That sound you hear is Lange rolling in his grave as Luxon sells our Independent Foreign policy to the American Military Industrial Complex for 3 Magic Beans.
We are rapidly shedding any pretence of peace and diplomacy for a little brother sheriff routine for America.
It’s sickening.
And economically dangerous.
China is a complexity, of that there can be no doubt and the Chinese shadow banking has created a financial infrastructure for Meth cartels to gain a foothold here as part of Grey Zone warfare that sees Chinese gangs flooding the Pacific with meth.
These challenges must be confronted honestly, but we should not and do not want conflict with the Chinese as part of a war game for American Corporations.
This Government is rapidly tying us to American interests and pretending those are New Zealand’s interests!
Our interests are peace, not conflict.
We’re in the kill chain now baby..
NZ joins US military exercises deploying AI for ‘kill chains’
The Defence Force has been helping the US military with artificial intelligence-powered weapons to speed up what they call “kill chains”.
US reports show the NZDF is one of a half dozen militaries involved in regular exercises to link American and allied war-fighting technology more closely.
The Pentagon has been putting a lot more stress on getting allies on board to counter China.
In an exercise in California with six nations in March, a F35 jetfighter with AI-driven sensors instantly passed targeting data along the “kill chain” to an unmanned kamikaze drone.
In another exercise – also attended by New Zealand – the controversial surveillance firm Palantirsupplied a so-called “metaconstellation” of submarine-hunting satellites.
US military chiefs said they were getting to the point where the combined forces can join up their technology in a “kill web”.
“We’ve always aspired to get this ‘kill web’-type of capability as a joint and combined force, and we’re starting to get to that point,” said the US commander of the “global information domination” exercises (GIDE) New Zealand has been part of.
We are linking up to systems we can’t control here, and seeing as our own Intelligence Agency has been caught out loading NSA spyware into our own systems without any authority from the Civilian Executive, why can we trust Space infrastructure that allows real time target acquisition for real time execution based on the killing autonomy of a robot.
What could possibly go wrong?
Well, we won’t know because, you’re going to love this…
The New Zealand government recently shut down an expert advisory group on killer robots.
…hilarious.
The less scrutiny, the more we creep towards something we can no longer recognise.
The Shadow of AUKUS
AUKUS provides a first strike capacity option against China using nuclear subs armed with hypersonic missiles.
It’s an aggressive posture response aimed at removing Chinese strategic naval dominance by 2040.
That leaves 16 years before China lose military advantage.
That’s a pressure cooking 16 years.
Fuck getting dragged into another American war, we just lost Afghanistan but I’m not fighting for China either!
Both are human rights abusing Empires fighting it out for top dog dominance in late stage capitalism with the biosphere on verge of collapse.
Now more than ever we must reconsider our loyalties and look to isolate our interests to defending our sustainability & helping our Pacific neighbours.
We need an independent foreign policy to navigate between America and China.
If we are serious about an Independent Foreign Policy, we have to accept it is going to cost us a lot more.
Sorry Rob Campbell, we should never fund aggression but we must pay the price for self defence…
There are better things to spend $4b on than the military
The drums are beating for increased military spending. This is an important test for who we are and who we want to be. I know where I stand:
I am a citizen of Aotearoa and I do not want us to be a pawn in others’ war games. Defined positively by my connections with this whenua and moana and their peoples, not by outdated colonial affiliations and alliances.
…sure, but that doesn’t mean being defenceless.
I believe that the climate crisis means we need a vastly larger military to cope with civil disasters and if we are attempting to distance ourselves from China and America, we need to make a decision to dramatically lift what we spend on the military for purely defensive capacity.
How would we go about defending the realm of NZ and all our economic exclusive zone?
Currently we spend 1.1% of GDP on our entire military, to defend the full realm of NZ and pursue an independent foreign policy, I argue we need to push that up to 3%.
Note – NZ should only build up its military to defend our full territory (NZ islands, EEZ, Ross Dependency, Tokelau, Cook Islands and Niue). Any upgrade of our military is for purely defensive purposes, not for military adventure or invasions.
We can’t pull away from America and China and pretend there is no cost to being Independent.
With the climate crisis looming, we need that debate now. Looks like we have 16 years.
Enemy to none, friend to all – but lift military spending to 5%
We need to increase Military GDP spending to 5%.
I believe that the climate crisis means we need a vastly larger military to cope with civil disasters and if we are attempting to distance ourselves from China and America, we need to make a decision to dramatically lift what we spend on the military for purely defensive capacity.
How would we go about defending the realm of NZ and all our economic exclusive zone?
“We will no longer be a political football in the wars of imperial powers. We will no longer act as a Pacific spy base for the Five-Eyes Alliance”
…this is an intelligent proposal and alongside our independent foreign policy should be the bindings of a strong national identity.
On ANZAC Day, while we remember those who fought and died, we also remember conscientious objectors, diplomats, activists, artists and all who have worked to prevent war and save lives.
As the drumbeat for war slowly echoes across the Pacific, we need collective courage for Peace first and self defence second like never before.
Increasingly having independent opinion in a mainstream media environment which mostly echo one another has become more important than ever, so if you value having an independent voice – please donate here.
NZ has no resources to pitch against armies of super powers on scale. It would be a prudent strategy for NZ to have, at face, a defensive neutral role like what Switzerland did during the last world war. But that doesn’t mean bowing out completely, there are other ways to engage in defences with allies. Todays conflicts aren’t like yesteryears wars, we’re in the age of hybrid next gen guerrilla warfare now, and that is already been highly active for many years.
Switzerland’s defense spending as a percentage of GDP peaked at around 20–25% during the war. This was a massive increase compared to pre-war levels, as the country mobilized its military, fortified key defensive positions (like the Réduit in the Alps), and maintained a well-armed militia.
Economic growth is always just out of reach. There’s a lot of different ways of doing growth like creating opportunities and stomping corruption and exploitation at all levels in government and also the private sector, there’s also policies that create a healthy and well educated population.
And of course security can be improved. I haven’t mentioned all of them but government defence policy for the last 40 years has been quite extreme. We’ve just focused on one specific area which was reducing taxation. Weve never focused on a well balanced policy that includes reconstruction of New Zealand and the south pacific nations or the restructuring of corporate feudalism or relocating refugees.
There are plenty of wrongs that need to be tackled individually but the expansion of the rules based order didn’t address any of it. What wasn’t discussed was creating a military force large enough it could be posted in sufficient numbers everywhere and respond to threats both large and small within a reasonable time.
Single mindidly targeting spending is the dream of every paranoid individual who is highly fearful of its own population. Unemployment has been high and wage growth low. The fact that foreign investment is anemic is due to high energy prices. But John Key would have known all of that when he privatised half of New Zealands energy stocks. I guess any economic activity is better than none.
One of the biggest problems of the rules based order was that it could cut off trade at the same time we were reducing the one thing that cuts trade off in the first place, namely the military. America doesn’t want to fight for people who posses envy in there eyes so one of the problems we have with the rules based order is it cuts off and chooks trade to our east and to the west namely China and America.
When economic sanctions and blockades are erected it cuts trade and the flow of money where people go to, grow and develop. The point is by having a well balanced government budget we have had in our hands the making of an economic boom. But at this point, only if we play our cards exactly correct.
What privatisation has done to New Zealand is very interesting. It’s created boards and shareholder wealth and if anyone resisted the offshoring of profits they are labelled enemies of the state and just like that New Zealand is proudly on its way to becoming the 56th state of America, or China if John Keys has his way.
It’s not the initial sale of public assets that’s the issue it’s the massive contracts after a sale that’s bumping up energy prices. Because we’re paying one of the highest energy prices yet New Zealand is not increasing its labour force or scaling up any of our companies. Of course this would pump in a lot of money if energy prices were lower, then factories could be built.
So I’m saying seize back the energy sector, and seize water and rail while you’re at it. Then all of the factories will come back. But these kinds of projects will likely never happen there are to many local voices and local interests that might not want there society destroyed. Under The CCP these local voices are simply vanished and the under western rule local voices are punished.
We’ve had mega projects before the problem is – is the money sustainable and is it being spent well. The problem with Muldoons Think Big Project was that he overbuilt in the wrong areas and when rail was privatised it created ghost towns. The whole thing gone over night. No thought about re tooling and upskilling it was just they are your masters now. Now, no one really wants to live in New Zealand to the point that even our top 10% are feeling the cost of living pressure because all of our resources are being spent on things that don’t give kiwi entrepreneurs a return.
And so when we look at the NZDF and we see them rebuilding an area denial capability or an Air Combat capability or whatever you have to ask will these investments give kiwis a return on there own ideas and investments. Usually when you’re fighting an actual war the loser pays for everything, instead in its current form NZDF is a drain on the over all growth and sustainability of New Zealand. I’ll give the bean counters one thing they’re really good at keeping costs down but you also have to ask of them. Are we getting a return on our investments.
It was a Royal New Zealand Navy Frigate that played a central role in communicating Chinese Naval Warship movements and activities. It took us 1 hour to inform there Australian counterparts that CCP warships was conducting live fire exercises a few hundred kilometres from the Australian coast. That time lag needs to be zero.
Point is scaling things up ought to reduce costs. As in instead of reducing costs based on examining each line item we have to reduce costs in terms of how much access to resources and a return will this capability secure.
I’m not even sure that having 4 frigates in a reconnaissance role 1000ks from New Zealand is what they were intended for. As far as I’m aware we needed a presence in the Suez canal 10,000ks away because that’s where all our oil comes from. That’s why we needed 4 frigates but now the CCP is playing up in our front yard it’s changed the calculus, significantly.
Concentrating all of New Zealands anti air capabilities on 2 warships is a big mistake. Putting all of you anti ship missiles on a light helicopters is no response at all to 3 CCP warships carrying over 300 missiles. More than that if we cut trade with China it’ll be ghost towns all over New Zealand. Yet we still need to respond in a way that says if you do that again we will knock your block off.
But the point is the more resources that New Zealand can leverage and control then the more that we can organise our vendors and business to collaborate and produce an effective economy with a well balanced budget.
But yeah frigates meant to patrol 10,000 kilometres away ain’t a great or cheap response to enemy movements 1000ks off of your own coast.
Y’know when were these CCP warships first spotted on a direct course to New Zealand. Where were the satellites. And why was all of our 2 frigates and 2 available P8s tied up in one puny skyrocket test.
While I can go on and on about the failings and weaknesses of each line item the point is it’s the overall failure of the Government’s response to the CCP incursion on New Zealands sea lanes of communications. While we were patting ourselves on the back for saving money we were punching ourselves in the dick.
Instead of creating economic benefits for your own people, improving health and education and employment and improving access to government services. It’s like ramping up military spending alone won’t be the response to CCP incursions that reap returns.
Firstly the south pacific and Antarctica are easy. That’s our region but equally that trade bottle necks around the CCP and the White House are of equal importance. Not only do we need a military capable of operating in the Pacific and Southern Oceans but we also need a military capable or operating in the Indian and Atlantic Oceans. And that will mean one of two things. Either paying the CCP a levy by allowing them to raid our fishing grounds or sucking up to America’s next war. Or we can do nothing and let the CCP raid our fishing grounds and America fights it’s silly wars anyway.
The problem with increasing defence spending is that it doesn’t create returns for the long term Yet the solution is to increase economic security but ultimately economic development is a far far larger expense and may not even pay itself off in the end but to sustain increased military spending we have to increase tax revenue and to do that we have to let people have more kids, increase immigration etc.
A more powerful military can create a safe environment where people want to live and conduct business the problem with the rules based order was we ended up being the ones issuing dodgy loans and siphoning resources from the people we said we were helping. Not only has the Rules Based order done a poor job at keeping everyone safe it’s actually ending America’s Military dominance over the CCP. Regime change steals resources from 2nd and 3rd world nations decreasing the world economy and tax revenue at home.
It doesn’t matter if we suck Chinese dick or American dick the job of the New Zealand Priminister is to insure the economic security of New Zealanders.
The first issue is defining Defence. To me that is protecting ourselves in our backyard, and not projecting that into aggression elsewhere and at someone else’s behest.
so we will spend 2% of GDP 8 billion per year so we can send our kids off to fight a war the USA has started or is funding through the back door .All the while we are funding the US economy which is built on the arms race .Mean while we have a growing number of homeless people and 156k children living in poverty and being fed pig swill for lunch .WTF NZ wake up you idiots .
Five percent is a large proportion of my income to spend on defence. However if the colonialists are moving towards two percent of GDP I concede that it is not inappropriate, and the money will buy a considerable quantity of ammunition and additional firearms for the local lads. If other tangata motu can do the same then in terms of military defence capability we will be in a good position for the foreseeable future.
There’s a suggestion that the orange house wants to ditch Canada from 5 Eyes, if this is true either us and Australia. A nice little conundrum.
..
The armed forces could be tweaked to battle things like the damage done by flooding, earthquakes and other destructive events ,,, Disaster relief and emergency or urgent civil engineering would be a good focus for them…..
If our armed forces could be re-orientated to be a defense against the real battles facing us (which is not china), then that would be the ONLY scenario I’d support increasing their budget and the percentage of GDP spent on them…….
….. this would also have the bonus aspect of the military spending being the only example of socialism that right wingers are keen to spend money on.
What if they gave a war, and we didn’t show up?
The US turning Australia into a nuclear submarine platform, China advances toward the Cooks, and other Island nations. Bi-annual US led live fire exercises in the South Pacific, and now China live fire exercise in the Tasman Sea.
It is obvious that the Southern Indo-Pacific region is increasingly becoming a hotspot of imperialist rivalry and conflict. To fight this coming war in the Southern hemisphere, far from their own borders, is cool for them. Not so cool for us.
“We need to increase Military GDP spending to 5%…..” MB
5%, 10%, 20% or even more, it won’t make any difference. No matter how much ‘we’, NZ Aotearoa, spend on this country’s defensive military capability, it would never be enough to militarily defend this country in case of foreign military aggression. I would argue that such a strategy would be a gigantic waste of money, (and possibly lives).
If we used all of that 5% to buy missiles bombs, warplanes, warships, military drones etc. Who would we buy all that military hardware from?
Who ever it is, if we buy it from either the Yanks or the Chinese, or their allies, it would mean embedding ourselves in their web of military and political supply chains and alliances. Whichever side it is, it would piss off the other side. Embedding ourselves in the military supply chain of one military alliance or the other, would make it difficult for us to claim neutrality from the UN. Or stay out of any future war.
We are only a small island nation with a total population of 5.2 million souls.
Who are we kidding?
Even if we beggared our entire population to engage in full scale war production, we couldn’t match the war production capabilities of major US and Chinese cities like Shanghai. pop. 29.8 million or even New York, pop. 8.2 million, .
How about this;
Instead of funding a hugely expensive military build up, we fund a small army of New Zealand diplomats and lawyers versed in international law to travel the world on a global diplomatic mission to lobby the governments of UN member states to officially recognise this country as a neutral country.
To be fully in compliance with the international laws and duties of a neutral country, as regulated by two international treaties adopted at the Second Hague Peace Conference of October 18, 1907, and updated in 1927 and 2009, We would firstly have to cut all military ties with all foreign countries, including all intelligence transmissions into and out of this country.
Secondly; our small army of legal and diplomatic emissaries campaign to achieve internationally recognised neutral country status begin their diplomatic efforts, by starting in the global south. Once our diplomats have achieved a majority of UN member states signed up to recognise this country’s neutral status, then our team of diplomats switch their lobbying to the UN to have our neutral status put to a vote of the UN General Assembly to be officially recognised by the UN.
P.S. International recognition of our neutral status, would include agreement to recognise this country’s sovereignty over our region of the Pacific, (however that region is defined). This is how we will find out which countries are truly the biggest threat to New Zealand sovereignty.
The laws of neutrality were first formulated in two treaties adopted at the Second Hague Peace Conference, October 18, 1907 and have stood for more than a century through two world wars.
These treaties are:
Convention (V) Respecting the Rights and Duties of Neutral Powers on land.
https://www.jstor.org/stable/2186561?seq=1
Convention (XIII) Concerning the Rights and Duties of Neutral Powers on the sea.
https://www.legal-tools.org/doc/727a73/pdf
The law of neutrality as it applies to air warfare is dealt with in Articles 39 to 48 of the 1923 Hague Rules of Air Warfare, and the 2009 Manual on International Law Applicable to Air and Missile Warfare.
Comments are closed.