Divided Loyalties: Can the Prime Minister, Jacinda Ardern, be relied upon? That’s what the boys and girls at Foggy Bottom and the Pentagon needed to be reassured about. Because, from the perspective of Washington, it’s looking more and more like Jacinda Ardern and her Labour Party comrades are getting ready to sell their souls for a pile of soybeans (or milk-powder!) and forgetting all about their duty to protect the interests of their “very, very, very good friends” – in the United States and Australia.
AT ROUGHLY the same time as the police presence at Ihumatao
was suddenly and inexplicably boosted (5/8/19) New Zealand’s Deputy-Prime Minister,
Winston Peters, was sitting down to dinner with the US Secretary of Defence,
James Esper. This high-level diplomatic tête-à-tête took place at the
Deputy-Prime Minister’s home in the swanky Auckland suburb of St Mary’s Bay. It’s
a safe bet that Mr Peters’ American guest talked about mustering coercive
forces far greater than those then arriving at Ihumatao.
That Secretary Esper was there at all is, in itself,
remarkable. The US Senate’s stamp of approval has barely had time to dry and
the politician charged with responsibility for the greatest aggregation of
military might in the planet’s history is on his way to Australia and New
Zealand. Not to the United Kingdom and Europe, it is worth noting, but to
Australasia, the crucial pivot-point of the United States’ brand new
“Indo-Pacific Strategy”.
The change of
nomenclature – from “Asia-Pacific” to “Indo-Pacific” is important. It
betokens a critical shift in emphasis. From the straightforward projection of
American power to the farthest reaches of the Pacific Ocean: a constant of US
foreign and military policy since the heady days of Teddy Roosevelt and his
“Great White Fleet”; to the vastly more ambitious goal of “containing” the
growing power and influence of the Peoples Republic of China by asserting
American hegemony over both the Pacific and the Indian Oceans.
To make this work, the United States requires the active
support and cooperation of Japan, Australia and India. Together, these nations
form what to Chinese eyes must look like a profoundly threatening arc of
offensive military capability. Japan stands at the arc’s eastward extremity,
India at its western end, while Australia, at the arc’s base, straddles the two
great oceans that give the strategy its name. With these three powers holding
the perimeter, the other powers of the region: the Philippines, Indo-China,
Indonesia, Malaysia, Burma and Thailand have little option but to go along for
the ride.
For the geopoliticians in Washington, New Zealand also has a
role to play – albeit a negative one. If Australia is going to fulfil its
strategic obligations to the north and west, then it cannot afford to have
anyone but a friend protecting its crucial eastern and southern flanks. As far
as Washington is concerned – that’s us. Under no circumstances can New Zealand
be allowed to fall any further under the influence of China. In the memorable
phrase of the US Secretary of State, Mike Pompeo, who travelled as far as
Australia with Secretary Esper, the nations of the region could either “choose
to sell their souls for a pile of soybeans, or protect their country.”
This, I strongly suspect, occupied a large part of the
American agenda at St Mary’s Bay. Secretary Esper would have been anxious to
know exactly where New Zealand’s loyalties lie: in Washington, or in Beijing?
Not that he entertained the slightest doubt about Mr Peters’
loyalties. His recent speeches, delivered on American soil, have made his
feelings about Chinese influence in the South Pacific crystal clear. Nor had it
escaped the notice of New Zealand’s ‘Five Eyes’ partners that Mr Peters had
retired the outdated formulation “Asia-Pacific” in favour of “Indo-Pacific”. It
was great to have New Zealand’s Deputy-Prime Minister and Foreign Minister on
board and with the programme.
But what about New Zealand’s Prime Minister? Could she be
relied upon? That’s what the boys and girls at Foggy Bottom and the Pentagon
needed to be reassured about. Because Secretary Esper may well have suggested
to Mr Peters that, from the perspective of Washington, it’s looking more and
more like Jacinda Ardern and her Labour Party comrades are getting ready to
sell their souls for a pile of soybeans (or milk-powder!) and forgetting all
about their duty to protect the interests of their “very, very, very good
friends” – in the United States and Australia.
As the desert plates were cleared away at St Mary’s Bay, and
the whiskey liberally dispensed, did the US Defence Secretary seek to discover
how the Leader of NZ First would react if push came to shove – in Hong Kong,
for example – and his coalition partners declined to break-off relations with
Beijing? Did the American remind Mr Peters’ that he, uniquely, enjoyed the
political privilege of choosing his country’s bosses?
This essay was originally published in The Otago
Daily Times and The Greymouth Star of Friday, 9 August 2019.
