David Parker on Turbulent Times, Seen Recently, & Ask Terence
The rules-based order is under big strain — what does this mean for New Zealand?
Don’t miss Diplosphere’s upcoming event
Also Seen Recently
Ask Terence
Don’t miss Diplosphere’s Upcoming Event
The rules-based order is collapsing—what does this mean for New Zealand?
Places are limited, Register Here for details. Thursday 27 March, 2025 @ 8am to 9:15am in Wellington.
Opposition Spokesperson for Foreign Affairs Hon David Parker will examine the consequences of this global shift for NZ’s international relations, security, and trade. He will also explore the changing dynamics in the Pacific, including the Cook Islands and AUKUS Pillar 2, and what they mean for NZ’s future. Followed by a Q&A chaired by Thomas Coughlan, NZ Herald.
Teaser of next week’s event: David Parker spoke with Toby Manhire on the Spinoff’s Gone by Lunchtime podcast about the ructions shaking today’s world and New Zealand’s stances. Parker spoke of similarities and differences in approach on New Zealand foreign policy between the opposition and the government of today.
Similarities - There were similarities of thought with the government on the Cooks & China brouhaha. The softly softly approach when dealing with the Trump 2.0 administration and the threat of tariffs. The importance of “traditional partners”, and “like-minded” nations was also mentioned.
Differences - But key differences were highlighted: the New Zealand government’s decision to keep quiet as the US sanctioned International Criminal Court officials is inconsistent with advocacy for international institutions. NZ chose not to join a statement of support from France, the UK, Switzerland (originator) and others:
We, the undersigned States Parties to the Rome Statute of the International Criminal Court (ICC), reaffirm our continued and unwavering support for the independence, impartiality, and integrity of the ICC
Helen Clark was mentioned on more than one occasion (Iraq war decision, mission creep with Five Eyes), as was Lange, and it appears a return to a Labour tradition of a more “principled” and independent foreign policy is on the cards. When speaking of increase in spending on defence, Parker advocated for more of both hard and soft (diplomatic, trade, cultural) power. AUKUS Pillar 2 was not in the cards, and is seen for it is - a containment strategy aimed squarely at China. Luxon’s rhetoric of being “force multiplier” for the US & AU was also criticized.
All foreign policy starts at home - Parker has evidently thought critically about the underlying causes of the rise of populism in many parts of the world including Trump’s America. Parker recalled how one Trump 1.0 senior official decried the effect of globalisation, outsourcing, and private equity in
Also Seen Recently …
Prof. Jeffrey Sachs calls for an independent foreign policy (in Europe) at the European parliament. This is a worthwhile 90 minute watch for its critique of European dependence the US in the post-Cold War era. Sachs advocates for a “decoupled” European foreign policy - an independent foreign policy - and bemoans 30+ years of servility. Thank you Diplostack reader Peter Barrett for the find. The talk in Europe is all about increasing defence spend, conscription, and the like. There are still 100k+ US soldiers in Europe. Though the talk is heated, there are hardly alarm bells rings of imminent invasion, and that talk sounds exaggerated (which unfortunately our former London emissary indulged in). See Jeffrey Sachs video here.
This week, the world witnessed another atrocity: a shocking death toll in Gaza after renewed Israeli bombing attacks in the dead of night kill over 400 including 183 children, according to the Palestinian Ministry of Health, shattering the fragile ceasefire that held there since late January (Al Jazeera). Earlier in the week, Prof Robert Patman rightly points out the double standards of New Zealand which has stayed silent on the US role in enabling the ongoing horrors of Gaza (The Spinoff).
New Zealand has revealed a selective approach to upholding international law and human rights in the desperate conditions facing Gaza
Ask Terence
From Terence O’Brien - various sources:
The defining characteristics of the US national security state combine a staunch threat mentality with a firm conviction about the utility of hard power. Diplomacy in the shape of the State Department is displaced to a secondary role. Given that soft power is NZ’s sole attribute when cultivating trust and opportunity diplomatically with old and new international partners, it seems counterintuitive to so weight NZ institutional arrangements for the conduct of important external relations along the lines of a national security state model (Otago Foreign Policy School 2014)
The Cooks …
My idyllic first impression of a South Pacific paradise, where everything moved delightfully at its own pace, was soon belied by an animating encounter with Cook Islands politics. My appointment was meant to supply tangible proof that New Zealand intended its links with Rarotonga to move away from the old colonial relationship, and henceforth approximate to a more regular diplomatic and mature connexion that better reflected the Cooks’ status as ‘self governing in free association with New Zealand’ – which incidentally allowed the Cooks the right to appoint their own head of state. My predecessors had worn two hats: head of state and New Zealand representative. (Diplomatic memoir)
A flash of acerbic prime ministerial humour illuminated Muldoon’s
last full day. The afternoon had been left free for a fishing trip around
Rarotonga and the Prime Minister’s immediate party duly assembled
on the wharf at Avatiu Harbour. It was a beautiful day and the small
attractive wooden-hulled fishing boat, with Minister of Internal Affairs
Tupui Henry (Sir Albert’s eldest son) as host, set out on a four-hour
expedition.
The Cooks’ hosts provided food and refreshment, which included
delicious young coconuts into which the liquor of your choice (vodka,
rum, gin, etc.) was poured to mix with the clear coconut milk. When
finished, the empty husk was disposed of over the side of the boat, and a
new young nut prepared. It was all very congenial out on the blue water,
except that the fish declined to bite on any of the four long trailing lines
behind the boat that were intended to catch marlin, tuna or whatever.
After nearly four hours at sea, the skipper announced it was time to
turn back to harbour. Just then the lookout, a small boy at the mast,
cried out ‘Shark! Shark!’ and sure enough we sighted dorsal fins cutting
the water near our lines. The skipper shouted for more fish bait to be cast
overboard to entice the sharks. The boy shouted back that we were out
of bait – the buckets were empty.
At this moment the Prime Minister rose from his seat, having
already cast a few coconut husks overboard, and in a voice heard by
almost everybody declaimed ‘Out of bait? Throw in the foreign affairs
representatives!’ After a pause which would have done credit to the most
professional stand-up comedian, he then added, ‘On second thoughts,
foreign affairs representatives are an acquired taste – even for sharks.’
These remarks were greeted with much mirth, except by the serious-
minded foreign affairs officer travelling in his party from Wellington,
whose subsequent career was illustrious, but who remained woodenly
impassive in the face of the PM’s humour. As the boat neared the wharf
the skipper reached into the cool hatch and retrieved a string of reef
fish, which he handed to Muldoon to carry with him down the small
gangplank to where a small crowd of Rarotongan onlookers awaited to
see the New Zealand leader disembark after a successful day’s fishing (Diplomatic memoir)