US warship's New Zealand visit a sign of ‘deep ties' amid Trump-era uncertainty
The recent arrival of a US warship in
New Zealand is likely a result of improved security relations under past administrations that could be jeopardised by Donald Trump's return to the White House, according to observers.
The USS Blue Ridge arrived in Wellington Harbour last Friday on a goodwill visit, marking the first visit by an American naval vessel to the city since 2021.
During the visit, which ended on Thursday, US Navy officials are said to have met their local counterparts to discuss ways of improving operational readiness and advancing future military capabilities, according to New Zealand media.
The last US Navy vessels to visit were the guided-missile destroyers USS Howard in 2021 and USS Sampson in 2016.
The 200-metre (660-foot) Blue Ridge – flagship of the Japan-based Seventh Fleet – departed Yokosuka Naval Base on April 3 and has visited Australia, Fiji and New Caledonia, American military newspaper Stars and Stripes reported.
The USS Blue Ridge in Wellington, New Zealand, on Wednesday. Photo: Facebook/Ship Spotters New Zealand
Vice-admiral Fred Kacher, commander of the fleet, said the visit spoke to the 'deep ties' between Washington and Wellington. 'Our partnership is rooted in our common values and respect, and our visit here represents an important opportunity for us to further strengthen the bond between our nations and our navies.'
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
RTHK
4 days ago
- RTHK
Hegseth sparks potshots with Lee-Trump comparison
Hegseth sparks potshots with Lee-Trump comparison Secretary of Defense Pete Hegseth in the midst of making his speech outlining US strategy in the region at the Shangri-La Dialogue in Singapore. Photo: Reuters US Secretary of Defense Pete Hegseth rankled Singaporeans on Saturday by likening President Donald Trump to the city-state's late founding prime minister Lee Kuan Yew. In a major speech outlining US strategy in the Asia-Pacific region, Hegseth referred to both leaders as "historic men". "Like the late prime minister, President Trump's approach is grounded in common sense and national interests," he said at the Shangri-La Dialogue which gathers key defence leaders from around the world. Lee, a British-trained lawyer, served as Singapore's prime minister for three decades. Hegseth praised his "sage leadership and strategic vision". "That's what common sense policies can achieve, and that's precisely what President Trump's vision is all about." Lee, who turned Singapore into a high-tech industrial and financial centre, remains highly revered in Singapore more than a decade after his death. Social media erupted with loud and acerbic criticism of Hegseth's comparison. "One is historic, the other is hysteric," said one commenter. Another said: "Trump compared to Lee Kuan Yew? That's like saying instant noodles are the same as fine dining." "I felt a tremor just now. Must be LKY rolling hard in his grave," said someone else on social media, using Lee's initials. (AFP)
Asia Times
27-05-2025
- Asia Times
The defense-industrial base and alliances: US Steel and beyond
As last fall's presidential election returns reminded us, massive trade imbalances in products ranging from textiles to automobiles to electronics are making Americans conscious of growing weaknesses in the industrial base of America's heartland. Coupled with rising geopolitical tensions across the Pacific, Europe's first major land war since 1945 made leaders of industrial democracies throughout the world increasingly cognizant of vulnerabilities in America's defense-industrial base. At this time of great transition and uncertainty in global politics, it is important to focus intently on the defense manufacturing crisis and to consider how the United States got here and what might be done. In 1950, US manufacturing produced more than half the industrial product of the entire world. In 1960, America's share was still well over a third. Yet today the American share is less than 16% percent, with the US ranking third as a manufacturing power – behind even Germany, which has a GDP only a third its size. Importantly, the largest global manufacturer – by a considerable margin – is China, with which the US faces an increasingly confrontational geopolitical relationship and on which America relies heavily for manufactured imports. The US does remain dominant in some important manufacturing sectors, most importantly aviation – although China is making advances even there. And the situation is very different in the strategic maritime area, as I point out in my recent book, Eurasian Maritime Geopolitics . Not even 1% of the world's ships are built in the United States – even including production for the US Navy, which requested 2025 budget funds for only six new ships. About five commercial ships are built in the US annually. Over 50% of global shipbuilding is in China, the world's largest producer, with seven of the top ten shipbuilders by order volume being Chinese. The Chinese navy now boasts, by a substantial margin, the largest fleet in the world. Even more ominously, future US defense-production capacity is eroding when its expansion is greatly needed. The average US Navy vessel today is 19 years old. Of the vessels in China's navy, by contrast, 70% have been launched since 2010 – and China's production base is expanding much more rapidly than American. The situation is similar in shipping and in port development. Three of the top ten shipping companies in the world are Chinese. America's largest, the Matson Line, is ranked 28th. Similarly, seven of the ten largest ports in the world are Chinese, with China leading the world in computerized container shipping. America's largest ports, at Long Beach and New York City, rank 22d and 24th respectively. Some attribute America's weaknesses in the maritime area to regulatory challenges. The Jones Act, an arcane law requiring that shipping between American ports be in American bottoms, is justified as bolstering national security by strengthening the US shipbuilding and shipping industries – but critics say that overall it has had the opposite effect. Equally damaging to US shipping is the broader weaknesses in basic industry. Highest on the list is the US weakness in basic steel. There America's flagship firm, US Steel, ranks only 28th in global scale. Much was made, on both sides of the Pacific, of former President Joe Biden's 2024 veto of Nippon Steel's bid to acquire US Steel. Although no doubt short-sighted from an economic standpoint, Biden's stance – similar to that of Donald Trump before his election – was understandable in political terms. US Steel, after all, is the US industrial flagship firm, founded by Andrew Carnegie in 1903, and headquartered in Pennsylvania, the most consequential US swing state of 2024. In a Presidential election year, with the United Steel Workers of America vehemently opposed – if not many local affiliates – it was not surprising that such an iconic firm would be a lightning rod for protectionist impulses. Yet amid the heated debate over US Steel's future course, it is important not to lose sight of the truly crucial national-security issue: the future of America's defense industrial base. Donald Trump's historic May, 2025 reversal – to support Nippon Steel's acquisition, on condition of $14 billion in added investment; an all-American board of directors; and continuation of the US Steel name and Pittsburgh headquarters – was an important step forward in that regard. Reviving America's steel, shipbuilding, shipping, precision-machinery, and capital-goods manufacturing sectors, to name a few, will be a crucial imperative in coming years, given the challenge of China and other competitors. And steel-industry revival will be fundamental to basic-industry revival more generally – not least on the seas. Such Technology and capital, provided largely by the private sector, supported by plausible market dynamics, will be crucial imperatives. Tariffs alone cannot possibly revive American maritime manufacturing. Particularly in the maritime sectors, and potentially in steel and some machine-building sectors as well, democratic allies will almost inevitably be a primary source of both technology and capital, as well as production volume. Strategic advantage in these basic sectors, after all, accrues to those who operate at scale. And China today in the maritime sectors has scale. The US needs its allies to help achieve that, and to move toward integrated capacity at optimal scale. In an era of potentially protracted conflict, as the experience of the Ukraine war suggests, production scale and capacity are looming larger than heretofore. Apart from China, the largest and most productive shipbuilders in the world are all in Japan and South Korea, supplied by their own productive, efficient steel sectors. Their expertise and investment will almost certainly be crucial to the revival of the US maritime industrial base. A ship under construction at a graving dock in the Philly Shipyard in Philadelphia, Pennsylvania, USA. Photo: Philly Ship Indeed, that process has already begun. In 2024 Japanese and South Korean firms agreed to repair US Navy vessels and in December a Korean firm acquired and began rebuilding the Philadelphia Naval Shipyard, which produced some of the US Navy's most powerful capital ships during World War II. Moving to the future, both sides of the Pacific need to build on lessons of the US Steel case – especially the importance of trans-Pacific cooperation in the rebuilding of America's defense-industrial base. Governments themselves need to take a longer view, and to grasp the vital importance to national security of cooperation among allies that does not compromise sovereignty or deeply held values. With the transition to leadership in Washington, and major trans-Pacific summits impending, now is the time both to learn from the past and to let partners play a role in helping to make American manufacturing great again. Kent Calder is Director of the Reischauer Center for East Asian Studies at Johns Hopkins University SAIS, former Special Advisor to the US Ambassador to Japan and the recent author of Eurasian Maritime Geopolitics (Brookings, 2025).
South China Morning Post
26-05-2025
- South China Morning Post
US' 500 military personnel in Taiwan an ‘open test' of Beijing's red lines
Washington's disclosure that around 500 US military personnel are stationed in Taiwan signals more open and substantial defence support for the island – a pivot from a previously discreet partnership that is openly testing Beijing's red lines, according to analysts. The disclosure, made on May 15 by retired US Navy Rear Admiral Mark Montgomery during congressional testimony, was the first official acknowledgement of such a substantial American military presence on the self-governed island. Taiwanese experts say the number refers to training personnel. It also vastly exceeds the previously known 41 personnel that were confirmed in a US congressional report a year earlier. Montgomery told lawmakers that the US military involvement was essential to training Taiwan to become a credible 'counter-intervention force' capable of real combat or complicating Beijing's military options. 'If we're going to give them billions of dollars in assistance, sell them tens of billions of dollars' worth of US gear, it makes sense that we'd be over there training and working,' he said. Days after the hearing, mainland Chinese state broadcaster CCTV took the rare step of airing commentary on Montgomery's remarks about the American military presence on the island.
