NZDF General discussion thread

Brucedog

Member
So pointing out the bleeding obvious is against the rules? It's not political rubbish, it's FACT. The political leanings of your country go directly to the heart of your pathetic defence spending. Don't blame me if you can't handle the truth. The ALP are lefterd nutjobs but they still fund the ADF.

I noticed you didn't try and refute any of my claims.
 

Brucedog

Member
The politicians control defence spending and policy.

There are also rules against "fantasy fleets". Suggesting the RNZN is going to get 4 Hunter class frigates is definitely a fantasy.
 

ngatimozart

Super Moderator
Staff member
Verified Defense Pro
So pointing out the bleeding obvious is against the rules? It's not political rubbish, it's FACT. The political leanings of your country go directly to the heart of your pathetic defence spending. Don't blame me if you can't handle the truth. The ALP are lefterd nutjobs but they still fund the ADF.

I noticed you didn't try and refute any of my claims.
THERE'S NO FUTURE IN PICKING FIGHTS WITH MODERATORS. ANY FURTHER OUTBURSTS LIKE THIS WILL RESULT IN SANCTIONS FROM THE MODERATOR TEAM .
 

Rob c

Active Member
So pointing out the bleeding obvious is against the rules? It's not political rubbish, it's FACT. The political leanings of your country go directly to the heart of your pathetic defence spending. Don't blame me if you can't handle the truth. The ALP are lefterd nutjobs but they still fund the ADF.

I noticed you didn't try and refute any of my claims.
I would point out that the last time defence spending was above 1.5% GDP for any length of time was during the David Lange government in the 1980"s. Underspending on defence is a fact of life whether left or right wing in NZ and we all know it and in the most part disagree.
 

ngatimozart

Super Moderator
Staff member
Verified Defense Pro
I would point out that the last time defence spending was above 1.5% GDP for any length of time was during the David Lange government in the 1980"s. Underspending on defence is a fact of life whether left or right wing in NZ and we all know it and in the most part disagree.
I am reasonably sure that defence spending was around 2% GDP until Ruth Richardson's mother of all budgets in 1991 when defence spending was cut by 26%. So it's been SOP for NZ governments to run NZDF on minimal capabilities since then.
 

ngatimozart

Super Moderator
Staff member
Verified Defense Pro
Here's an view of Dr Wayne Mapp's take on the Government's defense policy challenges and opportunities in uncertain times.
Ah yes read that. Not the brightest boy in the city is Wayno. The B787 is a composite material aircraft, carbon fibre or similar, so it won't take kindly to having large holes cut in for cargo doors. Also Air NZ would be loathe to let any of those go, because they are, from memory, 25% cheaper to operate than the B777-200ER. It makes no financial sense for them.

With regard to the Harry de Wolf AOPV, I do like them and I believe that they would meet the NZ criteria for a SOPV, but Wayno misses the point. They will be required for more than monitoring ice flows, toothfish and the meanderings of whales, orca and seals. They will also be required to monitor increased state and non state activities in the waters surrounding the continent and will most likely be required to enforce the provisions of the Antarctic Treaty and any Accords.

He still has his attitude that we don't need to pay attention to or be concerned about anything that happens outside the South Pacific. Unfortunately Wayno sticking your head in the sand and hope that the bully and terror from the north goes away doesn't work. That attitude also really annoys the hell out of our one ally and friends, who rightly expect that we pull our weight instead of bludging off them. Maybe that's why Kiwis living in Australia get such a stink deal, because we shat on them defence wise in the late 1990s.
 

MrConservative

Super Moderator
Staff member
Here's an view of Dr Wayne Mapp's take on the Government's defense policy challenges and opportunities in uncertain times.
"Having a Defence Force that is primarily focused on New Zealand’s obligations within the South Pacific will make this easier. New Zealand need not be drawn into every flash point in the North Pacific."

Sorry Wayne. We will not get to choose. It is no longer 2008. The indecisive fence sitting approach era that you favour is over. I have always got the impression that in Wayne's World of passive incrementalism we can always keep defence spending at around 1% of GDP.

The RNZAF should take the opportunity to replace the B757 with aircraft that are both more modern and have much longer range. Air New Zealand will be disposing of all of its B777-200s. It would not be surprising if B787s also come onto the market. These latter aircraft would be particularly suitable for the RNZAF.

The 772 is much cheaper but both hold the same in the lower hold. Boeing haven't fully taken the plunge on the B789 Freighter which a spin off QC / Combi would need to be based on. Still years away as they will have to work out how to do it.
 

MrConservative

Super Moderator
Staff member
Unfortunately Wayno sticking your head in the sand and hope that the bully and terror from the north goes away doesn't work.
But Wayno thinks the PRC are the Kiwi pathway to riches and all we have to do is be very nice and don't rock the boat.

If he took his views beyond the little sandpit that is Kiwi Defence commentary and into a more international audience he would have his quaint views from the geo-strategic past (Pre 2008) completely, though politely savaged. That said he was a very good commercial law academic. He should use his retirement to write on his strengths.
 

ngatimozart

Super Moderator
Staff member
Verified Defense Pro
But Wayno thinks the PRC are the Kiwi pathway to riches and all we have to do is be very nice and don't rock the boat.
Unfortunately he's not the only one. There are still quite a few of those who inhabit the corridors of power and influence that is the cesspool of Wellington.
 

ngatimozart

Super Moderator
Staff member
Verified Defense Pro
One positive outcome of the Coronavirus in NZ has been an upsurge in job applications in the Defense Force, as reported here.

Just means that they have a larger talent pool to pick and choose from. Which I suppose is good in one aspect.
 

ngatimozart

Super Moderator
Staff member
Verified Defense Pro
The Australian government have reappraised the strategic situation and outlook for the region, resulting in a realignment of its forces to face the main threat in the region which is an aggressive PRC Home : Strategic Update 2020 : Department of Defence To this end it is funneling funds towards specific capabilities and assets to ensure that it is able to respond to any threats to Australia.

It is my opinion that NZ needs to undertake a similar exercise and to realistically assess the threat that the PRC brings to NZ and the region. In both Australia's and NZ's cases it's not just the PRC that is a threat, but also dysfunction in other states within the region caused by by the COVID-19 pandemic and the subsequent economic depression. However ultimately the PRC is the main threat because it will take advantage of other states misery. We, as in the NZG, can no longer keep our heads stuck in the sand or up the collective anal orifice ignoring the geostrategic and geopolitical situation.

Some Kiwi pollies and more than a few bureaucrats in MFAT are scared of offending the PRC, but I read somewhere (trying to find reference) that 23% of NZ exports went to the PRC vs 32% of Australian exports going to the PRC. So yes if / when the PRC take offence at something we said / did, then we are going to take a hit but it's not going to be the end of the world. We recovered when we lost our pommy markets when they joined the EEC in 1973.

Another point and far more important one is that FVEY is a cornerstone of our security. Our continued participation in it is under threat because of the PRC / CCP penetration of NZ political and economic institutions NZ still plotting place in China's Belt and Road. This is quite a serious concern and the situation needs to rectified quickly. One way would be to change the law around who can qualify to become a MP, and restrict foreign nationals activities in political parties.

The NZG would have to consider seriously resourcing NZDF to a level where it's FOC across all domains and not just have minimal capabilities as the current government policies provide. This would have to include an ACF and some form of Over The Horizon Radar capability (OTHR); JORN comes to mind with someone suggesting on one of the threads that we look at it. A JORN asset looking north and north east into the Pacific would be a worthwhile investment.

Whether or not, after the upcoming election, the next government will decide to
undertake a defence and security reassessment of the geostrategic and geopolitical situation of the Asia Pacific region remains to be seen.
 

JohnJT

Member
NZ has to stay in "five eyes" because if they left or were ejected it would become "four eyes" and that sounds too much like a nerd with glasses;)

But seriously, I agree that NZ should follow Australia's lead and take a serious look at it's defense capability in the face of Chinese expansion into the pacific.
 

Gibbo

Active Member
The Australian government have reappraised the strategic situation and outlook for the region, resulting in a realignment of its forces to face the main threat in the region which is an aggressive PRC Home : Strategic Update 2020 : Department of Defence To this end it is funneling funds towards specific capabilities and assets to ensure that it is able to respond to any threats to Australia.

It is my opinion that NZ needs to undertake a similar exercise and to realistically assess the threat that the PRC brings to NZ and the region. In both Australia's and NZ's cases it's not just the PRC that is a threat, but also dysfunction in other states within the region caused by by the COVID-19 pandemic and the subsequent economic depression. However ultimately the PRC is the main threat because it will take advantage of other states misery. We, as in the NZG, can no longer keep our heads stuck in the sand or up the collective anal orifice ignoring the geostrategic and geopolitical situation.

Some Kiwi pollies and more than a few bureaucrats in MFAT are scared of offending the PRC, but I read somewhere (trying to find reference) that 23% of NZ exports went to the PRC vs 32% of Australian exports going to the PRC. So yes if / when the PRC take offence at something we said / did, then we are going to take a hit but it's not going to be the end of the world. We recovered when we lost our pommy markets when they joined the EEC in 1973.

Another point and far more important one is that FVEY is a cornerstone of our security. Our continued participation in it is under threat because of the PRC / CCP penetration of NZ political and economic institutions NZ still plotting place in China's Belt and Road. This is quite a serious concern and the situation needs to rectified quickly. One way would be to change the law around who can qualify to become a MP, and restrict foreign nationals activities in political parties.

The NZG would have to consider seriously resourcing NZDF to a level where it's FOC across all domains and not just have minimal capabilities as the current government policies provide. This would have to include an ACF and some form of Over The Horizon Radar capability (OTHR); JORN comes to mind with someone suggesting on one of the threads that we look at it. A JORN asset looking north and north east into the Pacific would be a worthwhile investment.

Whether or not, after the upcoming election, the next government will decide to
undertake a defence and security reassessment of the geostrategic and geopolitical situation of the Asia Pacific region remains to be seen.
You're absolutely right NgatiM and the recent issues in Hong Kong will be just starting to slowly turn the wheel of public perception in NZ...but there's a long road ahead that we may not have the luxury of time to address. I'm sure there must be a fair bit of closed door discussion going on between FVEY partners and NZ will very definitely be privy to this. I bet the Oz Govt are quietly making some noise in Wgtn corridors of power... NZ's response could either make or break the trans-Tasman relationship. Won't get political but I suspect that until a Govt can be formed in NZ's MMP environment with a clear majority then there's unlikely to be any significant change in policy.
 

Rob c

Active Member
The biggest problem in NZ is the complete lack of sensible and logical debate on defence and the jurno's preference for reporting on anti defence outbursts and not questioning some of the emotive rubbish served up as reason by the anti's. Talk to most pollies and you get the standard "I don't see a threat to NZ". Point out to them that no one can see into the future and no one scan see a threat in time to act on it and they suddenly find it is urgent for them to talk to someone else or be somewhere else. We need a large increase in logical, sensible debate based on facts and widely available to the public across a wide range of media including social media.
 
I'm finding local media silence to our closest neighbour and allys recent announcements re defence spending frustrating. Morrisons comparing 2020 indo-pacific to 1930s Europe is pretty accurate when you look at whats been happening recently (annexation of territories, wholesale detention of ethnic groups in labour camps, suppression of democracy, ongoing cyberattacks). And with the US's current leadership it seems Australia (and by implication NZ) is less likely to be able to count on US support.

Alarm and media hype about the cost (and it is a significant cost for our small nation) of merely replacing end of life platforms to maintain existing capability is as far a the conversation generally seems to go. What we should be talking about is increased or new capabiites in an increasingly unstable and unpredictable indo-pacific. New technologies and means of waging 'war' by potential adversaries mean we have to reassess our vulnerabilites, and desired roles and capabilitie sof NZDF and its partner agencies.

Incline is a good website: The All Singing All Dancing National Security Strategy Doesn't Exist
 
The NZG would have to consider seriously resourcing NZDF to a level where it's FOC across all domains and not just have minimal capabilities as the current government policies provide. This would have to include an ACF and some form of Over The Horizon Radar capability (OTHR); JORN comes to mind with someone suggesting on one of the threads that we look at it. A JORN asset looking north and north east into the Pacific would be a worthwhile investment.
I think there is something in the Australian document about investing billions in an undersea sensor network. Apart from the potentially prohiberative cost, this is something i would like to see in NZ and perhaps we could piggyback onto the Aust program- at least across our northern approaches.

In my mind and direct threat to NZ or NZ trade will be maritime -surface or subsuface. (or cyber- but thats another conversation). Beefing up ASuW/ASW capability would therefore be my priority (NZ ANZAC and P8 launched LRASM/JSM deterrence).
 
Top