The NZG has extended its Afghanistan commitment to June 2018 and increased the number of trainers from 8 to 10.
NZDF General discussion thread
- Thread starter NZLAV
- Start date
40 deg south
Well-Known Member
Centre for Strategic Studies - School of History, Philosophy, Political Science and International Relations - Victoria University of Wellington
The Vic Uni Centre for Strategic Studies website hasn't been updated since the DWP symposium earlier this week.
Did anyone here manage to attend, or hear any reports from the day? I suppose it would be wildly optimistic to think there will be any videos or summaries posted on the web?
Interested to note from the PDF flier that the Australian government is a sponsor!
The Vic Uni Centre for Strategic Studies website hasn't been updated since the DWP symposium earlier this week.
Did anyone here manage to attend, or hear any reports from the day? I suppose it would be wildly optimistic to think there will be any videos or summaries posted on the web?
Interested to note from the PDF flier that the Australian government is a sponsor!
News release from Ministers of Defence and Foreign Affairs
Note that it takes place at the same time as RIMPAC 2016.
Joe Black
Active Member
Interestingly so is Pitch Black 2016.
The only story I've seen post-conference so far is this piece by Richard Harman at Politik (link), who was also a speaker at the event. There were a few news stories on the day (Radio NZ, text & audio, NewstalkZB), and some photos on Twitter (#NZDWP - it might help to also click the Live tab to show all messages) - but Twitter isn't exactly the Rosetta Stone of effective communication.
That said, it was an academic-run event. Some proceedings may well turn up in a year or two! It's still early days. I was hoping Mark Thomson would have produced a summary on ASPI's Strategist blog, or that perhaps something would have appeared at the VUW's Incline blog.
P.S. .... and there you go. A piece by Terence O'Brien on the foreign policy implications of the White Paper has now appeared at Incline.
http://www.incline.org.nz/home/new-zealands-defence-in-an-era-of-transformation
Last edited:
40 deg south
Well-Known Member
Many thanks for the links, Chis. Looking at the O'Brien piece now.
Apparently, the new Line of Defence magazine will be publishing a Defence White Paper special issue late-July / early-August. Commentaries from Robert Ayson & Peter Greener. One to look out for I think. (source)
Also: gleaned from the parliamentary Estimates debate last week: the $20b of new expenditure on defence covers some 13 major projects.
Dr Shane Reti:
My guess as to the 13 projects over the next 15 years (in no particular order):
I would suggest Future Air Mobility needs to be split into several Phases (as the Australians do): 1-Tactical & 2-Strategic (heavy lift) at least.
* Note: the source is a draft transcript. There appears to be some errors eg. Ron Mark saying "block-ups" would seem to be "block obsolescence". He seems to have gone off the farm again regarding submarines. What the heck - 350 subs in our waters?
Also: gleaned from the parliamentary Estimates debate last week: the $20b of new expenditure on defence covers some 13 major projects.
Dr Shane Reti:
(source)*
My guess as to the 13 projects over the next 15 years (in no particular order):
- Future Air Mobility: C-130 replacement (tactical airlift), Boeing 757 replacement (strategic airlift)
- Future Air Surveillance (P-3 replacement)
- Frigate replacements (likely two)
- Network-enabled army
- Real-Estate / Infrastructure upgrade
- LAV upgrade/replacement (maybe Armoured LOV as well?)
- Maritime Sustainability Capability (Tanker)
- Littoral Operational Support Capability (diving / hydrography / mine-countermeasures)
- Remotely Piloted Vehicles
- Cyber warfare
- Artillery / Land weapons replacement
- New polar OPV
- Army Transport fleet (rolling upgrade)
I would suggest Future Air Mobility needs to be split into several Phases (as the Australians do): 1-Tactical & 2-Strategic (heavy lift) at least.
* Note: the source is a draft transcript. There appears to be some errors eg. Ron Mark saying "block-ups" would seem to be "block obsolescence". He seems to have gone off the farm again regarding submarines. What the heck - 350 subs in our waters?
Last edited:
Fair assessment and comment. Yes, I wonder if Ron has spent to much time in the silage pit again. He does more harm to defence interests by making silly claims like that without backing it up with facts, real facts. If he has info like that, publish in the public arena so that we can evaluate it, comment on it and give the public something to worry about. Do those sub movements include all the friendly ones that occur and have occurred? If so then that negates the effectiveness of the claim. Or is it unwelcome foreign subs? Then that strengthens the claim. Note that our esteemed leader says that the $20 billion is "capital investment".
Government approves $1.7b military base revamp | Stuff.co.nz
I also thought the central defence hub was going to be around Ohakea rather than Linton?
Whats a mounting base?
I also thought the central defence hub was going to be around Ohakea rather than Linton?
RubiconNZ
The Wanderer
My speculation is it will be a "bare base" available for peak periods during exercises as they wind back the other base facilities and services, some of which are quite old if I'm not mistaken.
40 deg south
Well-Known Member
http://www.nzdf.mil.nz/downloads/pdf/public-docs/2016/defence-estate-regeneration-2016-2030.pdf
Here is the actual document - a 40 page PDF.
It has a liberal sprinkling of management-speak, but there are some detailed task lists for each base at the back. If you want to know when the Burnham drinking water network is being upgraded, or the Ohakea chapel being moved, it's all in there.
The $1.7 billion is being spent (helpfully) over a 17-year period, meaning an average of $100 million a year on infrastructure. It isn't being spent that smoothly thought - he first three years are pretty slow. The bulk of expenditure happens between 2020-2025 - see p19.
40 deg south
Well-Known Member
International response to ISIL: NZ Contribution [Ministry of Defence NZ]
A week ago the NZ government released a batch of documents relating to the decision to extend the training deployment in Iraq.
Making this information available is a very positive step, even if practically no one will bother to read it. Ditto the release of background papers on the decision not to purchase a C-17.
The summary of public submissions on the DWP noted there was a strong call for more transparency and openness regarding military activities - hopefully this has been noted and acted on.
A week ago the NZ government released a batch of documents relating to the decision to extend the training deployment in Iraq.
Making this information available is a very positive step, even if practically no one will bother to read it. Ditto the release of background papers on the decision not to purchase a C-17.
The summary of public submissions on the DWP noted there was a strong call for more transparency and openness regarding military activities - hopefully this has been noted and acted on.
NZDF is participating in the South Korean US Exercise Ulchi Freedom Guardian (UFG) that runs from 15 August to 2 September. Apparently it is the worlds largest C2 exercise. The Chinese are really annoyed with the exercise and the North Koreans have threatened nuclear retaliation, so I suppose that we should be shaking in our boots from such rampart threats, not.
I think we should be shaking in our boots, that's with laughter, hopefully the rest of the body shaking as well
We're Kiwis cuz. Any shaking, apart from that induced by earthquakes, that will do will be to the accompaniment of 10 guitars bro. :rotfl
kiwi in exile
Active Member
kiwi in exile
Active Member
Possibly of interest to thread readers- shifts in thelocal 'benign strategic environment'
Analytic Brief: Fiji’s strategic pivot. « 36th Parallel Assessments Ltd (NZ)
http://www.radionz.co.nz/http://www...16140/new-forum-members-about-reining-in-fiji
Analytic Brief: Fiji’s strategic pivot. « 36th Parallel Assessments Ltd (NZ)
http://www.radionz.co.nz/http://www...16140/new-forum-members-about-reining-in-fiji
kiwipatriot69
Active Member
I wonder where this leaves Australia, Nz then, if China does achieve basing rights in Fiji as mentioned, would this be seen by our pollies as an 'act of agression' like what China is doing in South China Sea with its neighbours?
Would we still be sending ships for HADR response, or patrolling their regions with ships and maritime patrol aircraft if they manged to exclude us from Pacific forum meetings? Only recently Pm Frank Binimarama was calling for this, citing Nz as Australia as, 'not pacific islanders', funny that, arent we in the pacific?
Would we still be sending ships for HADR response, or patrolling their regions with ships and maritime patrol aircraft if they manged to exclude us from Pacific forum meetings? Only recently Pm Frank Binimarama was calling for this, citing Nz as Australia as, 'not pacific islanders', funny that, arent we in the pacific?
kiwi in exile
Active Member
Arguably, China having foreign bases is not an act of aggression. America has had multiple overseas bases for almost 100 years. Expansionism, yes, but not necessarily aggression. NZG would be reluctant to publically label anything Chinese as aggressive given our trade relationship. John Key seems to have trouble at times calling a spade a spade. The Chinese suddenly finding fungus in our kiwifruit was obviously in no way related to people complaining about crappy steel flooding the market.
kiwipatriot69
Active Member
I was thinking more too on how China might feel about RNZN, RNZAF patrols we normally do in the area if/when that occurs. They could effectively kick us out, leaving fiji free riegn to do as they will against rival lesser equiped nations like tonga,samoa ect.