Agree completely. The issue is one of politics and diplomacy, which resulted in a impact on the NZ-US defence relationship, barring any significant movement towards a different result within NZ and/or the US, it really is time to move on.
Let us look at where the NZDF can go from here.
Now, touching upon the NZDF response to the Chrischurch quake, can people think of/know of kit which can help the NZDF in disaster response, if not now then for the future? And by help, I mean things which could assist in saving lives or otherwise easing the difficulties rescue efforts encounter which also have dual -use military applications.
One of the first things which comes to mind is for RNZN vessels, or at least the lift and replenishment vessels, to have excess potable water generating capacity, sufficiently to provide drinking water for nn people. Can anyone else think of others?
-Cheers
One further comment about the "relationship". Although the National Govt 1990-1999 received a lot of critcism for not ditching the legislation (at that time it was still a raw issue as the legislation had only been in place for a few years eg 1987 and the then PM, Bolger was guided by his political advisers keeping a close eye on the polls - this has been documented here), the then Govt starting the healing process with the then new Dem administration. The interesting part is the then Nat NZG (under a new PM, Shipley) accelerated rebuilding the relationship with USG by agreeing to use its limited defence budget (and around that stage the Asian financial crisis affected NZ) to proceed with the F-16 lease as a higher priority over the purchase of the 3rd ANZAC Frigate i.e. it put USG interests ahead of AusG interests (which naturally caused a lot of fallout with AusG, which reverberated for years)! The next NZG (Labour 1999-2008) and its Leader & PM was Clark, was one of the leading architects (some say the leader) of the ANZUS bust up and driver of the legislation (although to give Clark some credit, the realities of being the PM saw her also try and improve the relationship). Now from 2008 onwards the change of Govt has picked up again from where they last were in 1999.
In terms of Todjaeger's question about eartquake response, I agree this has all cemented the need for adequate sealift (and air & helo lift - which has also played a major part in the recovery efforts but is the less visible and less talked about aspect in the media). It may also cement our discussions a few days ago on the RNZN thread of having a more capable Endeavour replacement which additional sealift (and helo lift) capabilities eg imagine if HMNZS Canterbury was actually elsewhere at the time, talk about fortuitous that she was actually in port at the earthquake epicentre at the time)!
I heard last night HMNZS Canterbury will depart to Wellington (or has already done so) to pick up more supplies and return to Lyttelton over the weekend.
But has anyone else considered that this is an opportunity for the USN / USMC etc, to send a sealift type vessel / amphibious assault vessel / (aircraft carrier?) loaded with generators, water, tents, temp accomodation etc etc, to assist with the recovery which will take months (so there's time to sort this out at NZG-USG level)? *
The symbolism would be such that, any peaceniks would be "shouted down" by 99.9% of NZer's if they dared even lifted even one tiny finger to protest.
I kid you not, politically there is an opportunity to bury this irrational emotive atttachment (that activists use) to this outdated legislation (as in the cold war is over) with essentially nil political fallout for the Nat NZG (and Labour Opposition for that matter, it may be the circuit breaker that some in Labour Party require now that Clark is out of the political scene, to ensure bi-partisan support in rebuilding the relationship). Like in Aus, bi-partisan support will see NZ and US allies again.
* Edit: as the recovery will take many months, NZ will need an "army" of engineering manpower and assets to undertake multiple infrastructural rebuild projects eg earth diggers to lay new water, electrical, sewerage piping, cabling and other utilities; shelter / temp accomodation for those who require their homes, factories, warehouses and businesses re-built, supplies for these etc, roading and bridges etc. The longer businesses (and weary people) are un-homed or cannot operate will hinder local and national economic recovery etc. (Funnily enough it has been done before - in WW2 an "army" of US personnel based in NZ quickly built-up infrastructure to assist with the war effort in the pacific etc).
Where the overseas sealift would come in handy would be for:
* accomodation, feeding, resting and basing the personnel (hundreds would be required & on rotation etc);
*helo'ing in the manpower and heavy supplies where required etc (I can see heavy helo lift eg Chinooks etc, would be useful to lift large objects away from damaged buildings;
*has built-in workshops for this personnel etc (the RFA Fort George has workshops I believe, hence why I supported Chris73's suggestion for NZDF to assess the RFA Fort George - perhaps NZ may be able to pick her up quickly and base her at Lyttelton for a few months to assist the NZDF support elements - I assume Burnham army camp has workshop space but only enough room and storage for their current land force support requirements?).
