NZDF General discussion thread

[ngatimozart]

I first read this article in Pacific Sentinel blog Pacific Sentinel and followed the link back to original source, the Institute for Defence Studies and Analyses in New Delhi Towards an Asia-Pacific Alliance | Institute for Defence Studies and Analyses It argues that the US is slowly pushing Asia - Pacific nations into a NATO type arrangement in order to deter Chinese expansionism and perceived aggression. Much as NATO did against the USSR and subsequent Warsaw Pact. The authors also suggested that in the long term, for this to work properly, eventually China would have to be included within the security sphere. This Asia - Pacific incarnation of NATO would include NZ and Australia and of course the US. No mention is made of Russia.

We had SEATO back in the 1950s and 1960s, which was an attempt to replicate NATO in SEA and the Pacific, to confront the scourge of communism in its Soviet form and its Chinese form. However SEATO didn't survive because of a lack of internal cohesion and common purpose within the group of treaty nations. Therefore one would have to ask, has that changed today some 40 or 50 years later? In NZs case we are keen to make defence committments as a matter of foreign policy, but our pollies don't have the moral fortitude or common sense, to backup their promises with adequate resourcing of NZDF, which is going to be the ones who have to carry out the committments. 50 years ago we had an air force and navy that could project NZ diplomacy and govt policy within the international arena, as well as meeting committments made by the NZG. No longer does that situation exist and a scion of SEATO, if it eventuates, is going to place a great deal of extra pressure on NZDF.

One can argue, relatively easily, that it would be in NZs best interest for such a security treaty structure to exist, but having said that, unless there is a 180 degree change in attitude by Kiwi pollies, and significantly greater access to resources and funding given to NZDF, then NZ entering such an agreement would, IMHO, not be in NZDFs best interest, because it wouldn't have the capability to meet the committments required of it, and that could do it irrepairable harm.

 

[RegR]

I see NZDF are going to a new multi terrain cam but also cannot help but notice we should have it just in time to pull out of Afganistan, strange considering this was the main driver behind it in the first place, and also Timor and Sollies. I understand its the way of the future but in this time of trying to save money we seem to be investing in a capability now that is most likely not going to be used to its fullest potential for a long period while we re-org from all our deployments, again alittle late to the party.

This will be a added expense in a time of 'shifting' funds that will need to replace alot of other ancillary DPM pattern related equipment (otherwise defeating the purpose if mixing old and new pattern) that could have been done on a as needed process waiting for the next big deployment to fully kit out NZDF which in all honesty could be a few years away now. For the few minor deployments that will be continueing even the old DPM/DDPM would suffice or you could just kit those few pers out fully easing the cost of a army/DF wide roll out(at this stage anyway).

Also seems pointless to me in having the new packs and webbing in a tan colour different to the uniform otherwise could'nt we have just made the uniform tan? If you are requireing the benefits of the new pattern on ops then surely you are requireing the use of your webbing, armour, weapon etc so should all be the same otherwise stands out that much more.

 

[Zach Z.]

I agree with what you're saying, let me see if I can get this thing back on track with a question.

I'm wondering something, what is the size and makeup of the NZDF as of 2012? Like what are their troop numbers, vehicle formations and makeup, aircraft type and numbers, ships and ship types, and what all does the NZDF do in its region and abroad?

A lot of this sounds like it's the question newby but I am new to this subject so please don't chop my head off.

 

[RubiconNZ]

I agree with what you're saying, let me see if I can get this thing back on track with a question.

I'm wondering something, what is the size and makeup of the NZDF as of 2012? Like what are their troop numbers, vehicle formations and makeup, aircraft type and numbers, ships and ship types, and what all does the NZDF do in its region and abroad?

A lot of this sounds like it's the question newby but I am new to this subject so please don't chop my head off.

In this case wikipedia is your friend:
[ame="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/New_Zealand_Defence_Force"]New Zealand Defence Force - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia[/ame]

That and the associated service wiki pages and home pages should cover all that you have asked.

 

[Zach Z.]

Thank you. But I don't honestly expect that Wikipedia would have all the answers. It never really does. I've learned to believe only what I hear and read from a primary source. But then again, I can use the sources Wikipedia cites.

 

[CJohn]

From RegR

I see NZDF are going to a new multi terrain cam but also cannot help but notice we should have it just in time to pull out of Afganistan, strange considering this was the main driver behind it in the first place, and also Timor and Sollies.

The NZDF stated operational experience in Afghanistan had proven the need for a more transitional camoflage uniform, coupled with the desire for a uniforn that would work well in an urban environment and distiguish NZ service personnal from others.
The new multi terrain pattern was found to work well in forest, open country tussock, sandy and urban terrain. Both current DPM and DDPM patterns work well in limited environments, but not in urban terrain.

A 'one size fits all' univeral camoflage uniform pattern is probably not possible, but if the new pattern performs better overall then thats a good move I would think.

 

[Lucasnz]

I see that both the Advanced Pilot Training Aircraft and a ROI for the ANZAC Frigate System Upgrade (FSU) are on the GETS site (Government Tenders). Does anyone have access to those sites as the docs are not on the MOD website.

 

[gf0012-aust]

The new multi terrain pattern was found to work well in forest, open country tussock, sandy and urban terrain. Both current DPM and DDPM patterns work well in limited environments, but not in urban terrain.

A 'one size fits all' univeral camoflage uniform pattern is probably not possible, but if the new pattern performs better overall then thats a good move I would think.

You can pick the Kiwi officers from a mile off out at ADF HQJOC. They're basically wearing euro cams and stand out like dogs balls......

 

[RegR]

From RegR

The NZDF stated operational experience in Afghanistan had proven the need for a more transitional camoflage uniform, coupled with the desire for a uniforn that would work well in an urban environment and distiguish NZ service personnal from others.
The new multi terrain pattern was found to work well in forest, open country tussock, sandy and urban terrain. Both current DPM and DDPM patterns work well in limited environments, but not in urban terrain.

A 'one size fits all' univeral camoflage uniform pattern is probably not possible, but if the new pattern performs better overall then thats a good move I would think.

Oh I agree about the functionality and improved camouflage this new uniform will afford our troops just saying that at this point in time we don't actually need a mass roll out across the entire NZDF as we are now not needing them in our major deployments for which they were required urgently, therefore the costs associated with a full replacement could be drip fed on a more 'as required' basis, which now could/should not be for awhile while we get back to basics and take a breath.

Can't quite remember the total costs per soldier to fully equip but it is definately in the thousands for just uniforms, smocks, wet weathers, warm gears etc and also the new service dress so it will definately add up over the course of 10,000+ defence staff not helped by the fact the civilian provider for NZDF adds quite a mark up. Just seems to me that there is now not the rush there was to equip with these new uniforms/packs/equipment etc straight away for basic, national and regional ops as we have finished with most of our major ops that needed them in the first place.

Even though we have a small defence force comparitively we also have a recently restricted defence budget, and I think there could be better things to fund for right now. For the short to medium term the current D/DPMs are still suitable(quite suitable actually) for the likes of Waiouru, the pacific, Sinai, Antarctica and downtown Wellington. Sometimes for the majority of on going ops, exchanges, disaster releif and round New Zealand work being detected is not the issue and being seen/identified is the actually an advantage.

I can see defence is just trying to avoid a mix n match rag tag looking army over a period of time and eventually consolidate into a 1 for all situation so can't really blame them.

 

[ngatimozart]

On 27th December 2012 the new Japanese Prime Minister, Shinzo Abe, published an op-ed titled "Asia’s Democratic Security Diamond" Asia In this he lays out what he sees as Japans best security option for dealing with Chinas increased assertivness. He has suggested a "security diamond" based on Japan, India, Hawaii and Australia. Further to this he wants Britain and France to engage in the area. Britain through the FPDA and France through it's Pacifc Armed Forces based in Tahiti. He suggests that Japan become involved with the FPDA as a group and with it's nations individually in multilateral small defence exercises. This includes the French Pacific Contingent.

Abe has good support at home and I believe a good chance of making this policy. He also wants to amend the Constitution so that a Japanese Army, Navy and Air Force can be created, andutilised as such, instead of the current Self Defence Forces which are, for all intents and purposes, de facto Army, Navy and Air Forces. from what I understand be has to get a 67% vote in the Diet for this to be passed and he is trying to have that also changed to a simple 50% majority vote.

If Abes new policy goes through there will be extra demands and taskings placed on NZDF by the NZG if it accepts Abes proposals. I would think the Australians would accept because they have been looking at closer defence relationships with the Japanese and they would also have some expectation of NZ to follow suit. What concerns me is the extra expenses that would be incurred by NZDF and the current NZG would not fund it but demand that NZDF fullfill the new tasking(s) regardless.

 

[ASSAIL]

Abe's policies certainly bode well for any possible cooperation with the future Submarine back half and may lead to even greater commonality.

I'm a big fan of Japanese marine engineering and construction haveing operated 3 Japanese built small ships for decades. Reliability is outstanding.

 

[John Newman]

On 27th December 2012 the new Japanese Prime Minister, Shinzo Abe, published an op-ed titled "Asia’s Democratic Security Diamond" Asia In this he lays out what he sees as Japans best security option for dealing with Chinas increased assertivness. He has suggested a "security diamond" based on Japan, India, Hawaii and Australia. Further to this he wants Britain and France to engage in the area. Britain through the FPDA and France through it's Pacifc Armed Forces based in Tahiti. He suggests that Japan become involved with the FPDA as a group and with it's nations individually in multilateral small defence exercises. This includes the French Pacific Contingent.

Abe has good support at home and I believe a good chance of making this policy. He also wants to amend the Constitution so that a Japanese Army, Navy and Air Force can be created, andutilised as such, instead of the current Self Defence Forces which are, for all intents and purposes, de facto Army, Navy and Air Forces. from what I understand be has to get a 67% vote in the Diet for this to be passed and he is trying to have that also changed to a simple 50% majority vote.

If Abes new policy goes through there will be extra demands and taskings placed on NZDF by the NZG if it accepts Abes proposals. I would think the Australians would accept because they have been looking at closer defence relationships with the Japanese and they would also have some expectation of NZ to follow suit. What concerns me is the extra expenses that would be incurred by NZDF and the current NZG would not fund it but demand that NZDF fullfill the new tasking(s) regardless.

Its certainly a rather bold statement being made by the Japanese PM.

I wonder if its more for "internal" consumption to show the Japanese people that they are being serious about issues with China regarding the disputed territories, etc.

Getting all the Countries mentioned would certainly be a big task, wonder if there has been any "back room" discussions prior to making those statements?

Has there been response by anyone yet to his statement?

As Assail said, be good for Australia, possible co-operation with the future submarine, gaining access to Japanese technology.

And yes, as you said, be interesting to see if the NZG would come up with the extra dollars too.

 

[MrConservative]

And yes, as you said, be interesting to see if the NZG would come up with the extra dollars too.

I think that NZ would first be waiting to see if firstly Abe can wrestle control of the upper house of the Diet later this year for his Jimento faction and its allies - only then will we know if he has the mettle or political staying power to push through any of his agenda.

His political message is for both domestic and chinese consumption. Message to China - is don't think we are as passive or as geo-politically disengaged as we look and the message to the Nihonjin - is wake up folks the world has changed. He must also be seen to reign in people like Shintaro Ishihara and Shuzuko Kamei from the numerous anti-TPP / pro JAg lobbies who are backward looking, isolationist who appeal to an older and less internationalist demographic. These minor party leaders need to be politically neutralised or their factional agenda's will derail any of Abe policy directions and/or his government.

NZ will not move too far from soothing words of welcome support towards Japans move to joining any western pacific liberal democracy arrangement without some concessions over the Ag trade access into Japan. Whether it be via a bilateral or that Japan passes muster and gives something meaningful towards the TPP is unknown - however if we are encouraged to spend more - we wont budge without earning more via trade or spend more on defence without the promise of liberalised trade. The NZ trade relationship with China (inc FTA) dwarfs Japans and that core fact will color everything that will lead though to defence commitments and spending.

Thus my call is that NZ will be looking for buy in from Japan into the Club not just in Defence but significantly in Trade (NZ like Japan has traditionally been post 1950 more trade centric in its foreign affairs than defence centric. The key difference is that since the mid 1980's NZ (and Australia) has been a global activist on free trade whereas Japan, especially its powerful Ag lobby has munted any move. Money or increases from NZ to cope with the widening of its defence scope and capability to Northern Asia will not happen unless Japan (and Korea to a certain extent) concede on trade access issues.

 

[chis73]

Apologies for changing the topic.

This may be of interest to some of you: the latest formal review of the MOD by the State Services Commission. I don't think a link has been posted here before. Not the greatest report card - "much work to do" seems the general theme. Provides a useful insight into the inner workings though.

Chis73

 

[ngatimozart]

I was have a nose on Australian Defence Magazines website today and it had a headline stating that NZDF had cancelled the Steyr tender. So I went to have a look but can't get at it because it's subscribers only. A Google search only turned up a Janes Defence Weekly story and tweet. The tweet states "A tender to provide 3,000 upgraded Steyr AUG 5.56mm assault rifles to New Zealand has been cancelled" and can't get at story because don't subscribe. Anybody able to verify this?

 

[MrConservative]

AG slams management of NZDF Civvy St Scheme

Lynne Provost the Auditor General has given the NZDF a right kicking in her review of the Civilianisation of the Forces.

Auditor-General's overview — Office of the Auditor-General New Zealand

You cannot be a modern defence force on the cheap - that is the statement I am looking for that is missing from the political discourse. It cannot be treated as a business case type proposition - because when that happens common sense drowns in the energy taken up with fiddling with the numbers to make less seems more.

 

[ngatimozart]

Lynne Provost the Auditor General has given the NZDF a right kicking in her review of the Civilianisation of the Forces.

Auditor-General's overview — Office of the Auditor-General New Zealand

You cannot be a modern defence force on the cheap - that is the statement I am looking for that is missing from the political discourse. It cannot be treated as a business case type proposition - because when that happens common sense drowns in the energy taken up with fiddling with the numbers to make less seems more.

You know that and I know that, but the pollies can't figure that out - it's too complicated for them. This discussion will continue to be absent from the political discourse because the two major political parties do not want a political discourse upon defence. There is an opinion piece in this mornings SMH comparing the ADF cuts to NZDF and states that NZDF is good for natural disasters SFs etc., but no good for wars because it's funding is 40% of GDP less than Australia. NZ has decided that it doesn't need to spend a lot on defence when it has the bulk of Australia to defend it. As a Kiwi it pains me to think I have to agree with that Australian journo. ADF Headed For Crisis

 

[ngatimozart]

Something else for the secret squirrels and the people in Bulls**t Castle to be concerned about. Remember when the late King of Tonga died in Hong Kong, it was the PRC Govt that paid for the transport of his remains back to the Kingdom. Now the sole local airline run and owned by a kiwi company has withdrwan because the Kingdom has be gifted some passenger aircraft by the PRC, a 50 seat (MA-60) and a 17 seat (Y12) aircraft plus flight training facilities and an engineering facility Chinese plane forces NZ airline out of Tonga. The Kingdom are sponsoring an airline to utilise these facilities and aircraft. The kiwi company, Chatham Airways has pulled out of Tonga because it will not be able to compete against the new airline Press Release on Uncertain future causes Chathams to withdraw scheduled Air Services from Tonga. It seems apparent that the PRC is gaining a foothold in the Kingdom of Tonga and I would think that this is more than just a foothold.

On 9th/01/2013 Pacific Sentinel published a story headlined News Story: Chinese paper advises PLA Navy to build overseas military bases with a very nice map of where the Chinese article suggests that these bases be. One is Port Moresby in PNG. So it appears that the PRC is making a push into the South Pacific albeit a soft one at the moment, but Tonga is close to NZ in more ways than one so the pollies in Wellington should start waking their ideas up. I do take the Chinese paper story with a dose of salt but there is a nationalistic push on in China at the moment and such ideas can take hold and become policy. Also it has been noted that some of the more hawkish officers of the PLA have been unmuzzled in recent weeks and they are having their musings and ideas published and broadcast. Little things but lots of little things can add up to be big things.

 

[ngatimozart]

Lynne Provost the Auditor General has given the NZDF a right kicking in her review of the Civilianisation of the Forces.

Auditor-General's overview — Office of the Auditor-General New Zealand

You cannot be a modern defence force on the cheap - that is the statement I am looking for that is missing from the political discourse. It cannot be treated as a business case type proposition - because when that happens common sense drowns in the energy taken up with fiddling with the numbers to make less seems more.

It appears that our Great Leader the Minister of Defence is dismissive of the report claiming it's old news. Defence minister plays down scathing report He also was reported in NZ Herald as saying that morale within defence has improved. Well I wonder what he has been smoking because comments I have seen posted elsewhere are saying the exact opposite and if anything more are becoming disenchanted with NZDF and leaving. Our idiot minister is not at all concerned about that now despite the fact that the numbers leaving are now having significant impacts upon NZDFs ability to do it's basic mission. The CDF admitted yesterday that NZDF is planning to reduce the size of the RNZN fleet. So whats going to be left? A Rhib with a .50 cal?

This has implications far and wide and when you have a Minister who is incompetent and doesn't care about his portfolio, plus a govt that is only focussed on making their mates richer, getting re-elected and a budget surplus regardless of the actual cost, then things such as defence are on the junk pile. To top it off Goff said that this govt had gutted NZDF and unfortunately he is right. I hate agreeing with Goff because I used to think he and Burton were the two most incompetent Ministers of Defence NZ ever had. However they have been supplanted by Coleman. It's not only him but also the senior officers and managers in NZDF who have created this mess. They are perceived as being political toadies and have forgotten their loyalty to the troops, airmen and sailors. Their loyalty now is to covering their arses, their political paymasters and bugger the rest. RIP NZDF.

The the implications are that NZDF will no longer be able to function properly as a integrated fighting force unilaterally or within an allied grouping. This has all been bought about by starvation of funds. NZ can afford a four frigate navy and an air combat wing plus funding NZDF at 2% GDP IF both the major political parties actually increased govt revenue through taxation increases, especialy for the wealthy, a capital gains tax and closed down the legal tax avoidance scams. Rant off.

 

[t68]

The the implications are that NZDF will no longer be able to function properly as a integrated fighting force unilaterally or within an allied grouping. This has all been bought about by starvation of funds. NZ can afford a four frigate navy and an air combat wing plus funding NZDF at 2% GDP IF both the major political parties actually increased govt revenue through taxation increases, especialy for the wealthy, a capital gains tax and closed down the legal tax avoidance scams. Rant off.

Well if your interested I believe the Spanish have 20 Eurofighter they want to get rid off, not exactly the type of aircraft the NZDF need, with their economy of late you might pick them up dirt cheap......