USUKAs

Written By: Mike Smith - Date published: 8:21 pm, March 3rd, 2024 - 32 comments
Categories: AUKUS, australian politics, China, defence, don brash, helen clark, jobs, Judith Collins, Pacific, Peace, tech industry, Ukraine, winston peters - Tags:

US Undersecretary of State Bonnie Jenkins is in Wellington this week with a hard sell for us on a promise of AUKUS Pillar 2 wunderwaffen maybes. The US’s real intent is to tie us to their wheel for the next fifty years. We should say tai hoa.

China is the target for the United States’ next proxy war. It is not clear yet who is the patsy this time, but Australia is certainly in the frame for having a role to play, hence AUKUS. Australia will also be very keen to have us tagging along in their wake. Dissent will not be allowed.

All sorts of futuristic goodies have been bandied around by Bonnie in recent presentations in the US about AUKUS. Quantum, cyber, AI, hypersonics, missiles are all on the smorgasbord of destruction, with jobs as the bait. Bonnie told the Atlantic Council think tank that her job was to explain the project to the public, not that she seemed very clear about any of the details.

Wise heads in New Zealand and Australia from across the political spectrum have said AUKUS is not a good idea for us. Helen Clark and Don Brash were explicit in an open appeal to the Prime Minister. Speaking after the recent inaugural Australia/New Zealand ministers’ meeting they said:

On the face of it, the two New Zealand ministers formally abandoned any attempt to maintain an independent foreign policy, and instead decided to throw in our lot with America’s attempt to slow China’s economic rise and keep it tightly hemmed in by American forces in South Korea, Japan, Guam, the Philippines, Papua New Guinea and Australia.

Prime Minister, it is imperative that you either reassert New Zealand’s independent foreign policy by making it clear that we want no part of Aukus, or of any other alliance designed to make an enemy of our largest trading partner, or acknowledge that we have indeed abandoned any attempt to maintain that policy.

It is not just a question of our independence, crucially important though that is. Budget implications are also important. The initial A$348billion cost estimate of the AUKUS nuclear submarine project is eye-watering, but if there is one thing that experience shows about weapons procurement in the West, it is that the only way the numbers go is up. Things have got so bad that there is now talk of the UK part of the acronym having to sell HMS Prince of Wales, one of its new-built aircraft carriers.

Then there is the question of the quality of the weaponry. It’s not clear how much the Brits would get for a used carrier, as both the Prince of Wales and its mother ship HMS Queen Elizabeth II have had to abort major missions in the last few years due to propellor shaft misalignment, a manufacturing issue. Also the recent Trident test missile launch by the UK’s nuclear submarine HMS Vanguard was a flop, as it fell back into the sea near the submarine.As for the wunderwaffen, Russia’s hypersonic missiles are operational while the US is still struggling to get them to work, with multiple test failures in recent years. Their technology is described as behind China’s.

One of the incentives for these sort of programmes is the promise of jobs. But it is important to note where the money and the jobs end up. Speaking to a neocon think tank last month on the second anniversary of the war in Ukraine, Undersecretary of State Victoria Nuland of “fuck the EU” fame reminded her audience where the money promised to Ukraine actually ends up:

And by the way, most of the support we are providing actually goes right back into the U.S. economy and defense industrial base—helping to modernize and scale our own vital defense infrastructure while creating American jobs and economic growth. In fact, the first $75 billion created good-paying jobs in at least 40 states across the U.S. and 90% of this next request will do the same.

AUKUS is an offer we can refuse and should refuse.

32 comments on “USUKAs ”

Comments are now closed

SPC 1

3 March 2024 at 8:31 pm

Helen Clark and Don Brash – 12 February NZ Herald

https://archive.li/JfhEE

Why doubt that New Zealand can sign up to AUKUS Pillar 2 and still retain and independent foreign and defence policy?

We avoided going into Iraq, despite buying ANZAC frigates. Sustaining connection/advanced capability via co-operation in advanced tech areas is simply good for our economic future.
Phillip ure 2

3 March 2024 at 9:19 pm

Mr smith I would like to both congratulate you and thank you for your recent precedent setting environmental court victory..

Best news in ages…

..and you have achieved a significant breakthrough..

..which will have many of the major polluters shifting uneasily in their seats..and clutching their wallets..

..and is a harbinger of a sea-shift in favour of the planet…and our future existence..

..you've justified your existence…and not many of us get to do that..
- Phillip ure 2.1
  
  3 March 2024 at 9:30 pm
  
  Note to moderator:..
  
  weird stuff still happening with my comments..
  
  ..now edits that I have done..and have appeared..have now vanished…
  
  ..this in multiple threads.. multiple times..
- Francesca 2.2
  
  4 March 2024 at 8:51 am
  
  Wrong Mike Smith Phil
  
  The environment court fellow was Mike Smith, of one tree hill fame ,
  
  Green Peace, Maori activist
  
  This mike Smith is the ex secretary general of the Labour Party
  - Phillip ure 2.2.1
    
    4 March 2024 at 9:22 am
    
    Heh..!..chrs for the heads-up..
    - Francesca 2.2.1.1
      
      4 March 2024 at 10:08 am
      
      They're both heroes in my book!!
- Mike Smith 2.3
  
  4 March 2024 at 3:14 pm
  
  That's another Mike Smith – there are lots of us. I agree he has done a brilliant job
Res Publica 3

4 March 2024 at 7:03 am

I think this is delusional, nostalgia filtered nonsense pining for a past that never existed. And a piss weak argument for a foreign policy that would deliver us no advantages while at the same time irritate China, the US, and Australia.

New Zealands foreign policy has never been truly independent: it was just that we were so minor a player we had some freedom to act out and, for example, leave ANZUS without ever seriously being on the US shit list.

Yes, the USA has done many horrible, terrible, no good things. But at least it, and the majority of its allies, are putative democracies. And make a decent fist of maintaining the international rules based order our foreign policy relies on.

China, although a useful trade partner and a country I very much respect, liked visiting and learning the language of, is a brutally repressive police state that under Xi Jiping is proving itself to be terrible global citizen.

I'd be horrified at the thought of New Zealand looking at the prospect of an alliance against authoritarianism in the Pacific and going "yeah nah, no thanks"
- Francesca 3.1
  
  4 March 2024 at 8:53 am
  
  Gaza .Tell me again that the western democracies abide by and uphold international law
  A genocide clear as day unfolding before our very eyes and we do nothing,Except declare the political wing of Hamas terrorists .Something that the UN has not done
  - Patricia Bremner 3.1.1
    
    4 March 2024 at 10:04 am
    
    Yes this Government is so right wing.
  - aj 3.1.2
    
    4 March 2024 at 2:45 pm
    
    Craig Murray wrote an interesting article recently on national identity, sparked by events in Gaza.
    
    https://www.craigmurray.org.uk/archives/2024/02/putin-history-and-the-mystery-of-national-identity/
    
    In particular, I was complacent in my dismissive attitude to the argument that the Western powers would back ethnic cleansing and massacre in the Donbass, by forces including some motivated by Nazi ideology. The same powers who are funding and arming Ukraine are funding and arming a genocide by racial supremacist Israeli forces in Gaza. It is beyond argument that my belief in some kind of inherent decency in the Western political Establishment was naive.
    
    I apologise.
  - Res Publica 3.1.3
    
    5 March 2024 at 9:05 am
    
    Yes: Israel is committing egregious war crimes and engaging in what could arguably be defined as ethnic cleansing under international law.
    
    And no, no country, and none of the international institutions that we trust will stop this kind of stuff from happening have done much about it.
    
    But that doesn't invalidate the fact that New Zealand lacks the clout, relevance, and capacity to pursue a truly independent foreign policy. We will be eventually forced to pick a side, just like we did in the cold war.
    
    FFS we even sent troops to Vietnam!
    
    But somehow, we on the left keep trying to view our foreign policy pre 1990 through the enormous nostalgia filter of the anti-nuclear stance and the Rainbow Warrior. When in reality it was a shitload more transactional and heavily tilted towards the US.
    
    For the reasons I've outlined, in the main because it's a dumb idea and the CCP are not nice people(tm), aligning ourselves with China or outside any US/Western lead international order would be tantamount to economic and moral suicide.
    
    There are no perfect answers here: we're either dealing with partners that for various reasons will either support Israel, or brutally repress and ethnically cleanse their own people.
- KJT 3.2
  
  4 March 2024 at 11:51 am
  
  Satire?
  - Res Publica 3.2.1
    
    5 March 2024 at 8:56 am
    
    Nope, that was actually a serious post. Because, in all honesty, wishcasting is a really shitty basis on which to organise your foreign policy.
- Robert Glennie 3.3
  
  4 March 2024 at 1:34 pm
  
  Maybe us New Zealanders are not as fully independent in terms of foreign policy as we think, but Resolution 2334 at the United Nations, which we helped sponsor in 2016 was a good case of us pushing back against the U.S./Israeli hegemony in the Middle East.
  
  The United Nations is toothless because the Security Council P5 don't want a tiger with teeth that can bite them when one or more of them do dumb things. The veto effectively takes the teeth out of the tiger.
  
  As for China, it's growth is quite something. It has gone from being a Cold War communist power to being an authoritarian capitalist power without any of the human or private rights afforded to western countries. Its military has gone from being one based on numbers – more tanks, guns, planes, soldiers, ships, missiles etc – to being built on smarter weapons systems, better resourced and trained troops. The economy and the military budget spent most of the 1990's, all the 2000's and most of the 2010's growing at near double digit figures per annum.
  
  At the same time it's clamped down massively after a post-Tiananmen Square "am I good boy now", attempt at cleaning its act up. The digital surveillance that it has introduced means millions of Chinese through no fault of their own are now marked people. Its crackdown in Xinjiang Province has drawn the ire of Amnesty International, and apparently the authorities are watching online for anyone non-Chinese who attack the regime, anyone who support dissidents or pro-freedom protests.
  
  No fan of either the Dragon or the Eagle, but the United Nations is as good as useless.
  
  Where does that leave us here in Aotearoa?
  - SPC 3.3.1
    
    4 March 2024 at 2:19 pm
    
    Resolution 2334 had the tacit support of the UK and USA (last act of Obama).
    
    Biden and Blinken's recent comments on the West Bank – walking back Reagan's support for WB settlements, re-booted by Trump and Pompeo, builds on that.
    
    A deliberate shot across the bows to ensure a cease-fire for aid delivery.
    
    Regardless of the UNSC veto – the principles of the UN, support for collective security, multi-lateralism and international law – seas, ICJ and ICC are still there and we still have agency.
    
    We can maintain capability, but choose when to engage.
  - Mike Smith 3.3.2
    
    4 March 2024 at 3:19 pm
    
    For a balanced view on China, it's worth having a listen to New Zealander David Mahon. He has lived there for nigh on forty years.
    - Francesca 3.3.2.1
      
      4 March 2024 at 3:48 pm
      
      Agreed .Be wary of propaganda.Everyone can do it, none better than the US, but they're fraying.
- Jono 3.4
  
  4 March 2024 at 10:16 pm
  
  It's called Neutrality..like India.
  
  This post is…I think..the best Op yet..thought provoking and prescient.
  
  Who supplied weapons to Saddam to kill invaders in 2003.. who defended Serbia in 1999..was afghanistan 2001 justified?…oh that's right..it never happened.
  
  Yet another brainwashed at the alter of the military industrial complex of the u.s and defense stock investors.. keep drinking the coolaid.
  
  AS FOR NZ ..if we are neutral..we are not threatening china…get it?
  - SPC 3.4.1
    
    4 March 2024 at 11:31 pm
    
    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Quadrilateral_Security_Dialogue
  - Res Publica 3.4.2
    
    5 March 2024 at 12:07 pm
    
    Jono, India definitely has the option to be (and remain) neutral in any face off between the two great powers. As a big player itself, it's got the size, economic influence, and military clout to chart its own course. And its own long-standing vendettas to worry about.
    
    They’ll happily align themselves with whoever turns a blind eye to hindu nationalism, will sell them weapons, and is willing to let them beat up on Pakistan.
    
    We, however, do not have that luxury. Instead, we rely on an incredibly imperfect rules based international order that China and Russia in particular are attempting to disrupt for their own ends.
    
    I'm as skeptical as anyone else on this site about US motives, greed, and culpability in a great many war crimes.
    
    But, at the end of the day, neutrality has never been a viable option: we've a long history of allying ourselves with major powers. First with Britain up until WWII, and after that the USA.
    
    And despite the spats with some of our friends/allies/benevolent corporate overlords over nuclear weapons and the use of state-sponsored terrorism on our soil (because fuck Francois Mitterand), sticking with the "western" world is probably still the best of a bunch of unpalatable options.
    
    When it comes to being a small nation in a great power world, it's important to hang together or else be hung separately.
    - SPC 3.4.2.1
      
      5 March 2024 at 1:12 pm
      
      As a member of QUAD, India is not neutral.
      - Res Publica 3.4.2.1.1
        
        5 March 2024 at 2:50 pm
        
        To be fair, I think the original commenter was referring to India pioneering the non-aligned movement during the Cold War.
        
        Certainly, their foreign policy has moved on somewhat since the fall of the Soviet Union, their ongoing tensions with China, the threat of nuclear with Pakistan, and the war in Afghanistan.
        
        That being said, I think their fundamental foreign policy aims haven't changed much: contain China and maintain military and economic dominance over Pakistan.
        
        SPC 3.4.2.1.1.1
        
        5 March 2024 at 3:13 pm
        
        Nations supporting "Kennan's" containment of USSR were not seen as neutral in the Cold War.
        
        And while AUKUS is said to be a containment of China programme – QUAD is more explicitly so. Japan organised it for that very reason. Rudd withdrew Oz because he did not support that. They are now not just back in, but now also with the nuclear powered submarine programme of AUKUS Pillar 1.
        
        https://www.csis.org/events/conversation-ambassador-kevin-rudd-australias-new-ambassador-united-states
        
        For mine AUKUS is more a NATO + endeavour – based on others working together as the EU nations do in common research and development cause (UK ex EU).
        
        https://www.csis.org/analysis/aukus-pillar-two-advancing-capabilities-united-states-united-kingdom-and-australia
        
        Other nations likely to be interested – include Canada and Japan
        
        https://thediplomat.com/2023/09/canada-and-new-zealand-need-to-consider-joining-pillar-2-of-aukus/
        
        https://www.japantimes.co.jp/news/2024/03/03/japan/politics/japan-aukus-pillar-2-participation/
        
        https://www.theguardian.com/world/2023/aug/30/aukus-alliance-australia-us-uk-japan-south-korea
Psycho Milt 4

4 March 2024 at 3:54 pm

It's easy to sneer at talk of high-tech weaponry, but keep in mind Ukraine didn't need any high-tech weaponry either – until suddenly it did. We may not have a land border with a large, psychotic neighbour like Ukraine does, but we shouldn't turn our noses up at cooperation on weapons development.
Steve Bradley 5

4 March 2024 at 5:26 pm

For simplicity, I just keep remembering the extended and extensive bombing of Cambodia during the Viet Nam War. This was kept secret from U.S. citizens and from the U.S. Congress. What else do you need to know?
Ad 6

4 March 2024 at 5:38 pm

I'm tired of even trying to defend the military actions of the United States; apropos

I'm so tired of you America:
Jono 7

4 March 2024 at 10:18 pm

It's called Neutrality..like India.

This post is…I think..the best Op yet..thought provoking and prescient.

Who supplied weapons to Saddam to kill invaders in 2003.. who defended Serbia in 1999..was afghanistan 2001 justified?…oh that's right..it never happened.

Yet another brainwashed at the alter of the military industrial complex of the u.s and defense stock investors.. keep drinking the coolaid.

AS FOR NZ ..if we are neutral..we are not threatening china…get it?
- Scud 7.1
  
  7 March 2024 at 3:06 pm
  
  Neutrality means Jack shit if you aren't prepared defend it!
  
  There many nations who believe that Neutrality would protect them at a time of war & failed because they failed to invest in there Military & put it all on Red and rely on Diplomacy to protect them.
  
  I personally don't trust China's or the US intentions in the region & if push comes to shove? I'll have to bite my lip & go with the Yanks, at least they are still a democracy atm.
  
  The bloody big moat around NZ isn't going to protect NZ btw, when NZ's economic growth & security settings are reliant on export led economy which over 90% of NZ exports/ imports are carried by box carrying ships.
  
  So there's a problem already, how to protect, defending & denying your SLOC's from Attack, Interdiction etc while protecting the EEZ & surrounding waters off NZ.
  
  The list goes on……
Tiger Mountain 8

5 March 2024 at 1:23 pm

Right now Gaza starvation and slaughter plus West Bank imprisonment and torture, is horrifying millions around the world. US Imperialism still operates approx 800 publicly findable offshore military bases and related facilities. So I have little to say at this point on AUKUS Pillar 2 apart from…“Yankee go Home!”
SPC 9

5 March 2024 at 2:18 pm

Labour is equivocal.

Both Twyford and Parker are now posing AUKUS as China containment, now their party is no longer in government. Labour was considering it when in office.

They say that we can continue to develop our capability, and retain inter-operable status as before AUKUS.

That can be debated, because if we are outside of technology development then we are dependent on others sharing that to remain inter-operable (this might not be available or would come at greater cost).

Then remaining inter-operable could depend on how long such capability remains in our defence forces.

https://www.rnz.co.nz/news/political/508926/aukus-a-military-pact-designed-to-contain-china-says-labour

The politics reminds one of the nuclear ships policy, the ANZUS breach occurred because of a misunderstanding on the arrival of a ship that was not nuclear powered or carrying nuclear weapons (it is possible to remain in NATO simply by not publicly challenging neither confirm nor deny) and that only led to the left swallowing the next tranche of Rogernomics.

So one wonders what that might mean for Labour in formulating their economic policy, greater freedom to remain neo-liberal, if they pacify the left on defence/foreign/security policy.

That said, does anyone expect Labour to promise to withdraw from AUKUS Pillar 2 if the government signs up to it?

So a risk the left is pacified on economic policy and then gain nothing once Labour is back in government. And this serves most of all the landlord/rentier class, the threat to them goes away.
SPC 10

7 March 2024 at 5:28 pm

AUKUS Pillar 2 wunderwaffen maybes.

There is only a risk of this, if Trump and the GOP and their SCOTUS takeover the USA.

They would be as close to the German 1000 year reich as any regime as any on earth since the 1940's (just look at their Christian dominionism and belief in Israel as part of biblical prophecy).

Abandonment of Ukraine to their ally Russia (Putin as new Valdimor Of Kiev eastern Tsar and his eastern church) and thus betrayal of their secular EU NATO partners (thus where are we as part of NATO plus) and they the NWO regime of the West.

That could lead to aggression vs communist China over Taiwan.

Labour should say very clearly there would be no bi-partisanship on AUKUS Pillar 2 until this is all taken into consideration after Jan 2025.

PS Basically Trumpian appeasement of Russia to better confront China, ignores the reality of N Korea as rogue agent and also the risk of Russian war with EU NATO and American war with China at the same time.