Self-destructive stupidity, New Zealand style

Written By: - Date published: 5:51 am, August 27th, 2023 - 25 comments
Categories: Andrew Little, China, defence, FiveEyes, helen clark, Iran, Japan, Korea, Peace, Peace, Russia, Spying, trade, uk politics, war - Tags:

By Tim Beal, cross-posted from Pearls and Irritations

‘Whom the gods would destroy, they first make mad’

What a pity it is that we no longer believe in capricious gods because that would offer a good explanation for the otherwise quite perplexing habit of governments, with intelligent and informed people theoretically at their disposal, to embrace policies which are manifestly an example of self-destructive stupidity. Clever people doing stupid things.

New Zealand’s latest Defence Assessment is a case in point. The public face of it – The Defence Policy and Strategy Statement 2023– was launched by Defence Minister Andrew Little. On the occasion he pontificated:

As we see conditions changing, not just in the Pacific but in the broader Asia-Pacific region, we have to be thinking about what that means for us.

“If for example, conflict does break out in the South China Sea, where $20 billion worth of our exports goes through every year, we have a stake and the nature of our relationships with our partners means we may be called on to play a role should conflict breakout.”

This is a very bizarre statement. $20 billion of New Zealand exports may go through the South China Sea, but Little omits to mention that some 70% of that goes to China. By ‘playing a role during a crisis’ he means assisting the US military whose function would, of course, not be to keep China’s trade routes open but to close them. The South China Sea, like the Straits of Malacca, is a choke point for China imports, not least oil from the Middle East, and a key objective in conflict, or even crisis, would be to close it off.

If the defence minister had said that the Yellow Peril had to be stopped at all costs and that NZ would need to be prepared to sacrifice its foreign trade that might be considered paranoid, but would at least have an element of logical argument. But to say that the best way to preserve the trade is to destroy it suggests a deep dissociation from reality.

That, unfortunately, is par for the course.

Little is quoted as claiming “we do not live in a benign strategic environment” and that touches on the core issue. The New Zealand ‘national security industry’ has a fundamental problem; the country has no credible natural external enemies. Its geographical isolation means that it has no territorial disputes and it offers no locational advantages on a strategic chessboard, unlike for instance the Korean peninsula where Russia, China, Japan and the United States meet and contest.

There are only two countries which could physically coerce New Zealand – Australia and the US. A cynic might ask, why bother? Australia owns it economically (all the major banks are Australian for instance) and the US controls it politically (think Vietnam, Afghanistan, South China Sea). No other country has the ability or any conceivable motive to threaten New Zealand and none has done so publicly. The only exception would be Japan, and that, significantly, was within the context of a war with the United States and its allies.

The stated threat-perception of the military is shared by the spooks. New Zealand’s Security Threat Environment 2023 just released by the Security Intelligence Service (SIS) solemnly tells us:

There are a small number of states who conduct foreign interference in New Zealand but their ability to cause harm is significant. This report highlights the activities of three states in particular: the People’s Republic of China (PRC), the Islamic Republic of Iran and Russia

Iran? Really? And how did the US, the UK and Australia escape their attention?

This is the first time that SIS has ‘shared’ its threat assessment with the public. There may, of course, be a real assessment that SIS keeps under wraps but its Director-General, Andrew Hampton, claims:

Our goal for this report is for it to be a starting point for a greater level of awareness and a healthy conversation.

A ‘healthy conversation’ is perhaps the last thing they want but the first is clearly the raising of the perception of threat from designated enemies, and an associated campaign against dissenters who might challenge the official narrative.

So we have the spooks conjuring up imaginary (but useful) threats and the military beating the drums of war, with a focus on China. Not merely are the threats bogus but the possible consequences – economic and perhaps military- are disastrous. It is significant that a senior minster is proposing increasing military expenditure during an election year.

The governing Labour Party is facing defeat, the health and education sectors are in crisis, there are huge costs arising from climate change and yet he is squandering money which could both help the country and assist election appeal. To sacrifice national interest is one thing, but to risk electoral defeat is another, and indicates considerable pressure from Washington

How do we explain all this nonsense? There are many threads in an answer but they would all lead in the same direction towards imperial strategy.

New Zealand (and Australia) have always been cogs in an imperial strategy. From the beginning of European settlement until the Pacific War it was centred on London, since then on Washington. In terms of fantasy the present situation is reminiscent of the Russian Scares of late 19th century which had the gullible believing    ‘The Russians are Coming’ and which left a number of unused (but, like AUKUS, no doubt profitable) forts on the coast of New Zealand and Australia. In terms of consequence it is akin to the string of imperial wars which has left cenotaphs in the cities and towns of New Zealand (and Australia) and so many bones overseas. Bad as those wars were, one with China would be far more consequential; this time the enemy can retaliate.

Why the talk of war? US hegemony is under threat from the rise of China and although the challenge is primarily economic, technological and diplomatic, militarisation is so deeply embedded now within the US political and economic structure, that the response is overwhelmingly military and coercive. Since the US is in relative decline, its subordinate allies become ever more important, hence constructed war fever in NZ and Australia.

Clearly the sensible thing for New Zealand to do would be to nudge America into the peaceful acceptance of multipolarity; Singapore’s Kishore Mahbubani provides an example.

However, at the moment New Zealand is following Australia on a suicidal path, with just a few signs of dissent within the political elite. Let us hope that the malevolence of the gods will be foiled and doubts, such as that expressed by former Prime Minister Helen Clark, will grow and develop into a movement for resistance to the US, for enlightened self-interest and the pursuit of peace. Those hopes will only be fulfilled if we are able to break through the twin carapace of propaganda and censorship to raise public awareness of the self-destructive stupidity of current policies.

Tim Beal Author, Researcher, Educator; Asia specialist. Tim is a retired NZ academic who has written extensively on Asia, with a focus on Northeast Asia. He also has an interest in imperialism, again mainly in respect of Asia but recently, also inevitably encompassing Europe. More at http://www.timbeal.net.nz/geopolitics/

25 comments on “Self-destructive stupidity, New Zealand style ”

  • Comments are now closed

  1. Peter Bradley 1
    27 August 2023 at 9:42 am

    This Australian comedy sketch sums it up nicely "Under this proposal we will spend $30 billion a year to protect our trading routes with China … from China. And that doesn't strike any at this table as odd?"

    • newsense 1.1
      27 August 2023 at 12:20 pm

      Beat me to it.

      A more succinct summary of Keating’s interview about the submarines where he points out of the 3 partners billions are flowing out of Australia to the US and the UK.

  2. pat 2
    27 August 2023 at 10:02 am

    You are with U.S. or agin U.S…..and despite the China trade we believe its more beneficial to be with them….who knows what is discussed in the darkened rooms.

  3. Anne 3
    27 August 2023 at 10:26 am

    Andrew Little said:

    “If for example, conflict does break out in the South China Sea, where $20 billion worth of our exports goes through every year, we have a stake and the nature of our relationships with our partners means we may be called on to play a role should conflict breakout.”

    What he says is the truth. That is exactly how it stands. But it doesn't necessarily mean we will be sending military personnel and equipment to fight in the conflict. We may do a Helen Clark and instead send troops and medical personnel to help clean up the resultant mess.

    It will be dependent on the outcome of the election. A NAct govt. will be in boots n’ all but Lab/Green will surely be far more nuanced than that.

  4. Ad 4
    28 August 2023 at 10:51 am

    "There are only two countries which could physically coerce New Zealand – Australia and the US."

    The only country to have coerced Australia in the last three years was China through a high impact trade embargo on iron ore, coal, wine, barley, beef, cotton, lamb, timber.

    New Zealand's vulnerability to trade with China is even greater than Australia's.

    Romeo and Juliet's line "my only love is my only hate" applies because our only trade risk is also our only military risk.

    That is a quandary entirely of our own making that Little is quite rightly preparing us to deal with.

    To be clear, Tim Beale is a fucking idiot.

    • Blazer 4.1
      28 August 2023 at 11:35 am

      Beale presents a balanced and reasonable assessment imo.

      Your case is very weak .Picking a 3 year window and a U.S inspired tit for tat sanction action by China re Aussie imports is not compelling.

      The U.S and Australia are lockstep in foreign policy.

      I'm sure you're aware of the sanctions the U.S imposed on NZ re nuclear warships and their relative indifference to the french regarding the Rainbow Warrior terrorism.

      Former aussie P.M Keating put the so called China threat in perspective.

      U.S influence is waning all around the world and the future belongs to the BRICS.

      • Ad 4.1.1
        28 August 2023 at 2:50 pm

        The writer proposes that Australia and the United States are internal threats to New Zealand. No evidence.

        Go right ahead and name a naval+intelligence alliance other than the US that can assure our trade will get through to Japan, Korea, Philippines, and Vietnam when as they promise China invades Taiwan. It was that same US navy that defended our trade through WW2, the Korean war, the Malay Emergency, the Indonesian civil war, and the Vietnam War when threat to our trade was quite real.

        New Zealand has successfully relied on the US-led Bretton Woods security-for-trade arrangement since before World War 2, and we continue to do so. 60 years ago that didn't matter when most of our trade went to the UK. Now, when about 80% of our trade goes to China, Australia, Japan, Korea, security of trade into Asia is paramount.

        https://www.rbnz.govt.nz/-/media/2d8c1d99514049ae85778554a22ef821.ashx?sc_lang=en

        The US actions against New Zealand for its nuclear-free ships policy solely limited military exercises with us. Not trade. Military relationships were re-established nearly 2 decades ago.

        France is not in question in a US military alliance, obviously.

        If you think US influence is waning, ask the Ukrainians or any European country, or China, or anyone who trades with us. The US is the only reason we have had a multilateral order that has enabled our trade and hence our country to flourish for the last 80 years.

        • SPC 4.1.1.1
          28 August 2023 at 3:15 pm

          Yet

          1. the biggest threat to our trade is war over Taiwan between China and USA and the associated disconnect between China/Russia/Iran and the rest of the world market.
          2. the USA is withdrawing from international trade engagement (obstructing WTO judicial administration and not joining "TPP") and protecting its global corporates from paying tax where they earn their money.
          • Ad 4.1.1.1.1
            28 August 2023 at 4:52 pm

            You are pointing to a huge trade and military threat instigated by China against Taiwan. I agree.

            No doubt Biden is having to work overtime to repair Trump's damage to the world system of trade. But Biden is trying to do something harder: replace the old paradigms of globalisation with a worker-centred trade policy that raises wages and taxes on multinationals right across the world.

            The old institutional confidence post WW2 will never return, and there will be a heavier leaning on the US to sustain what is left of that old order. That's because no other country is replacing either the US dollar or the US economy or the US market command or the US military and diplomatic strength any time soon.

        • Blazer 4.1.1.2
          28 August 2023 at 4:33 pm

          You seem to attribute some altruism re U.S foreign policy where none exists.

          Every single year the U.S is viewed as the biggest threat to world peace.

          Who is the biggest threat to world peace? – BBC News

          'to be an enemy of the United States is dangerous,to be a friend is..fatal'-Henry K.

          Has China invaded any countries since WW2,bombed anyone back to the Stone Age,made economies 'scream'?

          The U.S protect their own strategic business interests ,ignore international opinion and will have to contend with a majority of the worlds population determined to be free of their military and economic interference.

          • Ad 4.1.1.2.1
            28 August 2023 at 4:41 pm

            No what the United States did after WW2 was this deal:

            Come under a US-led military umbrella formally or informally, and the US will pay for securing trade among all participating markets which will make those participants rich – including US companies.

            It worked quite well to protect us from communism, worked quite well to protect us from the collapse of communism, and is now still working sufficiently well to protect us from the global consequences of regional wars.

            NZ has done exceptionally well out of that arrangement. No other country offered it and for the foreseeable future never will.

            • Blazer 4.1.1.2.1.1
              28 August 2023 at 5:20 pm

              Yes we were on the winning side in WW2.

              Not sure we needed protecting from Communism.

              There's always a bogeyman to protect' us from.Red devils,muslim terrorists,etc.

              U.S military might alone,expanding U.S business interests and bullying any opposition gave us uni polar world.

              Why do you think the BRICS are moving away from this 'benevolent' empire?

              • Ad …
                28 August 2023 at 7:38 pm

                If you still want a 'soviet' state, move to China. But everyone's moving the other way.

                The unipolar world is the one that gave New Zealand the modicum of success it has. The US can live without the thanks of the hard left.

                The BRICS are moving nowhere, are achieving nothing, and never will.

                We've picked a side, same one we've had for 100 years, and it's working fine for us.

                • Blazer …
                  28 August 2023 at 9:11 pm

                  Never been to Disneyland…I'm sure I don't know what I'm missing.

                  Yes we've picked a side…they do speak english.All good.

          • Obtrectator 4.1.1.2.2
            31 August 2023 at 7:44 am

            "Has China invaded any countries since WW2"

            Tibet. It's had a go or two at India as well.

        • Jake Dee 4.1.1.3
          28 August 2023 at 6:34 pm

          It is unreasonable to suggest that because The USA has provided security for NZ since WWII that it will always do so and should always do so. The British empire did so before and then it collapsed. History is full of examples when the most powerful of a group of allies turned on its smaller allies after the war was over and circumstances changed. Athens did it to the other Hellenic states after the Persian invasion and The British empire did it to the American colonies after the Seven Years /French & Indian wars.

          To say that NZ's security must be permanently provided by Washington is to say that NZ must permanently be a vassal state of Washington.

          There has been a lot of talk recently that the NZ economy is too dependent on China and as such has become vulnerable to undue influence from Beijing. It's an interesting argument with some merit to it. However, defense and culture are just as important as the economy, maybe more so. How much of our defense is dependent on Washington, and how much of our culture is downstream from Hollywood and New York city? Diversify your portfolio and you will become more resistant to a downturn in the market or a collapse in any one of your investments.

  5. UncookedSelachimorpha 5
    28 August 2023 at 12:48 pm

    "…peaceful acceptance of multipolarity"

    The 'multipolar' term sounds lovely, but is used as doublespeak to encourage acceptance and normalisation of brutal authoritarians, police states, dictators and warmongering imperialists, IMHO.

    • SPC 5.1
      28 August 2023 at 2:38 pm

      Regional hegemon post western international order – purportedly "democratic and human rights" based. But often based on a global market capitalism/anti-socialist agenda.

      A more constructive term would be diplomatic engagement with “non western actors”, rather than appeasement or confrontation.

      • UncookedSelachimorpha 5.1.1
        28 August 2023 at 4:06 pm

        Yes.

        Agree the West's interest in human rights etc is extremely limited. But that doesn't make me like fascism etc, as an alternative.

  6. SPC 6
    28 August 2023 at 3:03 pm

    I think the presumption made by the Singaporean cited, that China (falling below billion people) will supersede the USA as the largest economy is questionable.

    It seems more likely an economic equivalence between USA, EU, China and India.

    https://www.globaltimes.cn/page/202307/1294857.shtml

    He might also be underestimating the military side to it – given global warming and resource competition. Here Russia, Turkey, Israel, Iran and Japan are more important.

    • Ad 6.1
      28 August 2023 at 7:45 pm

      Reports of US decline are so 2016.

      US manages to be energy and food production independent of rest of world, and at the same time retains:

      – global currency of choice

      – highest degree of innovation in the world

      – strongest diplomatic influence in the world

      – strongest military in the world, and strongest and longest military alliances in the world

      – strongest cultural influences and media and social media power in the world

      – largest economy in the world

      – largest institutional influence over World Bank, UN, UNDP, and IMF

      Hey check out all that Indian and Chinese assistance to Ukraine.

      • Blazer 6.1.1
        28 August 2023 at 9:30 pm

        – global currency of little choice,thanks to the petro dollar…..in serial decline

        – highest degree of incarcerating its citizens in the world

        – most invasions of sovereign nations of any country

        – biggest military expenditure in the world,with over 800 bases globally to enforce their doctrine.

        – spread mass consumerism around the world and a debt based ,private banker ,crony capitalist diktat.

        – largest economy in the world,at the expense of environmental vandalism,and the pillage and plunder of developing nations resources

        – largest institutional influence over World Bank, UN, UNDP, and IMF…completely ignore international conventions when it suits…weaponise their domination of Swift,IMF,B.I.S

        -is the biggest threat to world peace

        -has crazy gunlaws where there are mass shootings every week

        -experiencing an explosion of homelessness and a gaping chasm of inequality

        -despised all over the world for hipocracy and regime change interference

        -has carpet bombed so many countries there is a huge worldwide refugee problem

        -has unpayable debt of ludicrous trillions that it inflates away

        -is one of the most corrupt countries in the world with bought and paid for politicians.

        -elects embarrassing presidents ,that are a laughing stock

        I could go on all night.

  7. Dean Reynolds 7
    28 August 2023 at 4:35 pm

    It's a disgrace that when there is so much unmet need in NZ re housing, health, education, etc. Labour boasts about the billions of extra dollars it's poured into defence spending. Spending on defence is the biggest example of wasted government spending – it produces nothing of value to the non military world. Our Nurses & Teachers had to strike to get reasonable wage rises & prevent resignations yet without asking, Little offers extra pay & bonuses to a bunch of soldiers, sailors & airmen whose only job is to kill people. His rationale is that otherwise they'd leave the armed forces – who care? Let them leave.

    The Australian skit summed up the stupidity of our position – our biggest trading partner is China, but we need to spend billions to help our allies 'contain' China. If China retaliates & reduces its imports of our products, are our 'allies' going to step in & buy more of our product? Don't hold your breath.

  8. Jake Dee 8
    28 August 2023 at 6:53 pm

    Leftists have always had a problem with defense spending as if pacifism is some sort of viable long-term plan and that a military is some sort of optional luxury. I think it was Machiavelli who said that a state without an army is like a palace without a roof, sooner or later the rains will come, and all your beautiful things will be destroyed.

    New Zealand history short though it is gives us some good examples of this. The Moriori of the Chathams had a good run with pacifism before they got slaughtered enslaved and eaten and the harbor forts that Tim Beal doesn't seem to approve of worked perfectly well. A guard dog doesn't have to bite a burglar to earn his meat and biscuits, they just have to keep them out of the house.

  9. Descendant Of Smith 9
    31 August 2023 at 8:54 am

    The biggest threat to NZ I would think is imported right wing American (including prosperity) Christianity along with Russian propaganda pushing the same.

    Certainly they wish to influence our political system and have done for some time.