Friday, March 29, 2024

ALTERNATIVE VIEW: NZ rejects herd mentality

Avatar photo
Last week saw a high-level conference on our relationship with China. It is in my view a special relationship that goes back to the early 1970s, when the then Labour Government invited China to have an embassy here. It was the first in the so-called free world. That relationship has grown since to the extent we were the first country to have a Free Trade Agreement with China.
Reading Time: 3 minutes

The conference was interesting in that it was frank and honest while not being sabre rattling.

Our position with China has upset a few of our ‘friends’.

My position is simple. I am extremely proud of the fact we are an independent democracy. We have stood independently on many issues from nuclear ship visits to nuclear tests in the Pacific, extolling free trade, advocating for arms control and having a strong and independent voice at the United Nations.

That independent stance has made the other members of the Five Eyes spy network, Australia. Canada, the US and the UK apoplectic.

The issue is that Five Eyes is a spy agency that wants to get into issues such as human rights. Anything it would seem to embarrass China.

Five Eye’s started as a joint intelligence agency between the US and UK back in 1941 when we were fighting Hitler. In 1946, Winston Churchill expanded it when he talked about “the special relationship between the British Commonwealth and Empire and the USA”. A lot of things have changed since 1946, including there not being a British Empire.

It was set up to “monitor the Soviet Union and the Eastern Bloc”. The Soviet Union doesn’t exist as such, and we trade with both Russia and members of the Eastern Bloc.

Then in the late 1990s word finally got out that it actually existed. Until then, for the previous 50 years it had been totally behind closed doors. It was described as a “super national intelligence organisation that doesn’t answer to the laws of its own countries”.

A simple example is Five Eyes spying on another country’s citizens to circumvent the laws of that country.

It’s never been the subject of parliamentary scrutiny in New Zealand or anywhere else.

Logic would suggest that while the security interests with the Five Eyes countries could align, the social commentary certainly doesn’t. Just think of America and ex-President Trump. I even have a problem with Boris Johnson. Australia – need I say more?

NZ, to its credit, has said that while it is a member of the Five Eyes security network, it won’t extend it beyond intelligence gathering. In a major speech late last month Foreign Minister Nanaia Mahuta set out the Government’s objections to Five Eyes proposed social commentary. I totally agree with that position.

The issue was that Five Eye’s, minus NZ, admonished China for its treatment of the Uyghur people. We were criticised roundly for that position. I was offended by one pompous, rounded vowelled and chinless British politician criticising us for our lack of commitment to Five Eyes.

The Australians waxed lyrically as you’d expect, even suggesting we were “free loading”. We weren’t. Our position was merely to reject the herd mentality.

China is a major trading partner and a friend. To get involved in a slanging match with that country does us no favours.

Just think of the international and trade implications.

The US, under the Biden administration, has said that China needs to be reined in. Why would we want to be part of that scenario?

Australian Defence Minister Peter Dutton said that conflict shouldn’t be discounted with China. I thought it was an amazing statement and he should concentrate on taking the trash out but again, do we want to be part of that debate? Not to be outdone, the UK has accused us of cosying up to China’s communist rulers. They must still think the empire is alive and well. 

Australia brashly criticised China and is paying for it with trade sanctions. Do we want to try and win a debating point and substantially lose trade as Australia has?

We then had a colossal own goal by the ACT Party who want Parliament to debate a motion declaring China’s oppression of the Uyghur people an act of genocide.

I’m not supporting the treatment of the Uyghur people, but the world is a nasty place. According to Wikipedia, we’ve had eight acts of genocide in the last short while and there has been little commentary from anyone.

So why would ACT put petty politics above common sense? Why would it put political point scoring above our country’s wealth?

As I said at the start, I’m proud of NZ’s independent foreign policy.

I don’t believe trade is above politics. What I do believe is that we should make our own decisions irrespective of international power plays, positioning and politics.

Total
0
Shares
People are also reading