NZDF General discussion thread

[Rob c]

Rob: in agreement with you that a nation must at the very least be able to defend its own territory (after all that's the history of mankind and civilizations) plus the rest of your commentary. The only variation I would add is I do think though that we must also have certain useful capabilities that can forward-deploy as part of the baseline. Like how we forward deployed the Services into the SW Pacific in WW2 (including maritime patrol to keep a lookout of our approaches).

I did include the need to contribute to regional defence, but this should not detract from our own defence. The other point I would make is that we cannot assume that China will be the problem in 20 years or more. Remember that Japan was an ally during the first WW1 and in fact escorted NZ and Australian troops to the Middle East during this time. Just over 20 years later we were at war. Also, were will China have bases in 20 years.
Assuming that a certain path will be followed and the conflict will occur in a specified region is a mistake as is assuming that only certain threats will be involved. In our case we do know that any threat can only come by air or sea, outside of that anything is possible.

 

[Catalina]

we cannot assume that China will be the problem in 20 years or more.

Yes we can, as it is regimes, not countries that are the defence threat. Referring to defence threats as countries, by using the word China, rather than as hostile political units, such as the Communist Chinese Party, is the cover they want us to use for it reduces the public's ability to understand the military threat facing them.

The Communist Chinese Party firing of an ICBM into the South Pacific on 26th September 2024, its 23rd October 2024 deployment of the Type 055 Renhai Class Cruiser Xianyang along with the formidable Type 052D Luyang III Class Destroyer Nanning, packing between them 176 antiship and land attack missiles, just two days sailing time from New Zealand in Vanuatu, along with the CCPs growing control of our neighbouring nations political systems, such as its 19th April 2022 signing of a secret security pact with our near neighbour the Solomon Islands, and the Communist Chinese escalating cyberattacks on New Zealand and our Parliament, as announced on 25th March 2024, demonstrate the growing Defence threat the Communist Chinese Party is to our Western nation.

Nazi Germany was a growing threat, until Allied militaries imposed regime change and removed the Nazi Party from power.
Imperial Japan was a growing threat, until Allied militaries imposed regime change and removed the Japanese Imperialists from power.
Soviet Russia was a growing threat, until Allied militaries imposed regime change and removed the Communist Party of the Soviet Union from power.
Communist China is a growing threat, and will be until Allied militaries impose regime change and remove the CCP from power.

Regime change of Communist China must be the ultimate goal of Allied Strategy, and with the advances in technology, the sooner we do it the better. Whether it is through hot war, as led to the regime changes in World War Two, or whether it is through the successful strategies of Strategic Containment and Economic Isolation of the Cold War, it is fundamental to the continued existence of Western Civilization to remove the CCP from power.

By playing hardball against the CCP Trump has already scored a major victory in pushing back against the the growing threat of the Communist Chinese Party with Panama now pledging to end its key canal deal with China and work with the US.

The survival of Western Civilization revolves around keeping the worlds maritime choke points under Western Control. New Zealand is strategically located astride the easiest route the CCP has to Antarctica and the huge resources it contains, resources that the CCP is already preparing to take. As global trade wars break out in 2025, New Zealand's age of strategic isolation has come to an end. Panama has recently found out that nations must choose quickly, and firmly, if they are in the Communist Chinese camp, or standing together with traditional allies on the side of the American Free World.

Whether they be Nazi's, Imperial Japanese, Communist Russians, or Communist Chinese, pushing hard back against them on every front until they collapse ensures the global dominance of our Western civilization and the survival and prosperity of our children.

It thus behooves those interested and involved in the Defence of the Realm of New Zealand to prepare, as our ally Australia is, for military conflict with the Peoples Liberation Army Navy.

 

[Rob c]

Yes we can, as it is regimes, not countries that are the defence threat. Referring to defence threats as countries, by using the word China, rather than as hostile political units, such as the Communist Chinese Party, is the cover they want us to use for it reduces the public's ability to understand the military threat facing them.

While I agree that it is the attitude of a regime that is the problem, we don't know whether the CCP will still support this attitude or the regime will exist at all in the distant future. The Soviet collapse was rather quick.
Outside of Taiwan which is a likely flash point due to Ideological reasons for the CCP I doubt that the would want to get involved in any direct conflict with the west if they can avoid it as they have simply too much to lose.

Soviet Russia was a growing threat, until Allied militaries imposed regime change and removed the Communist Party of the Soviet Union from power.

This is somewhat misleading, as the collapse was more a case of an internaL economic and political failure and western militaries had nothing to do with it.
And look what we have now in its place, possibly more dangerous.

Nazi Germany was a growing threat, until Allied militaries imposed regime change and removed the Nazi Party from power.

The demise of the Nazi party in Germany was more of a case of them biting off more than they could chew and the poor leadership of Adolf. If they had of stopped before invading Poland and in particular Russia they may have still been there today.

Imperial Japan was a growing threat, until Allied militaries imposed regime change and removed the Japanese Imperialists from power.

The Japanese made a direct attack on both the US and GB interests and this was was the reason for their fall, if these attacks had not taken place what would have happened ? Who knows, maybe the regime could have still been in power and occupied Korea and parts of China.
The point I was making was that we need a defence force capable of defending NZ first and contributing to regional defence irrespective of the perceived threat at the time.
I would also point out that in the 1960's we were committing troops and aircraft to Malesia to counter Indonesian agresion, but that situation has completely changed.
The basic western pholosity, excepting some hard liners is the the international rule of law should prevail, this because most countries just want to be able to have a peaceful existence. However as some would disturb this, a capable defence force is required.
In closing I believe that no country has the RIGHT to impose its wishes over another country, but that maintaining international accepted norms and law should be the aim of all.

 

[Rob c]

By playing hardball against the CCP Trump has already scored a major victory in pushing back against the the growing threat of the Communist Chinese Party with Panama now pledging to end its key canal deal with China and work with the US.

My personal view of current actions by DT is that it does not bode well for all concerned and is likely to be a case of DT shooting himself in the foot, and to negatively affect a lot of bystanders in the longer term.

 

[John Fedup]

Yes we can, as it is regimes, not countries that are the defence threat. Referring to defence threats as countries, by using the word China, rather than as hostile political units, such as the Communist Chinese Party, is the cover they want us to use for it reduces the public's ability to understand the military threat facing them.

The Communist Chinese Party firing of an ICBM into the South Pacific on 26th September 2024, its 23rd October 2024 deployment of the Type 055 Renhai Class Cruiser Xianyang along with the formidable Type 052D Luyang III Class Destroyer Nanning, packing between them 176 antiship and land attack missiles, just two days sailing time from New Zealand in Vanuatu, along with the CCPs growing control of our neighbouring nations political systems, such as its 19th April 2022 signing of a secret security pact with our near neighbour the Solomon Islands, and the Communist Chinese escalating cyberattacks on New Zealand and our Parliament, as announced on 25th March 2024, demonstrate the growing Defence threat the Communist Chinese Party is to our Western nation.

Nazi Germany was a growing threat, until Allied militaries imposed regime change and removed the Nazi Party from power.
Imperial Japan was a growing threat, until Allied militaries imposed regime change and removed the Japanese Imperialists from power.
Soviet Russia was a growing threat, until Allied militaries imposed regime change and removed the Communist Party of the Soviet Union from power.
Communist China is a growing threat, and will be until Allied militaries impose regime change and remove the CCP from power.

Regime change of Communist China must be the ultimate goal of Allied Strategy, and with the advances in technology, the sooner we do it the better. Whether it is through hot war, as led to the regime changes in World War Two, or whether it is through the successful strategies of Strategic Containment and Economic Isolation of the Cold War, it is fundamental to the continued existence of Western Civilization to remove the CCP from power.

By playing hardball against the CCP Trump has already scored a major victory in pushing back against the the growing threat of the Communist Chinese Party with Panama now pledging to end its key canal deal with China and work with the US.

The survival of Western Civilization revolves around keeping the worlds maritime choke points under Western Control. New Zealand is strategically located astride the easiest route the CCP has to Antarctica and the huge resources it contains, resources that the CCP is already preparing to take. As global trade wars break out in 2025, New Zealand's age of strategic isolation has come to an end. Panama has recently found out that nations must choose quickly, and firmly, if they are in the Communist Chinese camp, or standing together with traditional allies on the side of the American Free World.

Whether they be Nazi's, Imperial Japanese, Communist Russians, or Communist Chinese, pushing hard back against them on every front until they collapse ensures the global dominance of our Western civilization and the survival and prosperity of our children.

It thus behooves those interested and involved in the Defence of the Realm of New Zealand to prepare, as our ally Australia is, for military conflict with the Peoples Liberation Army Navy.

It is somewhat late for any eradication of the CCP. Western governments and corporations welcomed China’s entry into the WTO with SFA concerns about about how they operated. Prosperity will convert the CCP to “nice”. Morons!!! Cheap labour and technology transfers, great ideas for the greedy.

Now we have a threat with huge financial resources, a large number of Western trained scientists and engineers now creating locally educated Chinese scientists and engineers. Despite future demographic issues and some unrest amongst Chinese citizens, the vast state security apparatus will ensure the CCP survival. In short, we are likely &ucked barring an asteroid hit in China.

 

[jbc388]

Now the geostrategic issues. are going to start to manifest for NZ!!

'Do not see eye to eye': NZ and Cook Islands at odds over diplomatic issues | RNZ News
Cook Islands' deal with China takes NZ Government by surprise

and the government had better get it's "A@#$ into gear!!"

 

[Hone C]

Now the geostrategic issues. are going to start to manifest for NZ!!

'Do not see eye to eye': NZ and Cook Islands at odds over diplomatic issues | RNZ News
Cook Islands' deal with China takes NZ Government by surprise

and the government had better get it's "A@#$ into gear!!"

Unfortunately, most NZ pollies wouldn't recognise geostrategic issues until they were parading down Lambton Quay.

This is just the latest incident where the NZG has been blindsided in the Pacific. It gives lie to the claim by some that NZ has some mystical connection to the Pacific Islands that gives the government a special insight lacking amoung our friends and allies. Insight and influence that supposedly exists without the need for clearly articulated and resourced strategy, strong diplomatic and intelligence footprints, or much in the way of NZDF presence.

 

[Gooey]

I realise that it is easy to criticise after the event, but I agree Hone C.

It is absurd that our state funded media such as RNZ and TV1 simplify these national security issues as being Geopolitics is bad, US are just as big bullies as China, Australia are all racists unlike us who are Pacifica Horse Whisperer's.

Any discussion at all about the latest Cook Island debacle instead centres around the gotta moment of it being a Winston Peters failure. No commentary at all about our existential dynamic with CCP or the three pillars of defence, foreign affairs, and trade!

It's enough to make one cry in my weekbix.

 

[recce.k1]

Valid concerns chaps but lets look at some context. It appears to be an economic investment agreement from what little info has filtered through at this point (and apparently not security related, in fact Australia are signing a maritime security agreement with the Cook Is. to strengthen transnational crime co-operation, plus constitutionally wise the Cook's cannot enter into agreements on security and defence without NZ's agreement).

The issue seems to be the Cook Is. Prime Minister conducting these talks (and signing) in secrecy. This has cause an uproar for the local population and expect to see push back from them (he seems to have form and has now backed down from pressure from NZ over his recent passport issuing idea).

Suspect the secrecy is due (in part) to what some of the economic investment plans will involve and their scope (I'm guessing it will be larger than what the local population, other Pacific Forum nations and environmental groups will be comfortable with)? I think mention has been made of deep water resource extraction (and fishing) and I can only surmise China will no doubt in their usual way disregard "international" environmental safeguards and contaminate/pollute a much wider area than necessary (saw an article somewhere recently talking about environmental destruction being caused in the Solomon Is. caused by Chinese resource extraction efforts).

I'm not trying to downplay things as in essence this is yet more great power play competition in action with the CCP playing the long game. And whilst on the one hand I can see the Cook Is. PM wanting greater economic investment (from what NZ, Australia, US, Japan, EU etc can offer), I think he may be under estimating the balancing act he will need to maintain as the CCP will want and demand more and more.

In terms of "allied" response I think there may be some Pacific Island concerns over the new US Administration walking back on development and aid for "climate change" initiatives (so perhaps then, ironically, one of the world's greatest polluters (CCP) will then try and splash the cash even more to gain further influence)? The Mandarins in Wellington and Canberra will be busy earning their keep and trying to ensure the US remain engaged.

As an aside I flicked around some of the local media/foreign policy commentators on these issues to see (what little) they are saying so far over the last couple of days and in a couple of cases noticed their disdain for NZ's centre-right Govt and in particular Foreign Minister Peters sees them blaming him. Nope, the CCP have been active for years and presumably this issue had its origins under their favorite previous Govt (as agreements don't happen overnight) ... so please beware of biases in some instances.

In the meantime perhaps the NZG should seriously consider spending some $$ and forward basing one of the OPV's at Raratonga to keep an eye on things going on at sea (and the Cook Is. have been calling for a better NZ defence presence anyway). I'm sure it will help with recruiting, who wouldn't want to spend time in the tropics especially over winter! If so perhaps the UK model for the River-class batch 2's could be considered? That is, FIFO crews, meaning a small port side presence?

 

[jbc388]

Valid concerns chaps but lets look at some context. It appears to be an economic investment agreement from what little info has filtered through at this point (and apparently not security related, in fact Australia are signing a maritime security agreement with the Cook Is. to strengthen transnational crime co-operation, plus constitutionally wise the Cook's cannot enter into agreements on security and defence without NZ's agreement).

The issue seems to be the Cook Is. Prime Minister conducting these talks (and signing) in secrecy. This has cause an uproar for the local population and expect to see push back from them (he seems to have form and has now backed down from pressure from NZ over his recent passport issuing idea).

Suspect the secrecy is due (in part) to what some of the economic investment plans will involve and their scope (I'm guessing it will be larger than what the local population, other Pacific Forum nations and environmental groups will be comfortable with)? I think mention has been made of deep water resource extraction (and fishing) and I can only surmise China will no doubt in their usual way disregard "international" environmental safeguards and contaminate/pollute a much wider area than necessary (saw an article somewhere recently talking about environmental destruction being caused in the Solomon Is. caused by Chinese resource extraction efforts).

I'm not trying to downplay things as in essence this is yet more great power play competition in action with the CCP playing the long game. And whilst on the one hand I can see the Cook Is. PM wanting greater economic investment (from what NZ, Australia, US, Japan, EU etc can offer), I think he may be under estimating the balancing act he will need to maintain as the CCP will want and demand more and more.

In terms of "allied" response I think there may be some Pacific Island concerns over the new US Administration walking back on development and aid for "climate change" initiatives (so perhaps then, ironically, one of the world's greatest polluters (CCP) will then try and splash the cash even more to gain further influence)? The Mandarins in Wellington and Canberra will be busy earning their keep and trying to ensure the US remain engaged.

As an aside I flicked around some of the local media/foreign policy commentators on these issues to see (what little) they are saying so far over the last couple of days and in a couple of cases noticed their disdain for NZ's centre-right Govt and in particular Foreign Minister Peters sees them blaming him. Nope, the CCP have been active for years and presumably this issue had its origins under their favorite previous Govt (as agreements don't happen overnight) ... so please beware of biases in some instances.

In the meantime perhaps the NZG should seriously consider spending some $$ and forward basing one of the OPV's at Raratonga to keep an eye on things going on at sea (and the Cook Is. have been calling for a better NZ defence presence anyway). I'm sure it will help with recruiting, who wouldn't want to spend time in the tropics especially over winter! If so perhaps the UK model for the River-class batch 2's could be considered? That is, FIFO crews, meaning a small port side presence?

The major problem I can see with the NZ government response will be not wanting to spend any extra funds on defense basing an OPV up in the islands also we don't have enough ships and pers to crew them being a major factor these days.
The lack of funding for the NZDF is really going to limit NZ's defence related ability to base any ship in the islands.
The lack of funding for the last 30 odd years is now going to show up big time!
It's the NZ pollies that are to blame can't and won't think what may occur 10-20 years ahead!!

 

[Gooey]

Copied k1. Thanks.

Meanwhile on NewstalkZB

Cook Islands Prime Minister Mark Brown is heading to Beijing, where he's expected to sign a comprehensive strategic partnership. He says it's part of a broader strategy to strengthen relations with all of its key partners and expand economic opportunities.

MFAT says it would have expected to be fully consulted on such a deal - but wasn't. Winston Peters told Mike Hosking New Zealand's been blindsided, and we're not the only ones. He says they've asked for information over a number of months, but it hasn't been shared with them or the Cook Island people.

Cook Islands-China deal came out of left field, Winston Peters says

Foreign Minister Winston Peters says the deal between the Cook Islands and China came out of left field for not only New Zealand, but the people of the Coo

www.newstalkzb.co.nz

For what it is worth Winny says this is not just financial, but also to talk and discuss freely with the Cook Islands which isn't happening at the moment. PM Brown may have over played him hand by setting up China v NZ in a cash distribution fight. It will be interesting to see if the people of Cooks agree with Winny in that its also about democracy and freedoms.

An OPV at Raratonga would be truly awesome.

 

[jbc388]

Now we have this story!!!
I haven't been able to read the full story as it is paywalled
NZ Defence Force artillery stocks were allegedly run down to 50 rounds of ammo | BusinessDesk

This is beyond useless!!!

 

[recce.k1]

It's the NZ pollies that are to blame can't and won't think what may occur 10-20 years ahead!!

I agree the pollies are to blame but have you been paying any attention that they are actually planning out until 2040 at the moment?

Now we have this story!!!
I haven't been able to read the full story as it is paywalled
NZ Defence Force artillery stocks were allegedly run down to 50 rounds of ammo | BusinessDesk

This is beyond useless!!!

Denied by NZDF and even former DefMin Wayne Mapp says he is "skeptical" of these claims.

Wayne Mapp: Concerns low ammunition will impact Defence Force training

BussinessDesk reports sources say supply issues meant the country got down to its last 50 rounds of artillery ammunition. NZDF is adamant it has the stock

www.newstalkzb.co.nz

It has been reported that global stock supplies are impacted by events such as the war in Ukraine.

Speculation: NZ Army 105mm rounds have been sent to Ukraine, impacting time-frames for NZ to restock (as demand is prioritised to where it is urgently needed). That could mean stocks in country are lower than the peacetime norm (hence the claim) but NZDF have ordered replacements and are (or were) awaiting shipment/delivery, accepting delays for the greater good elsewhere. Frankly the article stating that the NZDF won't confirm matters is somewhat absurd reporting because yes it is normal to withhold such information due to national security concerns (NZ is not alone in doing this) and the journo should know that. (Basing all this on the fact which was reported eventually that NZDF sent its Javelin ant-tank missiles to replenish US warstocks at the frontlines during the WoT (along with other allied nations). Seems the MSM didn't sensationalise that at the time as stocks would have been low).

So when you see these "gotcha" news articles please join up what you know or have read (as you will have a better grounding than most journalists), as repeating sensationalised reporting impacts the reputation of Defence and its hard working personnel.

 

[recce.k1]

For what it is worth Winny says this is not just financial, but also to talk and discuss freely with the Cook Islands which isn't happening at the moment. PM Brown may have over played him hand by setting up China v NZ in a cash distribution fight. It will be interesting to see if the people of Cooks agree with Winny in that its also about democracy and freedoms.

It is concerning that the Cook Island PM is conducting these affairs in secret. It is obvious that this lack of transparency shows that he and the CCP have plenty to hide. Which again is another blunder the CCP have made (like their recent ICBM launch) that will have many Pacific Island forum nations (inc. the Western countries) mistrusting CCP intentions even more. Suspect there will be negative rammifications for these two parties. Especially once the agreement is better understood by the Cook Islands public and PI Forum members. Could even be challenged so let's see how things play out!

 

[jbc388]

I agree the pollies are to blame but have you been paying any attention that they are actually planning out until 2040 at the moment?

Yes I have been watching and paying attention but what the NZ pollies say then actually do!! is usually another thing!! National MP's are good at talking the talk, but not supplying the funding to do the walk!!

 

[Gracie1234]

A great interview. Very clearly links defense to trade. Will be interested to see when the next report is released.

 

[CJohn]

An interesting point made by Kiwi Tech entrepreneur Sean Gourley with regard to NZ participation in AUKUS pillar 2.

 

[recce.k1]

A great interview. Very clearly links defense to trade. Will be interested to see when the next report is released.

Thanks for posting this. Narrowing down a number of wider perspectives to the issue of 2% defence expenditure and that being understood by Government (and putting aside why are they not talking of a somewhat higher figure), but perhaps not that it can do so overnight realistically (and we are not alone, other nations face this and the question of whether to increase taxes, increase income generation or take on additional debt and therefore interest repayments etc) ... wonder what is Govt/Defence thinking. Perhaps investing in getting the basics in motion (eg increase recruitment, meaning more supporting infrastructure etc)? Perhaps some short/medium term high value acquisitions (eg supplement aircraft/land type numbers etc)? Longer term (as in out to 2035), replacing the Navy's fleet. But paradoxically, apart from the fit-out (granted is crucially important and where the costs come into the equation), the actual vessels themselves tend to be procured from non-US shipbuilders (saying this as NZG balances USG expectations).

An interesting point made by Kiwi Tech entrepreneur Sean Gourley with regard to NZ participation in AUKUS pillar 2.

Fascinating. This is the future of warfare explained in 16 minutes. Hope the NZG & Defence is meeting and listening to this guy. Clearly, despite NZ being a small player, it needs to be involved whenever and wherever it can in terms of technological development and collaborative efforts where practical. Which means greater NZG financial support (and putting investment into technical training as well as company R&D etc).

Perhaps it also means, particularly for lethal capabilities, that we must be procuring some types for shorter term use (or with upgrade pathways) as they could become obsolete in a relatively short timeframe?

Another thing, thought bubble wise, in terms of AI, as the current technological offset (aka the third - after the first being nuclear weapons and the second being stealth weaponry and precision munitions), then to ensure geopolitical supremacy (thinking global contexts here), could rather than the CCP building up to re-take Taiwan (and allied efforts to build up forces to respond) .. could the objective be to destroy Taiwan's crucial CPU manufacturing and development industries, so the CCP can dominate global AI chip development and therefore global ai and geopolitical dominance? If so do "we" (i.e. royal "we") need to re-think traditional defence planning and strategy? As in, are "we" investing billions/trillions to counter an adversary that will not show up to the fight so-to-speak, instead be pulverizing Taiwan whilst "we" plan a response? If so, too late? So do "we" need to do and plan things differently?

 

[Rob c]

At this point in time I see AI as very relevant in the NZ context, but dones less so except for forward deployed personnel. AI will become part of most factors in defence in the time ahead, the only question being the time it takes. However dones by their nature , do have range constraints and while they would be useful for local defence should the threat get close, I would seek to keep any threat further away with longer range options. As to what our government will do, I think it will be minimalistic so as to appear to be "pulling our weight" and little else. The big problem that they could be working on now, which is how to keep our experienced personal from leaving has not been addressed at all. There is no point buying the best equipment in the world if you don't have the experience personal to use it.

 

[downunderblue]

The new stategic partnership to be signed in Beijing between the Cook Islands and China seems to have caught the NZ Govt by surprise. I note the public commentary has gone gone from surprise, to critical (Winston Peters) to the over the top Should New Zealand invade the Cook Islands?

I think its a good for NZ to have this public debate, and hopefully leads to increased NZ defense spending. I should note though its a good idea to examine and declare a defense strategic plan and then allocate those resources to meet that plan, rather than just raise defense expenditure for the sake of it.

How can you contribute in a meanful and sustained way? I've heard debate that the focus should be on integrated into a unified command with AU, but I question whether being a jack of all trades and a multi role force is the best use of resources.

Anyway, it's your debate to have, but I'm glad that you're having it. I was in NZ recently and remarked how different our statetegic priorities are, and the danger of NZ being so Pacific focused in a blinkered way. I get it because of your immediate geography, but the threat to the Western and South Western Pacific will only ever originate from Asia, and to think you are removed from it is ignorant, lazy and dangerous.

That's politicians for you though, they do that, until you make them accountable. How the NZ Labour Party can remain committed to a policy of avoidance is simply beyond me, but Chris Hipkens seems to think there are easy votes here and its criminally wrong to think NZ sit on the fence like ASEAN. Hopefully their position evolves over time, but we all need to act now to avoid conflict into the future.