Yes the new geopolitics of the Pacific is bringing us conflict
Well duh…
“The future looks grim.”
That’s the standout assessment in a new document released by the Ministry of Foreign Affairs and Trade (MFAT), which finds a shift in the Pacific’s strategic balance and competition in the region – primarily driven by China’s more assertive foreign policy – poses a risk to New Zealand’s security.
The ministry said the globe is experiencing “heightened strategic tensions and considerable levels of disruption and risk”, with New Zealand just as affected as others due to its interconnectedness, the changing nature of the Pacific and the evolution of new threats.
It said the period to 2035 “will likely be challenging for New Zealand and the Pacific region”.
Conflict in the wider Indo-Pacific region “could occur” and security considerations “already dominate” some countries’ thinking, the report says.
This changing geopolitical landscape could have severe implications for New Zealand, with less opportunity to focus on economic priorities and a requirement to spend more energy and resources on defence and security imperatives.
..as TDB has been arguing for sometime, the geopolitics off the Pacific have mutated quickly and we need to urgently reset ourselves towards a neutral independence.
After we got a great welcome for Chippy in China, and a glimpse of maybe a different kind of relationship with the largest Communist regime on earth, Beijing released the legal blueprint they’ll use to invade South Pacific…
Explainer: China’s foreign relations law to take effect, its significance explained
The law also focuses on safeguarding national sovereignty, security and development interests. It stipulates that China has the right to take, as called for, measures to counter or take restrictive measures against acts that endanger its sovereignty, national security and development interests in violation of international law or fundamental norms governing international relations.
It also stipulates that the state shall take measures as necessary in accordance with the law to protect the safety, security, and legitimate rights and interests of Chinese citizens and organizations overseas and safeguard China’s overseas interests against any threat or infringement.
…what they are saying here is that if the rights of their diaspora in foreign countries is threatened, the Chinese will do whatever they like to protect the interests of their diaspora.
Imagine a scenario where domestic populations in the Pacific turn against Chinese business and riot, what this new law allows for is China to do anything they like to protect those interests.
These are significant increases in what China considers its rights to protect the interests of their citizens overseas.
How far will the protection of those interests manifest?
Xi was very happy to see NZ in Beijing.
When the crocodile smiles, be extra careful.
Chippy’s recent speech on NZs foreign affairs was a rare moment of recognition there are other things beyond these shores.
We face geopolitical shockwaves unlike any before them.
Climate change, pandemics, refugees, war – they are all coming here.
Our distance is no longer a tyranny, it’s a blessing.
An Independent Foreign Policy is not enough to protect us from the shocks coming.
If we are serious about an Independent Foreign Policy, we have to accept Neutrality is going to cost us a lot more.
The Māori Party suggestion of neutrality is worth considering.
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 and civil disaster capacity.
How would we go about defending the realm of NZ and all our economic exclusive zone?
We can’t pull away from America and China and pretend there is no cost to being Independent.
We need to increase Military GDP spending to 5%. Interestingly Labour have quietly ratcheted GDP military spending from just over 1% to just under 2%.
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.
If you can’t contribute but want to help, please always feel free to share our blogs on social media
My pick is for New Zealand to enter an era of smug self-delusion, thinking the country’s neutral and independent when it’s just ignorant.
Ukraine had a treaty with The U.S. pretty much saying if Ukraine gave up its nuclear weapons then America would fight if it was attacked and Ukraine is being attacked by Russia and America is nowhere to be found. It’s would trigger WW3. Any treaty is meaningless without the military muscle to back it up.
Russia was also a co-signature to that agreement: The Budapest Memorandum.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Budapest_Memorandum
Neutrality isn’t that expensive. We just need anti-ship missiles to sink any American ships that approach.
Are you kidding. A cheap cruise missile is 3 million dollars just for one missiles not including launchers, radar, maintenance. Surveillance. 5% GDP spend on defence takes account of all that. anything less is just a hobby.
Maybe we could arm our citizens as a deterrent to possible foreign invaders, works for Switzerland.
I agree Erik. To paraphrase a certain well known ammendment “A well regulated Militia being necessary to the security of a free New Zealand; the right of the people to keep and bear arms shall not be infringed”.
Any increase in conventional military capability (fighter planes, destroyers, tanks drones missiles) that we might be able to afford would be easily swatted away by any super power wanting to attack us.
Compulsory military service, with all fighting-age men enlisted in the reserves, would be the bare minimum requirement.
The ultimate solution is nuclear weapons. Nobody would try to invade Israel or North Korea. Gadaffi and Saddam would most likely still be there if they’d gone the same way.
Agree, we could probably declare neutrality if we left 5 eyes. But it is pointless being neutral unless you are independent, and that involves being able to defend yourselves. Switzerland has compulsory military service for able bodied men, voluntary for women. They are well armed and trained to fight. They have natural defences, and bunkers 1km below the Alps. Importantly, they have a strong sense of nationhood and strong social cohesion and a participatory democracy. Most Swiss will fight to the death for their country, and potential enemies know all of this.
I would suggest this would be a bare minimum for independence, and we would fail on pretty much every count in NZ. Spending bucks on equipment even if it were 50% of GDP is pointless.
When I say neutrality I mean the ability to maintain our borders against even a super power. if you’ve been to Switzerland you’ll know they kept and still maintain there WW2 bunkers and gun emplacements stuck in the side of mountains. There’s no way anyone but Alexander The Great or Genghis Khan could take Switzerland.
New Zealand has lost most of it’s manufacturing capability, and our self suffieciency in everything from petrol to pharmacuticals, clothes to tinned tomatos means our ability to import or export is our achillies heel. In short we need trading partners and we need their shipping to stop by. Neutral or not- we are beholden.
Spot on, I remember working in foundries, machine shops , glass factories etc in the 70s. None around now. We also had a shipping line. Now we are shutting down fossil fuel industries, coal, oil, gas, refining. We are perilously vulnerable.
Currently only the Maori Party are raising this issue.
Logically if you are interested in having New Zealand’s neutrality on the table in the ruling body of this country, don’t give your vote to the war parties, Lab, Nact, Green, cast your vote for the Maori Party.
Increasing superpower tensions and rivalry in the Pacific, with the very real possibility of war in this region, New Zealand’s neutrality needs to be seriously considered,
If we don’t decide this issue for ourselves now, once war starts, it will be too late, and it will be decided for us by others.
If the government and our diplomats are to be criticised it is for pretending that, as Fukuyama proposed history has ended in an unending liberal continuum. That was the assumption of the US$ “rules based” G7 regime that foolishy ignored the aspirations of emerging economies on the basis that “imperial” soft and hard power would ensure continuity of rule.
NZ happily sat as a complicated three monkey look alike whilst the world changed. Because we refused to go through the pain of becoming neutral and fostering new relationships we are now damned, attached as a limpet on a sinking hegemon. I’d love us to be neutral but I’d posit BRICS nations see us clearly for what we are. Imperialist toadies, not to be trusted.
It’s funny how people are only now getting their knickers in a twist over China. Allow me to explain the recent history:
>President Clinton let China into the WTO (his campaign coffers benefitted from significant Asian money) and created a monster in doing so. China broke every trade rule and got away with it. They stole a vast array of western tech and global corporates moved factories there because of the cheap labour, losing control of their IP as they did so.
> China’s bullying style of diplomacy has alienated all its neighbours so that now China stands alone, surrounded by enemies. Enemies that control its access to shipping, which is its life blood.
> Chinese labour is no longer cheap, and international corporations are building their new factories elsewhere. For example, the Japanese government is paying its corporations to shut down their Chinese operations and move elsewhere. China is reliant on western consumer demand to keep its economy afloat and it lacks oil & gas so is also reliant on energy imports too. It faces a banking crisis that dwarfs the GFC. It is also facing demographic collapse thanks to their One Child Policy. China is WEAK!
> Trump figured out that China is a ‘busted flush’: That despite the bravado, the Chinese economy is collapsing from within. So, he reversed the Clinton doctrine of appeasement and began to push back, imposing tariffs and patrolling the ‘nine dash line’ zone with the US Navy.
> The Biden administration quietly adopted the Trump doctrine, the visible results being the US/AU nuclear subs and US diplomats openly visiting Taiwan despite hissy fits from China.
I recommend NZ exports urgently look for other customers in order to secure their futures, because the inevitable collapse of the Chinese regime and subsequent chaos will be problematic for them.