"For the first time in New Zealand’s history, the engine of world economic activity has shifted to our geographic region, the Asia-Pacific."
The Diplomat's Zachary Keck spoke with New Zealand's Prime Minister John Key concerning nuclear security, Afghanistan, relations with the United States and China as well as the Trans Pacific Partnership.
New Zealand is often seen as “punching above its weight”. One area where this is certainly true is on nuclear non-proliferation issues. What are some of the things your government has been doing as part of nuclear security summits, and do you anticipate a future for this forum after the initial four years are over in 2014?
New Zealanders are proud of this country’s long record of advocacy on nuclear disarmament, and our strong support for the vision of a nuclear-weapon-free world. New Zealand views nuclear security as part of our broader and longstanding commitment to nuclear disarmament and non-proliferation.
We contribute regularly to the International Atomic Energy Agency’s Nuclear Security Fund. We are an active member of the Global Initiative to Combat Nuclear Terrorism and we funded a workshop by the World Institute for Nuclear Security on securing radioactive sources in South East Asia in early 2012. Since 2004 we have provided over NZ$6 million towards G8 Global Partnership projects aimed particularly at securing nuclear materials in the former Soviet Union.
The Nuclear Security Summit process has been useful to focus high-level international attention on this important issue and to build an international consensus on the steps needed to combat the threat posed by unsecured nuclear material. It’s not yet clear what the future of the process will be but we hope that it will lead in time to a more coherent international nuclear security framework and a strengthened role for the International Atomic Energy Agency.
You have said that the most difficult decision in your tenure as Prime Minister was recommitting troops to Afghanistan. Then, in announcing an accelerated drawdown of troops stationed in Bamiyan Province last August, you noted the new date of withdrawal was needed to airlift the troops out of the area in light of the dangers of traveling to Kabul by road. With the U.S. and other NATO-led ISAF forces now also accelerating their drawdown, do you still believe the war has been worth fighting? Where do you see Afghanistan in say the next five to ten years?
International headlines on Afghanistan, which primarily focus on security incidents and fatalities, make it easy to forget what has been achieved since the international community became involved there following the events of 11 September 2001. The truth is that Afghanistan has made tremendous progress over the past eleven years. Most importantly, the country is no longer a haven for international terrorists. Al Qaeda, a substantial threat to international security in 2001 and the reason for our initial military involvement, has been significantly weakened and largely driven from Afghanistan. Furthermore, with the assistance of the ISAF coalition, the Afghanistan National Security Forces are becoming increasingly capable of continuing the fight against the Taliban after the ISAF mission concludes next year.
Thanks in part to international efforts, Afghanistan also now has a functioning, albeit Afghan-style, representative democracy. State institutions are in place, and there is a thriving civil society not seen in Afghanistan for a generation. Despite ongoing challenges, millions of Afghans now enjoy human rights they were denied by the Taliban. In short, quality of life for ordinary Afghans has significantly improved.
While New Zealand, which has been present in Bamyan Province for ten years, will be withdrawing our PRT in April, we leave a lasting legacy. In the Hazarajat region, which includes Bamyan, 84% of people in last year's Asia Foundation survey said that they rarely or never fear for their own or family's safety. The PRT has also directly contributed to an increase in local capacity and quality of life. New Zealand’s role was gratefully acknowledged by the leadership and people of Bamyan during my visit to the province in May 2010.
These gains in Bamyan and across the country as a whole have not come without cost. New Zealand has had ten fatalities since it began its involvement in Afghanistan; for many other ISAF nations, the toll is much higher. Those sacrifices have not been in vain. Yes, significant challenges remain. But it is important to remember just how far Afghanistan has come since 2001, and what has been achieved.
Challenges remain, but we believe that with good leadership, transparency and accountability, the Afghan Government should be able to sustain the gains of the last ten years. The international community, including New Zealand, will continue to do what it can to support these efforts, but ultimately Afghanistan’s fate rests with its people.
Photo Credit: Wikicommons
View as Single Page
Reddit
Digg
StumbleUpon
Delicious
Technorati
Yahoo
Google
Plurk
Matthew Brown
If anyone would be kind enough to forward this to John Key’s page…
Dear Mr Key,
As a smoker, if I can convince you to bring forward the day that you stop pushing that awful stuff (and at such a price), I’ll happily give you the credit for the additional 5000 lives you save. Per year.
Dr Brown.
@madphysician
PS- don’t think you’ll be able to pull the same nonsense as last time. It’s illegal to imprison someone based on their political views.
PPS-I do hope you don’t mind me getting in touch.
JohnX
John Chan wrote: "JohnX, you are walking on a dangerous path of provoking racial conflict like what has happened in Yugoslavia, Rwanda, etc. by spreading fabricated racial hatred rhetoric. You soon will be a qualified indictable candidate by the ICC for crime against humanity if you continue your current moronic rant."
I would wager that you would know as many of your posts are fabricated racial ranting. So, I should expect to see you there standing next to me in the dock?
kiwi asian
The above comments are really led astray by John Chan. 南瓜's comments are spot on.
What needs to be made clear is that New Zealand is a country that upholds a high standard of ethical behaviour.(Although the choice of food ethics is relative to each culture e.g. Many in Hindu cultures would find New Zealand's level of beef and other meat consumption as unethical. Like wise New Zealand does not condone the consumption of dog meat. )
New Zealand's highest risk however is how to uphold a high standard of ethical behavior with the rapid change in demographics. The Corruption Perception Index, though not perfect puts New Zealand as first equal. This at very least is of a extremely high standard globaly and something for New Zealand to be proud of.
While Japan (17th on the CPI), a long standing significant partner to New Zealand, and it's whaling practices are raised as a point of ethical/cultural friction, it has maintained a good standard of behavior as a trading partner, and through cultural exchange. The true risk lies in New Zeland can engage with countries in the Asia-Pacific while managing ethical friction in a broader sense.
Opening up trade inevitably opens up cultural interactions. In this sense the nations which present the greatest opportunities for economic gain also unfortunately happen to have high levels of corruption culture. Of the BRIC's nations, Russia(133rd=),India (94th=), China(80th=) all have ubiquitous and monumental corruption problems. Key Countries in the Next 11 such as Indonesia (118th=),Vietnam(123rd=) are also battling corruption. New Zealand's leadership requires a rigorous strategy in order stay as a leader in anti-corruption.
For New Zealand these issues are a ever present reality, and pose a threat to important industries such as the every present poaching and illegal export of high value fisheries, including Paua or Abalone(Fetching upwards of NZD500/kg in Asia). Not only is the poaching itself damaging but those policing these activities are exposed to the temptations of bribery in-order to turn a blind eye. It poses significant threat to the economic, social and environmental sustainability of the nation.
New Zealand has much to offer and gain in the Asian century, but this should not be at the expense of it's values. The old proverb is if you mix with red ink you become red.(靠着朱砂的变红), let's hope that John Key has plenty of green ink up his sleave.
Reference:
http://cpi.transparency.org/cpi2012/results/
Nangua
Dear Mr. Chan
Thanks for your comment. NZers and many others are not happy with Japanese whaling, that's true, and it's an issue that needs to be solved.
However, two points:
1) NZ provides its own patrol ships for its own Exclusive Economic Zone, thank you very much. There will be no PLAN vessels patrolling down here just because you don't like what Japan's doing. That's a proxy war. China's grievances with Japan belong in diplomatic channels and at the negotiating tables at ASEAN, not in the Southern Ocean.
2) Look at Chinese domestic problems first, before looking for someone else's trouble. Do something to significantly reduce or eliminate entirely consumption of shark-fin soup (nothing but a vanity dish), tiger penises, bear bile, rhino horn, elephant tusk, and other animal-based ingredients of TCM (Traditional Chinese Medicine), and then China will gain more credibility when telling others what to do.
Sincerely,
Nangua
John Chan
@Mangua,
1. I personally do not consume shark-fin soup, ivory products, tiger penises, bear bile, rhino horn or anything I do not approve, like I stop buying Japanese products since the Japanese actions at the Diaoyu Islands remind me their unapologetic war crimes in China and other places in Asia. I try to impact my surrounding with my idea too.
2. Japanese hunt whales indiscriminately in the international waters and waters bordering NZ’s jurisdiction, NZ only looks after its EEZ is an irresponsible action toward the whales, and it is an appeasement to the Japanese and the world biggest hegemon’s military and economic might. NZ must take pro-active actions to protect the whales in the breeding grounds around Antarctica for the humanity heritage sake. Looking for excuses to underman the capability to police the ruthless and greedy Japanese whaling factory fleet is a de factor accomplice of exterminating the whales.
3. USA and the old school imperial powers have no creditability in morality and keeping peace at all, yet NZ has not told them to gain more creditability before telling other what to do like it tells China, it is disappointing to know that NZ holds such discriminatory attitude toward China even though China is 2nd biggest benefactor of NZ. Your comment seems totally contradictory to what the NZ PM has said.
Nangua (南瓜)
Dear Mr. Chan
Thank you for your replies. Allow me to address them one by one.
1) I personally feel good that you take such a stand on animal-based products. Such action, when spread to sufficient numbers of other PRC nationals, which you might be trying to do, will have benefits for the survival of those animals. As far as boycotting Japanese products, that's not something I would do, but that's your choice. Referring to your Point 3, in general I wish that some other PRC citizens would "gain more credibility before telling other what to do".
2) You yourself have said in many other posts that the US has no business in PRC's backyard (ie. EEZ, or even South China Sea), and that this area is PRC's responsibility. If you apply such logic, then why would NZ not focus on its own backyard first? Once your house is tidy, then you can sweep the street in front. Hypothetically, would you accept US warships patrolling PRC's EEZ on fisheries protection tasks, even if these were ostensibly focused against other nations? I would think not. And as I said before, the PLAN would not be welcome to export a proxy war to the Southern Ocean, nor would such an action an admission of NZ somehow being an accomplice of whale extermination. Additionally, you might not be aware that the PRC voted against a zero-catch for the 1986 whaling moratorium.
3) For all their failings and faults (and yes, there are many) the ex-imperial powers have created a system that has brought prosperity, global trade, and relative stability to many throughout the world. The PRC itself has benefited from this very system, which you know very well if you allow yourself a moment of reflection.
It is true that some in NZ have discriminatory attitudes to Chinese, and that is unfortunate. PRC Chinese make the single biggest recent East Asian immigrant group in NZ, and some local-born people (including earlier immigrants from HK and Guangdong) have negative attitudes towards them. A lot of it is that they conflate Chinese individuals with the CCP, whom the majority outside of the PRC simply do not trust. This is an unfortunate fact: that the CCP has an international image problem, and that this sometimes makes it harder for individuals who happen to be from the PRC. Perhaps if the CCP works on that image, then it might make life easier for Chinese individuals. Adopting a more diplomatic approach to its immediate neighbours might be a good start.
Sincerely,
南瓜
John Chan
@南瓜,
1. You keep on telling others what to do and refusing to accept other’s constructive criticism, it is a trait of either American Exceptionalism or Japanese Fascism; neither of them have any creditability.
2. You are working hard at diverting the discussion away from on how to stop the greedy Japanese factory whaling that is endangering the whale; it seems you are conducting a proxy war on behalf of the Japanese to white wash their crimes against whales; yet you insist that NZ is above the par of dirty global politics; your claim does not match your action, it is puzzling behaviour of a NZer that is quite different what the NZ PM demonstrates.
3. Protect the whales is the responsibility of all human beings; if NZ fails its responsibility to protect the whales on behalf of humanity due to its opaque reasons, all human beings have the right to question NZ why, regardless the political ideology he believes. You on behalf of NZ is determined to stop others from poking the ugly truth revealed by the Greenpeace, is there something the NZ want to hide?
4. Sorry I cannot accept your defence for the bellicose warmongers and the financial terrorist of the West, that have been bombing and killing on human beings, jobs, life savings, societies, … since WWII on fictitious narratives; accepting such distorted reasoning is just not fair to all those millions killed, maimed and harmed by the West.
6. NZ government accepts those new immigrants after scrutiny; NZers should accept them with open mind. Casting a suspicious eye on the new arrivals because of their different culture is unwarranted. BTW you should not let Anglo’s snobbish caste social culture pollute a new land that is far away from the corrupted old world in a far corner of this planet.
Tom F
@Nangua
You have hit the nail on the head Nangua, that is most Chinese expats, and HK Chinese do NOT trust CCP China. There has even been report of CCP spies operating in NZ universities. Spying on your own citizens? That is a sure sign the CCP considers its own citizen a bigger threat than foreign adversaries.
John Chan
@Tom F,
I have never seen such silly comments like yours by mixing national security with naivety (trust in your word). Can you tell me what the responsibilities of FBI, CIA, MI5, MI6, …? And can you tell me which nation does not have security apparatus to spy on its own citizens?
Americans are always abusive, unmanned drones are flooding American sky, they are being used by the police to violate every aspect of citizens’ privacy, from obscene scanning images to voice spoofing; the way the authorities spying on their citizens in the West is beyond imagination.
The biggest human rights violators in the world are those nations they called themselves western democracies.
南瓜
Dear Mr. Chan
Sorry, I forgot to add one thing:
The PRC is NOT a "benefactor" of NZ, it's a trading partner. Make sure that you understand the difference very clearly; it's important.
Sincerely,
南瓜
John Chan
@南瓜,
China’s economy growth did added substantial benefits to the NZ’s economic that NZ will not get from its traditional trading partners, why is it inappropriate to call China a benefactor of NZ? Are you viewing the term with racist lens?
JohnX
@Nangua,
I believe that you wrote a well written argument supporting the NZ position.
Though, the main reason that NZers are unsure of Chinese immigration is that they remember thier history. In 1835-45, there were a small number of Pakeha and a treaty was signed between the local inhabitants (Maori) and the new people (Europeans/Pakeha). The English Government was imperialistic and forced control over the new immigrants regardless of what nationality they were. It was thier ethnicity that they said allowed them to do so. They were Pakehas and all Pakehas are subservient to the English Crown in NZ.
Nowadays there are a number of Chinese immigrants and an Imperialistic Chinese nation who believes that all ethnic Chinese regardless of national origin are subserviant to China. Thus the question exists, will China intefere in NZ? Many of the population are unsure and therefore do have a problem with the Government allowing mass immigration from Asia, especially those who are Chinese immigrants. They also have a concern as to the Government support of Chinese imports as it impacts thier production.
Its the uncertainty regarding Chinese Government interests in NZ, not ethnic Chinese who are not an issue as 2nd and 3rd Generation Chinese NZers are not a problem for NZ, only recent immigrants who can provide an excuse for China to push its Imperialism. Its also the question of numbers as by the 1860s there were the Maori wars in NZ caused mainly by an increased immigration policy and recent immigrants who had no understanding of the original inhabitants an their concerns.
A repeat of history and the violence it creates is a concern for some NZers. (So I understand it)
John Chan
@JohnX,
One of the reasons the West has lost creditability is that they manufacture consensus and fabricate reality out of thin air for their insidious purpose. The West labels China imperialism without supporting facts, all the West can go by is their conjecture fueled by their western supremacist paranoia.
The West’s, particular the USA, imperialism is simply a fact, they are evidence all over the world, military bases in majority nations of the world, bombing and killing all over the world on fictitious narratives, and coercing other nations to surrender their nations’ financial independence, etc. Any actions that an imperialist can employ, you name it they got it. In contrast China does not do any of that harmful imperialist behaviour.
The West knows they cannot argue on facts, so they resort to fabrication reality and manufacturing consensus, they are better than their teacher Joseph Goebbels.
JohnX, you are walking on a dangerous path of provoking racial conflict like what has happened in Yugoslavia, Rwanda, etc. by spreading fabricated racial hatred rhetoric. You soon will be a qualified indictable candidate by the ICC for crime against humanity if you continue your current moronic rant.
南瓜
Dear Mr. Chan
It's not about racism. Don't play the racism card — that's just cheap.
It's because benefactor (恩公; 捐款者; 再生父母) is not the right word to describe a relationship that is supposed to be mutually beneficial. Benefactor implies that the traffic is more or less one-way — that China has beatifically benefitted NZ, but not the other way around. Trading partner (贸易伙伴) does not have that master-servant superior-inferior implication. Does this make sense to you?
Sincerely,
南瓜
南瓜
Dear Mr. Chan
Again, thank you for your comments. Allow me to address the 5 points you have raised above:
1) I am neither an American Exceptionalist nor a Japanese Fascist, nor do I represent them or their views. As an individual, I certainly do accept constructive criticism, and in fact have conceded that the Western imperial powers did a fair number of "bad things" in the past. However, I see no concessions towards anything in any of your arguments on this site, which I have been reading for some time. I do not know whether your views represent PRC Exceptionalism or not; others may have an opinion on that.
2) Again, I state that involving PLAN in a proxy war exported to international waters is not a good solution to Japanese whaling. This is not an anti-PRC argument, nor does it reflect any kind of endorsement of Japanese whaling. The PRC is not a neutral party in this due to historical reasons, so the possibility of sparking conflict by sinking a Japanese factory ship would high. If there was to be a whaling patrol in international waters, better to make it a mediated multinational effort, like the Somali anti-piracy patrols of the last couple of years, in which the PLAN has taken part as a team member. There are also other methods of applying pressure. How about a boycott of Japanese products, for example, combined with a clear statement by the PRC government against Japanese whaling? Or is that not agressive enough for PRC ultra-nationalists?
Incidentally, John Key does not represent the opinions of all NZers, nor do I represent him or his views on this forum. That's the beauty of democracy and free society – freedom to diverge in opinion.
3) Protecting the whales is indeed the responsibility of all human beings. Thus, why did the PRC government vote, WITH JAPAN, AGAINST the 1986 zero-commercial-catch moratorium (which is the current legislation concerning whaling)? This was something that the NZ government voting FOR. How, in that case, was the PRC government doing its duty to protect whales? Additionally, I am not arguing for hiding any information given by Greenpeace, so I'm not sure where you got that argument from.
4) I accept that you have difficulty with some aspects of Western history, just as I do, and you will note that many in the West are unhappy with the way the financial and global trade system operates (which the PRC has been able to use to its advantage by manipulating the RMB). Nonetheless, everyone has made mistakes in this world. "Let him among you who is without sin cast the first stone." If you choose to bring up WW2, you will note that many of those killed were Westerners themselves, as well as Japanese (Pacific War). Must I also list the atrocities within China, both before and after the founding of the PRC?
As an aside, the term "West" is problematic. What is meant by it? Is it any more useful a term than, say, "Asian"?
5/6) Most NZers do accept immigrants with an open mind. Auckland has one of the highest diversity indices among world cities, precisely because of this, and, 99.9% of the time, everyone lives together in peace. Negative attitudes among a minority of local-born people towards immigrants and visitors you'll find everywhere; the PRC is no different in this respect. Additionally, a class culture is not a unique feature of Anglo culture — the most cursory of glances at Chinese (and anyone elses') history will tell you that. Nor has the Socialist Revolution changed this to a great extent. As I mentioned previously, it is the PRC government's international image problem that has caused some negative perceptions of recent Mainland immigrants.
Anyway, Mr. Chan, I do hope that you've had a Happy New Year, and eaten some tasty dumplings!
Sincerely,
南瓜
John Chan
@南瓜,
I didn’t know you are that sensitive and disapprove other’s self-righteous opinion; through your comments, you couldn’t care less about China’s sensitivity and insist on your self-righteous opinion regarding China must be taken as truth, such as twisting China’s offer into PLAN warships conducting proxy war around NZ, banishing thousand years knowledge of Chinese TCM in a simple stroke, and smear China’s national creditability without hesitation.
Indeed China has a lot of problems, but at least it did not lecturing others on the moral high ground without looking in the mirror first.
Tom F
@John Chan 'protecting the whales is the responsibility of every human being'
Perhaps you will not object to 'protecting Chinese citizen' from CCP control and exploitation is also the responsibility of all free citizens of the world, and that is why CCP China is targeted as the world antagonist.
John Chan
@Tom F,
Why are you limiting your target of attack to CCP only? How about the control and exploitation that GOP, Democrats, Conservatives, Labor Party, and the political parties in all other nations exerting on their citizens?
Suppressing different opinions is behaviour of tyranny; that is why GOP, Democrats, Conservatives, etc. are target as the world tyrants.
papa john
Well said, Nangua. I personally told John Chan and many of Chinese here not eating shark-fin soup, ivory products, tiger penises, bear bile, rhino horn and dog meat. For them, pizza is much better instead of those but it seems they are arrogantly not listening. Now, they want to take over Japanese islands of Senkakus to hunt sharks.
John Chan
@papa john,
You are wrong, Chinese do not hunt sharks, it is the other nations’ people hunting sharks cruelly in order to profit from Chinese shark-fin soup. It was a good habit for not to be wasteful, but it is abused by the other people and becoming an punch bag by the insidious westerners.
It is just the same old Western bashing China campaign blaming everything on China. The real responsibility of reining those rouge fishermen lies on the nations of those fishermen hunting sharks irresponsibly.
Pizza is laden with toxic synthetic oil and meats, American’s awkward body shape is the result of consuming pizza, burger, hotdog, etc. junk food.
John Chan
The author has forgotten to ask one question that is important to the humanity; the question is what New Zealand can do to protect the whales from being hunted by the Japanese excessively and causing human being on the danger to lose one of our related species.
China as a responsible member of the international community is willing to cooperate with New Zealand on works to protect a species that is a family of Mammals, whales, which is hunted by the Japanese excessively for other than greed with no other purposes. Whale meat is not even a common item in Japanese diet.
Japanese whale hunting must be condemned and stopped; China can provide maritime patrol ships and personnel to help New Zealand to stop Japanese idiotic and moronic whale hunting activity.
Tom F
I could be wrong but I recall that the area in question (where Whale hunting occurs), is being claimed by Australia currently, formal recognition require numbers and I thought China is one of many countries objecting to Australia'a claim. Australia has also threatened the Japanese whaling fleet with legal action, though that shall remain a threat until such time as the legal status of Australia's claim is finalised. So don't blame NZ, look further north JC.