Luxon’s Support for AUKUS 2 is Against Our Interests

Written By: - Date published: 9:29 am, August 18th, 2024 - 21 comments
Categories: China, Christopher Luxon, Deep stuff, International, us politics - Tags:

It is well time the Prime Minister set out how it is in our interests to move against China by buying into AUKUS.

For decades, China has moved methodically to dominate in ever more global product categories from toys and clothing in the 1980s to semiconductors, cars and renewable energy today.

China today has the capacity to manufacture half of the world’s 80 million vehicles.

In 6 years’ time that capacity could grow to 75%. This year China will blow past Japan for global leadership, exporting 6 million vehicles to 140 countries.

Chinese brands like SAIC’s MG, Chery, Geely’s Volvo and BYD are leading the way, from Brazil to Thailand, from the UK to Thailand.

In 2020 we imported 752 EV’s from China, and in 2023 we imported 10,600 EV’s from China. SAIC now outsells Ford here – though Japanese brands still dominate.

Legacy European brands like Citroen are showing signals of rapid decline: Citroen is now pulling out of Australia, and Nissan in the US is crumbling and preparing for closure.

China continues to lead the world in solar and wind electricity generation, with twice as much capacity under construction as the rest of the world combined. 

It is China far more than anyone else that will enable us to make the transition away from oil and gas and the combustion engine, and towards electricity and our low carbon future. 

China now produces a third of the world’s manufactured goods — more than the United States, Germany, Japan, South Korea and Britain combined.

We buy most of our structural steel from China. We sell them some of the coking coal to make it.

China is New Zealand’s largest export and import market.

China takes 29-28% of everything we export. China accounted for 16.5% of New Zealand’s total imports last year. What we export to them is dairy concentrates, butter, logs, mostly unprocessed fruit, and honey. That’s pretty much everything we’ve got in the tank to sell.

China also owns many of our top exporting companies, including Synlait Milk, Oceania Dairy, Yashili NZ, the Synlait and Crafar Farms, Yili who owns Westland Dairy, Shanghai Bright Meat Group who own most of Silver Fern Farms our main meat exporter. And on the other hand, Fonterra’s global outreach is in rapid decline even though it was promised to be one great global powerhouse.

So with this utter reliance on China to take our exports and no route out of that dependency, could Prime Minister Luxon please explain why he wants New Zealand to join a new defence pact with Australia designed to contain China?

In his recent speech to the Australian Lowy Institute he said there was “military expansion and modernisation” occurring in the Pacific, and a growing risk of conflict.

Insofar as we still have a national interest left to defend, our largest economic interest to defend is with China.

21 comments on “Luxon’s Support for AUKUS 2 is Against Our Interests ”

  • Comments are now closed

  1. Tony Veitch 1
    18 August 2024 at 9:41 am

    I've said it before: China could cut us off in the blink of an eyelid and not even notice.

    I lived in China for 3+ years and do not recall seeing one identifiable NZ product on the shelves! And an economy controlled from the top, Xi Jin Ping could cast us loose with the stroke of a pen (or such is his power, with a lifted eyebrow!) [Shades of the film ‘The Death of Stalin.’]

    As for Luxon – inexperience. The man hasn't got a fucking clue!

    • bwaghorn 1.1
      18 August 2024 at 9:59 am

      Even though we are only a rounding error in china's eyes them being invested in our companies might not be so bad of an idea after all

  2. Stephen D 2
    18 August 2024 at 11:20 am

    Whatever happened to our “independent foreign policy?” I know we go on about a rules based order, but Luxon hasn’t squared that circle. A rules based order, our reliance on China as a trade partner, human right’s, China’s aggression in the South China Sea, and Aukus.

  3. tWig 3
    18 August 2024 at 1:11 pm

    The Guardian sees China's manufacturing economy as over-exposed and over-heated.

    "… Zongyuan Zoe Liu, a fellow at the Council on Foreign Relations thinktank, notes that China is producing twice as many solar panels as the rest of the world can put to use, while almost a third of car manufacturers are unprofitable.

    “China is producing far more output than it, or foreign markets, can sustainably absorb. As a result, the Chinese economy runs the risk of getting caught in a doom loop of falling prices, insolvency, factory closure, and, ultimately, job losses,” she says."

    • Subliminal 3.1
      19 August 2024 at 9:10 am

      You may find that it is foreign manufacturers that are being made unable to compete by Chinas ability to efficiently produce reliable EVs at quantity.

      The visiting team is still on the field, running around as fast as it can, trying to forge a comeback.

      For decades, they thought they were playing on a familiar field. But time is up, the game is over. China – the home team – is the winner.

      Spectators have just watched a sudden and catastrophic collapse of global automakers in China.

      https://newsletter.dunneinsights.com/p/china-is-done-with-global-carmakers

    • mikesh 3.2
      19 August 2024 at 9:55 am

      Why then is Biden wanting to impose a 100% tariff on chinese EVs ?

  4. Patricia Bremner 4
    18 August 2024 at 1:58 pm

    I'm trying hard to see anything this man has done that is in our interests.angry

  5. aj 5
    18 August 2024 at 5:09 pm

    Youtube – Australia's Defense Policy Explained | Utopia

    With a major defense white paper about to be launched Jim & Rhonda ask Tony for help.

    I won't link, it's been up here several times. Truth in satire.

    While on his trip to NSW getting tips on Infrastructure, in which I've already said he should have talked to Tony who could explain Australia's defense policy – to counterbalance his instructions from the Heritage Foundation.

  6. Populuxe1 6
    18 August 2024 at 8:38 pm

    Unpopular opinion: pandering to China's insecurities does not, in fact, add up to an "independent foreign policy" either.
    Aukus pillar II, as far as I can see, really doesn't change our status vis a vis the US any more than being in 5 Eyes or being Australia's closest defence partner.
    If anyone attacks us, Australia must, by mutual agreement, respond, and vice versa, and if Australia is involved, Aukus is involved. Whether we like it or not, we're going to be part of Aukus by default. That, and as far as both Australia and the US are concerned, Anzus still exists – the only variable is that the US suspended an absolute obligation to come to our aid, but again, it's impossible to see how our relationship with Australia wouldn't place us under that umbrella anyway.
    There are a couple of other factors. Diplomatically and militarily, we have always sided with democracy against totalitarianism, and we are traditionally pro-Nato. If, for example, China, attacks Taiwan, are we just going to abandon those principles. We also have a vested interest in the South China Sea being kept open and free as regards our dependence on trade – it's not really something we can pressure China about on our own. There's also the little matter of our publicly siding with Ukraine while China is transparently supplying Russia.
    If the price of trade with China is deferring to its geopolitical sensitivities, it's probably not a relationship worth having.

    • Subliminal 6.1
      19 August 2024 at 9:31 am

      China is a massive trading nation. The biggest it could be argued. They more than anyone have a vested interest in keeping the South Cina Sea open. Given this obvious fact, diplomacy would seem a far better option than "containment" which seeks to wrench control of this important route back to the US/UK through Aukus. For what purpose can nuclear subs for Aus be? Perhaps to help with upcoming enforcement of sanctions against China?

      You mention Chinese "transparent" supply of Russia for their Ukraine war but China denies this. In fact, Chinese made drones are appearing in large numbers on the side of Ukraine. This is a result of their ready availability and reliability rather than direct support for Ukraine.

      As to "deferring to sensibilities" what an anodine remark. If Aukus is not "deferring to" US "sensibilities" I don't know what is.

      • Populuxe1 6.1.1
        19 August 2024 at 4:35 pm

        China is a massive trading nation. The biggest it could be argued. They more than anyone have a vested interest in keeping the South Cina Sea open.

        It could be argued, by someone who hadn't really thought about it, or being deliberately disingenuous about it, but Chinese control of the South China Sea doesn't affect Chinese imports or exports. It does, however, have implications for everyone else in the neighbourhood and beyond.

        You mention Chinese "transparent" supply of Russia for their Ukraine war but China denies this. In fact, Chinese made drones are appearing in large numbers on the side of Ukraine. This is a result of their ready availability and reliability rather than direct support for Ukraine.

        China secretly sends enough gear to Russia to equip an army – POLITICO
        The fig leaf of dual-use is rather convenient
        How is China supporting Russia after it was sanctioned for Ukraine war? (bbc.com)

        As to "deferring to sensibilities" what an anodine remark. If Aukus is not "deferring to" US "sensibilities" I don't know what is.

        The insistence on conflating pillar II with the rest of Aukus is intellectual laziness, not least because our anti-nuclear stance is solid. The focus will likely be almost entirely a matter of interoperability with Australia.

        • Scud 6.1.1.1
          19 August 2024 at 11:05 pm

          Including NZ, be it our SEA exports & imports via the Singapore Hub which also includes the bulk NZ's Refined POL imports come from Singer's now since Marsden Pt Oil Refinery close!

          Then there is NZ's Export & Imports from Nth West Asia ie China, Taiwan, Sth Korea & Japan will be effected by any Conflict in the SCS even though those Ships going directly.

          But they will still effected indirectly as those SCS Sea Lanes will be closed off by Conflict.

          While the Direct Sea Lanes to Nth West Asia & from NZ are likely to be degraded to a point that NZ will see a decline in shipping effecting those Exports & Imports most likely by huge increase shipping insurance or by attacks on Merchant Shipping by Submarines & or Surface Merchant Raider's under a false flag ie the same types that operated around NZ Waters during both World Wars by Germany etc.

        • Subliminal 6.1.1.2
          20 August 2024 at 6:34 pm

          You're upset that China supplies non lethal but militarily useful equiptment to Russia as per your linked article and this is a reason to confront them in the South China Sea??

          There are a lot of people with lots more reason to be upset by extremely lethal militarily devastating equiptment to Israel in unconditional support of their genocide in Gaza. If its the principals that are at stake that you demand we choose our allies by, lets be clear that the US and UK demonstrably have none. They are self interested and act only to maintain their ability to project power and access resources.

          Part of Aukus is the building of a nuclear sub base in the Northern Territory and a large increase in the number of US military stationed in Aus. The US does not subordinate command to any country even in foreign territory. It is naive in the extreme to believe that pillar 2 will not mean developing extremely close, controlled relationships with this increasing US military in Aus

    • mikesh 6.2
      19 August 2024 at 10:06 am

      democracy against totalitarianism ?

      Oligarchy against authoritarian, I think.

  7. SPC 7
    19 August 2024 at 1:10 am

    Proposing a wide-ranging technology co-operation agreement within AUKUS, as Pillar 2, is both clumsy and provocative.

    It is the USA at its blundering worst.

    The point of having an independent voice is to proffer advice, not to go along with a bad idea. Exercised wisely means we were not involved in Iraq (the Islamic State creation programme).

    This has three purposes

    1. a way for the UK to be involved in tech co-operation, now it is outside of the EU.

    2. bringing Japan (already in QUAD) and South Korea into the western security co-operation orbit.

    3. inferring a form of collective to constrain unilateral Chinese hegemony (because it is an add on to a project to extend the range of Oz subs, via nuclear power propulsion and also the UK and US association with bases in Oz). AUKUS Pillar 1.

    1 and 2 can not only be done totally separate to AUKUS Pillar 1, they should be.

    Given our own nuclear power free zone and nuclear weapons free South Pacific position, this should be our position.

    7 Nations (USA, Canada, UK, Japan, South Korea, Oz and Enzed) tech co-operation is fine, but is of a much wider area than just military.

    Our foreign policy line should be that we and Oz are defence and security partners, seek a resolution in the dispute over South China Sea economic zone areas (and de-militarisation of the atolls), support a self governing Taiwan within China, and want a Korean peninsular peace that ends the possession of nuclear weapons by North Korea.

  8. TeWhareWhero 8
    19 August 2024 at 10:03 am

    Given Aotearoa-NZ's isolation, being an archipelago with increasingly unreliable transport links between and within the islands, and having a tiny population, the country cannot defend itself against hugely more powerful nations, and would not be of much practical help to any of its allies if they decided to defend another country.

    The only logical course of action for Ao-NZ is a declaration of absolute neutrality; withdrawal from all military treaties (which were all the product of arm twisting by the old and the current global empires), maintain our nuclear-free status, and negotiate such trade deals as are beneficial to developing as sustainable an economy as it is possible in an era of hyper-consumption. Ao-NZ could become the catalyst for the development of new Non-Aligned Movement for the global south; take the lead in finding ways to clean up the various toxic messes hyper-capitalism has created….

    Well, an old socialist can dream …

  9. Sanctuary 9
    19 August 2024 at 12:12 pm

    Interesting factoid – China's Co2 emissions have peaked and are now declining…

    https://www.carbonbrief.org/analysis-chinas-emissions-set-to-fall-in-2024-after-record-growth-in-clean-energy/

  10. roblogic 10
    21 August 2024 at 3:00 pm

    There are interesting rumblings in the Labour-led Australian government, the previous administration's enthusiasm for AUKUS is evidently not shared across the nation.

    Arnaud Bertrand: https://x.com/RnaudBertrand/status/1825845630532567151

    Something quite extraordinary is happening in Australia. Over the past few weeks, many key authoritative figures – former PMs, top strategists, etc. – came out against AUKUS and US imperialism, in favor of Australian independence. A small 🧵 listing the various key statements..

    First of, Paul Keating, former Prime Minister, describing AUKUS as the “worst deal in all history” and saying it will turn Australia into the 51st state of the US. [link]

    Malcolm Turnbull, another former PM, writing in The Guardian that it jeopardizes Australia's defense capability and sovereignty: "we now have to face the real prospect […] of not having any Australian submarine capability at all." [link]

    Former Foreign Minister Gareth Evans calling AUKUS "one of the worst defence and foreign policy decisions our country has made" [link]

    Another former Foreign Minister, Bob Carr, colorfully describing AUKUS as "fragrant, methane-wrapped bullshit" [link]

    [snipped a dozen more quotes]

    This list is far from exhaustive but it shows, and this is a vast understatement, how increasingly controversial AUKUS is both in Australia and in the region overall. People are realizing that it is essentially a trap by the US against Australian sovereignty, using them as a proxy against China in their quest for preserving a fast-eroding primacy. And they worry, rightly IMHO, that it may end up destroying both Australian prosperity and security, as well as that of the region overall.

  11. aj 11
    21 August 2024 at 6:19 pm

    enthusiasm for AUKUS is evidently not shared across the nation.

    For those without X

    https://threadreaderapp.com/thread/1825845630532567151.html