FBI opens New Zealand office, citing China threat
Patel has spent recent days in the capital Wellington meeting with senior government ministers as well as intelligence bosses and law enforcement officials.
'Some of the most important global issues of our times are the ones that New Zealand and America work on together,' Patel said in a video released by the US Embassy in Wellington.
Patel singled out 'countering the CCP' as a priority, referring to the Chinese Communist Party.
New Zealand is a member of the 'Five Eyes' intelligence-sharing alliance alongside the United States, Britain, Canada, and Australia.
'The FBI cannot do it alone,' Patel said.
'Our partners in the Five Eyes are our greatest partners around the world. But we need all of them... to get after the fight and put the mission first.'
The US Embassy in Wellington said the FBI office would investigate 'terrorism, cyber crime and fraud, organised crime and money laundering, child exploitation, and foreign intelligence threats'.
It will also cover FBI partnerships in Antarctica, Samoa, Niue, the Cook Islands, and Tonga.
The minister responsible for New Zealand's spy agencies, Judith Collins, said the FBI was a valued intelligence partner.
The FBI has hundreds of special agents spread across the world.
'We exchanged a range of insights on areas such as trans-national organised crime, counter-terrorism, cyber-security and espionage,' Judith Collins, Minister for Digitising Government, said today.
'NZSIS and GCSB relationships with overseas partners like the FBI, as well as their support to New Zealand Police, are an important part of how the intelligence agencies deliver on their mission to keep New Zealand safe and secure.'
New Zealand Police Minister Mark Mitchell welcomed Patel to the country and warned criminals of the new partnership.
'New Zealand Police are continually working with their overseas counterparts like the FBI to catch those engaged in illegal, harmful activities such as drug smuggling and online child exploitation, as well disrupting and preventing this offending from happening in the first place,' he says.
'Police are part of a global effort on law enforcement. Director Patel's visit was an excellent opportunity to share our common concerns while reinforcing the importance of New Zealand and the US working together to protect our citizens.'
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
ABC News
11 hours ago
- ABC News
Trump's new tariffs reveal somewhat vindictive and irrational strategy
Myanmar, Laos, Serbia and Syria. They seem unlikely targets for some of the most aggressive moves in Donald Trump's war on the global trading system. Yet these small and troubled nations are among those facing the highest tariffs from the United States in the wake of its president's slew of August 1 trade announcements. Myanmar, which mostly exports clothing to the US, and Laos, which predominantly exports electronics equipment, now face 40 per cent tariffs on the goods they sell to America, while Serbia will be hit with a 35 per cent tariff and Syria 41 per cent. None of these countries have been notably the subject of the same public Trumpian wrath as, say, Canada (35 per cent) and Brazil (50 per cent) since "Liberation Day" on April 2. And the country which is arguably the biggest target or threat to the US in terms of world trade — China — was not mentioned at all but will be engaged with in further negotiations. Having said that, there is still a 40 per cent on goods regarded as being "trans-shipped" to avoid higher tariffs (for which read "trans-shipped from China"). And the tough treatment on Friday of South-East Asian nations which are manufacturing hubs for China must be seen as an indirect assault on the regional economic superpower. In Australia, the focus on Trump's tariff announcements on Friday (AEST) was of course primarily on the "relatively" good news that we were still only facing a 10 per cent tariff, when the spectre of a 15 or 25 per cent generic rate had been mentioned by the US president in the days leading up to the announcement. The outcome somewhat took the wind out of the sails of those who have been criticising the prime minister for not getting to the White House, or into any meeting with Trump, and instead boosted the argument that there was little to be lost from staying out of his uniquely coiffed hair. Australia will enjoy the 10 per cent tariff rate being applied to those countries that buy more goods from the US than they export to America: that is, that run a trade surplus with one of the world's biggest economies. The new tariff regime starts at 10 per cent, based on trade balance, lifts to a 15 per cent rate for countries that only have a small deficit, while those with big deficits, that haven't negotiated, or that have otherwise incurred the ire of the president face this much wider and more unpredictable range of outcomes. It's worth pausing for a moment of silence to mark the momentous shift in global affairs that the Friday announcement confirms: the shift not just from a free trade ambition to a protectionist one by the United States, but a shift to a system of fairly arbitrary, vindictive and sometimes irrational decisions. Beyond that, though, the patterns in the trade deals that have been done to date — or perhaps more appropriately the lack of patterns and rigour — raise a range of other questions about their impact, and the extent to which they appear in some cases to be little more than standover tactics of lesser or greater actual import. Take the deals struck with Japan and the European Union last month. Both exemplified some striking features of the "deals" being done. In both cases, the parties documented very different understandings of the deals they thought they had done. There were also glaring holes in the deals in terms of major sectors about which there was only a conspicuous silence. For example, the EU deal was silent on wine and spirits. Most of the deals have yet to be formalised or legislated. Finally, the US has been claiming in almost all of the deals that it struck prior to August 1 that they involved massive commitments of investment in the US by the trade partners involved. For example, in Japan's case, the White House announced that Japan would create a $US550 billion fund to invest in the US, with Trump making the investment decisions and the US government receiving 90 per cent of the profits. It seemed this astonishing deal was news to Japanese negotiators who, the New York Times reported, had already made an offer (which in itself seemed extraordinary): to create a $US400 billion investment fund with half the profits going to the US government. The US president subsequently referred to the deal that he announced as a "signing bonus", which underpinned Japan "only" facing a 15 per cent tariff impost, even as doubts were aired about whether the investment would ever materialise. The NYT reported that Japan's chief trade negotiator, Ryosei Akazawa told Tokyo that the deal was that Japan would offer a blend of investment, loans and loan guarantees, totalling up to $550 billion, with profits to be allocated based on each side's committed risk and financial contribution. There have been similar scenes unfolding over possible investments from the European Union and South Korea. Equally unsettling has been the increasingly blatant intrusion of non-trade factors into the tariff decisions announced by the White House. Brazil is facing 50 per cent tariffs because Trump doesn't like the way former president, strongman and Trump ally Jair Bolsonaro is being treated by the Brazilian judicial system, where he is facing up to 40 years in prison for allegedly plotting a coup to stay in power after losing the 2022 election. By agreeing this week to a Trump demand for a ceasefire, Thailand and Cambodia appear to have ended up with lower 19 per cent tariffs they had originally been proposed. Canada appeared to be facing a more punitive tariff regime than Mexico at 35 per cent — which Trump said was due to Prime Minister Mark Carney signalling Canada would recognise statehood for Palestine. But it turns out the higher tariff rate will not apply to goods covered by the United States-Mexico-Canada trade agreement. That covers an estimated 94 per cent of Canada's exports to the US. The tariff decisions will have a very different impact to those suggested by the headline numbers in other countries too. For example, Germany may only face a 15 per cent tariff as part of the EU deal but is particularly exposed through its big automotive exports to the US. Another shock was the 25 per cent rate applied to India. This caused immediate political blowback for Indian Prime Minister Narendra Modi who claims "bestie" status with the US president but who immediately faced intense criticism at home that this elevated position had not saved India from a punitive tariff rate. What happened in India is just one of the examples of the political shock waves caused around the globe by Trump's moves, in addition to any economic impact they may have. There is considerable concern in Europe, for example, about how European Union member nations react to its deal. The federated nature of the EU structure lends itself to a lot more public debate about a deal not directly negotiated by national leaders. The concern among European political analysts this week is that the deal will play into the hands of far-right and nationalist groups in fuelling resentment against both the EU and sitting governments. It will take countries around the world some time to see how these domestic pressures play out. And then there's the question of how such a deliberately uneven playing field affects their relative competitiveness to each other, even when direct trade with the US is left out of the calculations. It feels like a certain resignation has crept into global trade discussions in the past few months. It is driven as much by a trade-off between uncertainty and certainty as specific tariff numbers. If there is one thing we seem to know about Donald Trump, it is that all that uncertainty is unlikely to end any time soon. Laura Tingle is the ABC's Global Affairs Editor.
News.com.au
19 hours ago
- News.com.au
Pro-democracy politician who lit candles for Tiananmen Square victims arrested under China's ‘chilling' new law
Macau's best-known democracy advocate has become the first person detained under China's newly expanded national security laws. 68-year-old Au Kam San, who has spent the past two decades as a lone dissenting voice in Macau's tightly managed legislature, now finds himself behind bars for allegedly 'colluding with foreign forces'. According to a statement from Macau's Public Prosecutions Office, 'compulsory detention' was imposed on Au following a 'preliminary investigation' after police arrested him at his home on Wednesday. Authorities claim Au maintained contact with an unnamed 'anti-China organisation' abroad since 2022, and accuse him of spreading 'false and seditious information' to incite hatred against the Chinese government. The charges also allege Au attempted to disrupt Macau's 2024 leadership election and provoke 'hostile actions by foreign countries against Macau.' 'The Public Prosecutions Office will fully hold accountable those who attempt to disrupt national security,' the statement reads, promising to 'confront hostile forces to the end.' Au Kam San, a former school teacher and founding member of several moderate pro-democracy groups, became a quiet but consistent critic of the opaque governance and social inequality in the ritzy gambling enclave. On the 36th anniversary of the Tiananmen crackdown in June 2025, Au said he lit candles in remembrance and posted on Facebook it was 'the best way I can honour the memory of the event'. 'My stance is very clear, and I am not someone who changes easily. I won't alter my approach simply because someone shows a bit more 'concern',' he wrote. In mainland China, it is effectively illegal to speak about the Tiananmen Square massacre in any public or commemorative context. Since the 1990s, authorities have banned all public mourning, detained individuals who attempted memorials, and suppressed the memory of the event through pervasive censorship. Even the words 'June 4' and 'Tank Man' are barred on Chinese social media. Unlike the more combative pro-democracy figures in neighbouring Hong Kong — where mass protests in 2014 and 2019 brought international attention and brutal crackdowns — Macau's opposition has long existed on the margins. Through the 2000s and 2010s, Au stood largely alone in Macau's Legislative Assembly, pushing back against authoritarian drift and warning of rising inequality in a city flush with casino money. He openly criticised the handling of corruption cases involving senior officials like Ao Man Long and Ho Chio Meng, who were both jailed in high-profile graft trials. 'Chilling effect on Macau' Jason Chao, a Macau-born activist now based in the UK, said the arrest was disproportionate. 'Au had occasionally made mildly critical online posts against the Chinese and Macau governments but nothing to warrant his arrest,' Chao said via Reuters. 'There will be a profound chilling effect on the people of Macau.' Au's detention marks the latest episode in Beijing's relentless campaign to crush dissent under the banner of national security. In Hong Kong, sweeping national security laws imposed in 2020 have led to the closure of newspapers like Apple Daily, the arrest of virtually all opposition lawmakers, and the effective end of its once-thriving civil society. When local authorities still found pockets of resistance, a second, even tougher, security law was rammed through in 2024. In 2023, Macau's security laws were expanded again to include vaguely defined threats like 'external interference' and 'provoking hatred against the government.' Civil rights groups warned at the time that it would become a tool to stifle legitimate political expression. Au is one of many prominent dissidents to be detained in China in recent years. Among the most high-profile cases is that of Ilham Tohti, a respected Uyghur economist who was sentenced to life in prison for 'separatism' after promoting peaceful dialogue between Uyghurs and Han Chinese. His jailing sent a warning that even moderate calls for understanding would be treated as existential threats. A similar message was delivered in 2023 with the 14-year sentence handed to Xu Zhiyong, a former legal scholar who led the New Citizens' Movement, a grassroots push for transparency and rule of law. In the same year, media mogul Jimmy Lai, founder of the now-shuttered Apple Daily, was put on trial under the national security law, accused of collusion with foreign forces in a case widely condemned by press freedom advocates. Joshua Wong, the student activist who became the face of Hong Kong's 2014 Umbrella Movement, has also faced repeated arrests under similar charges.
Sky News AU
a day ago
- Sky News AU
Australia ‘looking good' after tariffs held at 10 per cent
Former Trump trade adviser Kelly Ann Shaw shared her views on how Australia has lucked out in remaining at a 10 per cent tariff rate. 'Australia is looking pretty good right now compared to other governments, and I think you should be feeling very good about where you landed in terms of this new us tariff structure,' Ms Ann Shaw told Sky News Australia. 'This is one of the most interesting dynamics in the world, you have two of the world's largest economies, both nuclear powers, both who have expressed an interest in not decoupling but also de-risking from one another from strategic supply chains. 'I do think that where the US-China relationship is right now is somewhere between a 30-55 per cent average tariff rate is likely where it's going to stay for the foreseeable future."
