NZDF General discussion thread

[StingrayOZ]

More messaging in Australia about Taiwan.

Former defence minister warns of potential Indo-Pacific war with China

The chances of a war in the Indo-Pacific region involving China are rising sharply, according to former defence minister Christopher Pyne, who warns Taiwan is the most likely next flashpoint.

www.abc.net.au

'Contingency' plans discussed with United States over possible Taiwan conflict

A senior American diplomat says Australia and the United States are discussing contingency plans in case a military conflict erupts over Taiwan.

www.abc.net.au

It seems most planning around this seems to think that the conflict is likely to timeframe within the next 5 years. I think that is optimistically long. Planning it seems is going beyond what Australia would contribute to such a conflict, as we are quite distant from it, but more about what happens after it.

Its pretty universal in Australia and all the think tanks are saying basically the same thing. War is now a real possibility, prepare for the conflict, prepare for post conflict situations. While not inevitable, its certainly a very real situation developing. In terms of preparation, COVID19 has probably helped in that regard, and recent Chinese trade actions have made it a clear priority that Australian businesses need to diversify away from China, and more importantly, develop local supply chains.

Sometimes I worry that China will take action that leads to war not because it intends to, but because it's being ignored.

Communication is extremely strained currently. When you have diplomats asking media if they have heard anything recently, its very bad. It appears all that effort into soft diplomacy and relationship building have not developed the side communication links we had all hoped would develop.

In such situations, misunderstandings, and miscommunications can easily cause conflicts. Even when carefully crafted by competent people and both sides genuinely don't want to fight. As an Australian, East Timor is a classic recent example.

I don't think China is being ignored, but regular dialog isn't occurring, and small issues, over time can cause calamities.

 

[ngatimozart]

I have copied the above post over from the Japan, Koreas, China and Taiwan regional issues thread because it is applicable to NZ as well. It's concerning that such actions are being taken by Australia and yet our government sees fit to bury its head in the sand.

If we have MFAT ignoring UN blacklists, regardless of previous and current government policy, then we have a problem within the Ministry that calls into question the validity of advice it has been giving to government over the years. It appears that it is hell bent on the course of trade before anything else and bugger what anyone thinks. I don't normally give the time of day to the NZ Greens and peace groups, but in this case they are correct in that MFAT was wrong in approving export certification for these particular exports. Maybe MFAT is run by the Ferengi, or is Ferengi.

Since the Ferengi-MFAT will avoid at all costs jeopardising trade with the PRC, it will not countenance any actions that rock the boat and upset the PRC. I also wonder how well the CCP has penetrated MFAT. Maybe it's time for a clean out there.

 

[kiwi in exile]

I have copied the above post over from the Japan, Koreas, China and Taiwan regional issues thread because it is applicable to NZ as well. It's concerning that such actions are being taken by Australia and yet our government sees fit to bury its head in the sand.

If we have MFAT ignoring UN blacklists, regardless of previous and current government policy, then we have a problem within the Ministry that calls into question the validity of advice it has been giving to government over the years. It appears that it is hell bent on the course of trade before anything else and bugger what anyone thinks. I don't normally give the time of day to the NZ Greens and peace groups, but in this case they are correct in that MFAT was wrong in approving export certification for these particular exports. Maybe MFAT is run by the Ferengi, or is Ferengi.

I hope this whole thing was just a clumsy slip up rather than a deliberate move to trade military tech with blacklisted countries- 'trade above all else' as you say. Likewise, this is one time where I found myself agreeing with Golriz on foreign policy. Not impressed with the gov't response to this.

Since the Ferengi-MFAT will avoid at all costs jeopardising trade with the PRC, it will not countenance any actions that rock the boat and upset the PRC. I also wonder how well the CCP has penetrated MFAT. Maybe it's time for a clean out there.

NZ is approaching a crossroad. The time is approaching where we will have to make a choice between trade and our values/strategic alliances.
Fonterra/the dairy lobby will have a lot to say. After what happened to Australia re barley/wine, my first thought ws we need to diversify out export markets. China uses its trading position as an economic political weapon. we are not immune to this. There needs to be more public discourse about this. NZers and our politician prefer to keep our heads in the sand. I would imagine/hope that behind the scenes- given our FVEY membership our allies are allready leaning on us. We have been seen in the past as the weak five eyes member and potentially compromised by the amount of foriegn (you know who) interference in out politics on both sides of the spectrum.

Anna Marie Bradys work on CCP influence here/internationally is worth a read. Doesn't get the recognition she deserves here.

More broadly, I think NZDF and the wider security agencies need to plan for more hybrid forms of warfare. As practiced b Russia and 'ukranian sepratists'. Any future peace keeping of could become a proxy way or opportunity for a rival power to test/exploit our military capabilities.

We need to focus on our economic preparedness for Asia-pacifi instability given our reliance on shipping trade and trade with China.
Military leaders warn we must prepare for a crisis worse than COVID-19

We should begin by articulating a clear stategy

 

[ngatimozart]

Yes I have been reading Anne Marie Brady's work and agree about her lack of recognition.

It is my belief that it is time to stop using NZDF for peacekeeping and for to focus more on warfighting because that's what its going to be required to do. If the NZG want to continue peacekeeping they can always form a peacekeeping corp with the Green Party as its core running it.

You are dead right about the lack of an overarching national security strategy. The cynic in me believes that this is deliberate so that the pollies don't have to devote to many resources to defence and because of the lack of a strategy, avoid being asked questions on it.

The COVID-19 pandemic has shown that we have been ill prepared for the shipping and trade disruptions. We don't have the reserves onshore that we need, we are reliant upon foreign shipping companies for our sea freight, and we rely to much on the just in time logistics system. We don't have our own flagged ships so being reliant upon foreign flagged ships can mean that we could be left in the lurch when things are tight on the international shipping system.

At the moment TEU containers are as rare as hens teeth, and because of delays in other parts of the world, some shipping lines are bypassing NZ because we are an outlier. That creates problems for us because it means less shipping space available both to and from NZ. If we have NZ flagged ships we could alleviate some of these shipping problems, however for it to be competitive, costs would have to be minimised and that in itself would create problems because there would be an uproar if we used the standard practice of cheap labour from developing countries. Australia would be in the same position as well.

It has to be a holistic whole of government approach to cover not just the security side but the resilience side as well, to ensure that we are able to withstand the inevitable disruptions to our air and SLOC that will occur.

 

[John Fedup]

I assume Canada has virtually no flagged commercial vessels, just like NZ. Land connection to the US helps to an extent. I wonder what percentage of commercial vessels that visit US or UK ports are flagged by either country. Would some of the Euro countries be significantly higher?

 

[ngatimozart]

I assume Canada has virtually no flagged commercial vessels, just like NZ. Land connection to the US helps to an extent. I wonder what percentage of commercial vessels that visit US or UK ports are flagged by either country. Would some of the Euro countries be significantly higher?

There must be an open source database somewhere that isn't paywalled that can be accessed for such information? I don't mind paying to access sites which I am a regular user of, but do begrudge having to cough up heaps of beer tokens for single access.

 

[swerve]

I assume Canada has virtually no flagged commercial vessels, just like NZ. Land connection to the US helps to an extent. I wonder what percentage of commercial vessels that visit US or UK ports are flagged by either country. Would some of the Euro countries be significantly higher?

Canada - 3 million DWT, 2.4 mn GRT in 2012, or 1% of the Panama-flagged fleet, 0.2% of the world fleet. There'll be more recent free data out there, I'm sure.

Ownership is very different from flags, of course. As of 2020 -
Greece 18%
Japan 11%
China 11%
Singapore 7%
Hong Kong 5%

Asia 52%
Europe 41%
North America 6%

 

[Shanesworld]

Canada - 3 million DWT, 2.4 mn GRT in 2012, or 1% of the Panama-flagged fleet, 0.2% of the world fleet. There'll be more recent free data out there, I'm sure.

Ownership is very different from flags, of course. As of 2020 -
Greece 18%
Japan 11%
China 11%
Singapore 7%
Hong Kong 5%

Asia 52%
Europe 41%
North America 6%

I wonder what those proportions were in 1939? In terms 9f warfighting vs peacekeeping there is a glacial shift in focus/awareness in army underway. Unsure of navy but it isn't like they can just whip down to countdown for some warships and crews.

 

[John Fedup]

Canada - 3 million DWT, 2.4 mn GRT in 2012, or 1% of the Panama-flagged fleet, 0.2% of the world fleet. There'll be more recent free data out there, I'm sure.

Ownership is very different from flags, of course. As of 2020 -
Greece 18%
Japan 11%
China 11%
Singapore 7%
Hong Kong 5%

Asia 52%
Europe 41%
North America 6%

Of that Canadian tonnage, I wonder what portion is Great Lakes based and Canadian coastal operations? These flagged vessels are likely Canadian owned whereas other trans ocean vessels are foreign. In any event, some FEYEs are vulnerable.

 

[kiwi in exile]

It is my belief that it is time to stop using NZDF for peacekeeping and for to focus more on warfighting because that's what its going to be required to do. If the NZG want to continue peacekeeping they can always form a peacekeeping corp with the Green Party as its core running it.

https://www.abc.net.au/news/2021-04-14/military-reminded-lethal-violence-defend-australian-values/100066796
'We've gone a little bit woke': Military reminded core business is to use 'lethal violence'

Shanesworld is right- re-orientating to a more warfighting posture across the wide NZDF will be cost time and money. I question the current combat capabilities of our major assets (frigates-no anti ship missiles, P3s- iron bombs, no missiles). Not sure there is enough in the current DCP to address this. And I'm not sure the current gov't will have the inclination to take us in this direction. We are in a vulnerable position like Australia. Look at how they have responded (although much of Morrisons soverign defence indistry is argaubly about local jobs and local votes). We will or should ge pressure from our allies. The brief to the current MinDef states there will be another defence assesment in May 2021 and a whitepaper in 2022. Fingers crossed...

However some actors/commentators think NZs more 'mature' relationship with China is better than Australia's hawkish stance. Current gov't may shy away from making any bold statements and policy changes re defence.

 

[ngatimozart]

'We've gone a little bit woke': Military reminded core business is to use 'lethal violence'
'We've gone a little bit woke': Military reminded core business is to use 'lethal violence'

Shanesworld is right- re-orientating to a more warfighting posture across the wide NZDF will be cost time and money. I question the current combat capabilities of our major assets (frigates-no anti ship missiles, P3s- iron bombs, no missiles). Not sure there is enough in the current DCP to address this. And I'm not sure the current gov't will have the inclination to take us in this direction. We are in a vulnerable position like Australia. Look at how they have responded (although much of Morrisons soverign defence indistry is argaubly about local jobs and local votes). We will or should ge pressure from our allies. The brief to the current MinDef states there will be another defence assesment in May 2021 and a whitepaper in 2022. Fingers crossed...

However some actors/commentators think NZs more 'mature' relationship with China is better than Australia's hawkish stance. Current gov't may shy away from making any bold statements and policy changes re defence.

Yes well that particular Cabinet Minister was and is an idiot. He was speaking well outside of his portfolio for a start. And he didn't have a clue about the situation. The NZG version of the Kopp & Goon show.

In order to address the current situation the total funding in the current DCP requires to be doubled and the asset charge needs to be rescinded. Also big decisions have to made and some dead rats swallowed policy and ideology wise. Whether the current NZG have the intestinal fortitude and wisdom to travel down the required road remains to be seen. I am not holding my breath.

 

[kiwi in exile]

More commentary vis a vis NZ & China/Taiwan from Robert Patman

Global Insight: What China could lose if it invades Taiwan

Longterm economic blowback on China may be economically punishing given its dependence on democratic export markets

 

[KiwiRob]

There must be an open source database somewhere that isn't paywalled that can be accessed for such information? I don't mind paying to access sites which I am a regular user of, but do begrudge having to cough up heaps of beer tokens for single access.

Have a look here.

Merchant fleet – UNCTAD Handbook of Statistics 2022

stats.unctad.org

 

[ngatimozart]

Have a look here.

Merchant fleet – UNCTAD Handbook of Statistics 2022

stats.unctad.org

Great. Thanks Rob.

 

[ngatimozart]

Alexander Gillespie is a Professor of Law at the University of Waikato. He recently wrote a piece for The Conversation discussing NZ policy towards the PRC and it's not very flattering. In fact he called it empty and says that it's appeasement.

Now we are aware that foreign policy informs and impacts upon defence policy and when a government decides upon appeasement turning its back upon its only ally and its friends, there has to be concern about the direction that this particular government is taking. As mentioned in the article, and elsewhere, it is known that a long term CCP goal is to split NZ off from the other FVEY partners.

Given the current NZG foreign policy settings it is suggested that the CCP is on the way to achieving its goals. The current government is somewhat dysfunctional in that it tends to muddle through situations and not think consequences both intended and unintended. It is also driven more by ideology than practicality.

So we now have a situation where we have an assertive PRC flouting and breaking the very international rules that the current NZ government claim that they support, yet getting the current NZ government to publicly censure the PRC is worse than drawing teeth. They didn't even support Australia in its dispute with the PRC, especially when it was obvious that Australia was the wronged party.

So what's going on with this government? Why are they charting a course that is taking us on a diverging track to our FVEY partners and friend? More importantly it's negatively impacting our security, defence and defence capabilities, and increases the the threat to our sovereignty.

There is far to much risk in this bolshy attitude by this government and it's going to alienate us from our only ally, and friends with whom we have a lot in common, fought alongside, speak a common language, have a common history, legal systems etc.

Without evidence of real progress, NZ’s foreign policy towards China looks increasingly empty

The Quadrilateral Security Dialogue might be the most important security alliance you’ve never heard of – and New Zealand needs to start taking it seriously.

theconversation.com

 

[ASSAIL]

Reported in the Australian today (no link)
Foreign minister Mahuta has stated just prior to a visit by Australian Foreign Minister Marie’s Payne that NZ is uncomfortable in expanding the 5Eyes role beyond intelligence sharing.
She has raised with 5VEY partners that she is uncomfortable expanding the remit of the relationship and would much prefer to look for multilateral opportunities to “express our interest in a number of issues”.

As you can imagine this has not sat well with the public here in Oz and the comments re the report are indicative.
eg. “NZ has forfeited the right to be a member”
“Kick NZ out and add Japan, it would have much more clout”
“While Aust has been bullied and punished, NZ has smiled and profited”
These are the nicer ones!

 

[John Fedup]

Reported in the Australian today (no link)
Foreign minister Mahuta has stated just prior to a visit by Australian Foreign Minister Marie’s Payne that NZ is uncomfortable in expanding the 5Eyes role beyond intelligence sharing.
She has raised with 3Eyes partners that she is uncomfortable expanding the remit of the relationship and would much prefer to look for multilateral opportunities to “express our interest in a number of issues”.

As you can imagine this has not sat well with the public here in Oz and the comments re the report are indicative.
eg. “NZ has forfeited the right to be a member”
“Kick NZ out and add Japan, it would have much more clout”
“While Aust has been bullied and punished, NZ has smiled and profited”
These are the nicer ones!

I guess the case could be made to kick Canada out as well and forget Japan’s entry leaving it as 3EYES. These three members are more or less on the same page most of the time whereas NZ and Canada, not so much.

 

[FoxtrotRomeo999]

Very disappointing response from a Government that normally stresses their human rights credentials. IMHO, Australia should pushback against such cowardice.

 

[milliGal]

To be fair, our new foreign minister has issued a number of statements that are critical of the CCP since she took charge last year (primarily over HK and Xinjiang). Just yesterday she gave a speech to the NZ China Council highlighting our disagreements and urging exporters not to put all their eggs in one basket (link to speech and article). I think their reluctance to expand 5eyes and go all in on alliances like the Quad is more a result of them seeking to chart an independent foreign policy than being under China's thumb.

 

[OPSSG]

To be fair, our new foreign minister has issued a number of statements that are critical of the CCP since she took charge last year (primarily over HK and Xinjiang). Just yesterday she gave a speech to the NZ China Council highlighting our disagreements and urging exporters not to put all their eggs in one basket (link to speech and article). I think their reluctance to expand 5eyes and go all in on alliances like the Quad is more a result of them seeking to chart an independent foreign policy than being under China's thumb.

For others to believe NZ is able to chart an independent foreign policy, your country must have some limited military capability to be independent.

As a 2 frigate navy, the country has less than a limited capability to patrol its waters. I wish NZDF good luck to generate the needed patrols, when a maritime militia swarm arrives.

If NZDF is going to be resourced to buy a 5th or 6th P-8A and the replacement frigate build plan brought forward to 2025-2028 (along with a concurrent plan to get a 4th Frigate in the mid-term), then you can really say that the NZ Government is serious about charting an independent path.

What is an alternate way of looking at current NZ government moves? Do we consider it as NZ government’s way of giving lip service (and concurrent appeasement)?