Warning: Photo BARF ALERT!
Helen Clark
Posted on 05/04/2003 1:48:36 PM PDT by shaggy eel
New Zealand Prime Minister Helen Clark has arrived home to a fresh torrent of criticism after telling Britain and America they might live to regret unleashing the "law of the jungle" through their war in Iraq.
While Miss Clark was accused of driving a wedge between New Zealand and its closest allies, the United States rolled out the red carpet for Australian Prime Minister John Howard on his trip to America.
Mr Howard, lauded by United States President George W Bush as a "man of steel" and "kinda like a Texan", has stayed at Mr Bush's ranch and will be honoured at Yankee Stadium in New York as a sign of gratitude.
Amid clear signs that the United States is rewarding friends and punishing critics, Miss Clark's latest remarks, quoted in an interview in the Guardian newspaper in Britain, had her political opponents shaking their heads. They accused her of cutting New Zealand loose from its traditional allies. Long-held hopes of a free-trade agreement with the US have receded after the White House indicated it was in no hurry to begin negotiations. By contrast, Mr Bush and Mr Howard were yesterday optimistic that a deal could be struck between their countries within a year.
Remarking on Miss Clark's comments, ACT NZ leader Richard Prebble said: "I just think it is incredibly silly. "If (British leader) Tony Blair was visiting New Zealand and decided to give a few off-the-cuff remarks criticising New Zealand foreign policy to The Dominion Post, Helen Clark would be very angry indeed."
National Party leader Bill English said the comments had been damaging. "Helen Clark should have learnt from her earlier comments about (Democratic presidential candidate) Al Gore."
Miss Clark told the Guardian that the US and its allies had created a dangerous precedent by going to war in Iraq without a United Nations resolution. New Zealand refused to support the war, while Australia committed troops to the invasion of Iraq.
Miss Clark was quoted as saying: "This is a century which is going to see China emerge as the largest economy, and usually with economic power comes military clout . . . I don't want precedents set, regardless of who is seen as the biggest kid on the block."
The damage to the UN had to be repaired to prevent a return to 19th century-style anarchy in international relations, a situation that could leave countries such as New Zealand at the mercy of the great powers.
"Who wants to go back to the jungle?" Miss Clark said.
A spokeswoman for Miss Clark said yesterday there was nothing new in the article, which repeated previous observations.
Miss Clark was criticised last month for observing that the war in Iraq was not going to plan and suggesting it might not have happened under a Democratic president. She later apologised to the US.
A spokesman for the British high commission said Britain was relaxed about differences on Iraq.
Helen Clark revelled in her Paris visit this week after being kissed on the hand by French President Jacques Chirac. The whole thing obviously went to her head. She spoke of New Zealand being linked to a French/German/Russian/Chinese bloc instead of a “small Anglo-American group.” So once again we turn our back on traditional allies like Australia, Britain and the US. This follows insults to Australia and the US in previous weeks where the PM accused Australia of trading Australian lives for trade and said the Iraq War would not have happened under an Al Gore (Democrat) presidency. The latter remark, after a Washington protest, resulted in an apology, although the PM is still refusing to give Parliament the text of this.
The irony of all this is that Jacques Chirac was the person who repatriated Rainbow Warrior saboteur Dominique Prieur. Also, through documents found in the bombed out Iraqi Foreign Ministry and security agencies, the French have also been caught out for feeding information to Baghdad on US war intentions. French-US discussions were channelled to Baghdad to assist Saddam Hussein! Other documents showed French cooperation with Saddam’s security forces to thwart human rights protests in France over Saddam’s evil regime. The French, of course, benefited by billions of dollars under the United Nations oil-for-food deal. No wonder they threatened a UN veto on military action. Helen Clark finds it convenient not to address all this. The extraordinary thing is how the New Zealand news media is so compliant that it is not putting all this together. The adulatory coverage of her trip to Europe could have been written by her own spin-doctors.
Bill English
Leader of New Zealand's NATIONAL Party.
May 2 2003
The Law of the Jungle: Moral Alternatives and Principles of Evolution
J. L. Mackie, The Royal Institute of Philosophy
When people speak of ‘the law of the jungle’, they usually mean unrestrained and ruthless competition, with everyone out solely for his own advantage. But the phrase was coined by Rudyard Kipling, in The Second Jungle Book, and he meant something very different. His law of the jungle is a law that wolves in a pack are supposed to obey. His poem says that ‘the strength of the Pack is the Wolf, and the strength of the Wolf is the Pack’, and it states the basic principles of social co-operation. Its provisions are a judicious mixture of individualism and collectivism, prescribing graduated and qualified rights for fathers of families, mothers with cubs, and young wolves, which constitute an elementary system of welfare services. Of course, Kipling meant his poem to give moral instruction to human children, but he probably thought it was at least roughly correct as a description of the social behaviour of wolves and other wild animals. ...
While Anzac Day is our chance to commemorate, and show our respect for, the sacrifices made by those who fought against tyranny, it is also a time to reflect on the state of our nation’s defence capabilities – our readiness to protect ourselves from international threat, and our ability to fulfil our allied regional defence obligations.
Some would argue that international and national security is the core role of government. Yet our Labour Government’s defence track record leaves much to be desired.
Scrapping the combat wing of the Air force has left New Zealand without the ability to defend itself. According to one eye witness, the Royal New Zealand Air force’s Anzac Day fly-over of Wellington was: “pathetic and embarrassing. I am ashamed to be a Kiwi. The two planes, presumably all that remains of our air force, consisted of a silver passenger plane and a green C130 transporter. Did my grandad and uncles fight for this?”
The dismembering of our air force must rank as one of the most ill advised decisions of any government in our history, especially given the sweetheart deal for strike aircraft negotiated by the previous Government with the US.
Originally, 28 US F16 fighter jets were to be sold to Pakistan but, after Pakistan began developing nuclear weaponry, the US revoked the sale decision and mothballed the aircraft in the desert. They were offered to New Zealand for $400 million – a fraction of the estimated real price tag of around $1.5 billion. It is quite possible that money would have never needed to change hands, since an F16 fleet based in New Zealand – to supplement Australia’s strike combat force – would have provided a strong strategic allied air deterrent in the South Pacific.
Word is, however, that after being elected, Prime Minister Helen Clark bypassed normal military and diplomatic channels to renege on the F16 agreement with the US Government. She cancelled the deal herself, and instead ordered 105 Land Assault Vehicles (LAVIIIs) for the army worth $750 million.
This, surely, has to rank as another of the biggest blunders made by any government. LAVIIIs are so big that they take up a whole road, are too big to fit into a C130 Hercules Aircraft – our only transport aircraft – without being dismantled, and are too heavy for a fully fuelled Hercules to even take off. Once the fleet arrives in New Zealand, it appears they will be stuck here – almost a billion dollars worth of expensive toys!
Meanwhile, an $800 million investment in defence could have secured the F16s and a close working relationship with the US military – as well as having hundreds of millions of dollars to invest in the sensible upgrade of army equipment.
All of this leads to the issue of whether it is now time to rebuild our relationships with our allies and rejoin ANZUS. New Zealand effectively expelled itself from ANZUS following the Lange Government’s decision to prevent nuclear-powered ships from entering New Zealand waters.
However, in light of the findings of the 1992 National Government’s Somers Report – which concluded that, not only was there was no possibility that a naval propulsion unit could act like a nuclear bomb, but that Auckland Hospital leaks more radiation into the environment every day than the entire US nuclear fleet and support facilities in a year – surely it is time to rejoin the coalition.
One of the enormous benefits of doing this – not lost on defence personnel – is America’s propensity to help equip and train allied forces. Watching television accounts of the Iraq war, one couldn’t help but notice the huge advances in military hardware: the accuracy of air attack weaponry, and the new generation of army kit and equipment. In comparison, the gear we provide to our own military is archaic. It is unforgivable to send them off on dangerous assignments so exposed.
One of the issues that is regularly discussed on Anzac Day is the drop-off in the number of volunteers – territorial soldiers, and naval and air force reserves. A major factor appears to be the growing pressure of daily life, and the underlying financial stress faced by most families.
The reality is that, with New Zealand’s economic position slipping more each year, families must now work harder to maintain their relative standard of living. For many families, this means working longer hours, six days a week, which leaves little time for voluntary commitments.
How I wish that ACT’s three-step plan to turn around our failing economy was more popular: lowering taxes to create jobs and growth, cutting small business compliance costs to increase productivity and profitability, and welfare reform to ensure that those who can work do work.
Overseas experience has shown that a commitment to these three steps would transform New Zealand into the prosperous nation it once was, with a standard of living that rises instead falling.
The third part of that three-step plan – welfare reform – is critical. One initiative that received widespread support on Anzac Day was the idea that any young person leaving school without going on to further education, training or a job, should be required to undertake a minimum three-month military training programme.
For many young people, this sort of programme – with the army, navy or what’s left of the air force – would be their first contact with the armed forces. For victims of intergenerational welfare, this could be the key to a future of hope and opportunity instead of the dole.
During their three-month programme, these young people may be encouraged into apprenticeship training, the medical core, or perhaps even find that a career in the service is what they were looking for. Whichever way you look at it, such a programme could provide a stimulus to transform young lives in a way that would otherwise be impossible, as well as providing the armed forces with a fertile recruiting ground.
I always feel so proud of being a New Zealander on Anzac Day, and sometimes wonder whether it should become our national day – I think, however, that that’s another debate.
Helen Clark
My comment has nothing to do with the article but is LERNT a word? I have seen it used several times lately and was just wondering. It's not in my dictionary.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.