate irony cf all is that }reen now works on

international population issues as a director of the Population Crisis
Committee. As an ambassador implicated in one of the modern world�s worst
genocides, ]reen might be expected to have his own peculiar perspective on
solutions to population problems.

]re8n responds to accusations of conspiracy and dirty work with laughter.

He rejects the charges levelled against him regarding his role during
Whitlam's dO�TIfall, but Long's article fails to give specifics. To quote from
the book "Rooted in Secrecy, The Clandestine Element in Australian Politics"
by Joan Coxsedge et al. (CAPP, 1982. p. 24): "Marshall }reen had been
mentioned in the Pentagon Papers as a high-level policymaker for America in
South-East Asia, and he had lectured at the CIA-sponsored Center for strategic
and International Studies of Georgetown University in the US. He had been
involved with at least four other countries which had later sprouted
coups .... In his dealings with Australian Labour Party leaders, }reen was
10
apparently quite blatant. One senior Labour Minister reported a threat made
by Jreen in the Minister's own office to the effect that if Labour handed
control and ownership of US multinational subsidiaries to the Australian
people 'we would move in''' .

The current US Ambassador to NZ, Paul Cleveland, i s a protege of Jreen.

Cleveland cut his teeth as a career diplomat under Jreen's ambassadorship in
Indonesia in the last days of Sukarno's rule ( 'The Star ', 16 September 1933).
After President Nixon's visit to China, Cleveland accompanied 8r'"en, the then
Assistant Secretary of State for East Asian and Pacific Affairs, on a trip
through the Pacific explaining developments in Washington-Peking relations
( 'The Star ', 14 November 1985). A clear message in all of this could be tha"
little New Zealand might expect some rough 'diplomatic' treatment from the USA
if we persist in our maverick ways.

COUNTRY PLAN NEW ZEALAND

written and directed by the UNITED STATES INFORMATION A]ENCY

Reviewed by Nuclear Free Kiwis

The US Information Service operates out of the American embassy in

Wellington and has branch offices in Auckland and Christchurch. The home
office (called the US Information Agency) is in Washingtooc DC. The busines"
of the USIS (A) is not simply to supply information to host nations as their
open libraries of US books and magazines might suggest. The USIS carries out
,L-:.nual "Country Assessments" and updates annual "Country Plans" based upon
information and intelligence gathered by US agency employeus stationed :"1
foreign countries. Even as a former ANZUS ally (now just a friend) New
Zealand was never exempt from this scrutiny and strategic p 1anni: ,g by the US
government. No host country is exempt.

The fiscal year 1986 "Country Plan New Zealand" was released in 1=137 to
peace researchers. Prominently labelled 'Limited Official Use ' on every page,
the document was gutted by deletions before release to the people of the
·�arget nation, Aotearoa. In the 21 page document pages 1 and 2 and 3 to � i.
inclusive are completely blank except for the page one title and page numbers.
?our other pages contain substantial deletions,

Page 1 begins: "Wellington, Country Plan E ssay, FY-1936, I. U.S. PUBLIC

A,'FAIRS CONCERNS II, NEW ZEALAND, A. OVERVIEW". But all following text 'Nas
delet,cd.

Current IS8u � s' are discussed beginning on page 5: "With such a vlide
variety of exchanges that cut across so many levels of society, one could
ea sily jump to the conclusion that mutual understanding and agreement reigr,s
supreme i:l the U.S.-New Zealand relationship. But only a few days in New
Zeal md :re enough to convince one that this i s not so." No further text
appears until page 12. Then, innocuous tables fill the next 4 pages.

Since this document was the 1936 plan, there is a discussion of the
proposed Christchurch Branch Office'. The Christchurch USIS office has now
been operating for over a year. Reasons for the 're-opening' were described
as follows: "The Christchurch Branch Office is intended to strengthen Post
programming presence on the South Island and to lend support to the Operation
Deep Freeze Antarctic logistical supply mission. The academic and media
communities have been very supportive of the idea". This support is not to.'
surprising in view of the IVG programme described below.

The USIS conducts a significant programme called the Exchange MiX':

cademic and cultural exchange of New Zealanders and Americans. USIS says
"Our second priority in the exchange area is the International Visitor
Program. With the doubling of New Zealand 's IV allocation in FY-1930, we 3.re
.
now looking forward to sending 22 fully-funded grantees and at le� st flve
partials." (Articles about the IV� programme are available from Peace
Researcher'; e.g., see PR No. 17.)
 11

, "

· -----
-_ .

A page from Country

Plan New Zealand -
entire text deleted.
What is the USIA
reporting about N Z
that New Zealanders
are not allowed
to read?

With just over half the text of the "Country Plan New Zealand" deleted
and thus protected from the prying eyes of New Zealanders, we would seem to be
quite justified in questioning the true role of the USTS in our nuclear-free
country. United states Information Service - information for whom, and for
what purposes?

U.S. CENTRE TO PROBE NZ FOR WEAK SPOTS:

SUCCESS AT LAST FOR U.S. ACADEMIC SUBVERSION

by Nuclear Free Kiwis

A new project is under way to help the US undermine New Zealand's nuclear
free stand. A collaborative study, lasting three years, has been set up by a
Honolulu-based research institution, the CIA-connected East-West Center ('The
Press', 25 March 1988). It will focus on the relationships between NZ and the
US and will survey relationships among the ANZUS nations - Australia, NZ and
the US.

The East-West Center is funded by the US Congress through the US

Information Agency CUSIA) which is known to be running a campaign to subvert
NZ's nuclear free status. The Center is also funded by the ASia Foundation,
12
known as a CIA front ('Wellington Confidential', paper on �iji coup, June
1987) . This Hawaiian Center will work with N Z's Institute of Policy Studies
at Victoria University of Wellington and the Australian Institute of
International Affairs.

According to the press report, the study will begin by examlnlng basic
social, political and economic trends in each country over the last 4J years.
It will then assess change among the ANZUS partners, the ANZUS alliance, and
foreign policy issues. The pro ject's director, Richard Baker, is quoted to
the effect that the three countries involved "need to know each other better".
Obviously, this study is intended to provide the US with a better knowledge
of NZ society in order to better manipulate it. In this enterprise, the
East-West Center can rely on a number of ex-foreign affairs department people,
as well as current academics - wittingly or unwittingly - to help it provide
such information/ammunition. Big money is clearly behind the project.

Baker openly acknowledges the relevance of the "disagreement by N Z over

the entry of nuclear weapons on US warships" which jolted assumptions about
the common interests of the three countries. Ever since NZ drew the line oc
nuclear warships, US intelligence-connected "academia" has been trying to
initiate a large-scale collaboration with similar-minded elements in NZ. At
last, they seem to have succeeded; it is another ominous Sign of the
continuing erosion of this country's independence.

Since the N Z refusal in 1984 to admit US nuclear ships defined a sharp

limit to NZ's subservience, quite a history has developed of US plotting and
manoeuvring to co-opt the NZ university system into working for a return to
our former subservient condition. Central to these efforts has been political
science professor Henry Albinski of Pennsylvania State University. Albinsk i
has worked closely with the USIA to get an ANZUS study project gOing with NZ
participation. Albinski's hand is implicated in the new East-West Center
venture. A ttention was publicly drawn to Albinski 's intelligence links back
in late 1984 when he was named as a member of former CIA Deputy Director Ray
Cline 's notorious ANZUS think-tank ( 'NZ Times', 13 November 1934, 10 �ebruary
1933).

Documents released in 1986 under the US �reedom of Information Act reveal

the priority for the USIS of academic exchange and collaboration between NZ
and the US. Academic exchanges are usually administered by the NZ-US
Education Foundation. A USIA officer and the US Deputy Chief of Mission serve
on the Foundation board. Albinski has continually tried to get a "research"
programme together which would include and foster more such exchanges.

About the time of the media publicity on Cline's think-tank, Albinski was
making a trip to N Z with Admiral Lloyd Vasey, director of the right-wing
Hawaiian think-tank, Pacific �orum. Their trip was assisted by the USIA. The
pair saw leading decision-makers in NZ and laid the base for further
persuasion/research in NZ. They warned against the collapse of ANZUS and
promoted the Soviet threat. Vasey, incidentally, is alleged to have been head
of a secret intelligence unit operating in Australia during the period of the
Whitlam government overthrow. Albinski and Vasey concluded from their NZ trip
that the US should improve its information/persuasion efforts in Australia and
NZ ( 'N Z Times', 22 June 1986).

A Victoria University political scientist, Stephen Levine, was (and still

is?) a member of the Pacific �orum's Research Council. Levine has pro-Zionist
connections. It is interesting that in recent years there has been joint
US-Israeli activity in the South Pacific from which stems much of the media
hype about Libya. Along with other agents, Albinski has continued to wcrk
hard to spread his academic/intelligence network, especially through his
Victoria University connections. Several times he attempted to set up .an
educational exchange between his university in Pennsylvania and Victoria
University. Sponsorship was sought from the USIA which was closely associated
with Albinski's programme. Indeed, Albinski was all but guaranteed a $SJ,JOO
grant from the USIA in late 1984 to finance the exchange of 17 staff between
the two universities over two years. Albinski was reported in �ebruary 1933
 13
as saying that the Institute of Policy Studies and the Stout Research Centre,
both at Victoria University, as well as the NZ-US Education Foundation and the
N Z Institute of International Affairs wanted to be involved with his project
('NZ Times'. 10 February 1985) . It is very significant that the recent press
report about the new project sponsored by the East-West Center mentio'lS the
involvement of Victoria University's Institute of Policy Studies. A lbinski's
lobbying has finally paid off.

In late 1984 and early 1985 Albinski's efforts had fal len through.
Indeed , Albinski's activity drew charges of political intrigue,,
charges which
,
he in turn levelled at the hierarchy of Victoria University ( NZ Times , 2
June 1986). Later, however, when a new Vice-Chance llor arrived at Victoria
University, A lbinski judged that the time was ripe for a renewed lobbying
effort. Vice-Chancellor Le81ie Holborow came to Wellington from the
University of Queensland with which Albinski' s Pen" State Center had had c.

formal link since February 1933. Holborow, who knows Albinski from his time
at Queensland, reportedly remembers him as an academic with a good reputatior..
Holborow was c ited in June 1986 as saying he was puzzled about the �'vents :)f
the previous year which led to the failure of the Albinski proposal ('NZ
Times', 22 June 1936). In fact, Holb�row indicated he would be open to
Albinski's overtures. Is it a coincidence in the light of recent events 1:ho,
Holborow went on a USIS-paid trip to America in May 1987? Later in June 1937
two Asia Ei'oundation representatives visited Wellington 0;: a "f3.ct -findi:',g
mission" sponsored by the US embassy. Similarly, Pacific Forum
representatives visited Wellington last year to start a major US study of the
South West Pacific region ('City Magazine', Spring 1937) and no doubt helped
prepare for the East-West Center study.

It is worth noting that A lbinski's connections in N Z inc lude the

Moonie-backed Professors' World Peace Academy and its key NZ reDresentative
. ,
Professor Walter Murphy who is in retirement from his political science post
at Victoria. Murphy recently received an award from the World Anti-Communist
League, the neo-fascist organization sponsoring death squads under US-backed
regimes, among cther activities. Albinski has also been working through the
NZ -US council, ircnically an organization which gets official support from the
NZ government and yet is now directed by Peter Watson, a NZ-born rightist
opDosed to cur nuclear-free policy. The former NZ Ambassador to the US, Bill
Ro� ling, is formally linked to this Council ('The Press', 4 ,ebruary 1933) .
Rowling has helped facilitate the pro-ANZUS Albinski link with the Institute
of Po licy Studies �t Victoria ('Wellington Confidential', No. 37).

The grand design behind a l l of this is as evident as when Cline's

think-tank was first made public. Our Prime Minister, Mr Lange, then
described c,s "relics" members of this American outfit set up to consider the
future of ANZUS ('The Star', 4 December 1984). Mr Lange called it "a
right-wing, fundamentalist think-tank". Today, the think-tank, more a network
perhaps, has at last got a major, officiallY sanctio�ed entry into the NZ
academic establishment. This is a sad comment on N Z s academic independence
and a significant co-optation of our intelligentsia.

One of A lbinski's original proposals concerned research on the role of

the N Z press in influencing public opinion on defence, and especia lly on NZ-US
relations ('NZ Times', 22 June 1986) . As this East-West Center project gets
going it will feed all sorts of useful information to US intelligence about
how to inf luence and shape the political process and public opinion i;l our
country. Let's hope independent academics can infiltrate the project enough
to reveal its true implications.
 14

PHILIPPINES PEACE BRI1ADES:

NEW ZEALANDERS ASKED TO JOIN AN INTERNATIONAL ACTION A1AINST

THE U.S. BASES IN THE PHILIPPINES

New Zealand anti-bases activists should begin to consider extending their

protest to aid our friends in the Philippines. The action is in the
Philippines at the end of December and into January 1989. The full period of
action will span four weeks but shorter periods of participation can be
arranged. Participants must fund their own travel and expenses.

This initiative is the climax of regional anti-bases activity in

participating countries. It makes concrete the political COQmitment to
tackling the bases issue in a truly regional manner.

The reasons the Philippines has been chosen as the site of the major
regional activity are:

1. The US-Philippines Bases Treaty is up for review.

2. The social, economic, political and military effects of the bases can be
seen very clearly.

3. Mass anti -bases organisa'tions in the Philippines are strong and highly
developed.

4. The US bases in the Philippines, the biggest outside the USA itself, have
particular functions that make them lynch pins of US strategy in the region.

The following organisations are the Philippine sponsors of the regional

activity:

1. BAYAN
2. NATIONAL ALLIANCE �OR JUSTICE, �REEDOM AND DEMOCRACY

These organisations are mass coalitions of sectoral organisations such

KMU (trade unions), KMP (peasants), squatters, the urban poor, etc.

3. }ABRIELLA - National women's coalition

4. NO NUKES - Anti-nuclear sectoral coalition
S. NUCLEAR �REE AND INDEPENDENT PACIFIC (Philippines) - This is the
Philippines counterpart of NFIP in Australia
o. CENRAL LUZON ALLIANCE FOR SOVEREI}NTY OF THE PHILIPPINES (CLASP) - A local
anti-bases organisation in the locality of the two major US bases.

The �ilipinos are organising for up to 1000 international participants

from Australia, Pacific nations, Aotearoa (NZ), Japan, USA, Can"da, etc.
The New Zealand Anti-Bases Campaign will be organising participation from this
country. I f you are interested in participating, please notify CDH as soon as
possible at P.O. Box 2253, Christchurch. We can provide further details of
dates and organisation.