Helen Clark’s global wisdom on NZ/Cook Islands/China/US is the voice we need right now

Helen Clark, the second female Prime Minister of New Zealand, former UNDP head, multiply-vetoed UN Secretary-General nominee, Mt Eden resident, has been on something of a media rampage recently. Given that it’s not about the hours and frequency of Eden Park concerts for once I take it that matter is temporarily for this week at least not an active issue in front of any council committee or hearing commission. Clark has returned from the Munich Security Conference (note she never mentioned if she was actually invited or not – I understand MPs of her vintage still retain generous free overseas airline privileges) and asked Guyon Espiner on Q+A this weekend (02/03/2025) what is the point of NATO if the USA is not going to underwrite European security? This was recorded before the incredible televised row between Zelenskyy, Trump and Vance in the oval office, so the question had more than just rhetorical import when it went to air.

Clark’s Q+A interview addressed China and the Cooks directly as well as some general aspects of New Zealand foreign policy. It was interesting, but her takes on the world and New Zealand’s part in it were of an earlier generation and riven with self-serving mythology assisted gleefully by Espiner. She could say as she pleased without resistance. So, she framed US Vice President J D Vance’s criticism of Europe’s free speech crack down and over-turning of the Romanian presidential election on the grounds Russia put propaganda on Tik Tok as Vance’s lecture about “letting the far right into government.” No mention of the extremists of the left – the communists – being able to be part of governments of course! No mention on Starmer’s Orwellian proclivities. Her view is very orthodox social democratic European – sometimes she sounds like a foreigner when she speaks of the country which is unnerving, and occasionally refreshing.

The dismissive tone became wearying at points especially laughing at New Zealand’s military – she scoffed at it. An over-inflated opinion of NZ foreign policy, but a drastically realistic opinion of the country’s military strength. We may agree the NZDF is relatively small but to hear an ex-PM snear at it is discomforting, insulting. A columnist can talk shit about them but a PM who sent NZDF personnel into war on more than one occasion talking shit about them was a bit much to take. The disdain for collective security when it comes to New Zealand was astounding: the Skyhawks strike wing was laughed off dismissively as a waste of money. Who does she think defends NZ – she’s an atheist so it’s not God! Collective security – but NZ doesn’t have to pay its share? The parasitic thinking of the security bludger is not intelligent it is infuriating, but the side-eye lickspittling is even worse:

“NZ had by and large got itself off the bandwagon… of US adventures and I would be a strong advocate of not getting on that bandwagon…”

Clark got NZ – at the behest of the US – into Afghanistan and Iraq – so it’s hypocritical tosh. She volunteered to fight in Afghanistan (then blames its loss on Trump – because we should still be fighting there I suppose is what she’s saying: “European nations [and others] came to help one way or the other with Afghanistan which eventually ended in tears as a result of actions taken during the Trump presidency…”), and she agreed with the US to back their takeover of Iraq at the UN and then send in the troops (which ended up guarding the British fortress in Basra) so Espiner’s comment “…pressure to go into Iraq – which you resisted” is a nonsense piece of false propaganda that New Zealanders just love to coddle themselves in. Just stop the lying, it’s embarrassing. Clark sucked up to the US just like Bolger did, like Key did. Clark used the disagreement with the Alliance over invading Afghanistan as an excuse to call a snap election in 2002 so let’s not misremember that everyone was in favour of it.

Clark linked the Chinese naval task force with NZ’s naval participation around China:

“It’s a tit-for-tat. NZ cheerfully sails through the Taiwan strait with a tanker behind an Australian vessel, Now the Chinese sail through our backyard in the Tasman Sea and now the PM says he wants to send a frigate sailing up the South China Sea. Why are we buying into this fight?”

Glad that was said! No sense pretending this isn’t reciprocation. Problem is since Clark was PM we’ve had a very weak Obama administration under Hillary Clinton allow the Chinese to build up in the South China Sea – that is the reality Clark never faced in her “benign strategic environment” premiership 1999-2008. I don’t buy into her and Paul Keating’s idea that China means no harm – they do. Is the best way for NZ to resist Chinese aggression to convoy with others through the South China Sea and the Formosa Strait – well maybe it is?

Clark’s understanding of the Cook Islands – China situation comes from the 2001 centenary text between PMs that require consultation when matters effect each others jurisdictions. The uncomfortable fact is by that text she let the Cooks do as they want in total disregard to the Cook Islands Constitution Act of 1964, the Governor-General has no remit over them any more either. She was part of that evolution/mutation and ought to bear some responsibility for where the relationship is now – distant.

She was rightly alarmed by the content of the documents the Cook Islands government had signed. The Cooks supporting Chinese candidates at world bodies was something that slipped past me, but not her hood-eyed scan, “Cook Islands government is right out of [court?] on it and again Winston Peters had to go to Beijing to raise this.”

But how weak that was. Winston had to go and tell China about our special “realm” relationship? It’s China who told him about the detail of the damn agreements not the Cooks… so what then of his special relationship? It’s evidently less special than the Chinese relationship with the Cooks isn’t it, Winston. It’s all so weak. I’m not sure she grasped just how weak it was.

Much was made of New Zealand’s “Independent” foreign policy – but independent of whom? Apart from the nuclear ships issue – which is domestic – what independence has ever been shown? Seriously, what independence? I am unaware of anything independent – NZ always aligns with others and their interests. This is the same Helen Clark who said East Timor was part of Indonesia forever. Has she ever said anything about West Papua, or Tibet or the Uighurs? I cannot recall that she ever has. The only thing that counted as being independent that she raised was NZ allowing bottom trawling against the wishes of all other South Pacific nations – I guess that qualifies as independent.

Espiner gave her a dream ride for an interview. More interesting on the Cooks side was a discussion she had in a five way panel on the new “Te Kaupapa” podcast from Waatea digital (aired 10am on Saturday 01/03/2025) 

Clark found herself in agreement with her comrade/nemisis Richard Prebble that MFAT diplomats were not suitable. The ball has been dropped. Promotion of younger people too soon too fast was causing problems (like Grant Robertson without a days work in the real world  under his belt, armed only with a BA (Hons) being recruited out of university by MFAT and appointed straight to the UN in New York you mean lol!).

The ambassador to Beijing has no competency with China – can’t speak the language. But his wife is Tongan. What’s the bet they have appointed a Mandarin speaker to Tonga! I saw the new appointments a couple of weeks ago and they are all cookie-cutter Wellington type women including a fresh one off to Rarotonga right at this crucial period. My impression is that it is probably a result of the seniority system – this would account for placement of people out of any rational alignment.

Clark was quite free-wheeling on the hour-long podcast and candid in a way that might surprise. The one issue she didn’t seem keen on discussng was the Manawanui situation. Everyone else had a giggle, but Helen didn’t want to go there… for some reason.

The full report into the sinking of the HMNZSLGBTQ Manawanui is set to be delivered by the Defence Ministry’s Court of Inquiry later this month (I think they actually said February in their press conference last year). There has still been no communication from either the Navy or the Minister of exactly when this will be released. Defence Minister and Cesar Romero Joker impersonator Judith Collins’ game of pretending it didn’t officially happen – by issuing no press releases or statements in her name or on the Beehive website continues. This childish behaviour of attempting to avoid responsibility by never admitting she’s wrong and just gate-crashing the Navy’s press conferences is not just laughably unprofessional it is absurd denialism. Even the existence of the Court of Inquiry is not acknowledged in any official Beehive statements let alone the fact the Navy’s supply/dive vessel is at the bottom of a reef in Samoa. The interim Court of Inquiry report from November last year indicated – without doubt – that the Commander at least (unless she resigns?) will face a court martial after the report is issued.

“Rear Admiral Golding said why it happened and what would come next in terms of lessons learned were still being worked on as part of the wider Court of Inquiry, which was expected to be completed in the first quarter of next year.”

How will Judith “Joker” Collins avoid making a statement on the full report and the court martial I wonder? How can a government get through these things – losing an eighth of its navy because no one noticed the auto pilot light was on – and there’s no official record from the minister? How has this ego queen not been impeached for failure to account? Churchill during WW2 suppressed the sinking of a troop ship evacuating from France in 1940 for the purposes of public morale, but even he – of his own volition – had to release the information once the impact of the shock had passed. Collins, being a stubborn biddy, may not be capable of such admissions even in peacetime. Will there ever be any statement about it at all – will it ever be acknowledged? Or will it be Chris Penk as Associate Minister who will be forced to issue a statement and finally put under the Beehive letterhead what has happened?

Earlier last month the Chinese came to the financial rescue of the locals – something the NZ government has not done – giving cash relief within 24 hours of having been asked.

“Communities in Safata district, Samoa, whose livelihoods were impacted by maritime closures due to the sinking of the New Zealand navy vessel HMNZ Manawanui last year, have received a WST$50,000 (around NZ$30,000) donation from the Chinese embassy in Apia.

Since the disaster in October 2024, villagers have not been allowed to fish in the area where the Manawanui sank, just off which is just off the coast of Tafitoala village.

Community leaders met with Chinese embassy staff on Wednesday this week to seek livelihood assistance from Beijing.

A spokesperson for the district Tuia Pu’a Leota said the Chinese embassy did not wait long and helped them within a day.

“We express great gratitude for what they have done for us,” he said.

“We met with them in Vaie’e on Wednesday, and yesterday (Thursday) I got a call at 5pm to meet with them.

“This is not the end of their assistance; this is only the beginning. We discussed other projects and ways they can help us through the process.”

[…]

Tuia said that they have not received any other livelihood assistance from the Samoan government or from New Zealand.

“We have only had seminars and discussions with the government, which have informed us about the processes and what will happen next.

“We wrote to them last year but did not receive a response; they have only spoken to the pulenu’u and not to the traditional council of each village,” he said.

For $30,000 the Chinese government get to be more caring than the NZ government who caused the problem in the first place! NZ due to the utter incompetence of naval staff drives a ship onto their reef and prevents fishing and gives them no compensation – nothing according to the article. The Chinese step up instantly. So, whose navy would the Samoans be happier with operating in their territorial waters do you think? Which nation would the Samoans view favourably at this point and going forward? – Is it going to be New Zealand who doesn’t give a fuck and won’t give a buck, the “friend” who says suck it up? – or is it going to be the People’s Republic of China who donated with a smile and without hesitation and without tense meetings, stonewalling and bullshit? As the spokesperson said “it is only the beginning.” And MFAT, populated as it is by mediocre complacent Wellingtonians, would consider that an excuse not to pay or do anything rather than as a threat or a challenge. Don’t worry – the Chinese are in charge of all that stuff, it’s sorted. Building a wharf there are they, that’s nice. Chinese company will operate diving on the Manawanui wreck – that’s cool. Chinese Coastguard visits to meet up with naval task forces in the Tasman etc, it’s all fine.

MFAT can fly sheep and brief cases of US dollars to Saudia Arabia to bribe sheiks, but they can’t give a cent to the Samoans for poisoning their livelihood. Millions from the NZ government to keep WW1-cum-WW3 going along the Ukrainian front, but not even a club sandwich for the unemployed fishermen of Upolo. The Royal New Zealand Navy can be floating doormats for the Americans in the Arabian Sea escorting ships going to Israel to break sanctions over Gaza (put on by the Yemeni Houthis) and the navy can join American intimidation runs in North East Asia against China and North Korea but they don’t have any spare change for the Samoans. The navy have got insurance for the salvage but there’s no money to pay the people affected. How, how, how; what’s the word… colonial. Part of the colonial trauma is the Samoan government not demanding better treatment, or thinking that it can’t.

Would the RNZN give nothing if this clusterkaze sinking had occurred on a reef in Europe or North America, Australia – a white country? Or Taiwan or Japan – a rich country? Would NZ refuse to compensate the fishing towns of South Korea too if it had happened there? Would NZ be satisfied if the Samoans did the same thing to us – idiotically drove a vessel with half a million litres of diesel onboard into a reef off Tutukaka sinking it and preventing fishing and diving and not expect them to cough up compensation? Seem to recall when a civilian vessel ran onto a reef approaching Tauranga compensation going to Motiti Islanders – but just plain unlucky and never mind if you live on an island in Samoa, right?

China can now benefit greatly, with very little cost, because of the colonial attitude of Wellington towards the Samoans – as they have benefited greatly from the lackadaisical attitude of Wellington towards the Cook Islanders.  This won’t be pleasant to hear, but the reputation of New Zealand’s navy is sinking to the depths of the reputation of its foreign affairs. The credibility and capacity of New Zealand’s projection of power in the South Pacific is not so much buckling under Chinese pressure as it is imploding under the weight of its own unfounded pride.