Prime Minister Chris Hipkins has met with Chinese President Xi Jinping in Beijing as he works to shore up New Zealand’s trading relationship with the world’s second largest economy.
Hipkins focused on economics in the meeting on Tuesday, while the Chinese leader took a more personal approach in his opening remarks.
“China always views New Zealand as a friend and a partner,” Xi said. “Amidst the changing international landscape, our relationship has remained robust and strong”.
Hipkins was hesitant to use the same words when later asked by reporters. He described the meeting as being “warm” but said he’d only describe China as a “friend” in certain contexts.
“I would describe the relationship between NZ and China as an incredibly important one. We cooperate and work together on areas where it is in our interests to do that, we disagree from time-to-time and we convey those disagreements”.
Hipkins said it was a partnership, in the sense they shared a free trade agreement, and it was a friendship, in the sense they had regular dialogue and worked together on some issues.
He said China was largely a friend and partner but it could “depend on the context”.
“I don’t think one or two words will ever adequately describe an international relationship”.
Talking trade
As signalled, Hipkins said the trade relationship was the main topic of discussion in the 40 minute meeting. However, the Pacific, the United States, and Ukraine were also discussed.
“There was a particular economic focus to our conversations, that’s an issue of such importance to New Zealand exporters,” he told reporters in Beijing.
Not much time was spent reiterating New Zealand’s discomfort over issues such as human rights abuses in Xinjiang, as China was already aware of these views.
In his opening remarks, Xi said other countries in the region had been following Hipkins' visit “very closely”.
This was likely a reference to China’s hope that other countries will copy New Zealand’s independent foreign policy and not take cues from the United States.
An editorial published in The Global Times, a state-owned media company, said NZ’s approach to diplomacy should set an example for other Western countries.
The article was written by an academic named Qin Sheng, who studies Australia, New Zealand and South Pacific, and was timed to coincide with Hipkins’ arrival in China.
“The meetings between the leaders of China and New Zealand will send an important signal to regional countries and even the world, that only by jointly addressing global threats, abandoning ideological prejudices, and rejecting Cold War thinking can we follow the right path of history,” it said.
Since most media in China is controlled by the Chinese Government, editorials like these are often thought to reflect the views of the country’s leadership to some extent.
The South China Morning Post, an English language newspaper based in Hong-Kong, reported Xi as having said the two countries should see each other as partners, not adversaries.
“[We need to] respect each other, treat each other as equals, be open and accommodating, be harmonious but different,” he said.
One China Policy
Hipkins also met with Zhao Leji, chair of the Standing Committee of the National People's Congress, who thanked Hipkins for visiting China and for 50 years of diplomatic relations.
“It has brought about great benefits to the two peoples and made positive contributions to regional peace, security, and prosperity,” Zhao said, in his opening remarks.
Hipkins welcomed the opportunity for a face-to-face meeting and said New Zealand remained “firmly committed” to its One China Policy.
This policy acknowledges (but doesn’t endorse) the Chinese government’s view that Taiwan is an “inalienable” part of its territory. It has been in place since NZ helped China join the United Nations in the 1970s.
35 Comments
For the last 120 years the US has wanted to be the undisputed 'number one' in the world, both in an economic and a global influence sense. They cannot tolerate any other country who might in any way threaten that self-proclaimed title (like China). And whilst I totally support our mutual 'western' democratic approach, I do think that the US political focus on its own global objectives has led them to make far too many enemies around the world. Their blinkered view is that you are either totally with them or you are pretty much ostracised; just as New Zealand found when we instituted our nuclear free policy in the 1980's. However, the price of being part of their global 'gang' does mean you must play second fiddle to them in all ways.
‘Not much time was spent reiterating New Zealand’s discomfort over issues such as human rights abuses in Xinjiang, as China was already aware of these views.’
They may be aware of such abuses but it doesn’t mean they’ll do anything about it.
In a previous China article, I didn’t get a direct answer to my question (aside from being accused of western arrogance) so I’ll ask again here:
At what stage do you make a moral stance and cease trade with another nation due human rights abuses?
I get that we make money from trade, but believe New Zealanders should also take other values aside from economic gain into consideration… am unsure though where we draw the line in the sand.
is it a good idea to mix political issues with trade? If we can go tell them how to run their country, does it mean they can do the same to us based on their ideas?
Human rights is real issue in China, no doubt about that, but it's not up for us to decide what they can/should do. Ultimately it'll be the Chinese people decide what type of government they desire, and deserve.
Last point, we can certainly 'talk softly', but we certainly do no possess 'a wielded big stick'.
Diplomatic speak is really annoying. He would have been drilled by MFAT officials not to say certain words and if he does there will be repercussions. They're experts at telling horror stories to politicians.
The result is a weird word salad. Our relationship is warm, but we're only friends in some contexts. What the hell does that mean? It's code language that doesn't mean anything to most people.
but said he’d only describe China as a “friend” in certain contexts... WTF? You know that's our most important trading partner right! and our economic outlook is already looking bleak. I'd bet a large sum of money that John Key would've walked away from a meeting like that being besties with Xi Jinping.
We and our children will reap what we sow.
China is a dictatorship en route to becoming the worlds dominant military and economic superpower. Supporting Russias dictator in a war, building military bases in international waters, kicking off pandemics without controls or apologies and ignoring AI controls.
Sitting silently - ignoring their monsterous acts for greed - and gleely stuffing their blood money in our pockets today is similar to our approach to the environment and economy.. leaving a total mess for tommorow and the next gen. We should be very vocal about how we really view their policies and actions and their risks.
Australia is totally freaking out with the POSSIBILITY of a Chinese navy base in the Solomon Islands which is "just" 2000km from Australia. Meanwhile, the US has nearly 200 military bases in Japan & South Korea, which are "more than" 300km from China. Nearly half of US overseas Link
The point is that China actually invents and builds things. You want 300km/h high speed roll on-roll off rail connecting Invercargill with Auckland and everywhere inbetween? You can't go to the USA for that because they don't have the technology. And it would cost three times as much even if they did.
We should be closer to China but we shouldn't bend a knee.
The issue we have is we fundamentally only export raw materials and not many processed goods to China. We fundamentally need to rebuild our competitive advantage in exporting goods, particularly timber/lumber, wool products, honey derived products, cosmetics etc.
I really don't see why we have a vested interest in the United States' side of this Great Power Conflict. The US offers Usury, Sodomy and Abortion (USA) and the Chinese offer money and goods. You can see why the non-insane parts of the world who haven't been ruined by decadence and prosperity are siding with China.
I'm surprised that only a few commentators have talked about what really matters here to New Zealand. Improving our quality of life, income and national security by establishing a trusted working relationship with Asia in general and China specifically. Asia (to broadly also include India) is the up and coming economic centre of the 21st Century. The western nations, and especially USA/UK/Germany are now on a course for long term economic, cultural and moral decline.
For those concerned about Beijing's security clampdown on its western Xinjiang province you need to know about the many incidents of Islamist terrorism which affected China over the years. You also need to know that militants from Xinjiang province fought alongside ISIS in Syria. I didn't notice many people wanting to cut off relations with USA after the Abu Ghraib debacle, Australia after their multiple atrocities against Afghan civilians or the EU for its role in turning Libya into an open air slave trading failed state. The morality play we are being treated to is a propaganda play.
The US needs and wants a military confrontation with China to happen soon because in five years the Pentagon will be completely outmatched in the western pacific. This would be a fight between nuclear armed powers and the most powerful role that NZ can play is to help diplomatically defuse and talk down tensions in the Pacific.
The western nations, and especially USA/UK/Germany are now on a course for long term economic, cultural and moral decline.
Nothing could be further from the truth. The West is the leading edge of modern humanity. It's very apparent when you consider how close the member nations of the West are, plus the consistent push toward individual rights and freedom they all share. There is no other system like it.
Great nations like China and Russia are essentially on their own, or if they do have allies, they are extremely dubious ones. They also follow a system that is essentially religious in its thinking. Belief in "the people" or "the nation" or "society", something we have largely discarded or something we patronisingly tolerate, even encourage, only amongst disadvantaged minorities. We now all mostly aspire to be individuals who care about things but don't believe too strongly about things, especially unscientific things. I like to think most aspire to be people like the BBC documentary maker Louis Theroux, curious, humorous, intelligent and "modern".
Recent events should have highlighted to everyone just how much better the West is for individuals. It looks like decline to some but the West remains extremely powerful and, dare I say it, hegemonic. All those that follow alternative, especially outdated systems, will fall by the wayside or suffer great disappointment.
Eventually all must follow the humanistic path of the West as the only intelligent way forward. More individuals, even nations, will leave the mindset of the East and the South and embrace Western values. We will remain a beacon for all humanity. This will also ensure our civilization will continue to grow and prosper and advance.
Nothing could be further from the truth. The West is the leading edge of modern humanity.
You seem to have forgotten that countries like India, China, Iraq, Iran, Afghanistan, Libya, Algeria, Vietnam, Laos, Nicaragua...(the list goes on) have actually had extensive first hand experience with "modern", "intelligent", "humanistic" western values and priorities. Not just the jingoistic preaching and marketing but the hard edge of cruel colonial application and as you say, hegemony. And they have found those values and priorities to be sorely wanting. All you need to do is look at the skyrocketing rates of anti-depressant and anti-anxiety medication use in western societies to know that something is badly broken, not to mention the collapse of fertility rates far under replacement value necessitating mass immigration of workers to fill the gaps. In my view, western marketing of materialism, fads and perversions is not going to outlast true spiritual, religious and cultural traditions.
Certainly simple, unscientific, lifestyles can override the need for mental health interventions for some individuals. Anxiety and depression are a byproduct of an affluent lifestyle, however, the cost is worth paying for most freedom loving humans. I'd rather battle anxiety and depression than not being able to be who I want to be.
Failure by some countries to embrace Western values is more the fault of those countries than the West in general. The results speak for themselves. Most of the countries you mention have considerably, if reluctantly, altered their revolutionary systems to reflect more modern ways of doing things.
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.