New Zealand's support of the US

me | September 19, 2001 | Doug Loss

[Doug Loss]

A few days ago I posted an article from the New Zealand Press in which the NZ Prime Minister Helen Clark was quoted as saying NZ was withdrawing from the ANZUS pact and wouldn't support the US in its time of need. This engendered quite a response, mainly from outraged Americans.

However, I've also heard from Kiwis who said that the newspaper report wasn't accurate, the PM doesn't speak for them, and that the NZ people heartily support the US. Most of the Kiwis were polite in their messages :-), too.

Now that things have cooled down a bit I'd like to thank everyone from NZ who replied for their thoughts. We welcome your support, both moral and material. However, I hope you can soon put your house in order. Your PM is an international embarrassment to you.

[muzza29]

i dont think i said the game plan did hinge on which way NZ goes? By the way my typical "blame the victim" seems to be matched by you typical "bury my head in the sand" talk. I can believe so many people take what they are told by the media as the gospel truth. Dont you question? Dont you think for yourself? I have no bad feeling towards Americans as a people only some of the policies carried out by the current and past administrations. I have friends and family living in Bakersfield, Salt Lake City and other cities across the us and a cousin who was 2 blocks from the WTC when it came down. I am not condoning the behaviour of the people who perpetrated this atrocity. I am just saying that the policy of the US govt. to act all gung-ho before taking a minute to find out for sure who did this, is not one that is, to me, a righteous one.

[shaggy eel]

,,, there sure are a lot of intelligent, wonderful etc etc Kiwis selling their homes and not coming back though, eh?

[N Evans]

All kiwis were appalled and horrified at the tragic events of last week, and our hearts go out to the bereaved and injured. We also watched with admiration, the work of your emergency services, and the spirit of the people in and around the target sites, as they coped with this outrage, and rallied to help. Civilised people everywhere, want these perpetrators to be caught and punished for the war criminals that they are. Contrary to your quite misinformed comment that precipitated this discussion, New Zealand and New Zealanders stand ready to support the United States in ways in which it is able - a fact conveyed to, and acknowledged by, President Bush. We have stood beside the United States in many wars: WW1, WW2, Korea, Vietnam, and the Gulf War. We are small, so our contributions are necessarily modest, but symbolise our regard for the democratic values for which we both stand. The discussion on ANZUS is a red herring in discussing the current events. Some earlier comments have correctly noted that it has not been operational for 15 years. This was because of OUR exclusion by the U.S., due to our ban on nuclear ships. Mention has been made by others of nuclear testing in the South Pacific, the "Rainbow Warrior" affair, all of which underscores our abhorrence of nuclear weapons. New Zealand's anti-nuclear stance means that we are not prepared to be in an alliance at any price. We are entitled to our values too, are we not? And differing values, just like different religions, should not prevent us being friends. Your readers would be wrong to assume that a change of government from a centre-left to a centre-right would do anything to change our nuclear stance. We had a conservative-ish government from 1990 to 1999 (Mrs Shipley, and including our erstwhile Defence Minister Max Bradford) and they didn't dare overturn our nuclear stance, as they had the sense to realise that to try and do so would have been political suicide. It is true that the present Labour government has cancelled an arrangement to acquire F-16s. We have had two squadrons of A4 Skyhawks for 30 years. They have never been deployed in a theatre of war, and have never fired a shot in anger. We have 1,200 miles of water to our nearest neighbour, Australia, so even to a layman like me, an air defence capability seems a bit of a luxury. However, the government is investing more than its predecessor on defence, with a greater emphasis on the army. Successive NZ governments had previously neglected spending on the army. Yet it is our army that has been the most active in peacekeeping roles in the Middle East, Angola, Balkans, the Solomons, and presently East Timor. We have never failed to answer a call from the United Nations for a peacekeeping role. Our troops are well liked, because they take the trouble to get alongside and understand the locals, and are seen as honest brokers. When I read some of the gung-ho and jingoistic comments of your readers, I really fear for the judgement of some of America's citizens. They remind me quite a lot of these fundamentalists we abhor. The projection or threat of US power, support for corrupt regimes - Noriega, Somoza, Saddam Hussein (vs. Iran), and overwhelming self-interest, is part of the reason that the United States has made some bitter enemies around the world. We learn now that the US in Afghanistan's war against the USSR even supported Osama bin Laden. This present world crisis will require cool but determined heads to effect the goal to eliminate terrorism. The enemy is shadowy, elusive, and smart - as the planning of their attack showed, so plastering some barren hills in Afghanistan might be somewhat satisfying to the American psyche, but may not achieve very much (as President Clinton proved). We will all cheer if this goal is achieved and these criminals are brought to justice. I believe however that it must equally be accompanied by diplomatic and genuine efforts to address the conditions that breed this kind of fanatic, and a genuine willingness to try and understand legitimate aspirations and displaying even-handedness in dealing with these. The alternative is too horrible to contemplate.

[cynicom]

We has been Zealanderized...

[Big Bunyip]

Wul said!

[Big Bunyip]

The Japanese would have easily taken over Australia then New Zealand

The question is: Did they want to?

The logistics of taking over Australia would have made Rommel's supply-line problems in the Western desert seem neglible. According to the Japanese themselves, the goal was maybe to take Darwin. The Kiwis would have been isolated but pretty safe.

That's not to say the Battle of the Coral sea wasn't a glorious victory, or that it didn't turn the tide of the war in the pacific.

As for saving people's asses, the Diggers' timely arrival at Buna after fighting their way over the Kokoda trail saved that fight for MacArthur, who displayed his typical graciousness by issuing a statement saying the battle had been won by U.S. forces with "allies contributing."

Old Diggers still get snaky about MacArthur's passion for flashbulbs.

If you're interested in wartime relations between the Pacific allies, do a web search on "battle of brisbane." You'll be surprised to learn who the australians were fighting.

[Truerepublican]

Good on you Doug for admitting you got it wrong. How many non-allies have had their troops deployed with ours in Bosnia, the Gulf, or have been prepared to take casualties for our cause in places like Timor?? When we bombed our own people in Kuwait who was killed? US and New Zealand military personnel. We have been falling beside each other since the First World War and it is great to see that the world's most isolated country is prepared to continue fighting for freedom in the new challenge that confronts us. New Zealand should be held up as a model not criticised. My reading of what PM Clark said is that NZ is waiting for a request from the US. In the meantime she has offered full intelligence cooperation (SOMETHING THAT NZ HAS BEEN GIVING ANYWAY) AND SPECIAL FORCES. That means crack troops training amongst otherthings in counter-terrorism. Sounds pretty good to me. And as for Steven W. Since when have we ever given aid to NZ??????? Their lifestyle is better than ours. They have been wealthier than us for big periods of their history and I have a funny feeling that they will get there again.

[eve]

I am surprised and offended that some responses to the freerepublic website have suggested New Zealanders are cowards. If we cast our minds back to the 2 major world conflicts of last century, New Zealanders were dying on the front line, 12.000 miles from home, long before America became involved and none of the western allies lost a greater slice of their nationhood in achieving those victories 'www.cwgc.org'. Unlike Canada and Britain, New Zealand was also one of the few western allies that followed America into Vietnam. Despite all this unjustified criticism, Kiwis would follow America into hell itself and are united behind America in this latest crisis. We have made our elite troops available and are ready and willing to make the appropriate sacrifices required to preserve the freedom our forefathers died for. Hold your insulting accusations of cowardice until after the lead starts flying.

[lewislynn]

The attack on America.

"Just 24 hours before the attack on America, New Zealand’s Labour Government destroyed this country’s own strike force capacity by dismantling our fighter jets from the airforce. We were assured by our Deputy Prime Minister that in this day and age, there would be no risk from attacks from other countries."

[The Iguana]

NZ,

I spent a year in your very fair country a few years ago for grad school (Victoria U.).

I think you make some fair points. There is a lot of ignorance going around here, though it is not surprising - most Americans I come into contact with think New Zealand is somewhere in Europe.

Kiwi troops suffered more than their fair share in both world wars and Korea and Vietnam and the Gulf. Rommel, in fact, rated them the best Allied troops he ever faced. I am not sure he was wrong.

Your basic understanding of Lange's confrontation with the U.S. in 1986 is of course correct. I cannot, however, agree with your evaluation of it.

Lange's anti-nuke feelings, reflecting as they did much of the Labour caucus, got the better of him. Ultimately he wanted to be part of ANZUS but only on his own terms.

Sidebar: I knew some Kiwis who felt that Lange only fought on the nuclear issue because he wanted cover with the Left part of his caucus for Douglas's radical privatization and free market schemes.

The fact remains that New Zealand was the only treaty ally that had a problem with the U.S.'s confirm-or-deny policy on nukes, though I know Norway came close to it. What was worse is that Shultz essentially offered a compromise to Lange, offering to unofficially send only ships without nuclear warheads on board. Lange rejected the compromise, noting that he did not want even nuclear *powered* ships in New Zealand waters. That effectively ruled out most of our surface combatants and all of our submarine forces.

New Zealand is indeed a small country and would have suffered disproportionately from any nuclear attack. But she is hardly the only small country that was in the same boat. Luxembourg (or the other Low Countries) did not feel similarly dissuaded from staying in NATO despite the fact that she could expect that a single nuclear blast could efectively wipe the country out. But she did not have the luxury of being 10,000 miles away from the nearest Soviet forces and having little strategic value.

I simply find it disappointing that given New Zealand's staunch contributions and support for the British Empire and the West in general for so many years that she (or at least Lange) bailed out at a crucial time when the apparent costs to her for doing so were apparently negligible.

As for Helen Clark, I met her briefly back when she was a shadow cabinet minister and did not think much of her at the time. I hope that her position is not as was reported in this thread, but then I would not be surprised.

Anyhow, I am sure that most Kiwis - despite a lingering anti-U.S. resentment - are firmly with the U.S. in this hour of trial. Despite your limited resources I hope that you are in fact able to help out in the common cause in the coming months.

[mrbluesky]

You know...one of the reasons I left the US for NZ is that my fellow Americans love to point the finger of blame on the other guy. They love to find a scapegoat and hang them out to dry in just about every situation. I find that the Kiwis have no problem stepping up to accept the blame for their own actions and tend to be more supportive of each other. Do you realize that no one Kiwi is allowed to sue another Kiwi for damages? Funny that the US hasn't taken on such a prospect, then they would maybe learn how to be responsible for their own actions...and not so quick to blame their fellow man.

[Big Bunyip]

I am sure the Americans had a policy of not telling if their ships were nuclear armed way before NZ began its policy and since they knew the American position, they also knew it would in effect bar all U.S. Navy ships.

Mate, I don't want to get you barking and howling, but you're out of line talking to my Trans-Tasman brothers like that. I've lived in the US for 25 years and the arrogance of the reply i've quoted is still pretty galling -- but far from unusual.

For starters, the Kiwis and Australia have every reason to be upset about nukes. The bloody French were letting them off at muroroa, in the atmosphere and underwater until just a couple of years ago, and poisoning half the pacific. Australian milk still has some of the highest strontium 90 levels outside the chernobyl fall-out shadow. Tempers got so frayed about it that someone burned down the french consulate in Perth.

The NZer's had every right to say no to nukes. Just as they've got every right to tax themselves to oblivion, lacerate themselves with white guilt, and win the America's cup. It's their country after all. The Reagan administration over-reacted, which in turn sparked an even greater anger in New Zealand. Today, the legacy of that Reagan era arrogance manifests itself in Helen Clark's antipathy. It's wrong, but that's the history behind it -- and it could have been avoided if the US had demonstrated a bit of diplomatic savvy.

As for the presumption that the US has been a four-square ANZUS partner, I think not. Once again the problem is arrogance.

Look what the U.S. did to Australian and NZ lamb exports. Stopped 'em cold. All this talk about free trade from Washington, and the moment a few sheep shaggers in montana or wherever buy the ear of a congressman, Kiwi lamb exports get taxed off the US market and the NZ economy gets sacked.

OK, so you probably think they deserve it for banning your nuke warships. So what about Australia? It always welcomed any ship the US sent, and what did Washington do: It banned Australian lamb, too. Thanks very much, our great and powerful friend!

Now don't get too upset, on the grand scale of humanity, America still comes up with a pretty decent batting average. But at a time like this, when people of goodwill all over the world want to support the US, that sort of arrogance doesn't make it any easier. High-tax statists like Hulun Cluck remember the petty slights, the same way you would if a visitor to your home and dropped his cigar in your orchid pot.

It loses more friends than it gains. Anyway, the Kiwis have enough on their plate. The Prime Minister is an economic illiterate and the country's moral compass is set by social workers. If they couldn't go to Australia, they'd have nothing to look forward to.

Finally, here's a song to serenade the next Kiwi you meet. It's sung to the tune of Amore and it goes like this:

When you see
Two black feet
On the street
In Bondi,
It's a Maori!
Kiwis always enjoy fine music.

[Mel A]

Mmm, nice. I'm glad to see that literary ability is alive and well. New Zealand has nothing to be ashamed of, except perhaps our support of the USA in the Vietnam and Korean wars. Also, when it comes to WW2, where were America when the Nazis invaded Poland? It took a direct attack on the USA for any involvement in the world's events. Not that that's a bad thing, of course. War should never be something that is entered into lightly and without proper forethought. New Zealand has offered it's support to the USA. Most of the public here simply want to be sure that we are fighting the right war, for the right reasons, and against the right people. If you can't understand that, then I sincerely hope that you are a minority. I would have hoped that as a species, we would have learned something from our past mistakes. If you don't think that war is bad then there is something very very wrong with you.

[Kiwi and Proud]

Yes so I only joined yesterday. So what ? It is only because of all the ill-informed attacks on my country. Amazing how people resort to name calling and labelling others when they lose an argument instead of having an intelligient debate.

[Kiwi and Proud]

Again with the name calling and labelling. I am not a leftist (don't even know what one looks like) or a rightist or whatever. The economy is doing nicely thank you very much and people are not leaving in droves. In recent times we have more people coming in than leaving. Most young Kiwis go overseas for their big OE or to obtain opportunities that are not available here because of our small size and isolation (geograpgically speaking). The grass is greener on the other side theory.

[Citizen of the Savage Nation]

Well, we're not quite at the 'cooler heads' stage of the game yet, so feelings are running a bit hot. Remember, the Italians were being bashed well over a day after they ensured total military committment to the US, so sometimes news travels a bit slowly.

[K1W1]

Excellent statement Big Bunyip. Well said.

I will also add that it makes it a little hard to have offered all support we possibly can and be spat at by the likes of damian5. Thankfully his support seems to be dwindeling down to just himself.

It does make me angry when they also tell us that we are the bad guys because a small newspaper prints out an inaccurate story. Even when the facts become clear, "people" like damian5 still want to hate.

As said in the previous forum, my brother was supposed to be in a meeting in the tower except for a missed connecting flight, I have friends who have flown to New York to be beside the bed of a very close relative with 60% burns from being a survivor - her husband was identified by the watch on an unattached arm found in the rubble.

Some of the beef about ANZUS seems to be that we would not allow nuclear ships into our ports. This did indeed have the effect of stopping all US ships to our ports but surprisingly, the US did make a concession to Japan and sent a stated non-nuclear ship to their port when one of theirs had the same policy. We were never an enemy in war, yet the USA preferred enemies to friends.

In the previous forum I also related the instance when we were under terrorist attack and both Britian and the USA put pressure on Australia to release the terrorists as the USA much preferred to deal with France where the terrorists came from, than with it's friends (a full member of ANZUS at the time) New Zealand.

I am wondering why, after doing so much and offering so much, when we are spat at, threatened with nuclear attack and invasion and turned away from, we are even considering the US amongst friendly nations. Except that I can clearly see now that the rhetoric from those such as damian5 are as much as an embarrasement to Americans as Helen Clark (and most of the members of the NZ Parliament) are to most New Zealanders.

[eve]

Disbanding our air strike force was a mistake. If we’d turned up in the Middle East with our 40-year-old Sky Hawks, Bin-Laden would have died laughing.

[NZ747]

Sheesh, where did you get this crap from?

A labour strike during a world war? This would've amounted to treason!

If the US Marines had to load/unload their own equipment at a NZ port during the war,this would've been because of either manpower shortages due to the war effort or because they themselves didn't want civilians handling their equipment, both understandable.

The only time I've heard of any labour dispute around that time was the 1951 waterfront dispute which was in fact an employee lockout.

You wanna consider suing your history teacher, angry little boy!