Making a difference: another perspective: Gerald McGhie reflects on New Zealand's place in the world in light of recent comments by the Labour Party's foreign affairs spokesperson.

• Author: McGhie, Gerald

The last issue of the NZIR (vol37, no 1) contains the text of a talk given to the NZIIA's Wellington branch by Phil Goff, the former minister of foreign affairs and, later, of &fence. Now Opposition spokesman for foreign affairs, he drew on his lengthy experience in both portfolios to discuss New Zealand's place in the world.

As Goff explained, the fundamentals are clear--New Zealand, small and isolated is deeply dependent on overseas markets. Even so, we have played an almost disproportionate role as an international citizen, particularly in overseas wars. The First and Second World Wars; gave us the credentials for an early seat at the major international organisations, particularly the League of Nations and the United Nations, where we have played an active part in discussions on major international issues including the work of the specialised agencies. Goff expressed opposition to the United Nations Security Council permanent members' veto and was critical of the 'lack of will and commitment' among member states to reach agreement on solutions and implement them.

The Opposition spokesman wants to see Wellington making its own decisions on what alliances and international commitments New Zealand enters into. In deciding on the key issues, a Labour government would be guided by the values and principles that underpin New Zealand society. Those principles fit us well to become involved in international conciliation and mediation issues.

It is not possible to cover in detail the comprehensive range of issues discussed by Goff, which included climate change, Doha, disarmament, non-proliferation and conflict prevention. He also referred to his wish to rebuild the Ministry of Foreign Affairs and Trade. (2)

There is a comment that four economists will express five different viewpoints on a given issue. Perhaps foreign policy commentators have a similar disposition. Be that as it may, I offer the following as a supplement to Goff's views.

Walter Lippmann (3) considered that to establish a balanced foreign policy a nation must maintain its objectives and its power in equilibrium; its purpose within its means; its means equal to its purposes; its commitments relative to its resources; its resources adequate to its commitments. Without these factors in line it would not be possible to undertake an effective foreign policy. Lippmann's comments provide a valuable foreign policy perspective--for both small countries (New Zealand) and large (the United States, now the world's largest debtor nation).

Significant changes

The global financial crisis, the rise of militant Islam (not Islam as such) and the growing international presence of China are significant factors for change in the current international scene. Many countries are having to rethink both domestic and international policies as a result of mounting debt levels. The end result may not mean radical shifts in foreign policy, but, as the United States has shown in relation to the Pacific, a certain on-going process of re-emphasis and de-emphasis is required to adjust to the new realities.

Given Hillary Clinton's attendance at the most recent Pacific Forum and the statements she has been making, it is surprising then that Goff made only the briefest reference to the South Pacific--our Near North. In March 2011 Clinton made her position quite clear. 'Let's ... talk straight Realpolitik', she told the United States Senate Foreign Relations Committee. 'We are in competition with China. We have a lot of support in the region which embraces our values.' (4)

In a statement at the 2012 Forum, she modified her position to say that the Pacific was big enough for both China and the United States to work together in, but an early indication of the continued competitive context is the Trans-Pacific Partnership negotiations, the terms of which we do not yet know but which promise to have a profound effect on our trading relationships and internal regulatory processes. China is not a party to the TPP and is watching developments closely, particularly as New Zealand's military/defence relationship with...