Operation Poseidon Archer

Written By: - Date published: 12:38 pm, January 25th, 2024 - 31 comments
Categories: defence, FiveEyes, Free Trade, gaza, israel, Peace, us politics, war - Tags:

CNN reports that the US has named the ongoing operation against Houthi in Yemen “Operation Poseidon Archer, suggesting a more organized and potentially long-term approach.” New Zealand has joined it – cue the slippery slope.

New Zealand is sending six specialists with targeting expertise according to Defence Minister Judith Collins.

Prime Minister Christopher Luxon stated repeatedly at Monday’s car-crash Beehive Press conference that their deployment would finish at the end of July. Luxon also stated that the decision was not linked to the Israeli-led and US-supported massacre in Gaza. The second statement is utterly not believable, and events may prove the first to be wrong. The US is yanking our chain.

This has all the appearance of us being drawn into another US-led swamp. The Houthis have seen off Saudi Arabia’s efforts to bomb them back to the stone age, and have shown they have accurate long-range missiles in their inventory. President Biden has admitted that the US bombing is unlikely to stop the Houthi attacks on Israeli shipping, but it also won’t stop the US doing the only thing they know which is to keep on bombing.

Defence Minister Judith Collins’ admitted that the New Zealand service-persons will be involved in “targetting” which they are “very skilled at.” I think it is highly likely that some of the defence personnel sent to assist Ukraine were also involved in targetting, using information from US and NATO reconnaissance aircraft and spydrones.

Now that warfare has shifted from boots on the ground to eyes in the air, this means they are active participants in war.

Labour’s Foreign Affairs spokesperson David Parker has said that this is an operation that we do not need to get involved in. He reminded us that unlike Australia we did not join US President George Bush’s “coalition of the willing” in Iraq in 2003.

The National/NZ First/ACT government are leading us into a “coalition of the captured.” It is one of a piece with the AUKUS agreement, which the coalition government is also pushing us into.The fundamental issue is not about capability, it is about our sovereignty

Its most pungent manifestation came with a recent comment which was first aired by former prime minister Malcolm Turnbull and widely attributed to President Biden’s Asia ‘tsar’, Kurt Campbell. Campbell described the AUKUS agreement as “getting Australia off the fence. We have them locked in now for the next 40 years”.

The last thing New Zealand needs in this shifting world is to be locked into the US embrace as it moves from one disastrous losing war to another, leaving behind millions and millions of lost and ruined lives.

31 comments on “Operation Poseidon Archer ”

  • Comments are now closed

  1. Christopher Randal 1
    25 January 2024 at 1:30 pm

    Why not just arm the merchant ships with high powered artillery, manned by US/UK military?

    • Powerman 1.1
      25 January 2024 at 1:34 pm

      Alternatively, why not de-escalate the situation by persuading Israel that killing children is not a good idea?

      • SPC 1.1.1
        25 January 2024 at 1:40 pm

        OK. What is the attacks on shipping occur until Israel withdraws from the 1967 occupied territories. OK? What if they occur until the 1948 refugees are allowed right of return? OK? What if they continue until there is a unitary state as Palestinian Arabs wanted pre the UN decision. OK?

        That is the position of Iran which supports the Houthi, Hezbollah, Shia militias in Iraq. All non state actors.

        What if Russians ask Houthi to continue attacks after this until the West stops aiding Ukraine from being annexed into Russia? OK?

      • Christopher Randal 1.1.2
        25 January 2024 at 2:47 pm

        With Netanyahu in power that is as likely as our Lord returning to earth tomorrow

  2. tsmithfield 2
    25 January 2024 at 1:37 pm

    Firstly, there is no justification to fire on innocent merchant shipping, especially since many of those ships will likely have nothing to do with Israel.

    Secondly, we are highly dependent on sea trade as a trading nation. So, it is in our interest to do something to ensure our trade routes stay open rather than just bludge of other nations.

    Finally, ships taking the much longer alternative route is very negative in terms of climate impact. Therefore, it is beneficial to the climate to ensure that the best trade route stays open.

    So, I have no problems with the commitment we have made thus far.

  3. SPC 3
    25 January 2024 at 1:57 pm

    President Biden has admitted that the US bombing is unlikely to stop the Houthi attacks on Israeli shipping

    If that had been the case there would have been no Operation Poseidon Archer, the service to Israel via the Suez to Eliat was very small. Their Med ports could be serviced via the Atlantic easily enough.

    Now that warfare has shifted from boots on the ground to eyes in the air, this means they are active participants in war

    Against whom, a non state actor attacking shipping? It is an action based on a UNSC Resolution to protect shipping.

    It is one of a piece with the AUKUS agreement, which the coalition government is also pushing us into

    The fundamental issue is not about capability, it is about our sovereignty

    AUKUS 2 is about capability, the co-operation in tech development is good for the economy and it need not impact on sovereignty. Our only risk is via our security alliance with Oz, that would require us to inform Beijing where our boundaries are – international rules on borders and sea lanes, but not part of any coalition to support the independence of an island, Taiwan, that is not a UN member state.

    That leaves open some risk of what we would do if China blockaded (air or sea) Taiwan. We could indicate no military involvement on that one.

    • Subliminal 3.1
      25 January 2024 at 8:21 pm

      What absolute rubbish. Of course the choices you make with regard to weaponry impact on sovereignty! Australia made a careful study of going nuclear submarine before rejecting it in favour of the conventional French design precisely over sovereignty issues. They considered that if they could not sevice it themselves then their navy would not be sovereign. They would be open to manipulation. If you think its an easy thing to go against the thinking of the country that supplies a major chunk of the weapons and equiptment that your armed forces use then you are naive in the extreme. Israel removed support for weaponry, surveillance technology and training for Colombia when they came out strongly in support of Palestine. Since then, not a peep. This is exactly what "sovereignty issues" means.

      https://www.nakedcapitalism.com/2024/01/why-dont-countries-take-more-action-against-israel.html

      • SPC 3.1.1
        25 January 2024 at 8:33 pm

        "slippery slope" arguments are nearly useless; they turn 'risk' and 'inevitability' into the same thing. They are not.

        • Subliminal 3.1.1.1
          25 January 2024 at 9:06 pm

          I know the phrase has a nice ring to it but theres nothing slippery slope about sovereignty. Its more like virginity. One minute you have it, then you don't. But unlike losing your virginity, with sovereignty you may not realise you've lost it till you try to use it again.

          • SPC 3.1.1.1.1
            25 January 2024 at 9:40 pm

            We have a defence alliance with Oz so we have to have some capacity to work together.

            Beyond that neither Five Eyes nor AUKUS 2 co-op on tech development requires involvement of our military in Iraq style ops.

            Labour's decision on new planes with AWACS did not compromise our freedom of choice, nor will this.

            It will be interesting to note if Labour agrees with the National decision on AUKUS, it has been fairly uniform since National adopted the nuclear free position.

  4. Ad 4
    25 January 2024 at 2:00 pm

    "slippery slope" arguments are nearly useless; they turn 'risk' and 'inevitability' into the same thing. They are not.

    I agree we should be very cautious acting without UN mandate, but then you've got to decide and act. We've had a century of lessons about New Zealand's trade reliance on the Red Sea.

    • Bearded Git 4.1
      26 January 2024 at 6:01 am

      It follows that the NZ government, and all other “western” governments, should support a ceasefire in Gaza (and in the occupied West Bank for that matter).

      The Houthis would stop their attacks on Red Sea shipping if an unconditional ceasefire was enacted. Simple really.

      • Ad 4.1.1
        26 January 2024 at 8:34 am

        We do already.

        But then, BG, comes the natural interventionist question:

        Would you send your son or daughter or through the state the children of your neighbours, to go do peacekeeping in Gaza?

        That's the moral test that you get to pretty fast.

  5. SPC 5
    25 January 2024 at 2:20 pm

    CNN reports that the US has named the ongoing operation against Houthi in Yemen “Operation Poseidon Archer, suggesting a more organized and potentially long-term approach.” New Zealand has joined it – cue the slippery slope.

    The former government had agreed to action in this area up until July 2024

    Proactively Released Defence Documents

    HON ANDREW LITTLE, MINISTER OF DEFENCE New Zealand’s Maritime Security Commitments in the Middle East

    August 2023

    This publication provides documents on Cabinet’s December 2021 decision extend the mandate for New Zealand’s support to maritime security in the Middle East to 30 June 2024.

    The pack comprises:

    – the Cabinet minute of decision New Zealand's Maritime Security Commitments in the Middle East [ERS-21-MIN-0052] and

    – the Cabinet paper New Zealand's Maritime Security Commitments in the Middle East [ERS-21-SUB-0052].

    https://www.defence.govt.nz/assets/publication/file/MARSEC.pdf

    There is a UNSC Resolution to act on for awhile.

    It allows a defence of the safety and secure transport in the Red Sea.

    S/RES/2722 (2024)
    24-004372/2
    2. Demands that the Houthis immediately cease all such attacks, which impede global commerce and undermine navigational rights and freedoms as well as regional peace and security, and further demands that the Houthis immediately release the Galaxy Leader and its crew;
    3. Affirms the exercise of navigational rights and freedoms by merchant and commercial vessels, in accordance with international law, must be respected, and takes note of the right of Member States, in accordance with international law, to defend their vessels from attacks, including those that undermine navigational rights and freedoms;
    4. Commends the efforts by Member States within the framework of the International Maritime Organization, to enhance the safety and secure transit of merchant and commercial vessels of all States through the Red Sea

    https://wwwcdn.imo.org/localresources/en/MediaCentre/HotTopics/Documents/Red%20Sea/SCR%202722%282024%29%20on%20the%20Red%20Sea%20adopted%20%28E%29%201.pdf

    https://www.imo.org/en/KnowledgeCentre/Pages/IMOinUN-default.aspx

  6. Ad 6
    25 January 2024 at 2:20 pm

    In case I come across as too supportive of the US, I need to put on record about the Middle East:

    – The US wrecked Iraq. Under Bush 1, and then Clinton, and then Bush 2

    – The US wrecked Afghanistan. Under Clinton, then Bush 2, then Obama, then Trump. Biden finally got them out.

    – The US wrecked Syria. Woeful hashed regime change. From Clinton, to Bush 2, to Obama. Trump finally got them out.

    – The US wrecked Sudan. Under Obama. Worst humanitarian crisis in a generation.

    – The US wrecked Libya. Under Obama, then Trump. Turned a really bad place into a miserable non-state shitshow.

    – The Middle East countries the US props up with massive arms deals and military bases totalling over 40,000 personnel include: Jordan, Saudi Arabia, Israel, Bahrain, Qatar, and Kuwait.

    If this is the mess the Middle East with that much of the US military there, it would be a dark world if they all left … or it might look remarkably similar to what we have now.

    • tsmithfield 6.1
      25 January 2024 at 2:26 pm

      I think if the operation focuses only on preventing attacks on shipping it should be ok. For instance, firing on missile sites identified by their launch location. So, a missile fired at a ship initiates immediate counter-battery fire.

      Also, taking out boats attacking merchant ships etc.

      • Jenny 6.1.1
        26 January 2024 at 8:57 am

        '

        When your favourite tool is a hammer, every problem looks like a nail.

        tsmithfield @6.1

        25 January 2024 at 2:26 pm

        I think if the operation focuses only on preventing attacks on shipping it should be ok. For instance, firing on missile sites identified by their launch location…..

        "…it should be ok." Really?

        Except that it is not the only option. How about de-escalating the conflict in Gaza?

        That might be an idea to try first.

        Escalating the conflict in the Middle East by us helping bomb targets in Yemen can only be making things worse.

        Maybe if we applied the same level playing field in regard to Israel's attack on civilian shipping in international waters you might have a case.

        https://www.aljazeera.com/features/2020/5/30/a-decade-has-passed-but-the-mavi-marmara-killings-i-saw-still-shape-me

        If "preventing attacks on shipping", it is OK to fire on sites identified by their locations then it must also be OK for the Yemenis to fire on sites identified by their location…. (including the NZ targetters).

        From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia:

        On 11 January, U.S. Navy SEALS raided a ship off the coast of Somalia which was bound to Houthi militants. Iranian-made missile components and other weapons, including air defense parts, were seized from the ship. The ship was then sunk and its crew of 14 people were detained. During the raid, a SEAL was pushed into the water by high waves and one of his teammates jumped in after him, causing both of them to go missing.[68][69] Both SEALs were declared dead by the US military after a 10-day search failed to locate them.[17]

        https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Red_Sea_crisis

        From the same wikipedia post:

        Houthi spokesperson Yahva Saree announced that any ship destined for Israel was a "legitimate target" and claimed they will not stop until the Gaza Strip is supplied with food and medicine.[25]

        https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Red_Sea_crisis

        So far, apart from the two US Navy SEALs who fell overboard, no civilian seafarers or allied forces have died in the Yemeni raids on shipping through the Red Sea.

        To achieve Israel's stated objective to eliminate Hamas, the killing of tens of thousands of Palestinians, including women and children, is considered by the US and Israel to be "proportional" and "legitimate".

        Applying the same metric;

        To achieve Yemen's stated objective to supply the Gaza strip with food and medicine, – considering the low loss of life of civilian and military personal. Must be even more legitimate and proportional.

    • SPC 6.2
      25 January 2024 at 2:44 pm

      – The US wrecked Afghanistan. Under Clinton, then Bush 2, then Obama, then Trump. Biden finally got them out.

      They did that under Reagan supporting the Mujahadeen to take over as part of winning the Cold War at the expense of the women of Afghanistan. The secular regime had enabled women rights. This took them away. Then it got worse Taleban. Now they are back. The best period for women in Afghanistan was then and the 20 years the Americans were there. The departure from there, as if these women and their human rights was not part of a forever war, was the signal for Putin to act in Ukraine and see off the West.

      The US wrecked Syria. Woeful hashed regime change. From Clinton, to Bush 2, to Obama. Trump finally got them out.

      They still have a base there, near allies – Kurds and the "democratic" FSA remnant. It's only over because the rebels backed by the Gulf and Turkey lost to Assad, Russia and Iran (Hezbollah).

    • Mike Smith 6.3
      26 January 2024 at 4:19 pm

      The Iraqis have formally asked the US to leave now. Trump didn't get the US out of Syria – remember "we took the oil." They are still there as invaders and occupiers in an illegal operation in eastern Syria, still taking the oil.

  7. Tiger Mountain 7
    25 January 2024 at 4:56 pm

    Who knew there were so many highly skilled and knowledgeable geo political and military strategists here at The Standard…

    For us ordinary folks the call is more simple–“Ceasefire Now! and a negotiated settlement with Palestine.

    • Subliminal 7.1
      25 January 2024 at 5:50 pm

      Absolutely TM. It really is that simple. Instead we have Yemen once again blockaded by the US having just come out of a blockade that cost 80000 childrens deaths. At the height, one child was dying from malnutrition every 9 minutes. Thats starving to death. Its not pretty and not many of the rag doll children photos made it into the press at the time. And the Us was definitely implicated in what at the time was also correctly labelled as a genocide. No wonder they feel such afinity to Gaza. This is a link to a duck duck go search

      us complicit in saudi blockade of Yemen

      You will find that HRW, and even the NYT made the link between war crimes and the US. Some of the photos of malnourished children are very disturbing.

      And here we are again, sadly with NZ involved as well

      Last time, the US was complicit in air to air refuelling supply of weaponry and targeting. These aren't claims made by offbeat news sites but the New York Times.

      https://www.nytimes.com/interactive/2017/08/31/opinion/columnists/yemen-famine-cholera.html

      And now NZ will be involved in targeting which can only mean direct involvement in civilian deaths

  8. Ed 8
    25 January 2024 at 6:29 pm

    Shame on Luxon.

    Shame on Peters.

    Shame on Seymour.

    Shsme. Shame. Shame.

    This war is not in my name.

  9. Rodel 9
    25 January 2024 at 11:09 pm

    'Luxon also stated that the decision was not linked to the Israeli-led and US-supported massacre in Gaza. ' This is straight out of Trump's playbook. Ir is a barefaced lie..

  10. Dot 10
    26 January 2024 at 11:09 am

    Me too

    you put it beautifully Ed

  11. Stephen D 11
    26 January 2024 at 9:40 pm

    Pablo on the money again.

    https://www.kiwipolitico.com/2024/01/a-toe-in-the-fire

    ”It was obvious that a conservative pro-American government coalition would not only sign a US-drafted declaration defending freedom of navigation and denouncing Houthi attacks uncommercial shipping in the Red Sea, but would offer some symbolic material support (even if token) to the maritime picket line that the US and its main allies (all 5 Eyes partners) were putting together under the already extant joint task force CTF-153 headquartered at the US 5th Fleet HQ in Bahrain. The task force is led by a US admiral and operates under US Rules of Engagement (ROE). Prime Minister Luxon is an admitted “Americaphile” due to his time spent in the US as a corporate executive. Deputy PM and Foreign Minister Winston Peters was involved in negotiating the Wellington and Washington Agreements establishing US-NZ bilateral security ties and has long voiced his support for US leadership in. global affairs. The third coalition party leader, David Seymour, takes his policy prescriptions (and money) from US rightwing think-tanks and conservative lobbies.”

The server will be getting hardware changes this evening starting at 10pm NZDT.
The site will be off line for some hours.