The rock and the hard place that has defined New Zealand’s foreign policy for the last decade or so is getting ever sharper and more uncomfortable.
Since the thaw
in relations with the United States after the 1980s nuclear row, New Zealand
has been a reluctant friend. Consistent with what it holds to be an independent
foreign policy, New Zealand has supported the United States on some issues and
opposed it on others. For example, it provided significant military and
operational support to the United States-led Operation Enduring Freedom in
Afghanistan in the early 2000s but opposed the invasion of Iraq in 2003 because
it had not had the approval of the United Nations.
More recently,
New Zealand opposed the United States’ intervention in Venezuela as not in
accordance with international law. And although it had forthrightly condemned
the recent actions of the Iranian government, New Zealand stopped short of
explicitly supporting the United States-led attacks on Iran earlier this year.
While this
nuanced ambivalence has served New Zealand’s interests well in recent years, it
is easy to see how the United States, especially the current idiosyncratic
Administration, might feel that New Zealand is at best a “fair-weather” friend.
In this context, the recent comments by the War Secretary Hegseth that New
Zealand was “freeloading” off the United States by not more significantly
increasing its defence spending, and the new United States’ Ambassador’s
expressed “disappointment” at the continuation of our long-standing
anti-nuclear policy are not just idle comments. They clearly reflect a deeper
United States’ frustration at New Zealand’s continued broadly friendly, but
carefully distanced and wary approach to the bilateral relationship.
There are many
reasons for this, beyond the anti-nuclear policy, which although still a sore
point for the United States is largely a red herring, given the infrequence of
nuclear ship visits here prior to the 1987 ban being enacted. For example, promoting
two-way trade has long been an issue – from the time then Finance Minister Walter
Nash unsuccessfully proposed a “reciprocal trade treaty” during talks in
Washington in 1939, through to the more concerted, but equally unsuccessful,
attempts from the early 2000s to secure a free trade agreement. Against that
backdrop, President Trump’s imposition of “Liberation Day” tariffs on New
Zealand’s exports to the United States was a doubly bitter pill for New Zealand
to swallow.
Meanwhile, New
Zealand’s relations with China have been slowly expanding since the
establishment of diplomatic relations in 1972. Improved political, cultural and
economic links over the years led to a free trade agreement – China’s first
ever – being concluded between the two countries in 2008 and ever closer
political ties. The free trade agreement has been an outstanding success, so
much so that China is now New Zealand’s major trading partner.
But at the same
time New Zealand seems to have been none too bothered about being drawn ever
more closely into China’s expanding political web, to the extent that
successive governments have been almost pathologically scared stiff of saying
anything that might upset China and threaten our economic security. And consequently,
China, while occasionally making warm noises about how much it values its links
with New Zealand, largely does as it wishes in this region, and places little value
on anything New Zealand has to say. Whenever New Zealand dares pluck up the
courage to offer even the mildest criticisms of Chinese policy, it is firmly
rebuked by Beijing for interfering in China’s domestic affairs.
This year alone
China has conducted unannounced naval exercises in the Tasman Sea, close to
Australian territorial waters, and conducted a live missile firing test in the
Pacific with only the briefest advance warning to New Zealand. On both
occasions all New Zealand could do was stand by meekly and watch.
The sad, unintended
outcome of our foreign policy is that at a time of heightened global and
regional instability we are not trusted as reliable or committed by the United
States and are being walked all over by China. Even our one true ally,
Australia, has its frustrations with what it considers New Zealand’s less than
full commitment to regional security.
As an
independent nation, New Zealand has every right to pursue an independent
foreign policy and should not abandon that ambition lightly. But at the same
time, it must appreciate that it is not operating in a vacuum, and that there
will be consequences, whatever options it chooses. The combination of an
increasingly unpredictable and volatile United States, and a more activist
China playing out their quest for global supremacy in our part of the world
creates new pressures for countries like New Zealand.
That is why the
challenges confronting our current foreign policy have become more pronounced.
On the one hand, New Zealand cannot afford to become seen as too closely
aligned with either of the superpower rivals, despite its economic reliance on
China, and likely increasing pressure from the United States to modify its
stance. But on the other hand, it cannot allow itself to be seen by either
as irrelevant, or unreliable.
As the rock and
the hard place become ever more uncomfortable, New Zealand needs to strike a
new balance between upholding its independent foreign policy and being taken
seriously as a regional player by the superpowers. Achieving that balance and
protecting our national integrity will require our politicians and diplomats to
exercise even more skilful diplomacy and careful leadership over the next few
years than they have already done.
Yet it remains
a goal worth striving for.
No comments:
Post a Comment