NZDF General discussion thread

Novascotiaboy

Active Member
NZ is no different than Canada and other western democracies. Our politicians have their heads in the sand just like the run up to the second world war. Peace doesn't just happen. Deterence is the key. Making sure that we all have the resources to protect our interests. A look at the RN today shows how unprepared they are. The RCN has but twelve frigates today. Of these here in Halifax, of which there are seven hulls, one is in deep maintenance and two are in various levels of disarray. That leaves four hulls with one deployed resulting in three available. The five total on the west coast offer a similar availability. So out of twelve hulls we have maybe slightly more than half available. With only two available hulls and both being out of service this should be the wake up call to NZ that they have left themselves open to an incident. With four hulls at least two should be available at all times, one in home waters and one deployed.

Lets hope that someone sees this issue as important and needed funds diverted from the social realm to support a four frigate navy with better abilities than the current ANZACs.
 

Rangitoto

Member
I don't know what the best configuration of forces would be, but one thing the NZ government could do and should do is increase defence expenditure to 2% of GDP. That would demonstrate to NZ's allies and China that it's serious about defence and willing to play it's part in the collective defence of the Pacific.
 

Novascotiaboy

Active Member
A balanced force capable of a realistic contribution based upon threat analysis not the wishes of military brass looking to join the elite of military forces with flashy toys that are of little true value.

As a maritime nation a capable navy able to patrol and fight away from home waters with an ability to support land forces ashore. The current plans are moving in the right direction but more needs to be done in the form of rotary assets both transport and armed. Two sealift and the new tanker are a good start but decisions need to be made on the frigate replacement with a mind to expand the numbers. Ngati is on the right track with a SK build of a proven design. But care must be taken to maintain a GP frigate and not some behemoth which demands huge amounts of cash to procure.

But nothing will change until the GOTD has a scare and the ongoing push by China into the South Pacific should already be sounding alarm bells.

Even a decision to up arm the OPVs to give an offensive punch would be welcome or at least a plan to create corvettes when the replacements are announced mid decade. Something like the French Floreals built to civilian specs but armed with exocet and 4 inch gun on a hull of the same rough size. A little bit of deterent.
 

Massive

Well-Known Member
A balanced force capable of a realistic contribution based upon threat analysis not the wishes of military brass looking to join the elite of military forces with flashy toys that are of little true value.
I am not sure that a balanced force is the answer for NZ.

A heavy emphasis on maritime capability would seem more appropriate.

Imbalance guided by a clear strategy would seem the best way to spend 1 or 2% of GDP.

Looking at the three "Defence outcomes" (is there a clearer statement of NZ defence strategy) - maritime patrol and strike would appear critical, suggesting a prioritisation of the RNZAF and RNZN over the army, and within the RNZAF, maritime patrol and strike over transport.

Thoughts,

Massive
 

ngatimozart

Super Moderator
Staff member
Verified Defense Pro
A balanced force capable of a realistic contribution based upon threat analysis not the wishes of military brass looking to join the elite of military forces with flashy toys that are of little true value.

As a maritime nation a capable navy able to patrol and fight away from home waters with an ability to support land forces ashore. The current plans are moving in the right direction but more needs to be done in the form of rotary assets both transport and armed. Two sealift and the new tanker are a good start but decisions need to be made on the frigate replacement with a mind to expand the numbers. Ngati is on the right track with a SK build of a proven design. But care must be taken to maintain a GP frigate and not some behemoth which demands huge amounts of cash to procure.

But nothing will change until the GOTD has a scare and the ongoing push by China into the South Pacific should already be sounding alarm bells.

Even a decision to up arm the OPVs to give an offensive punch would be welcome or at least a plan to create corvettes when the replacements are announced mid decade. Something like the French Floreals built to civilian specs but armed with exocet and 4 inch gun on a hull of the same rough size. A little bit of deterent.
I am not sure that a balanced force is the answer for NZ.

A heavy emphasis on maritime capability would seem more appropriate.

Imbalance guided by a clear strategy would seem the best way to spend 1 or 2% of GDP.

Looking at the three "Defence outcomes" (is there a clearer statement of NZ defence strategy) - maritime patrol and strike would appear critical, suggesting a prioritisation of the RNZAF and RNZN over the army, and within the RNZAF, maritime patrol and strike over transport.

Thoughts,

Massive
If you are to base a force structure on the threat analysis then it would be strongly maritime focussed with a strong naval and air combat and ISR component, followed by an amphib component, with the army focussed on an amphib role, rather than the traditional facing hordes of Soviet armoured divisions racing through the Fulda Gap mentality which seems to permeate the senior levels of the army and pollies. The RNZN & RNZAF still require their transport / logistics capabilities purely for logistics because it's logistics that win wars, therefore in my view the tactical & strategic transport capabilities are just as crucial as the strike and ISR capabilities. It's no good having a heap of spears at the pointy end and no or little ability to feed & support those spears.
 

seaspear

Well-Known Member
I would suggest that foreign policy towards Pacifica island nation with the aim of real development to prevent China gaining a foothold could be more valuable than token defence spending
 

Massive

Well-Known Member
The RNZN & RNZAF still require their transport / logistics capabilities purely for logistics because it's logistics that win wars, therefore in my view the tactical & strategic transport capabilities are just as crucial as the strike and ISR capabilities. It's no good having a heap of spears at the pointy end and no or little ability to feed & support those spears.
Potentially not the best example - just trying to emphasise not being balanced for balances sake.

See ADF for an example.

Regards,

Massive
 

ngatimozart

Super Moderator
Staff member
Verified Defense Pro
I would suggest that foreign policy towards Pacific island nations with the aim of real development to prevent China gaining a foothold could be more valuable than token defence spending
Trouble is that you can and could end up in a bidding war, and neither NZ nor Australia have deep enough pockets to out bid the PRC, especially if it is determined to gain a strategic foothold in the region. Also, I get the impression that Australia probably inadvertently, mishandles its relationship with the islands and gives the impression that it is patronising, overbearing and still has some vestiges of colonial thoughts. That is more than likely unintentional, but that is the image that it appears to be portraying to the islands and that gets their backs up. NZ was like that until recent times when it started taking onboard its Maori culture, but we still have a ways to go. The PRC have use that dissent to crowbar its way in.
Potentially not the best example - just trying to emphasise not being balanced for balances sake.

See ADF for an example.

Regards,

Massive
I didn't use the word balance once, nor mentioned the concept. No ratios or quantities were mentioned, apart from the suggestion of refocussing army priorities, to whit: "... with the army focussed on an amphib role, rather than the traditional facing hordes of Soviet armoured divisions racing through the Fulda Gap mentality which seems to permeate the senior levels of the army and pollies." To put a clearer distinction on it: "... it would be strongly maritime focussed with a strong naval and air combat and ISR component, followed by an amphib component with the army focussed on an amphib role, ..." meaning that the RNZN & RNZAF would have higher priority than the army.
 

KiwiRob

Well-Known Member
I don't know what the best configuration of forces would be, but one thing the NZ government could do and should do is increase defence expenditure to 2% of GDP. That would demonstrate to NZ's allies and China that it's serious about defence and willing to play it's part in the collective defence of the Pacific.
It's a good idea but not one that will win an election, our politicians only support election winning policies.
 

KiwiRob

Well-Known Member
That is a very interesting and concerning report (60 mins). Reminds me of this one from last year.

Given the potential does everyone here think 3 or even 4 frigates would be adequate, (if we could get them) and could we do more than that?
I watched both videos, the way I see it is Australia, NZ and the US have opened the door and China has walked through it, it's probably far too late to try shutting it now, all we can do it try keeping the few PI states not under Chinese influence from being influenced, that means opening the cheque books and spending large on infrastructure. I don't see that happening anytime soon.
 

ngatimozart

Super Moderator
Staff member
Verified Defense Pro
Kiwi joint force projection.
I'm looking forward to more of this, on a larger scale, when the DCP promise of new sealift/amphibious capabilities comes to fruition.

Royal NZ Navy on Twitter
Yep, but no Southern Katipo this year. One wonders why, because it's been a biannual exercise since 2013 (or was it 2011). Was it to warlike for the current govt?
 

ngatimozart

Super Moderator
Staff member
Verified Defense Pro
Three Garrison & Training Support Vehicle Project RFTs were released on 15/11/19:
  1. Airfield Response Appliance RFT.
  2. Medical Response vehicles RFT.
  3. Mobile Bulk Aviation Fuelling Capability RFT.
Since then there have been numerous updates, usually around answering queries, and the closing date is 1700 hrs 10/2/20 NZDT. The Airfield Response Appliance appears to be an urgent acquisition because the current RNZAF Base Woodbourne fire trucks obsolescence:

4. "RNZAF Base Woodbourne has two Unipower ARA that were introduced into service in 1987 with a LOT of 30 years, due for replacement in 2017. Following a mid-life upgrade in 2009 the LOT was extended by two years to 2019.

5. The two Unipower ARA are the only remaining air transportable vehicles left from the original fleet purchase in 1987. Parts availability is low and poses a risk."

The other two are normal acquisitions from all appearances.
 

t68

Well-Known Member
Good grief; I knew China was making in roads within the South Pacific with its soft power but I had not realised to what extent Chinese influence was happening this illustrates how far China is making inroads. Those SLOC might be looking very vulnerable in the future

Nighthawk.NZ - China on the move...
 

ngatimozart

Super Moderator
Staff member
Verified Defense Pro
Good grief; I knew China was making in roads within the South Pacific with its soft power but I had not realised to what extent Chinese influence was happening this illustrates how far China is making inroads. Those SLOC might be looking very vulnerable in the future

Nighthawk.NZ - China on the move...
@Nighthawk.NZ has done a very good article on it there and he's made good use of Anne-Marie Brady's material. Anne-Marie Brady is probably the best expert on the CCP and its methodologies for getting what it wants. I follow her on twitter and she provides good material. She is fluent in Mandarin and has lived and worked in the PRC. She's been told that it's too dangerous for her to go back to the PRC, and her house and office at work have been broken into with laptops etc., stolen plus her car has been interfered with. So that's how much she's upset the CCP and its security organs.

There's this good article in the Financial Times - China is taking its ideological fight abroad - which discusses the infiltration of NZ's political system by the CCP, and I'll quote part of it:
"In November, Australia’s main spy agency said it was investigating “disturbing” allegations that Beijing had tried to install an agent in Australia’s federal parliament. The agent was found dead soon after he reported the plan and police have been unable to determine his cause of death.

In next-door New Zealand, some of the biggest donors to the main political parties are China-based businessmen with close ties to the Communist party. Campaign finance legislation rushed through parliament last month has done little to close off the loopholes that allow this kind of influence-buying. Astonishingly, a man who spent at least 15 years working for China’s military intelligence apparatus remains an elected member of parliament, even after admitting he was ordered by the party to conceal his past on his New Zealand immigration application. Tiny New Zealand may seem like a strange target for Communist party infiltration, but the country is attractive to Beijing as the soft underbelly of the “five eyes” intelligence sharing arrangement with Australia, Canada, the UK and, most importantly, the US. A senior intelligence official from one of these countries described New Zealand to the FT as “on the edge of viability as a member” of the grouping, because of its “supine” attitude to China and its “compromised political system”. China is New Zealand’s biggest export destination. Presumably out of fear Beijing would respond with economic sanctions, Jacinda Ardern, New Zealand’s prime minister, has gone out of her way to avoid even mentioning the topic of Chinese political interference.

Australia’s response has been far more robust. China has threatened economic consequences for Australia’s impudence, although these have mostly proven hollow. Even as some in Canberra fretted over the poor state of the relationship last year, Australian shipments to China rose to a record high, accounting for nearly 40 per cent of all exports. Political embargoes are often ineffective as they tend to hurt importers as much as exporters by raising prices and disrupting supply chains."
Both the major poltical parties in NZ have Chinese MPs, both of whom have links to the CCP through United Front Work which are intended to advance CCP interests before all others. Anne-Marie Brady describes united front work as:
"United front work is a task of all CCP Party-State-Military agencies (some more than others), as well as a core task of every CCP member. Under Xi Jinping, the CCP has sought to reassert its control over the business sector. Party control is now to the fore. Nearly all of China’s listed internet companies have Party committees. Close to 70 percent of the CEOs of China’s major corporations are now CCP members. Seventy percent of foreign companies working in China have a CCP cell. United front work is an all-of-CCP activity (全党的工作), meaning that all Party members are required to participate in it.

Xi-era united front work activities fall into four categories:
1. Efforts to control the Chinese diaspora, to utilise them as agents of Chinese foreign policy and suppress any hints of dissent.
2. Efforts to coopt foreigners to support and promote the CCP’s foreign policy goals and access information and technical knowledge.
3. Promotion of a global, multi-platform, strategic communication strategy aimed at promoting China’s agenda and suppressing critical perspectives on the CCP and its policies.
4. Rolling out of the China-centred economic, transport and communications strategic bloc known as the Belt and Road Initiative."

Hence it's very insidious, invasive and appears to be working when a senior NZ Opposition pollie spouts the PRC party line about the Uighars being held in concentration camps in Xinjiang. So I wouldn't be surprised that they're doubling down where they can in the Pacific Islands.

The PRC is definitely a clear and present danger to both NZ and Australia. That much is clear, however whether or not our pollies will do anything about is yet to be determined and Kiwi pollies are still hypnotised by the glittering treasure that trade with Beijing brings, especially the current opposition. Unfortunately MFAT is the same as well.
 

KiwiRob

Well-Known Member
What shocks me is that we allow dual
citizens to become members of our parliament, anyone who is a dual citizen should be excluded from sitting, just like the Aussies do.
 

ngatimozart

Super Moderator
Staff member
Verified Defense Pro
What shocks me is that we allow dual
citizens to become members of our parliament, anyone who is a dual citizen should be excluded from sitting, just like the Aussies do.
I totally agree Rob. Imagine the howling if we try to introduce a similar law here now, but I strongly believe that we have too.
 

Novascotiaboy

Active Member
Stuff is reporting, as a premium user, that Defence is being told to take a dive in spending for the well being of New Zealanders. Gotta love the left.
 
Top