Geopolitical Risk

[BlackPeter]

The importance of the Aukus decision

Prime Minister Christopher Luxon has joked about the announcement at the weekend that the Labour Party will not support New Zealand's involvement in the Aukus pillar 2 defence technology sharing alliance, and that it would withdraw in Government if the coalition signed up to it.

"Labour is deeply concerned about how much time and effort this Government has spent getting closer to the US over the past year," Labour leader Chris Hipkins said.

Foreign affairs spokesman David Parker explained it this way: "New Zealand's interests lie in trade, peace and in ongoing diplomacy, not in being a 'force-multiplier' for one superpower in a containment strategy directed against another."

Alluding to the TPP, which became the CPTPP under Labour, Luxon joked on Monday that if it only changed its name to the Comprehensive and Progressive Aukus, perhaps it would support it.

It is not a joking matter. And contrary to Luxon's framing of the respective positions, Labour's position, especially under Hipkins, has been to cautiously explore Aukus. That is quite different to National's and the coalition's, which is to enthusiastically explore it.

(I don't personally think Labour EVER intended possibly sign up to AUKUS, they were merely being disingenuous / polite to the US).

The fact that Luxon described Labour's position as "putting party before country" suggests that the coalition has all but made the decision to join in principle.

Labour's position is the most serious departure from bipartisan foreign policy since the 1980s anti-nuclear crisis. Labour did not campaign to leave Anzus in 1984 and campaigned, either naively or dishonestly, to maintain an anti-nuclear policy within the alliance.

The significance of its position now will depend on whether Aukus fizzles or develops into a muscular defence vehicle. If it becomes the latter, then any withdrawal is likely to present another crisis in the future.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------

The above is an excerpt from a Herald article...

I guess - so hard to predict the future. On one hand it does make sense in dangerous times to stick together and support countries with a very similar set of values like ours (individual freedom, democracy, integrity, rule of law, rule based international system) - and in general I would count Australia, Canada, the UK and even the US into this category.

On the other hand there is no guarantee that the perceived allies will stick with the same set of values. If the US are now marching towards totalitarism, international isolation and favoring the law of the jungle - what possibly can we gain by sticking with them? If anybody puts Xi, Putin and Trump into one room it is hard to identify the adult in this crowd - and it certainly won't be the US under Trump.

I would see in the current position clear advantages to keep a position of equidistance to all of them, but again - its dependent on things which will happen in the future, and nobody can predict that. 

Sort of glad I don't need to make the decision re Aukus - and I hope as well that we don't leave that up to the whim of populism. I just wish that we would have a set of grown up politicians making the best decision for the country, instead of playing politics. At the moment though, its clearly the latter.

[Davexl]

I guess - so hard to predict the future. On one hand it does make sense in dangerous times to stick together and support countries with a very similar set of values like ours (individual freedom, democracy, integrity, rule of law, rule based international system) - and in general I would count Australia, Canada, the UK and even the US into this category.

On the other hand there is no guarantee that the perceived allies will stick with the same set of values. If the US are now marching towards totalitarism, international isolation and favoring the law of the jungle - what possibly can we gain by sticking with them? If anybody puts Xi, Putin and Trump into one room it is hard to identify the adult in this crowd - and it certainly won't be the US under Trump.

I would see in the current position clear advantages to keep a position of equidistance to all of them, but again - its dependent on things which will happen in the future, and nobody can predict that. 

Sort of glad I don't need to make the decision re Aukus - and I hope as well that we don't leave that up to the whim of populism. I just wish that we would have a set of grown up politicians making the best decision for the country, instead of playing politics. At the moment though, its clearly the latter.

All good points BP. It will be good to see if the adults in the US can carry on keeping Trump in check, or if he is going to continue to trash the foundations of the West's economic and political security.

If things were to go pair-shaped in the US, one would hope the military itself would rise up to defend the constitution as they are sworn to uphold if the very worst were to come to pass...

At the end of the day, as Penny Wong makes clear in the earlier video - the time has passed on whether we can choose to maintain equi-distance between trade and security and Australia has both moderated its rhetoric on China (lesson from NZ ?) but definately chosen security, and is ACTIVELY stepping up.

NZ needs to follow and become way more clear eyed about the security situation and its near-term future...

The US has been saying for some time now that is is time to decouple from China also eg GM plants in China being shut down, similar with other manufacturers - meanwhile NZ is STILL pretending it's business as usual...

[Davexl]

Finland has many lessons for NZ and is already at 2.4% of GDP vs 1.1% for NZ (if we are generous).
Australia has already learned some of them some time ago and is stepping up rapidly...

Finland Crafting Whole-of-Government Defense Posture

https://news.usni.org/2024/12/04/finland-crafting-whole-of-government-defense-posture?ct=t(USNI_NEWS_DAILY)&mc_cid=c722ed1071&mc_eid=cc0f71bf89

Excerpt:
He pointed to Finland spending 2.4 percent of its gross domestic product on defense. That percentage needs to increase as security threats in Europe and the Arctic change. "That's our message [along with France] to other European countries" in the alliance and European Union.

In April, French President Emanuel Macron proposed a European defense initiative to defend the continent with its own nations' defense capabilities through a "common security framework."

Two percent of GDP has been a NATO security spending goal for members since 2014, when Russia illegally annexed Crimea and first openly backed separatists in Ukraine's eastern provinces.

Twenty-three of the 32 treaty partners meet the 2 percent target. Two of the largest economies in the alliance, Germany and Canada, do not.

In President-elect Donald Trump's first administration, he repeatedly criticized alliance members for failing to meet that goal. During his 2024 campaign, he added that he would not necessarily protect "delinquent" members if they failed to meet the 2 percent goal.

[Davexl]

New Zealand and Australia strike new defence agreement

by Thomas Manch

https://www.stuff.co.nz/politics/360511120/winston-peters-judith-collins-speak-australian-ministers


Watch: Winston Peters, Penny Wong, Judith Collins, Richard Marles meet in Auckland

https://www.rnz.co.nz/news/political/535855/watch-winston-peters-penny-wong-judith-collins-richard-marles-meet-in-auckland

[Davexl]

Man, we need those new frigates, along with all those drone & counter drone systems...

Dwarfed by China in shipbuilding, US looks to build its defence base

https://www.1news.co.nz/2024/12/06/dwarfed-by-china-in-shipbuilding-us-looks-to-build-its-defence-base/

[Davexl]

Apologies to Professor Paul Dibb for the late entry:

Finally we can see some crystal clear thinking and clear expectations.
But should have come from one of our own...

Designing a force structure for New Zealand's strategic circumstances

- Emeritus professor of strategic studies at the Australian National University

https://www.aspistrategist.org.au/designing-a-force-structure-for-new-zealands-strategic-circumstances/?utm_medium=email&utm_campaign=Weekly%20The%20Strategist&utm_content=Weekly%20The%20Strategist+CID_7fe16ca385a783b33802d5aeb728f633&utm_source=CampaignMonitor&utm_term=Designing%20a%20force%20structure%20for%20New%20Zealands%20strategic%20circumstances

[Davexl]

The flip side to standing up to Trump (Ist term)

Has Angela Merkel no shame?

https://www.aspistrategist.org.au/has-angela-merkel-no-shame/?utm_medium=email&utm_campaign=Weekly%20The%20Strategist&utm_content=Weekly%20The%20Strategist+CID_7fe16ca385a783b33802d5aeb728f633&utm_source=CampaignMonitor&utm_term=Has%20Angela%20Merkel%20no%20shame

[Davexl]

Where do they dredge up these people...from Bloomberg

Tulsi Gabbard, Donald Trump's nominee to be America's most senior intelligence official, has secretly met with Assad and defended Putin's war on Ukraine. Viewed as "compromised" and even a "Russian asset" by Democrats who, along with some Republicans, vehemently oppose her becoming national intelligence director, Gabbard now faces a broader coalition of opponents. The Associated Press reported that almost 100 former diplomats, intelligence community members and national security officials from both parties have urged the Senate to have closed-door hearings on her nomination, allowing for a broad review of all classified government information on the former Congresswoman.

[Davexl]

Good summary of the Syrian situation to date (Audio)

Will be interesting to see if neighbouring states allow room for Syria to breath as it reorganises its future, or if the 'order' vacuum formed by losing their ruthless strongman will collapse Syria into warring factions in a similar way that Iraq fell apart after the US military victory against Saddam Hussein.

For now, celebrations for the Syrian people, including their communities in New Zealand.
(But, Tulsi Gabbard could well be proven right on her Syrian views anyway...)

Syrian President Bashar al-Assad ousted as rebels take Damascus

https://www.rnz.co.nz/national/programmes/morningreport/audio/2018967587/syrian-president-bashar-al-assad-ousted-as-rebels-take-damascus

[Davexl]

Quote Originally Posted by moka View Post

Tulsi Gabbard ran for the Democratic presidential nomination in the 2020 election, but her campaign was ultimately unsuccessful. 2020 Election Tulsi Gabbard policies.

https://www.cfr.org/election2020/candidate-tracker/tulsi-gabbard

She opposes overthrowing the Assad regime, arguing that it would result in the victory of Islamist terrorist groups. She visited Syria in 2017 and controversially met with Assad and other Syrian leaders. Though she calls Syrian President Bashar al-Assad a "brutal dictator," she opposes his overthrow. She is a harsh critic of U.S. support for Syrian rebels, who she says have close ties to al-Qaeda and the Islamic State.

Gabbard identifies as a "hawk" on Islamist terrorism, supporting U.S. military missions against al-Qaeda and the self-proclaimed Islamic State, while opposing regime-change policies that she says create openings for terrorist groups.
She has spoken in favor of many aspects of the Green New Deal framework. She positions herself as an environmentalist and a critic of "regime change wars. Gabbard says she will end "wasteful regime change wars" that she says have cost the United States trillions of dollars that should have instead been directed toward health care, infrastructure, and other domestic priorities. She has warned against U.S. military interventions aimed at changing local governments in Iraq, Libya, Syria, and elsewhere, though she backs targeted counterterrorism missions.

Gabbard criticizes President Donald J. Trump's confrontational stance toward Beijing and warns about the downsides of escalating tensions with China. She says a cooperative relationship is needed instead to confront global challenges.

Gabbard supports the Paris Agreement, calling Trump's decision to withdraw the United States from the climate deal "short-sighted and irresponsible."
She has opposed the expansion of federal surveillance powers, which she says are a violation of basic civil liberties, and she backs legislation to end warrantless surveillance of Americans' communications.
She calls the market dominance of large tech companies such as Google and Facebook, which she calls monopolies, "a direct threat to our democracy," arguing that they censor dissenting views. She proposes breaking up such firms.

Gabbard, who saw active-duty military service in Iraq, has based her campaign platform around ending major U.S. troop commitments abroad, reorienting military policy toward more targeted counterterrorism goals, and improving veterans' care.
Gabbard is broadly noninterventionist, arguing that the United States should not use its military power to reshape other countries' political systems, but rather should use diplomacy to find common ground and avoid war even with the most intransigent adversaries.
Gabbard says it is the United States' responsibility as the world's most powerful country to give up "gunboat diplomacy" and seek to influence the world through "communication, negotiation, and goodwill."

She advocates for reducing tensions with nuclear-armed powers, especially Russia, in order to avoid "sleepwalking" into nuclear war. She says she would call for summits with the leaders of both China and Russia in her first week in office.
Gabbard opposed the 2017 tax reform championed by Trump, which she says provided "giveaways to corporations and special interests" while adding trillions of dollars to the "already-reckless deficit.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

On the face of this much more nuanced description, Tulsi Gabbard comes across as very balanced and sophisticated in her views on many issues, which would align with many if not most Kiwi opinions also.

I wholeheartedly take back my earlier snapshot reaction to the short Bloomberg summary article and will try to keep a more open mind.
To date, I have trusted Bloomberg, at least on financial & investment commentary, but politics may not be their forte...

Her comments on Syrian policy resonate here in NZ (except perhaps on overthrowing Assad, at this time).

eg. She opposes overthrowing the Assad regime, arguing that it would result in the victory of Islamist terrorist groups. She visited Syria in 2017 and controversially met with Assad and other Syrian leaders. Though she calls Syrian President Bashar al-Assad a "brutal dictator," she opposes his overthrow. She is a harsh critic of U.S. support for Syrian rebels, who she says have close ties to al-Qaeda and the Islamic State.

Gabbard identifies as a "hawk" on Islamist terrorism, supporting U.S. military missions against al-Qaeda and the self-proclaimed Islamic State, while opposing regime-change policies that she says create openings for terrorist groups.
She has spoken in favor of many aspects of the Green New Deal framework. She positions herself as an environmentalist and a critic of "regime change wars. Gabbard says she will end "wasteful regime change wars" that she says have cost the United States trillions of dollars that should have instead been directed toward health care, infrastructure, and other domestic priorities. She has warned against U.S. military interventions aimed at changing local governments in Iraq, Libya, Syria, and elsewhere, though she backs targeted counterterrorism missions.

[Waltzing]

Trump turned up in Paris with a YELLOW tie and deep blue suit...and met with M and Z...

well will T but the boot into P.

[Davexl]

Sweeping Syrian rebel advance resurrects US fears of Islamist takeover

https://www.stuff.co.nz/world-news/360516045/sweeping-syrian-rebel-advance-resurrects-us-fears-islamist-takeover

[BlackPeter]

Trump turned up in Paris with a YELLOW tie and deep blue suit...and met with M and Z...

well will T but the boot into P.

Yep - interesting - can't remember I have seen him with a yellow tie (or better without a red tie) before. Clearly - must mean something. Time will tell, whether its a good sign, though.

[Waltzing]

went up to Z and shook hands at the end again... also Z got the big clapping from the crowd.... The R MOB losing out in the middle east might turn out to be a decisive moment in GR (global Risk)..

[Davexl]

South Korea STILL unstable...(Some distressing content)

Police raid South Korean president Yoon Suk Yeol's office over martial law declaration

https://www.stuff.co.nz/world-news/360519943/police-raid-south-korean-president-yoon-suk-yeols-office-over-martial-law-declaration