US Warship In Wellington Harbour Symbol Of NZ Vassalage
The US navy promotes itself as 'deterring aggression' as they sail around in our part of the Pacific. This is the same doublespeak as using the word 'defence' to mean 'offence'.
Vice Admiral Fred Kacher, commander of the US 7th Fleet, commented on the visit to New Zealand: 'Our partnership is rooted in our common values and respect…'
Do we share values with people committing genocide in Palestine? Winston Peters has said in the past year that we have the same values as the US. This is probably true of the Government and much of Parliament, but it is not true of the rest of the country: New Zealanders do not value global dominance above the lives of foreign children. American values are looking less and less attractive to the rest of the world.
Although it is denied by Defence Minister Judith Collins, the visit is also being seen by experts as countering China's growing influence in the region. US defence analyst Derek Grossman says: "I think it's symbolic, but I also think it's indicative of the strengthening partnership with an eye towards countering China in the Indo-Pacific." And that it is symbolic of an "increasing alignment in the perspectives of Wellington and Washington".
Both those reasons for welcoming the warship in Wellington - symbolism and military security - should make us uneasy.
There has been some recent sabre rattling between the Chinese and the Australians and Kiwis. This is pushing the Government to instinctively move New Zealand closer to its traditional ally without thinking clearly about our own interests. If we are concerned about our security it would make more sense to maintain our relationship with China and keep our independence. Helping the US in 'countering China in the Indo-Pacific', whatever that means, does not sound like the act of a peaceful, neutral neighbour.
Judith Collins was quoted by 1 News when welcoming the warship: "The US and New Zealand have a great relationship. Our troops and our people work together in places like Korea and the Sinai. Our relationship with the US has always been very strong – the Marines were here in the Second World War. It's a very strong relationship and always has been, and I think people will feel really happy to see them in town."
Well no, Judith, quite a few Wellingtonians are not at all happy to see them in town. There have been a couple of demonstrations against the ship's presence by peace activists led by Peace Action Wellington and Just Defence. The feeling is more outrage than happiness. Outrage that our government is getting as close as possible to a country that is the world's main agent of death and destruction, currently enabling genocide. That is the US, not China. The sight of a US Warship in our waters is not a happy one.
There is a feeling amongst many Kiwis that the relationship with the States does not need to get any cosier than it already is. It is not an equal partnership but one where the US tells us to do something and we generally do it without demur. It is not in New Zealand's national interest to relinquish our sovereignty to another country – to follow behind one great power while risking antagonising another – China. It would surely be in New Zealand's interest to maintain a neutral, friendly relationship with all our trading partners, especially those with great military and economic power. That is the way to avoid not only financial damage, but war.
It is bad enough that New Zealand is risking deteriorating relations with our major trading partner, China, but much worse to follow the US in spoiling for a war with China. Nobody knows what Trump will do from one day to the next, but there are indications that the US is so desperate about China's increasingly superior economic status that it is considering a military offensive to bring it down.
The Americans would be keen to get NZ on board with AUKUS, and our current Government seems only too willing to follow the US with military support into a war against China. This is a war that probably cannot be won, certainly not by the US and allies, and would be disastrous for this country. One gets the feeling that we would be useful cannon fodder for the Americans in the Pacific and that if they started to lose the war they would abandon us to our fate.
We are welcoming US Warships, training with the US and the Israeli defence forces, sending troops to Yemen against America's enemies, and enormously increasing the billions of dollars we already allocate to tools of war that will never be used for our own defence but only as backup for the Americans (Gordon Campbell pointed out that there are no real costings for our defence spending plan). This all shows us that the Government is only too happy to lead us into that morass.
Let us Wellingtonians and Kiwis be quite clear eyed about the intentions of the US and our own Government. Let's not be taken by surprise if we are dragged down to the bottom of the Pacific Ocean behind the torpedoed American warship we are chained to.
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Scoop
4 hours ago
- Scoop
Govt Gets It Wrong With Cancelled Ferries
The cost of cancelling the iRex ferries shows the wastefulness and short-term thinking of the Coalition Government. 'We could have had new ferries by next year and millions of dollars left over to spend on critical infrastructure if it weren't for this irresponsible Government,' says the Green Party's spokesperson for Transport, Julie Anne Genter. 'This decision to cancel the contract for new ferries has cost us $671 million. This is a missed opportunity and a massive mark against this Government's credibility. 'For context, that amount of money could have funded the electrification of the main rail line from Waikanae to Palmerston North, or built thousands of much-needed homes. 'New Zealanders should have been taking those new ferries this and next year - instead we've had the Aratere taken out of commission, and more trucks on the road as a result of retiring our only rail-enabled ferry. 'The Hyundai order for two new rail-enabled ferries for $550m was one of the best deals the country ever signed up to. This Coalition Government tore it up and will likely be forced into signing a deal that leaves us worse off in the short and long term. 'The Government must stop cutting corners and commit to funding a transport network that works for people and planet,' says Julie Anne Genter.
Otago Daily Times
13 hours ago
- Otago Daily Times
Three Republican-led states send National Guard to Washington
The Republican governors of three states are deploying hundreds of National Guard troops to Washington, DC, at the request of the administration of President Donald Trump, who has portrayed the city as awash in crime. The announcements on Saturday of troops from hundreds of miles away in West Virginia, South Carolina and Ohio came a day after DC officials and the Trump administration negotiated a deal to keep Mayor Muriel Bowser's appointed police chief, Pamela Smith, in charge of the police department after DC Attorney General Brian Schwalb filed a lawsuit to block the federal takeover of the department. Trump, a Republican, said this week he was deploying hundreds of DC National Guard troops to Washington and temporarily taking over the Democratic-led city's police department to curb what he depicted as a crime and homelessness emergency. Justice Department data, however, showed violent crime in 2024 hit a 30-year low in Washington, a self-governing federal district under the jurisdiction of Congress. West Virginia Governor Patrick Morrisey's office said in a statement he was deploying 300 to 400 National Guard troops to DC in "a show of commitment to public safety and regional cooperation." The statement said he also was providing equipment and specialized training. South Carolina Governor Henry McMaster responded to a Pentagon request by announcing that 200 of his state's National Guard troops would be sent. Ohio Governor Mike DeWine said he would send 150 military police members in the coming days, adding none of them were "currently serving as law enforcement officers in the state." After the announcements, Mayor Bowser posted on X: "American soldiers and airmen policing American citizens on American soil is #UnAmerican." TROOPS TO OTHER CITIES? The National Guard serves as a militia that answers to the governors of the 50 states except when called into federal service. The DC National Guard reports directly to the president. Trump, who has suggested he could take similar actions in other Democratic-controlled cities, has sought to expand the powers of the presidency in his second term, inserting himself into the affairs of major banks, law firms and elite universities. In June, Trump ordered 700 Marines and 4,000 National Guard troops to Los Angeles, against the wishes of California's Democratic governor, during protests over mass immigration raids by federal officials. South Carolina's McMaster said his troops would immediately return to South Carolina if needed to respond to a possible hurricane or other natural disaster. Hurricane Erin, now northeast of Puerto Rico, has become a catastrophic Category 5 storm that could bring ocean swells to the US East Coast early next week, the US National Hurricane Center said on Saturday. National Guard troops often respond to natural disasters and rarely police US civilians. Drew Galang, a spokesperson for West Virginia's Morrisey, said the state's National Guard received the order to send equipment and personnel to DC late on Friday and was working to organize the deployment. A White House official said on Saturday that more National Guard troops would be called in to Washington to "protect federal assets, create a safe environment for law enforcement officials to carry out their duties when required, and provide a visible presence to deter crime." A US official, speaking on the condition of anonymity, said a formal order was expected to go out that would authorize National Guard troops in DC to carry firearms. The official said this order would affect mostly military police officers with sidearms. Reuters has reported that the National Guard troops would have weapons nearby, such as in their vehicles. The White House said on Saturday that DC National Guard members have conducted patrols on foot and in vehicles around the National Mall and Union Station. The White House said the National Guard troops are not making arrests now and that they may be armed. It is not clear how the administration could deploy National Guard troops elsewhere. A federal judge in San Francisco is expected in the coming weeks to issue a ruling on whether Trump violated the law with the Los Angeles deployments.
1News
15 hours ago
- 1News
Summit puts Putin back on global stage as Trump echoes Kremlin position
In Alaska, President Vladimir Putin walked on a red carpet, shook hands and exchanged smiles with his American counterpart. Donald Trump ended the summit praising their relationship and calling Russia "a big power ... No. 2 in the world," albeit admitting they didn't reach a deal on ending the war in Ukraine. By Saturday morning Moscow time, Trump appeared to have abandoned the idea of a ceasefire as a step toward peace — something he and Ukraine had pushed for months -– in favour of pursuing a full-fledged "Peace Agreement" to end the war, echoing a long-held Kremlin position. The "severe consequences" he threatened against Moscow for continuing hostilities were nowhere in sight. On Ukraine's battlefields, Russian troops slowly grinded on, with time on their side. The hastily arranged Alaska summit "produced nothing for Mr. Trump and gave Mr. Putin most of what he was looking for," said Laurie Bristow, a former British ambassador to Russia. ADVERTISEMENT The summit spectacle Putin's visit to Alaska was his first to the United States in 10 years and his first to a Western country since invading Ukraine in 2022 and plunging US-Russia relations to the lowest point since the Cold War. Crippling sanctions followed, along with efforts to shun Russia on the global stage. The International Criminal Court in 2023 issued an arrest warrant for Putin on accusations of war crimes, casting a shadow on his foreign trips and contacts with other world leaders. Trump's return to the White House appeared to upend all that. He warmly greeted Putin, even clapping for him, on a red carpet as US warplanes flew overhead as the world watched. The overflight was both "a show of power" and a gesture of welcome from the US president to the Kremlin leader, "shown off to a friend," said retired Col. Peer de Jong, a former aide to two French presidents and author of Putin, Lord of War." Russian officials and media revelled in the images of the pomp-filled reception Putin received in Alaska, which pro-Kremlin tabloid Komsomolskaya Pravda described as signalling "utmost respect." It called the meeting a 'huge diplomatic victory' for Putin, whose forces will have time to make more territorial gains. ADVERTISEMENT The reception contrasted starkly with President Volodymyr Zelensky's March visit to the Oval Office, where Trump treated him like a "representative of a rogue state," said Roderich Kiesewetter, a member of the German parliament. Putin has "broken out of international isolation," returning to the world stage as one of two global leaders and "wasn't in the least challenged" by Trump, who ignored the arrest warrant for Putin from the ICC, Bristow told The Associated Press. Russian President Vladimir Putin stands on the steps of the plane prior to departure at Joint Base Elmendorf-Richardson, Alaska, Friday, Aug. 15, 2025, after meeting with US President Donald Trump. (Source: Associated Press) For Putin, 'mission accomplished' Putin "came to the Alaska summit with the principal goal of stalling any pressure on Russia to end the war," said Neil Melvin, director of international security at the London-based Royal United Services Institute. "He will consider the summit outcome as mission accomplished." In recent months, Trump has pressed for a ceasefire, something Ukraine and its allies supported and insisted was a prerequisite for any peace talks. ADVERTISEMENT The Kremlin has pushed back, however, arguing it's not interested in a temporary truce -– only in a long-term peace agreement. Moscow's official demands for peace so far have remained nonstarter for Kyiv: It wants Ukraine to cede four regions that Russia only partially occupies, along with the Crimean Peninsula, illegally annexed in 2014. Ukraine also must renounce its bid to join NATO and shrink its military, the Kremlin says. After Alaska, Trump appeared to echo the Kremlin's position on a ceasefire, posting on social media that after he spoke to Ukraine's President Volodymyr Zelensky and European leaders, "it was determined by all that the best way to end the horrific war between Russia and Ukraine is to go directly to a Peace Agreement, which would end the war, and not a mere Ceasefire Agreement, which often times do not hold up." In a statement after the Trump call, the European leaders did not address whether a peace deal was preferable to a ceasefire. The summit took place a week after a deadline Trump gave the Kremlin to stop the war or face additional sanctions on its exports of oil in the form of secondary tariffs on countries buying it. Trump already imposed those tariffs on India, and if applied to others, Russian revenues "would probably be impacted very badly and very quickly," said Chris Weafer, CEO of Macro-Advisory Ltd. consultancy. ADVERTISEMENT In the days before Alaska, Trump also threatened unspecified "very severe consequences" if Putin does not agree to stop the war. But whether those consequences will materialise remains unclear. Asked about that in a post-summit interview with Fox News Channel, Trump said he doesn't need "to think about that right now," and suggested he might revisit the idea in "two weeks or three weeks or something." Russia's President Vladimir Putin speaks during a news conference at Joint Base Elmendorf- Richardson, Friday, Aug. 15, 2025, in Anchorage, Alaska (Source: Associated Press) More pressure on Ukraine In a statement after the summit, Putin claimed the two leaders had hammered out an "understanding" on Ukraine and warned Europe not to "torpedo the nascent progress." But Trump said "there's no deal until there's a deal." ADVERTISEMENT In his Fox interview, Trump insisted the onus going forward might be on Zelensky "to get it done," but said there would also be some involvement from European nations. Zelensky will meet Trump at the White House on Monday. Both raised the possibility of a trilateral summit with Putin, but Kremlin aide Yuri Ushakov said it wasn't discussed in Alaska. The Kremlin has long maintained that Putin would only meet Zelensky in the final stages of peace talks. "Trump now appears to be shifting responsibility towards Kyiv and Europe, while still keeping a role for himself," Tatiana Stanovaya of the Carnegie Russia and Eurasia Centre wrote on X. Fiona Hill, a senior adviser on Russia to Trump during his first administration, told AP that he has met his match because "Putin is a much bigger bully." Trump wants to be the negotiator of "a big real estate deal between Russia and Ukraine," she said, but in his mind he can "apply real pressure" only to one side — Kyiv. Hill said she expects Trump to tell Zelensky that "you're really going to have to make a deal" with Putin because Trump wants the conflict off his plate and is not prepared to put pressure on the Russian president. ADVERTISEMENT Far from the summit venue and its backdrop saying "Pursuing Peace," Russia continued to bombard Ukraine and make incremental advances on the over 1,000-kilometre front. Russia fired a ballistic missile and 85 drones overnight. Ukraine shot down or intercepted 61 drones, its air force said. Front-line areas of Sumy, Dnipropetrovsk, Donetsk and Chernihiv were attacked. Russia's Defence Ministry said it had taken control of the village of Kolodyazi in the Donetsk region, along with Vorone in the Dnipropetrovsk region. Ukraine did not comment on the claims. Russian forces are closing in on the strongholds of Pokrovsk and Kostiantynivka in the Donetsk region, which Moscow illegally annexed in 2022 but still only partially controls. "Unless Mr. Putin is absolutely convinced that he cannot win militarily, the fighting is not going to stop," said Bristow, the former ambassador. ADVERTISEMENT "That's the big takeaway from the Anchorage summit."
