Does the sinking of Manawanui alter NZ defense perspective? We could go full out disarmament and lead the submerging Pacific nations without our belligerent Oz competitor in Canberra calling the shots
If NZ disarms it will not be because of the loss of this ship. Loss of mind perhaps. No, we will not disarm and neither we should. Harris as President and Campbell as SoS appeals. Trump might be a good idea for the US and its uncontrolled immigration but the measured style of Kurt Campbell would be good for NZ. These are truly “interesting times”, the Chinese curse, and we need to keep our wits about us. Sadly, that will mean a major increase in defence expenditure.
NZ literally can't afford to decouple from China - and neither can most other nations for that matter - but it can de-risk to reduce over-exposure to the Chinese yuan.
I hear you Max. And my RNZNVR service number is engraved in my brain. My grandfathers served in WWI and WII. Dad was in RNZAF bomber command. We should increase expense expenditure on personnel and gear but imo align solely with our Pacific Island community. We need another waka nui to do that but we do not need to align with US or Oz or China or any other belligerent political world power except for trade
The big difference in my view for NZ and the world is that barbaric countries bent on violently destroying or imposing their will on others fear Trump and with good reason, whereas Harris would just as rightly be seen as a pushover, best of friends with those tending weak and woke. So yes, it's pretty clear on that basis who this country would rather cosy up to.
The results of this year's presidential election put New Zealand at a crossroad. Should Trump win, New Zealand may hold off joining AUKUS waiting to see what happens. Trump could pressure New Zealand to increase defence spending, and to exacerbate divisions within the Indo-Pacific region. This could lead to war.
Should Harris win the election, then the current government may enthusiastically sign New Zealand up to AUKUS. New Zealand maybe able to maintain good relations with China and the US. But what we don't know is whether New Zealand's prospects of achieving a free trade deal would be possible with a Harris presidency.
Does the sinking of Manawanui alter NZ defense perspective? We could go full out disarmament and lead the submerging Pacific nations without our belligerent Oz competitor in Canberra calling the shots
If NZ disarms it will not be because of the loss of this ship. Loss of mind perhaps. No, we will not disarm and neither we should. Harris as President and Campbell as SoS appeals. Trump might be a good idea for the US and its uncontrolled immigration but the measured style of Kurt Campbell would be good for NZ. These are truly “interesting times”, the Chinese curse, and we need to keep our wits about us. Sadly, that will mean a major increase in defence expenditure.
NZ literally can't afford to decouple from China - and neither can most other nations for that matter - but it can de-risk to reduce over-exposure to the Chinese yuan.
https://archive.is/20230624185313/https://www.economist.com/the-economist-explains/2023/05/31/what-does-de-risking-trade-with-china-mean
I hear you Max. And my RNZNVR service number is engraved in my brain. My grandfathers served in WWI and WII. Dad was in RNZAF bomber command. We should increase expense expenditure on personnel and gear but imo align solely with our Pacific Island community. We need another waka nui to do that but we do not need to align with US or Oz or China or any other belligerent political world power except for trade
Word is that Trump will choose Tulsi Gabbard as either Secretary of State or (more likely) Secretary of Defense. She's no neo-con that's for sure.
The big difference in my view for NZ and the world is that barbaric countries bent on violently destroying or imposing their will on others fear Trump and with good reason, whereas Harris would just as rightly be seen as a pushover, best of friends with those tending weak and woke. So yes, it's pretty clear on that basis who this country would rather cosy up to.
"barbaric countries bent on violently destroying or imposing their will" is a summary of the US imperialism of the last couple of centuries.
As Elon Musk has astutely commented. If you had to be a prisoner of war, in which countries would you rather be "accommodated".
The results of this year's presidential election put New Zealand at a crossroad. Should Trump win, New Zealand may hold off joining AUKUS waiting to see what happens. Trump could pressure New Zealand to increase defence spending, and to exacerbate divisions within the Indo-Pacific region. This could lead to war.
Should Harris win the election, then the current government may enthusiastically sign New Zealand up to AUKUS. New Zealand maybe able to maintain good relations with China and the US. But what we don't know is whether New Zealand's prospects of achieving a free trade deal would be possible with a Harris presidency.
Trump doesn't really believe in free trade, unless it's a one-way relationship in his favour.