Closer defence ties could come at a cost – professor

Former United States President Dwight Eisenhower famously once warned of the dangers of the pernicious influence of what he called the “military industrial complex”.

In a recent op-ed for the New Zealand Herald, David Santoro, president and chief executive of the Pacific Forum based in Hawaii, invites New Zealand to join this very military industrial complex through, among other things, joining Pillar II of the Aukus security pact.

Pillar II of the pact is a trilateral agreement between Australia, the United Kingdom, and the United States to develop and share advanced military technologies and defence capabilities jointly, distinct from the nuclear-powered submarine acquisition covered under Pillar I.

Santoro says it “offers an ideal framework to upgrade military capabilities without compromising New Zealand’s nuclear-free identity”.

But closer alignment with the US and the UK through collaboration with non-nuclear technologies such as artificial intelligence, cyber defence and autonomous systems, would amount to participation in the technologies of modern warfare, including lethal drones and increased surveillance of civilian populations. 

Overseas, such technologies have increasingly seen the targeting of civilians and children and the blurring of distinctions between civilian and military functions.

The military-industrial complex drains trillions of dollars globally and is responsible for killing and maiming thousands of civilians, including children.

Further, countries such as Israel are among its major players. Our involvement could inhibit future boycotts and sanctions against Israel, many of whose leaders have been indicted by the International Criminal Court.

The transparency provided by our freedom of information laws for government procurement does not extend to foreign affairs and defence.

An example of the dangers of overseas control is a 2016 agreement between New Zealand and the US governing space launches from Aotearoa.

The agreement is fortified by legislation empowering the Government to regulate which companies and nations can use our launch facilities.

No one would deny the need for some regulatory oversight, but the agreement means the US essentially establishes a veto on use of our sovereign space launch capabilities.

Rocket Lab’s launch complex on the southern tip of the Māhia Peninsula in Hawke’s Bay is a private orbital launch site. We have every right to be proud of Rocket Lab’s achievements.

However, Santoro refers to the Mahia Peninsula as a “unique resilient platform” for satellite launches and as providing “critical redundancy to Western orbital infrastructure during a crisis”.

Its use during any crisis could make this country a target and draw us into the conflict, whether we wanted to be part of it or not. Instead, during crises we should enact rules to prohibit the use of facilities in this country for war-like operations.

Far from Santoro’s characterisation of our non-nuclear stance as “an intellectual infrastructure frozen in 1985”, it has, to the contrary, enabled us to forge a genuinely independent foreign policy and avoid, for instance, being drawn into the entanglement of the 2003 Iraq invasion.

We have developed a solid relationship with China, our largest trading partner, and that country has refrained from using its powerful economic leverage against us, even when we are critical of its conduct, as during the recent ballistic missile test in the Pacific.

Chinese courts have upheld the intellectual property rights of New Zealand companies — for example in a recent ruling in favour of New Zealand apple growers.

The Chinese President has defended World Trade Organisation trading rules despite the severe assaults on them by the Trump Administration.

A critical part of this country’s infrastructure, our new Inter-Island ferries, are currently under construction in a Chinese military shipyard.

In counterpoint are the tariffs indiscriminately applied by the US. Santoro’s suggestion of a quid pro quo reduction of these, in exchange for closer military co-operation — even if we were willing to trust any assurances of the current US Administration — would only increase the risk of future blackmail.

Our laws should require defence contractors with a New Zealand connection to demonstrate corporate social responsibility to ensure they are not facilitating war crimes. The “local diplomatic trust” referred to by Santoro as our greatest strength is in fact only possible because of our moral distance from global military alliances.

It’s not physical distance that protects us from war and conflict.

It is our ability to morally distance ourselves by upholding international norms and condemning those who do not.