Making a case for a defence U-turn: Hugh Steadman responds to the defence minister's invitation to New Zealanders to have a say on defence by proposing a radical shift in approach.

AuthorSteadman, Hugh
PositionGerry Brownlee

New Zealand should seek increased independence from the Western Alliance and pursue a defence policy that will allow it to rely for its defence on its own resources. In essence, this calls for autarchy in regard to essential commodities and for universal military service along Swiss lines, with no armed forces deployed overseas and the main land forces being trained to fight a guerrilla war. The extent of New Zealand's defence commitment to Australia should be questioned. Israel's situation and its ability to fund universal military service at a much higher level than would be required in New Zealand should be considered in the forthcoming white paper.

**********

In the May/June issue of NZ International Review (vol 40, no 3), Minster of Defence Gerry Brownlee briefly discussed the impending Defence white paper alongside an advertisement inviting New Zealanders to 'have their say'. It can be anticipated that developments in defence policy resulting from this process will be no more than incremental. However, could the time now be ripe for a more searching review of New Zealand's current defence strategy? The late Malcolm Fraser, in his article published in the Review's March/April issue (vol 40, no 2) argued that the Australian and, by implication, New Zealand governments need to make a U-turn away from a seemingly ever deeper commitment to the Western (read United States) alliance.

At a time when the major Western alliance, to which New Zealand subscribes for its security, is growing increasingly enmeshed in peace-threatening crises of its own instigation--in the Ukraine, the Middle East and the South China Sea--New Zealanders could perhaps take a deep breath and ask themselves 'do we really need to go there?'

For those who wished to make submissions, the Ministry of Defence published a series of questions to be answered. These questions provide a useful template for the discussion.

What are the major threats or challenges to New Zealand's security now and in the future?

The triumph of the Washington-led consensus in the current competition for global dominance is by no means certain. Far more likely is the emergence of a multi-polar world. Those who have risked all by joining the United States in its bid for 'full spectrum global dominance' may well find that they, for no gain, have lumbered themselves with a future burden of ill-will from other powerful global players.

Brownlee invites his readers to ask themselves 'how much we value the existing rules-based system--and, based on this, what role we should play in defending it?' It is precisely the breakdown of this rules-based system that poses a, if not the, major threat to New Zealand's security. The problem is that the major players among our 'allies' (the United States, NATO, Israel) have a commitment to that system, secured as it is meant to be by international law, only when it suits them. Furthermore, they have the expectation that their allies and fellow-travellers, such as New Zealand, will raise no meaningful objection when their more powerful allies choose to ignore those rules.

As a consequence of the above situation, it is quite probable that New Zealand will find itself dragged into armed conflicts in which its real national interests are either not involved, or in which they are actually more heavily vested in the other side. As a case in point, New Zealand having its economy primarily dependent on one partner, China, while its defence posture is one of alliance to that prime trading partner's increasingly belligerent military competitor, the United States, is a conflicted policy that would seem bound to lead to grief.

A less immediate threat than involvement in wars not of its own making, but one which could ultimately lead to New Zealand being first swamped by refugees and later becoming uninhabitable, is the global community's inadequate response to the threat of rapid climate change. It is apparent that the present 'rules-based system' is unable to address this situation on the global basis that is called for.

From the above, it can be seen that a major threat to the nation's security is the apparent failure of successive governments to recognise that New Zealand's best defence lies not in military alliances with partners often disrespectful of international law, but in rigorous diplomatic action in defence of and towards the further development of that law. The government's down-grading of the diplomatic service over the past few years and its...

To continue reading

Request your trial

VLEX uses login cookies to provide you with a better browsing experience. If you click on 'Accept' or continue browsing this site we consider that you accept our cookie policy. ACCEPT