With Friends Like This, Who Needs Enemies? What Hegseth’s 3.5% War Spend Would Mean – Peace Action Wellington

US Secretary of War Pete Hegseth has called New Zealand a ‘freeloader’ because of the level of NZ’s spending on preparing and training for war. He has said that the country should be spending at least 3.5% of our GDP on war. The media are reporting that there is an existing ‘bi-partisan’ agreement (e.g. National and Labour, though presumably it also includes ACT and NZ First) to increase war spending to 2% of GDP by 2032.

All these numbers and percentages serve to cloud the enormous, eye-watering sums of cash we are talking about. So I wanted to take the opportunity to break these numbers down and put this spending into context. I also want to strongly put forward the view that a rise in war spending to 2% of GDP is itself completely unjustifiable and morally bankrupt.

But before I do that, I wanted to quickly address the assumptions about the state of the world that this spending is premised upon.

Threats, arms dealers and militarism
The 2025 Defence Capability Plan sets out what the NZDF sees as the main problem: “New Zealand is facing its most challenging and dangerous strategic environment for decades.” This is the story we are told over and over again: that the world is a more dangerous place, conflict is brewing, we need to be prepared. This is the rhetoric that gives justification for the massive new investment in war and weapons, and it is accepted as a kind of common sense that, of course, if we are being threatened with war, then we need weapons to fight back.

This justification does not really withstand much scrutiny. In particular, because the greatest threat to global peace and security is the very same gang that is selling us the idea that we need to urgently arm up so we can join them in the fight. This, of course, is the United States. As international relations professor at Te Herenga Waka Dr Van Jackson reminded me lately, the US bombed nine countries just last year. It is engaged in the supreme international crime – aggressive war – against Iran, alongside its closest ally, the genocidaire-extraordinaire, Israel.

The US has been hard selling the narrative of Chinese aggression and war since at least 2016, and NZ Defence documents show this quite distinctive shift from the assessment of a relatively benign strategic environment to one of great conflict in our region.

At this point, it’s really worth remembering this little gem: the Managing Director of Strategy and Business Development for Lockheed Martin is Kevin Short, who prior to taking up the role as sales guy for the biggest arms dealer in the world, was the Chief of the NZDF. Prior to him, Graham Lintott, who had been NZ Chief of the Air Force, had the job.

The revolving door of professional soldiers travelling between briefings by the US Embassy, making NZ war policy and selling weapons is clearly spinning quite effectively.

None of this is to say that the Chinese government is some force for good in the world, it isn’t. It is to say that the threat to New Zealand of war with China is non-existent if you remove US aggression from the equation. It goes without saying that New Zealand should be doing absolutely everything in its power to avoid a war with China.

What holds all of these frankly insane rationalisations is the deep belief in militarism, a political philosophy that emphasises the importance of military strength and preparedness. What must be understood is that militarism is a self-reinforcing ideology of insecurity that requires continually prioritising ever more weapons spending in the quest for a ‘national security’ that is always elusive and never actually satisfied, that arises as a direct result of endlessly preparing for war.

The sweat of our labour, the hopes of our children
So, turning to Pete-the-drunk-white-supermacist-Hegseth’s claims of freeloading and demands for an even bigger spend at the shopping mall of Lockheed, Raytheon and Boeing, let’s look at some figures (thanks to Peace Movement Aotearoa):

• Military spending allocated this year increased to $5,882,661,000 (Comprised of Vote Defence Force $5,491,151,000; Vote Defence $309,071,000; and Vote Education $82,439,000 [cost of military-style service academies])
• That equates to to more than $113.1 million/week & $16 million/day
• That is approximately 1.33% of NZ’s GDP of $433 billion

Hegseth wants 3.5%.

An increase to 2% of GDP will be $8.66 billion every single year; this is already agreed by both major parties. That we are not rioting the streets against the rise to 2% is an indication of how deeply the propaganda of militarism infects our society.

Hegseth’s 3.5% would be $15 billion, a sum so staggering that even pro-war, pro-US racist Don Brash thinks it’s nuts.

A few figures to understand what we are sacrificing:

• The cost for the new Dunedin Hospital is $2.05 billion
• The total cost of ALL Treaty of Waitangi Settlements ever made is $2.6 billion
• A dental plan that would cover everyone in New Zealand is estimated to be $936 million with a one-off capital investment of $1.06 billion.
• We have a historical $104 billion infrastructure deficit.
• A plan for a new Auckland Harbour bridge came in at $35-45 billion. The original bridge was built in 1959, nearly 70 years ago.
• The costs of all pay equity settlements at the point when the government changed the law in 2025 totalled $1.78 billion per year.
• NZ annual government budget $155 billion
• The total health budget is $32.7 billion

The compelling story about a credible threat and a possible war obscures the very real political choices being made: choices that mean

• 1 in 7 New Zealand children (~ 169,300 kids) are now living in material hardship, meaning they regularly go without daily essentials like fresh fruit, doctor’s visits, or adequate heating;
• that means that 19,704 people are on the state housing waitlist – already approved but for whom there is no house
• that our hospital emergency rooms are overflowing, and people are dying without medical care,
• VUW is fundraising for student heating bills as young people working two jobs and studying, freeze in their houses and are unable to afford to buy coats.

It means resources don’t go to addressing the climate and biodiversity emergencies as our environment collapses around us, but instead to prepare to fight catastrophic, unnecessary and entirely avoidable wars.

This is not an argument against the dropkick dick-swinger from Fox and Friends for a 3.5% war spend. It is an argument against the Labour-National consensus for a 2% spend.

“Every gun that is made, every warship launched, every rocket fired signifies, in the final sense, a theft from those who hunger and are not fed, those who are cold and are not clothed. This world in arms is not spending money alone. It is spending the sweat of its laborers, the genius of its scientists, the hopes of its children.” – US President Dwight D Eisenhower.

Our world in arms cannot continue. The massive weapons spend up must be stopped. The move to spending 2% of GDP on war must not proceed.

The hopes of our children depend upon us taking action to end this madness.