Speaking in April 2021, New Zealand Foreign Minister Nanaia Mahuta likened her country’s relationship with China to a harmonious connection between two mythical creatures.
“Taniwha are protectors or guardians, often of water, and hold dominion over rivers, seas, lands and territories,” she told the NZ China Council in Wellington. “The Dragon and the Taniwha can have respect for solutions that seek to benefit kotahitanga (solidarity) and our future generations.”
Not surprisingly, progressives responded to this declaration with the usual oohs and aahs, particularly given Mahuta was the first Indigenous woman to hold the foreign affairs portfolio. Never mind that she had no formal experience in this field. As she said upon assuming her role six months before this speech, she wanted to bring a “Māori world view” to the role.
Her critics, commentator Carrie Stoddart-Smith told Radio New Zealand, were motivated by bias. “Just as the antique wood and vintage carpets of the old men’s clubs across Wellington still carry the stench of colonisation, so too does their crumbling fortress,” she sneered.
So how did that turn out? Well, the best that can be said of Mahuta’s simile is that it was creative and original. Her China policy, otherwise known as fence-sitting, was not.
But that changed when the Kiwis belatedly recognised that China’s Pacific expansionism also threatens their country. When Washington and Wellington released a joint statement last week warning of “the establishment of a persistent military presence in the Pacific by a state that does not share our values,” Beijing reacted menacingly, warning that New Zealand’s reputation as a “green, clean, open and friendly country” should not be “squandered”.
In other words, the country’s $19 billion trade relationship with China is at risk. Suffice to say Dragon no longer tickles Taniwha’s tummy, instead threatening to bite him on the backside. I hate to say it, Ms Mahuta, but Kangaroo did warn his friend Taniwha repeatedly that Dragon was up to no good.
This blinkered approach was due not just to naivety and incompetence, but also opportunistic sycophancy. Take for example Trade Minister Damien O’Connor. Interviewed last year by CNBC following New Zealand’s upgraded trade deal with China, he spoke of his country’s “mature and honest” relationship with Beijing. “If (the Australians) were to follow us and show respect, I guess a little more diplomacy from time to time, and be cautious with wording, then they, too, hopefully could be in a similar situation,” he said obsequiously.
When Mahuta publicly announced last year that New Zealand would not countenance expanding the remit of the Five Eyes alliance to pressure Beijing, she blindsided Australian officials. China’s state-run media was delighted.
“In sharp contrast with Australia, which tied itself to the US’ chariot, New Zealand has maintained a relatively independent approach on foreign policies, paving the way for the country to pursue policies that benefit its own economy,” the Global Times declared. Beijing had good reason to be smug. It had succeeded in fracturing an alliance that goes back 80 years.
Ultimately, however, it is Prime Minister Jacinda Ardern who bears responsibility. “The New Zealand Labour leader’s preference for cosying up to China’s communist rulers comes at a time when the consensus among the world’s leading democracies is that Beijing poses the greatest threat to their long-term well-being and prosperity,” wrote the UK Telegraph’s chief foreign affairs columnist Con Coughlin.
As for what Ardern has done for the Pacific, she saw the region primarily as just another backdrop to grandstand and make provincial cheap shots. Who could forget her sanctimonious declaration in 2019 at the Pacific Islands Forum that “Australia has to answer to the Pacific” for its climate change policies? China’s Foreign Ministry gleefully seized on these remarks, accusing Australia of acting like a “condescending master” towards Pacific Island countries.
That’s not to say our diplomatic efforts in the Pacific have been without fault, but at least Australia has been consistent in resisting and calling out Beijing’s hegemony. The same cannot be said of Ardern, Mahuta, and O’Connor, whose contributions to regional security are worthy of a comedy stage show. The Three Amigos of Aotearoa, perhaps?
–
A question for Kiwi readers: is there something across the Tasman that fosters ridiculous expectations and an obnoxious sense of entitlement, particularly when it comes to Australia?
What prompted me to ask was Filipa Payne, a co-founder of the group Iwi in Australia and lead activist for Route 501, an organisation that takes its name from the section of the Migration Act allowing visa cancellations on character grounds. As she told Newstalk ZB radio last month, she intends bringing a class action against the Australian government for deporting New Zealand citizens who have committed criminal offences resulting in 12 months or more imprisonment.
So egregious is their alleged treatment she intends reporting Australia to the United Nations for human rights violations. After all, it is our fault these Kiwi expatriates commit offences in the first place, at least according to Payne.
“It’s not just that people go there and decide to be a criminal,” she told New Zealand television news show ‘Breakfast’ in February. “It’s the fact that we don’t get support in Australian society to sustain us to the standard to keep our families healthy … So before we put the accountability on criminal activity, I think the accountability should go on the Australian government … they invite us into their country to work there.”
Invite? No other country enjoys the blanket residency and work visas that New Zealanders have in Australia. But as far as freeloaders are concerned, no good deed goes unpunished. “Mr Albanese should give us a shared pathway to residency in Australia” and “voting rights,” said Payne. That’s just “for a start” she added.
According to New Zealand magazine In The Dogbox, Payne likens her campaign against the Australian government to the actions of Wang Weilin, the Chinese protester who stood in front of tanks in Tiananmen Square. I have no words.
Ardern has indicated the removal of Kiwi criminals, which she strongly objects to, will be “front and centre” at talks today with Prime Minster Anthony Albanese. This is an example of the stark difference between what one wants and what one needs to hear. I am reminded of The Spectator columnist Rod Liddle, who was amused by British activists protesting the deportations of foreign-born residents who committed serious offences. “If I were in charge of the deportation program, it would be like the Berlin airlift,” he wrote. “One plane leaving every 30 seconds”.
More Coverage
Work needed on PS productivity
While our political leaders no doubt are focused on the potential for interest rate relief before the federal election, they should instead be preoccupied with how to lift productivity and grow the economy.
Secrecy has been a big part of problem in terror fight
Much of the concern about the rise of anti-Semitic actions is due to too much secrecy and lack of demonstrated concern, for which politicians and police must share responsibility.