sign up log in
Want to go ad-free? Find out how, here.

Chris Hipkins says Labour opposes joining the ‘nuclear-adjacent’ defence arrangement

Public Policy / news
Chris Hipkins says Labour opposes joining the ‘nuclear-adjacent’ defence arrangement
Prime Minister Chris Hipkins in Shanghai, June 2023
Prime Minister Chris Hipkins in Shanghai, June 2023

A Labour Government would not join military partnership AUKUS in any form, party leader Chris Hipkins has announced.

“Our country has a fiercely independent foreign policy, and a government I lead will not join pillars one or two of AUKUS,” he said in a speech at the party conference.

“We are proud to stand apart and lead the world being nuclear-free, that is not going to change now.”

AUKUS is a defence agreement, involving nuclear-powered submarines, between Australia, the United Kingdom, and the United States.

While New Zealand was not involved in that arrangement, it has been considering a wider defence project called AUKUS pillar II.

This would be a non-nuclear technology sharing and cooperation agreement, but it has not yet been fully formed.

Consideration of this side arrangement began under the Labour Government and was picked up by the Coalition.

Prime Minister Christopher Luxon has said he sees the AUKUS deal as positive for regional security, but has been non-committal on whether to join Pillar II.  

However, his government is generally believed to be wanting to align itself more closely with the United States and sees merit in coordinating around AUKUS. 

This approach has some fierce critics, including former Prime Minister Helen Clark.

Hipkins said in his speech Labour had become “deeply concerned” about the coalition moving too close to the US. 

“…we spent six years in government diversifying New Zealand’s trade interests and staunchly defending our right to be independent.”

“New Zealand’s foreign policy will not be determined by Washington, Canberra or Beijing,” he said.

While he would want to have strong international relationships if re-elected in 2026, they could not be based on a “nuclear-adjacent platform”.

David Parker, the party’s foreign affairs spokesperson, echoed these comments in a press release. 

“This does not mean we are non-aligned. We are a liberal western democracy and share those precious values with others”.

“New Zealand’s interests lie in trade, peace, and in on-going diplomacy, not in being a ‘force-multiplier’ for one super-power in a containment strategy directed against another”.

Taking this position will make the AUKUS decision more complicated for the Coalition, as governments generally seek bipartisan support for foreign and defence policies.

However, AUKUS Pillar II has not yet been developed and New Zealand has not even been formally invited to join it.

China, our largest trading partner, opposes AUKUS and will welcome Parker calling it a targeted containment strategy.

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.

42 Comments

The no nukes is a smoke screen, we need to stay neutral, our export industry to China needs to stay uncompromised. That is the bigger picture. We are also geographically in a better position than Australia and lets get honest here we cannot even afford new ferries let alone subs.

Up
7

No-one ever suggested that New Zealand had to buy nuclear-powered submarines to be in AUKUS. Irrelevant strawman argument.

Up
15

True. However even in the article title  leader & content above Hipkins makes repeated references to nuclear justification for his decision eg a “nuclear-adjacent platform” presumably as a relevant strawman dog whistle to Labour voters.

Up
9

An interesting Labour play for the Green voting block.

Up
2

I think the anti nuclear theme has much wider appeal than just the Greens.

Up
8

We would only be considered for pillar 2. Haven't read anywhere that we need to host or arm with nuclear anything. Other existing members are Natural allies.

Edited X

Up
3

Not any more (although perhaps Australians spell it without an X too). 

The US has been calling itself the 'World's Policeman' for decades, but the reality has been a resource-grab, facilitated by the elevating of puppets, the fomenting of coups, by full-on wars with false justification in most cases (domino theory, weapons of mass destruction), by puppet-removal when they choose to champion their own, rather than US interests) and by loan-issuance then pound-of-fleshing extraction in lieu. 

Meantime, we traversed the peak of globalism trade-wise and are heading down the other side. The time of the US is coming to an end, as it was inevitably going to. Globally, the same limits say we will be hard-put to maintain our own consumption-rates - and others will look at us as pre-thieves. Better we pre-placate...

Up
5

God defend New Zealand and no one else likely will so that’s  about it then seemingly, according to ex PM Hipkins. As expounded, Bob Jones 1984 The New Zealand Party, New Zealand cannot possibly hope to defend itself so why bother trying. Nothing at all has changed since then. The reality, like it or lump it then.

Up
4

If there ever was a God he left this planet a long time ago. If the defence of this country bothers you then you should step up in your preparedness, God is not going to help us and the USA is going to be more and more focused on just saving itself.

Up
4

Strawman? Maybe, but not irrelevant. 

Pillar One is about building submarines. That they won't be in time to take part (the Limits to Growth apex being here, now) in any stoush, is an irony the MSM doggedly fails to connect the dots to. 

Pillar Two is what we are being 'invited' to. Ostensibly 'technology of a militarily useful nature'. 

You can't be part of Pillar Two, without being associated with Pillar One. That's a moral sleight-of-hand Hipkins is correct in steering clear of. 

 

Up
7

Worth remembering that even at the height of the Cold War, New Zealand continued to actively trade with the Soviet Union. Kiwis were also very well regarded in the early days of the Peoples' Republic of China.

Up
2

China - Rewi Alley had a bit to do with that

Up
1

It's a small world - Alley was a great friend of Brian Lochore's Aunt, who for a time was my next-door-neighbour. I saw a pile of letters - wonder if any survived? 

Up
1

We're just a bunch of chill guys

Up
1

If we ever do get subs, please don’t include the auto pilot feature.

Up
13

I actually laughed out loud. Thanks.

Up
0

I am, largely, very happy with the coalition but I agree with Hipkins/Labour on this. Why do we have to join any particular group of bullies.?

Hopefully the members of the coalition will not want to distinguish themselves against labour on this unnecessary (for NZ) project.

Up
5

Will be interesting to see Act’s take. Traditionally, libertarians have often taken anti-war positions, however Act have moved quite far from their traditional libertarian roots to more of a ‘right of centre - libertarian’ mish mash

Up
2

Chippy is beginning to remind me of Peter Dunne. Runs with hares or hunts with the hounds, depending on the pulse at the time. A complete U turn on CGT is one example. 

Up
13

I don’t really rate him. Probably ok as a mid ranking MP in cabinet, but nowhere near leadership quality

Up
15

Agree - but he ain't stupid, so I rate him ahead of Luxon...

Up
14

most of NZ did not agree, observation not judgement....

 

 

Up
9

I think we can safely say that Ardern, not Hipkins, lost Labour the 2023 election.

Up
3

She was vilified by an orchestrated spin-machine - it was very obvious. All of a sudden and all at once, and the GBH's came out of the woodwork on cue. 

But she was also in a cleft stick, as are all incumbents from here on in - they have to promise growthresurectionand they cannot deliver. Housing ponzi-resurrection aside...

Up
1

You've forgotten about how Ardern won by a landslide majority. Then lost it all in record time with her excessive lockdowns, switching the economic lights off in Auckland and multiple other authoritarian COVID measures. 

Up
2

Joking surely

Up
1

lol mike, more like runs with the hares and hunts with the sheep. One of the worst and most inept politicians in NZ’s history. Labours “fixit” man who left every portfolio he touched in a worse position than when he began. The laughable thing is, that he failed his way to the very top of the Labour Party 🤣🤣🤣.

Up
6

I am in favor of joining with Australia, the UK and the USA in an alliance of sorts as we have done many times in the past. I do not think  China would view such a move as unusual .   

Up
9

We're already in the Five Eyes with them, the top intelligence network in the world.

Up
1

Are we thinking about the wrong sort of war?  China does not show any interest in military expansion this far south.

But it has managed to establish economic control over nations all over the world including the south Pacific.  It already has inroads in New Zealand.

That's the war.  We should be seriously building our defense capacity there.  First essential step would be to own our own assets, enterprises and companies.

That's the necessary strength.

 

Up
5

Same with our private data, food supplies and energy. It's almost like there should be some sort of plan around this? Perhaps some people could be paid to think strategically and long term for the good of the country?

Up
1

Is Hipkins painting NZ into a corner for nuclear power stations? If not then he should have qualified his statement by referring to armaments and ships or aircraft potentially carrying nuclear weapons.

Up
0

The remaining time-lime (Limits to Growth, World3 graph, 2023 update) tell us that's irrelevant. 

Too late to start, too reliant on global trade. 

Up
0

This computer forecast tells us that human efforts are worthless

I do find it interesting that end-times thinking continues to persist so strongly in western culture.

Up
1

You have a linear-ly-wired brain, then. 

Within a Bounded System (Earth is one, NZ another), a regime of exponential physical growth (extraction/consumption/waste) will hit the Limits at a scope never-before seen. And will be blindsided. And will be chasing its tail all the way dow the other side of the Gaussian. 

Nothing to do with raptures or end-times (although perhaps the residual memory of failed civilisations has an echo). 

 

Up
0

You say that I'm the linear thinker whilst you proclaim mechanistic, Newtonian style physical limits on everything. Looking in a mirror may be of benefit, methinks.

Up
2

No - I cite the Laws of Thermodynamics

A little on beyond Newton - not that he was wrong...

Up
0

do you keep driving past petrol stations when the petrol light comes on? she'll be right mate - we'll make it - how far to the next one?

Up
1

How can anyone (not just Hipkins) take a position on Aukus Pillar2 when nobody appears to know what it involves?

Up
3

MikeM & In Vino right on the money! How can anybody take this guy seriously? He and Ardern are two of the most incompetent politicians we have ever had to endure! Made a good fist of nearly destroying NZ. Hipkin's also has no hesitation in telling outright lies having been caught out on many occasions. Capabilities of both only suitable to work in the "chippy"! Even there Hipkin's would no doubt be caught telling porkies about the type of fish you were buying!

Up
2

Economic growth destroys itself.

Every time. 

No exceptions. 

Blame where it lies, eh? 

Up
0

When the buffalo fight, the small animals get trampled.

Maybe we need to find a friendly buffalo, who looks where it puts it's feet.

Up
0