The Condi Rice visit
July 27th, 2008 at 12:12 pm by David FarrarIt would be churlish not to acknowledge that the visit to NZ of US Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice was a good thing, and primarily happened due to Winston’s personal efforts.
Peters said he wanted to focus on improving relations with the US, and he has suceeded in this to a reasonable degree. Some of it is fortunate timing (as China gets more aggressive in the Pacific we become more useful to Washington) but he has been able to pursue a closer relationship in a way a Labour Minister would not and could not have.
Rice even referred to NZ as an ally. Now that may not be a change of policy, but it still has some significance. As we fight with the US in Afghanistan it is ludicrous we can not officially train with them, and it is time for the US to drop the silly little ban which is againgst their own interests.
Less likely is significant movement on a free trade agreement. Rice has just six months left in office. Obama appears to be against free trade, and even if McCain wins the new Congress is looking to be highly protectionist.
Having the US use NZ, and specifically Winston, as a small non threatenign proxy for the West in dealing with North Korea was quite inspired and again Peters did well there.
So Winston was at his best charming Dr Rice this weekend. I am unsure if he will do so well on Tuesday trying to charm Sir Robert Jones!
Related posts:
- Good news for free trade fans
- Obama delays P5 trade negotiations
- Does NZ First now support free trade?
- Winston and Condi
July 27th, 2008 at 12:17 pm
This is all very nice David, but at the end of the day, Rice is going to be out of office come November as (hopefully) Winston will be also, so it will be back to the drawing board one would think.
Vote:Did John Key get to meet with her??
July 27th, 2008 at 12:28 pm
Peters looked like a smug bastard but had nothing substantial to say. Clark should have got Goff back from Geneva to handle the visit.
Vote:July 27th, 2008 at 12:32 pm
Didn’t Mr David Keegan on Agenda this morning suggest in propping up the word ally naturally to protect democracy that an invasion wouldn’t be out of the question – demanding that Fiji voted this year as previously stated?
Vote:July 27th, 2008 at 1:08 pm
I am ever so confused. There have been numerous media reports that Peters used the occasion to lobby for a Free Trade deal with the US.
But hold on, isn’t NZF opposed in principle to free trade deals?
I guess the answer to that is ‘along with Trusts and anonymous donations’.
Just how many ways can you spell hypocrite?
Good to see John Key distancing himself from him. Helen Clark should listen and learn.
Vote:July 27th, 2008 at 1:18 pm
My old lecturer Professor Steve Hoadley was on Radio Left Wing this morning talking about amongst other things the anti-nuclear policy. He said words to the effect that “we in the trade distinguish between realists and idealists. The realists tend to be National-ACT and the idealists Liarbore-Green.” He also made mention of Basset’s revelations that the policy came from the left wing of Liarbore led by Clark and it was sprung on Lange as a fait-accompli.
It’s very true, the anti-nuclear policy is and always was, absurd idealism. It has never been responsible for a single reduction in nuclear forces and anyone who argues otherwise is an idealistic idiot who doesn’t understand how the world actually works. At the same time NZ has suffered greatly in real terms both economically and militarily.
I just wish the reef fish who blindly support the policy could get that fact through their naive skulls so we could finally rid ourselves of this albatross. I also wish the Nats hadn’t caved on the issue in the name of taking it off the political agenda. That displayed a singular lack of courage.
Vote:July 27th, 2008 at 1:22 pm
Do you really want the kind of thing that the USA laughably calls a “free trade agreement”, which typically extends to thousands of pages and forces countries such as Australia to adopt facsimiles of ridiculously harmful US laws such as the DMCA?
I’m all for free trade. It’s what we’ve had, unilaterally with the whole world, since the mid 80′s. If other countries want to do the same then that’s great. And an official mutual free trade agreement, if desired, should take up one side of an A4 sheet.
Vote:July 27th, 2008 at 1:30 pm
“# Political Busker
July 27th, 2008 at 12:32 pm
Didn’t Mr David Keegan on Agenda this morning suggest in propping up the word ally naturally to protect democracy that an invasion wouldn’t be out of the question – demanding that Fiji voted this year as previously stated?”
Well any invasion will not be from the direction of NZ or Australia, neither (in the case of Australia ‘yet’ is the best word) of us have the projection and logistics capacity to do that. In the case of NZ we don’t have large enough forces for such an operation, nor do we have enough equipment to cope with normal attrition let alone the possibility of combat losses.
, we cannot do anything other than talk and that’s entirely our own fault.
Vote:Of course, this is why NZ is so big on diplomacy
July 27th, 2008 at 1:43 pm
“# reid (956) Add karma Subtract karma +1 Says:
July 27th, 2008 at 1:18 pm snip
It’s very true, the anti-nuclear policy is and always was, absurd idealism. It has never been responsible for a single reduction in nuclear forces and anyone who argues otherwise is an idealistic idiot who doesn’t understand how the world actually works. At the same time NZ has suffered greatly in real terms both economically and militarily.
I just wish the reef fish who blindly support the policy could get that fact through their naive skulls so we could finally rid ourselves of this albatross. I also wish the Nats hadn’t caved on the issue in the name of taking it off the political agenda. That displayed a singular lack of courage.”
However the anti nuclear legislation is a reality here and now and is not likely to change, although I suspect that opposition to the nuclear power section will soften over time as people get increasingly edgy of energy supplies: basing a modern nations power supplies on the favourable cooperation of the weather, as we have this year, is idiotic. I think that if NZ wants to be ‘back in the club’, have influence, or simply be taken seriously outside of minor issues or gimmicks, and not just by the US, we need to be much more realistic about what our interests are, where they are and how we defend those interests, and those interests are not just in the South Pacific.
Vote:July 27th, 2008 at 1:47 pm
In 2008, Reid writes:
“It’s very true, the anti-nuclear policy is and always was, absurd idealism. It has never been responsible for a single reduction in nuclear forces and anyone who argues otherwise is an idealistic idiot who doesn’t understand how the world actually works. At the same time NZ has suffered greatly in real terms both economically and militarily.”
In 2028, Reid’s son will write, equally accurately:
“It’s very true, the emissions trading policy is and always was, absurd idealism. It has never been responsible for a single reduction in carbon emissions and anyone who argues otherwise is an idealistic idiot who doesn’t understand how the world actually works. At the same time NZ has suffered greatly in real terms both economically and socially.”
Vote:July 27th, 2008 at 2:15 pm
Winston “. . . has been able to pursue a closer relationship in a way a Labour Minister would not and could not have.”
So Winston’s most use to us as Labour’s Foreign Minister is in the area of policy which isn’t really Labour’s . . . well I suppose that is something positive, for the price we have paid – him propping up Labour, being elastic with the truth and all that other krap.
Vote:July 27th, 2008 at 2:32 pm
Sadly George Reids son may well write those very words as a large proportion of this country are braindead lemmings who are more then happy to be told what to think then to think for themselves. In the end what might save us is that if NZ adopts an emissions trading scheme then all will get hit in the pocket and people don’t like getting hit in the pocket. While a anti-nuclear policy well have cost us many millions of dollars it’s not something that we notice comming out of the back pocket.
Vote:July 27th, 2008 at 3:00 pm
Their “silly little ban” on full disclosure David?
The silly little ban is in fact on our part requiring them to detail every military bit of hardware they have their ships knowing full well that no military will acceed to this bloody stupid demand.
Funny how chinese warships get to come alongside in Wellington and land armed sailors without making a full disclosure.
Vote:July 27th, 2008 at 3:36 pm
Winstons endeavours in creating closer relations with America may sound encouraging and inspiring to New Zealanders but I doubt the trip has endeared us much to Americans. On Fox News last night the newscaster mentioned that the Police had ordered the University Students to lift their reward for anyone doing a citizens arrest of Condy during her stop-over on her way to Samoa. No mention of Winston or Clark or any statement to do with NZ. This was immediately followed by the item on Tulula does the hula from Hawaii and a list of other crazy names Kiwis give their kids. The commentators enjoyed a laugh at our expense, but the two together didn’t speak volumes for our National intellect, or maybe it did.
Vote:July 27th, 2008 at 4:07 pm
Stuart Mackey:
“However the anti nuclear legislation is a reality here and now and is not likely to change, although I suspect that opposition to the nuclear power section will soften over time as people get increasingly edgy of energy supplies: basing a modern nations power supplies on the favourable cooperation of the weather, as we have this year, is idiotic. I think that if NZ wants to be ‘back in the club’, have influence, or simply be taken seriously outside of minor issues or gimmicks, and not just by the US, we need to be much more realistic about what our interests are, where they are and how we defend those interests, and those interests are not just in the South Pacific.”
Interestingly enough I was out with a bunch of friends last night – one of these being a rabid socialist… She was in agreement that nuclear power is the way forward. She says her opinion has changed due to now understanding the fundamental problems with the band-aid solutions that have been so prolific of recent times. Of the group I think 100% were in agreement that nuclear is the solution.
However she went on to confirm her idelogical views that will get us nowhere:
Her comment that Clark deserves to continue to be PM: “because she is poitically savvy” and the economy doesn’t matter, as long as the PM is politically savvy. This left me completely dumb founded….
She further underlined her complete lack of a grip on reality, when she told me that my recent burglary was alright, because the down and outs who will have committed it, need these opportunities to get ahead! Fuck me! She went on to tell me that the real criminals in this sorry saga are the insurance companies, and she would rather be burgled every few years (to help the down and outs) than pay the insurance companies.
We are all truly fucked if this is the theme the left are subscribing to.
Vote:July 27th, 2008 at 4:23 pm
# Murray (962) Add karma Subtract karma +0 Says:
July 27th, 2008 at 3:00 pm
Their “silly little ban” on full disclosure David?
The silly little ban is in fact on our part requiring them to detail every military bit of hardware they have their ships knowing full well that no military will acceed to this bloody stupid demand.”
The legislation does not say that, only that nuclear propelled and armed ships cannot come here. Its worth noting that French and British warships come here without issue. That our forces cannot train with US forces is a choice that only the US president can make, and did make, not us.
”
Funny how chinese warships get to come alongside in Wellington and land armed sailors without making a full disclosure.
”
Got verifiable evidence for those Chinese ships not declaring if they had nukes or not?, moreover the British and French navies also come here as well so I guess they cant have made a ‘full disclosure’ either. Btw, its a safe bet that those Secret Service agents that came here with Condi Rice were not packing water pistols you know.
Vote:July 27th, 2008 at 4:25 pm
mattyroo – what’s her address? i need a replacement plasma. i have some free time between 2 and 4am tomorrow. hope she’s got a HD one.
Vote:July 27th, 2008 at 4:27 pm
“baxter (436) Add karma Subtract karma +0 Says:
July 27th, 2008 at 3:36 pm” The commentators enjoyed a laugh at our expense, but the two together didn’t speak volumes for our National intellect, or maybe it did.”
More a case of NZ simply not being relevant to the US outside of mostly minor issues.
Vote:July 27th, 2008 at 4:40 pm
# mattyroo (6) Add karma Subtract karma +0 Says:
July 27th, 2008 at 4:07 pm
Interestingly enough I was out with a bunch of friends last night – one of these being a rabid socialist… She was in agreement that nuclear power is the way forward. She says her opinion has changed due to now understanding the fundamental problems with the band-aid solutions that have been so prolific of recent times. Of the group I think 100% were in agreement that nuclear is the solution.
”
Indeed, nothing like the prospect of cold showers to open the mind to the necessity of new power supply options. I have found that a bit of education on nuclear energy is the best way to convert a sceptic of it, and one can find the work credible scientists on its safety and viability easily online and in public libraries.
”
However she went on to confirm her idelogical views that will get us nowhere:
Her comment that Clark deserves to continue to be PM: “because she is poitically savvy” and the economy doesn’t matter, as long as the PM is politically savvy. This left me completely dumb founded….
She further underlined her complete lack of a grip on reality, when she told me that my recent burglary was alright, because the down and outs who will have committed it, need these opportunities to get ahead! Fuck me! She went on to tell me that the real criminals in this sorry saga are the insurance companies, and she would rather be burgled every few years (to help the down and outs) than pay the insurance companies.
We are all truly fucked if this is the theme the left are subscribing to.”
Oh dear, you have my sympathies on having to listen to that, I have anarchists in my family so I know what you just went through. Its sad when ideology replaces reason, for when that happens everyone suffers regardless of their political persuasion.
Vote:July 27th, 2008 at 5:01 pm
the funny thing is it seems Winston is actually a good MP. He could turn out to be very corrupt and still be the best man for the job. It is like how many see Bill Clinton.
Vote:Maybe I should vote for him just to try to get the smug little asshole back in as foreign minister.
July 27th, 2008 at 5:03 pm
I see the nuclear debate is getting a rehash. It is worth remembering that NZ was not kicked out of ANZUS merely on the (arrogant and selfish posturing) nuclear free legislation but the actions of Lange in giving the US the middle finger when they sent the USS Buchanan down to say hello. The US stuck with their neither confirm nor deny policy but as with Japan the US made am indication that the host nation’s views on nuclear weapons would be respected. Lange and his govt decided that b/c the ship was “nuclear capable” that it should be turned away without a full search. The nuclear capable was because it had ASROC which could technically fire a nuclear torpeado. (To point out how silly this the ANZAC frigates are “nuclear capable”, if anyone really wanted to they could stick a tomahawk in the VLS with a W-80 warhead). NZ had already won the battle – we could have had nuclear free and ANZUS but the hippies decided they had to go a step further and publically slap the hand of friendship. We have paid for it ever since.
Vote:July 27th, 2008 at 5:26 pm
We make people declare at customs if they are carrying a banana, yet you guys object to us asking the US navy if they happen to have any thermonuclear weapons of mass destruction in their posession?
The Kiwiblog right, always happy to roll over for uncle Sam.
Vote:July 27th, 2008 at 5:45 pm
and they don’t even ask them to use a condom..
(it’s very ‘needy’ of them..
..national have long had that cultural cringe/inferiority complex going on.. )
phil(whoar.co.nz)
Vote:July 27th, 2008 at 5:46 pm
“The Kiwiblog right, always happy to roll over for uncle Sam.”
That’s rich coming from someone whose glorious leader spends all her time sucking up to the Chicom generals and various other totalitarian dictators around the globe.
Vote:July 27th, 2008 at 5:47 pm
“someone whose glorious leader spends all her time sucking up to the Chicom generals”
Just lies, smears and sweeping generalisations – that’s all you right-wing extremists ever have…
Vote:July 27th, 2008 at 5:48 pm
“that’s all you right-wing extremists ever have…”
Stalk someone else creep..
Vote:July 27th, 2008 at 6:52 pm
There is ample evidence to suggest that the banana would be used here, and ample evidence to suggest that the weapons wouldn’t be. Well, perhaps unless the leftie trolls are planning a convention at the Chatham’s
Mind you if Helen keeps running our country out the OECD backdoor, then we should probably start allowing banana imports — it’s hard to be a banana republic if ya ain’t got any.
Vote:July 27th, 2008 at 8:04 pm
“GPT1 (444) Add karma Subtract karma +1 Says:
July 27th, 2008 at 5:03 pm
The nuclear capable was because it had ASROC which could technically fire a nuclear torpeado. (To point out how silly this the ANZAC frigates are “nuclear capable”, if anyone really wanted to they could stick a tomahawk in the VLS with a W-80 warhead). NZ had already won the battle”
No: the Mk41 VLS on the ANZAC’s are tactical length, not strike length, its impossible to put anything in them other than anti-air missiles like Sea Sparrow or, hopefully soon, ESSM. Moreover given a number of top weight issues its not likely that anyone will ever put in strike length VLS tubes as a decent new phased array radar set needs to be put in when they do get around to getting ESSM. Best bet for any kind of anti shipping or land attack missile is block 2 Harpoon, which is a bolt on job that can be put on in front of the bridge.
”
– we could have had nuclear free and ANZUS but the hippies decided they had to go a step further and publically slap the hand of friendship. We have paid for it ever since.”
Not really, Labour back then was smart, they put it into legislation because they knew damn well that then the decision could not be, easily, repealed without public debate whereas a simple policy can be overlooked or set aside as a matter of convenience when circumstance dictate. Regardless of ones point of view on the matter, that legislation is here to stay and while the nuclear power element may be repealed one day, the weapon bit probably wont so its best to work around it.
Vote:Our greatest problem at this time is not the anti-nuclear legislation, its Labour defence policy that is founded upon false premises, and a National defence policy that is a promise of a review to give them a clue, in all honesty our forces have been in decline since WW2 under both main parties, as a result we have made ourselves irrelevant by ensuring that we cannot do anything but ask the bad man of nation X to stop kicking the puppies.
July 27th, 2008 at 11:45 pm
Well given that the nuclear deterrent is probably what saved our bacon during the cold war at huge cost to the United States – the ‘silly little ban’ is justified in my view.
But as you mentioned, times have changed……..
Vote:July 27th, 2008 at 11:54 pm
Heres a thought, Winston for the UN, imagine that aye. Luigi does NYC.
Vote:July 28th, 2008 at 7:02 am
The visit was a nice gesture but I do not read too much into it. Ms. Rice was fulfilling a promise she made in 2007 to visit NZ before her term in office expired, and this is the follow-up (and farewell). No agreements were signed (although I would not be surprised if we hear that NZ will increase its troop commitment to the ISAF project in Afghanistan come the renewal date in September for the Bamyan PRT. What will be interesting is whether NZ re-commits front line combat troops as opposed to combat medics and engineers such as in the PRT given the deteriorating situation on the ground there). The US executive waiver on joint military exercises has been granted extensively since 9/11, and has not impeded a number of joint operations in a variety of theaters. In fact, it is the Labour government that prefers to avoid large public displays of military-to-military cooperation because of (perceived) opposition to closer military ties with the US on part of its left wing and potential coalition partners. The US military is not fussed either way–they and their NZ counterparts just quietly get on with their mutual business. The anti-nuclear stance is, according to Ms Rice last year, a “bump in the road” that does not impede further progress in the US-NZ security relationship. The point about Chinese and other warships from nuclear states making port visits is well taken because, like the US surface fleet, they are all nuclear capable (with proper modifications) but conventionally armed. Only the US gets asked about its weapon status on-board, which is a bit silly since it is widely acknowledged that the surface and logistics component of the Pacific Fleet do not carry nukes and are not nuclear powered (save the carriers). US subs are another matter, but given the state of NZ’s ASW capability, they can do as they please anyway when it comes to patrolling in NZ territorial waters, and that in fact may be of benefit to NZ in ways largely unseen and thus unspoken about by the governments of the moment.
Because she is a lame duck SecState Ms. Rice cannot offer anything on the possible FTA, as others have mentioned above. She can only try to embed what has been done so far, and her choice of the word “ally” is a symbolic reference to the restored security ties–but nothing else. It could also be reversed given the outcome of the November US elections (although unlikely).
I beg to differ with Prof. Hoadley (if he was quoted correctly) as to the realist versus idealist dichotomy in NZ foreign policy. Within Labour there are realist and idealist camps. Proof of Labour’s post-1980s realism is the recent signing of the Chinese PRT in the face of opposition on human rights and traditional alliance grounds. In fact, the whole pro-China trade shift and Asia-centric focus of recent foreign policy under Labour is clear indication of its realist-pragmatic assessment of where NZ’s interests lie in the changing global balance of power. So are the quiet security cooperation efforts mentioned above. Thus what is at play in Labour’s foreign policy is a form of pragmatic idealism: it champions human rights, multilateral solutions and non-proliferation among other soft power emphases, but realistically assesses specific foreign policy issues based upon pragmatic self-interest. The Greens are closer to the idealist model, whereas National is little different from Labour except that its public position is reversed: it talks more realist(ically), but also adheres to some time-honoured NZ foreign policy principles (I should note that it is eminently practical and realist for small vulnerable countries to prefer multilateral approaches to conflict resolution and trade, so even that stance is less idealistic than would appear at first glance). More broadly, the point is clear: parties become more realistic in their foreign policy once they assume office. Idealism may not be abandoned entirely, but that idealism faces a serious reality check once the full scale of international commitments and relationships is recognized and assumed.
At the end of the day the visit was a nice “feel-good” moment for NZ, but received no serious coverage in the US (where I am located at the moment) other than the limited focus accorded the side-shows by certain right-wing outlets. The day that the Washington Post or NYT has a front page story on NZ-US relations—now THAT will be significant.
Sorry for the length of the post–too much time on my hands.
Vote:July 28th, 2008 at 9:27 am
For glimpse of the difference between words and reality and the apparent power of cliche go here. Watch the video – or as many of cht cliches you can stomach – and then read the satirical essay.
Vote:http://www.timesonline.co.uk/tol/comment/columnists/gerard_baker/article4392846.ece
July 28th, 2008 at 12:18 pm
“Rice even referred to NZ as an ally. ”
I am actually quite impressed that Winston got that concession out of her. I remember when Clark met Powell a while back he referred to NZ as “very very very close friends”. The labour propaganda machine used this statement continually in their election advertisements, and none of the mainstream media bothered to bring up the fact that Powell’s statement was in answer to the question of New Zealand being an ally or a friend.
When taken in context, the notion of being a close friend is nothing to be proud of. When you are supporting US military initiatives in Afganistan (and elsewhere – such as deploying a frigate to search cargo ships), being called anything less than an ally is an insult. Sadly our media lack the basic inteligence to notice this.
Vote:July 28th, 2008 at 6:44 pm
“Paul G. Buchanan (15) Add karma Subtract karma +3 Says:
July 28th, 2008 at 7:02 am
Only the US gets asked about its weapon status on-board, which is a bit silly since it is widely acknowledged that the surface and logistics component of the Pacific Fleet do not carry nukes and are not nuclear powered (save the carriers).”
Would that be because they “neither confirm nor deny” the presence of nuclear weapons on individual warships as a matter of policy, and the others simply say yes or no, when they ask to send a warship/s here?
Vote: