![Xi on Chinese Navy ship](/sites/default/files/2022-03/xi-on-ship.jpg)
“All the way with LBJ”.
Those were the words that Australian Prime Minister Harold Holt used in 1966 to express his total loyalty to Lyndon Baines Johnson, the US president. Holt was a steadfast supporter of Australia’s alliance with the US, and of the war in Vietnam.
War has been a big part of the US/Australian relationship. The two countries have fought together in every major war since 2018. In the Second World War many Australians saw the US as their saviour in the South Pacific.
The relationship was cemented with the ANZUS Treaty in 1951 in the shadow of the Cold War. That treaty has only been invoked once, by Prime Minister John Howard in support of America several days after the September 11 attacks. Howard was sometimes referred to as George W. Bush’s ‘deputy sheriff’ in the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan.
Fast forward to 2022 and not much has changed. The current Australian Prime Minister Scott Morrison may not be quite as chummy with President Biden as Holt was with LBJ, and Howard with Bush, but he is a staunch advocate of very close ties between the two countries.
Indeed, Morrison has arguably strengthened those ties with the recent ramping up of US troops based in Australia, the AUKUS security pact, and QUAD, the Quadrilateral Security Dialogue. Morrison has also been vociferous in his criticism of China on everything from its attitude to an international investigation into the cause of the Covid-19 outbreak to its failure to rebuke Russia for the invasion of Ukraine.
A major rivalry has emerged in the Indo-Pacific between China and the US, and Morrison is making sure that there is no doubt where Australia stands.
Australia’s clear objective is to operate in lockstep with the US and other allies in the containment of a rising China. However, there has been a price to pay. Sino-Australian relations have collapsed, and China has waged a trade war against Australia (although it still spent $150bn on Australian iron ore in 2021).
The contrast between the Australian and New Zealand approaches to the US is stark.
For years Wellington has maintained an independent foreign policy. Not an overt independence like Switzerland but rather a neutrality-lite with kiwi characteristics.
The origin of the current policy lies in the mid-1980s when New Zealand declared itself a ‘nuclear-free zone’ and rejected US nuclear deterrence. America responded by suspending its commitments to New Zealand under ANZUS
New Zealand’s anti-nuclear stance was morally admirable and politically popular. It was also very well timed.
The country chose to loosen its ties with America and strike out for independence just before the Cold War ended and the world entered a period of relative peace. The collapse of the Soviet Union brought a unipolar world; a ‘Pax Americana’ with no strategic threats for a small liberal democracy at the bottom of the South Pacific.
If history was not at an end, it had certainly taken a holiday. Crucially for New Zealand, in this environment an independent foreign policy was both virtuous and safe.
To date at least, that policy has been successful. It has given the country the ability to trade and talk with all comers; to pursue multilateralism and avoid taking sides. A middle ground for Middle Earth.
Unfortunately, history has now returned with a vengeance. The world confronts two powerful authoritarian regimes with expansionist ambitions – Russia and China.
Having come close to economic collapse after the end of the USSR, Russia has spent years rebuilding its economy and its military. Armed with thousands of nuclear weapons, it now appears bent on reestablishing dominance on its western border by seizing or neutralising former Soviet republics.
China has become a new superpower to rival the US. Its rising self-confidence is backed by a massive expansion of The People’s Liberation Army. The result is increasing assertiveness in its territorial claims in the South China Sea and a determination to ‘reunify’ with Taiwan sooner rather than later.
Great power politics is back.
That spells danger for small states. Two thousand years ago, the Greek historian Thucydides described the harsh reality of the international system – ‘the strong do what they can, the weak suffer what they must’.
He might have added that in turbulent times, weak states would do well to get themselves strong friends. And with a major geopolitical division now emerging between liberal democracies and illiberal authoritarian regimes, that may necessitate taking sides and cementing alliances.
Wellington enjoys much warmer relations with Beijing than Canberra. New Zealand was the first western country to enter into a free trade agreement with China and the first to join China’s ‘Belt and Road Initiative’. Last year New Zealand sent a third of its exports to China.
The current dilemma of Finland and Sweden is fascinating. Close neighbours of Russia, those countries have maintained independence for decades and have not been part of the NATO security treaty. Unsurprisingly their attitude to independence has changed dramatically with the invasion of Ukraine. Both are now looking at joining NATO.
But as Wieslander and Skaluba point out in Atlantic Council, “it is not easy to take out insurance when the house is already on fire”.
It’s not too late to strengthen strategic ties … until it is.
NZ’s participation in international and regional organisations and its focus on trade has served the country well. But Russia’s invasion of Ukraine and its new ‘no limits’ partnership with China may be a tipping point.
There was a thawing in US/New Zealand relations in the 2010s but New Zealand’s status in ANZUS remains unclear. Is it time for New Zealand to consider fully recommitting to the treaty and the American relationship?
Would that provide greater protection in an increasingly hostile world? Or would it damage Chinese trade and entangle New Zealand in potential conflicts it might otherwise avoid?
Views will differ. One person’s rational self-preservation is another person’s warmongering.
Australia provides a useful case study. Some think it has been reckless in its antagonism of China. Others think there is no alternative but to challenge what they see as a rising threat and to balance against that threat with likeminded allies.
One thing is certain. New Zealand cannot ignore the rapidly changing geostrategic environment. The crucial issue of the country’s foreign policy must not be neglected in the chaos of short-term domestic concerns with Covid and the cost of living.
Ross Stitt is a freelance writer and tax lawyer with a PhD in political science. He is a New Zealander based in Sydney. His articles are part of our 'Understanding Australia' series.
111 Comments
After skimming this seems a reasonable summary. However on Google it says: ""The Australian Strategic Policy Institute is a defence and strategic policy think tank based in Canberra, Australian Capital Territory, founded by the Australian government and funded by the Australian and overseas governments, industry and civil society groups."" and then ends with ""Affiliations: Nonpartisan"" which seems unlikely.
Under "What's the solution" is ""The Chinese government should uphold the civic, cultural and labour rights enshrined in China’s Constitution"".
While complaining about the CCP makes you feel virtuous there are businesses the public have more control over: ""ASPI’s research has identified 82 foreign and Chinese companies potentially directly or indirectly benefiting from the use of Uyghur workers outside Xinjiang through abusive labour transfer programs as recently as 2019""
We should ask the aboriginal people what they think of the Australian government's human rights record!
Does mass killing = genocide, or worse?
https://www.theguardian.com/australia-news/2019/mar/04/the-killing-time…
I was unaware that it was Australian govt policy to murder all asylum seekers. There is evidence that being very hard on asylum seekers arriving by sea reduced the number who died at sea.
Genocide: geno = people , cide = deliberately kill. So a word that describes what was attempted during the holocaust for European Jews and the killing of Tutsi by the Hutu govt of Rwanda. It is wrong to dilute this word. Human right abuses is clear and sufficient.
Hello again 50cent,
One would not want to avoid giving the impression of being a human being, lest your CCP goons turn up for some organ harvesting.
It doesn't take an intellectual to understand that unelected dictatorships engaging in genocide are very bad. Civilised nations should have nothing to do with them.
Hello again 51cent
You don't have to pretend not been a human being. I get that you hate the CCP and China and the Chinese people. I can smell that jealousy and resentment of your. What can you do about it - NOTHING!
pumping your chest on your keyboard makes you look like a coward, not warrior (get it?). Get off your bXtt and do something that makes a difference. Starting with stop buying Chinese goods, throw out everything you own which are made in China (whole or part). But the truth is - the only thing you can do is bXtch and CRY.
And how much is your net worth - 51 cent?! Now I know why you feel so superior.
Silly 50cent. If I were going to astroturf for the CCP it would need to be for a lot more than 51cents.
What have you actually got to be jealous of. You are very small, and clearly not very bright either.
Yes, everything made in China needs to be thrown out quite quickly. All the best stuff is made in Taiwan.
My net worth is very high. You could work for the 50 cent army your entire life without catching up.
But my CCP social credit is very low. Does that make you superior?
Does the CCP grade you on how good your astroturfing in English is?
Because your English is bad. Maybe you will only get paid 25 cents for doing such a lousy job.
Drag should be in the past tense. Dragged.
Knock should be a verb in the current test. Knocking.
I bet a Uyghur would be jealous that I'm not getting genocided.
可怜的三脚狗
You obviously don’t have the aptitude to understand and accept reality. A broken China has certainly made you feel insecure and helpless. It’s not your fault so don’t feel bad about yourself. Just blame your 狗老母. She must hated you so much that she gave you that ugly look, small 𨳊 and tiny head with nothing inside.
I don’t GAF you attack the CCP. If you attack the Chinese people (you clearly did), you get 10 times in return! There are millions of Chinese don’t live in China and are not aligned to the CCP!
I bet you’ve been refreshing this page and hoping to see my response while jerking your little 𨳊 off. I’ve had a lot of fun with you. You can go back to your sad and lonely world now.
Hint – don’t refresh this page after reading this, just keep jerking off,…do you understanding?
In 2020 China banned Australian beef "for the safety of Chinese consumers". Slapped an 80% tariff on Australian barley "dumping and government subsidies". Followed by tariffs on wine.
China is strong and powerful, and known to lash out if annoyed. Not physically (traditional war) but via trade, to hurt finances (economy).
NZ ought to trade with China, just buy insurance.
"New Zealand cannot ignore the rapidly changing geostrategic environment. The crucial issue of the country’s foreign policy must not be neglected...."
The World Order, or pecking order is dynamic and changes. When under threat small states will look to form alliances. Or ways to defend. Can NZ afford to join UK in another war, another ANZAC.
Can NZ afford to join UK in another war, another ANZAC.
Probably not.
Equally can we afford to discard this relationship? - Russia a crucial partner for China in deterring US
Probably not.
There will be a Pacific & Sth Pacific strategy in place by the Western Powers. In the old days, post WW2 & Korea, Australia & NZ were part of both ANZUS & SEATO. Lately formed similarly, is the QUAD. USA, India, Australia, Japan. The Pacific is a colossal barrier to any invasion force. In WW2 Fiji was being fortified & prepared as a last line defence, a redoubt if you like against the Japanese. Success at Midway & Guadalcanal obviated the need. It still was though, a vital supply & support base. If push comes to shove & the West & the East erupt into open conflict, there is absolutely no chance that New Zealand will not be on the side of its traditional allies. Therefore if there is thought to be a really serious prospect of such conflict, New Zealand cannot afford, either morally or economically, to now try and farm both sides of the coin.
Not a clue. You object to profits being returned to country of origin? Those profits can be taxed. Does the US export bank profits to Swiss banks and if they do is that wrong? Do the Swiss and Danes import arms from the USA and if they do how do you decide which weapons are unnecessary?
Overreaction there. NZ will be no more a vassal state of the USA than it ever was before. But even if that was a possibility, my personal preference, and I imagine that too of the vast majority of New Zealanders, it would be monumentally preferable than being a vassal of China and/or Russia. Think about it, if you can.
We will end up having arms for Africa, which we can ill afford, and the Australian banking cartel, currently bleeding us dry, will look like a picnic once the Yanks move in. That's just the obvious infringements.
I noticed the Germans just signed up for a fleet of F35, which will hardly improve their air superiority.
And I do not want my son fighting a war for the US - I just missed Vietnam because of a change of government.
Been said all before hasn’t it. Over paid, over sexed and over here. Thank goodness Churchill persuaded the US to prioritise the European theatre. Otherwise Barbarossa’s second summer offensive might just have rolled up and over Moscow & made the Soviet Union kaput.
Odd comment. Before we met my wife worked for many years for a Boston based bank in London. One of my best friends for another US bank there. I worked closely in business with the then First National City Bank. As far as my experience all relative American executives were professional, extremely polite and courteous. Like most Americans though they did like to have fun, and were rather good at it too. I don’t begrudge them that either, but it sounds very much as if you would.
My immediate US boss in London (philandering son of a shareholder) failed to get to work on time for the whole time I worked for Chemical Bank, which went on to take over Chase Manhattan Bank, and thereafter JP Morgan.
But I was able to retire at 45, thanks to his and my superior in NY. An extremely savvy woman.
Principles for Dealing with the Changing World Order - Ray Dalio. Plan accordingly.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xguam0TKMw8&t=1s
Not to defend China, but don't forget America has done plenty of dastardly stuff too.
NZ govt has to be actively working in the best interests of kiwis, you can't do that if your working in the best interests of the US because the US would throw us under the bus if it suited their best interests - just like they did with Ukraine. We are a minnow in a world of sharks, let the sharks compete for dominance, we can't affect the outcome anyway.
New Zealanders would be colonized slaves to the Japanese emperor if it wasn't for the USA in WW2, and so would China.
China was freed by the USA and also, towards the end of WW2, by Russia whose army was rushed from Germany to blitz Japanese-held Manchuria after taking Berlin. This latter action is now looked upon by historians as being equal in effect to the USA's dropping of the two atom bombs on Japan.
Despite USA's sullied reputation for throwing their weight around since WW2, we have much to be grateful to them for.
I don't think the US had a choice of not going to war after the Japanese bombed Pearl Harbor. What were the Japanese thinking? taking on the world?
The US most likely didn't expect the ccp to rule China after WW2. Since then they had pointed hundreds of (nuke capable?) missiles at China from bases in Japan, SK, the Phillippines etc. I wonder how the Chinese people could sleep well at night.
The US did have a choice. The US fought with the Chinese against the Japanese long before Pearl Harbour. Read about Chennault’s Flying Tigers and General Stilwell, Vinegar Joe. And the Americans fought with the British and Chinese on the retreat all the way west to the Indian border. The Chinese had foregone their internal division to continue this war with united armies. Unfortunately in General Chiang Kai Shek of the Chinese National army, there was a formidable personality whose incompetent generalship was only exceeded by his corruption. By the end of the war, and after Stilwell had been replaced, the Americans were so disgusted with his antics, his pilfering of a immense fortune of American supplies for his own enrichment, that they just let it all go. Of course the generalissimo was then predictably defeated by the CCP forces, fled to Formosa, and here we are today.
Blimey you do like to get stuck in your groove.zYou must have “Go HomeYank” all over your wallpaper. Tell us all then about the number of nuke subs, not all nuke warheads, available at any one time. Then consider the odds roughly three to one, the Russian 30 models all virtually outdated, the Chinese 3, scarcely tested. Then think about how a hypersonic whatever targets one of the soon to be 100 of these opposing vessels, whereabouts unknown. As said before, aircraft carriers obsoleted battleships, nuke subs are now doing the same to carriers. Way back Eisenhower took this paramount defence capability off Le May’s Strategic Air Command for this exact purpose, and here it is now, like it or lump it.
You describe, more or less, the policy recently adopted by Australia. There is though no announced intention for their new subs to be nuke armed. But the building of the specialised bases would provide facilities for those of other nations that were, of course. NZ would be under the umbrella of all of that in terms of the security of the eastern seaboard of Australia, at the least.
I admire the new Zealands strategy. The non lethal support for Ukraine it a great reflection of the this.
As Gandhi said 'be the change you want to see in the world'
For bombs to be dropped in NZ i would contest that the rest of the world must already be destroyed.
Exactly: Corporate Takeover of NHS: The Demise of British Primary Care
From 2014 to 2021 the stewardship of the NHS was in the hands of Simon Stevens, ex-president of American private insurance giant UnitedHealth’s global expansion division, who had set out two years earlier his former employer’s solution for developed countries healthcare systems at the World Economic Forum.
His prescription was to replicate America’s private insurance industry dominated “managed care” model. Stevens, as chief executive of NHS England, had engineered the dire state of the NHS leading up to the pandemic.
The government’s pandemic response was to squander billions of pounds on private companies with no experience in healthcare and often without due probity. It has been one of the most expensive, most privatized and least effective public-funded health programs in the world.
The demographic challenges facing China very likely mean this is the zenith of Chinese military power and economic growth. At current birthrates their population might half in approximately 30 years. Tieing New Zealands economic prosperity to Chinas would almost certainly be disastrous for us.
Russia has an economy the size of Italy, the only threat it poses is due to possessing nuclear weapons (...if they even work!)
My belief is that militarily we should align with the US but Africa will become more important to trade.
We will have to pick our friend at some point. The 87 crash started the decline of the NZ military. The Clark govt continued to remove funding, and the Govts since have not changed that Perhaps we could be a neutral like the Swiss, though holding everyone's dirty gold and money certianly helps their case to do so.
If NATO does commit troops under humanitarian guise we are only one unguided missile strike away from it being all on in the Ukraine. Posturing about how much your specubox is worth will soon be meaningless after that.
Perhaps we could divert the Govt landlord subsuidys to defense spending?
Short video: Changing World Order Why Nations Succeed and Fail by Dalio Ray
We welcome your comments below. If you are not already registered, please register to comment.
Remember we welcome robust, respectful and insightful debate. We don't welcome abusive or defamatory comments and will de-register those repeatedly making such comments. Our current comment policy is here.