NZDF General discussion thread

Boagrius

Well-Known Member
I thought this was an interesting piece, and speaks to the radically changing strategic situation in the immediate region.


I must confess to being a little perplexed by the lack of urgency evident in projected NZ defence policy/spending going forward, especially compared to what is being canvassed in Aus. I would have thought NZ could, at the very least, play a key role in shoring up support among the Pacific island nations and exercising vital soft power in response to PRC/CCP ambitions in NZ's own backyard. Perhaps I am missing something here?
 

ngatimozart

Super Moderator
Staff member
Verified Defense Pro
I thought this was an interesting piece, and speaks to the radically changing strategic situation in the immediate region.

I must confess to being a little perplexed by the lack of urgency evident in projected NZ defence policy/spending going forward, especially compared to what is being canvassed in Aus. I would have thought NZ could, at the very least, play a key role in shoring up support among the Pacific island nations and exercising vital soft power in response to PRC/CCP ambitions in NZ's own backyard. Perhaps I am missing something here?
I watched it on Wednesday night I think and have been cogitating over it since. It is by Shirvan Neftchi , an Azerbaijani, who has an interest in history. The interesting thing about him is that he comments about subjects outside his own geographical area and he researches his topics. I searched out some info on him and this review is one of the better written pieces I found.

So since we have such a large continental shelf we'll have to invade Norfolk Island and New Caledonia to sure 100% ownership of and stop the pollution of aerial ping pong from the West Island. :p :D Well you know most of the regular Kiwi posters views on Kiwi pollies attitudes towards defence, so I won't repeat the obvious.

On a different matter.
Newsroom ran a story on Thursday, Tighter rules for sensitive exports within weeks that is pertinent to this discussion because it sources an Anne-Marie Brady paper, Holding a Pen in One Hand, Gripping a Gun in the Other, which is a follow up to her Magic Weapons paper. This paper looks at dual use technology and knowledge and NZ's weakness in legislation around it. She shows how much the PLA is involved with PRC educational institutions and overseas programs.

In 2017, a Chinese military company proudly announced production of an innovative cargo drone, marketed as suitable as an armed one-use military cargo plane which could drop off supplies in difficult mountainous terrain.1 China’s contested mountainous border with India would be one such location. The plane’s technology originated from a well-known New Zealand company that had once been owned by New Zealand taxpayers. The technology had been transferred in a deal that was endorsed by the 2008-2017 New Zealand National Party government. Praising the BAIC-Pacific Aerospace partnership in 2014, then Minister of Trade, Tim Groser, remarked—without any trace of irony—“Relationships like this demonstrate that we don’t just export dairy and lamb to China, but also our tech-nology.”2 New Zealand has indeed increasingly been exporting our innovative and sensitive tech-nology to China. As this paper outlines, some of these exchanges appear to breach our domestic laws and international commitments. The People’s Republic of China (PRC) is using civilian links with Western countries to access cutting-edge scientific expertise with military-end-use. China’s exploitation of civilian channels for military purposes raises national security, as well as reputational, ethical, and intellectual property risks for New Zealand. New Zealand’s experience of grappling with China’s covert military links may be relevant for other nations as they too re-assess their scientific, commercial, and educa-tional relations with the PRC.

Above is the abstract from the paper. And then there is this:

at200-hero-01.jpg


The AT200 developed from the PAC-750XL, China's AT200 Drone is Big Enough to Fit a Small Car Inside . Bet PAC don't get paid any royalties. I can't remember any NZ govt comments about it, but I think that some should be in order.
 

KiwiRob

Well-Known Member
The AT200 developed from the PAC-750XL, China's AT200 Drone is Big Enough to Fit a Small Car Inside . Bet PAC don't get paid any royalties. I can't remember any NZ govt comments about it, but I think that some should be in order.
PAC have licensed production to China, all this is is a remote operated 750XL, I would assume that they are receiving royalties for the basic aircraft but not for the modifications to make it remote operated.
 

Nighthawk.NZ

Active Member
PAC have licensed production to China, all this is is a remote operated 750XL, I would assume that they are receiving royalties for the basic aircraft but not for the modifications to make it remote operated.
Didn't they get into trouble a couple of years back because one of the aircraft ended up in North Korean hands... :rolleyes: not sure what the difference is? and why China is allowed it and North Ko... oh never mind trade deals... millions of dollars in trade deals... right... :oops:
 

John Fedup

The Bunker Group
With the Labour majority outcome in the recent election, I would be interested in NZ member opinions as to what this will mean for defence. Will there be any significant deviations for future requirements?
 

Redlands18

Well-Known Member
With the Labour majority outcome in the recent election, I would be interested in NZ member opinions as to what this will mean for defence. Will there be any significant deviations for future requirements?
Its no longer a Coalition Government and the deputy PM Winston Peters has lost his seat and wasn’t he pro Defence?
 

Shanesworld

Active Member
Its no longer a Coalition Government and the deputy PM Winston Peters has lost his seat and wasn’t he pro Defence?
Peters not so much. He had a history of throwing defence under the bus for his political gain. Ron Mark was good for defence and he was in Peters party. As far as I'm aware Labour doesn't have a defence spokesperson to assume the role after Iain Lees Galloway resign in ignominy recently.
 

Shanesworld

Active Member
With the Labour majority outcome in the recent election, I would be interested in NZ member opinions as to what this will mean for defence. Will there be any significant deviations for future requirements?
I would expect a reduction in funding and a far less focused plan going forward.
 

Redlands18

Well-Known Member
Peters not so much. He had a history of throwing defence under the bus for his political gain. Ron Mark was good for defence and he was in Peters party. As far as I'm aware Labour doesn't have a defence spokesperson to assume the role after Iain Lees Galloway resign in ignominy recently.
Sorry got Peters and Mark mixed up, either way can’t see this being a great result for Defence.
 

Lucasnz

Super Moderator
Staff member
Verified Defense Pro
Looking into the pretend crystal ball - Without the need for a coalition with the Greens generally I think the government will continue with the overall DCP19 plan. Part of my reason is that the loopy left in Labour during the Clark government are gone, and there is a broader consensus. Where I think we'll see some changes is renewed emphasis on consolidation of the RNZAF (Auckland goes). Movement of DNB will be off the cards (the move North was already canned pre-election but the dry dock is a different matter given there is a commercial rationale - potentially Wellington or Picton makes commercial sense).

In terms of the DCP for Navy the only significant decision is the Southern OPV which is not due for tender until 2023 - given this has already been delayed it probably won't be pushed back, For the airforce an off the shelf solution for the medium range MPA was signed off earlier this year and B727 and Sea Sprite tenders aren't due to 2024. The army Garrison and training support vehicles are due to Tender next year but most major items of expenditure are 3 + years down the road (OPV, Canterbury, LAV replacement). Overall a outside the Southern OPV and medium range MPA nothing in terms of capital equipment should affect the NZDF.

The challenge will be in maintaining the base line operating budget, given the increases that New Zealand First put through.
 

ngatimozart

Super Moderator
Staff member
Verified Defense Pro
Just to add for information and nothing else.

Last night the Greens leadership were talking up negotiations for the upcoming government and places in Cabinet, but they don't seem to understand that last night the rules changed. The new Ardern government doesn't need the Greens to govern and they could quite well be on the outside looking in. I think most of Labour's loopy left have migrated to the Greens because in their eyes Labour has become too centrist for them. Some of the left on social media are happy that Labour have won, but are decrying the fact that the Greens won't have any leverage over Labour to ensure that Labour will be "progressive enough" for those lefties. They believe that Ardern and Labour will sell their socialist comrades out and stick to the status quo safe middle ground.

Today Ardern said that she has spoken to the Green co-leadership by phone and that she will govern for everyone. But whether that translates into Cabinet seats for the Greens is a completely different story. She is in the position of forming a government on her own in 2 weeks and has already spoken to the Governor General. There are still special votes to be counted and the official results are due to be released at 2pm 6/11/20. Apparently over 50% of the votes were cast during early voting and at the moment the turn out is estimated to be in the region of 82%.

Wrt Defence I have no idea who will be the new Defence Minister and I cannot think offhand of anyone in the Labour caucus who could be good at the job. We'll just have to wait and see.
 

chis73

Active Member
Lucasnz, I'm a little less optimistic than you. I suspect we will quite possibly see a return to the default defence policy of "major party benign neglect" (to me, it doesn't matter much if it is Labour or National in sole power, you get the same). I guess we will get what has already been ordered (P-8s, Hercules, Bushmasters), but little else - for the next three years, and quite possibly longer. SOPV may well be downgraded in cost and capability (maybe another 2nd hand vessel). Mostly that will be due to the economic impacts of COVID - it will oh so easy to just ignore defence. Can't see any major base movements (too expensive). I actually despair for the frigate replacements - my gut feeling is that the forward planning & preparatory work will be left too late or simply not done (due to lack of interest from the politicians), and we'll be left with little to no options in the 2030s.

While I'm here, I'd like to publicly thank Ron Mark for his efforts as Defence Minister. He got more done in 3 years than all of the others (save perhaps Geoffrey Palmer with the ANZAC frigate purchase) did in more than thirty!
 

Gibbo

Active Member
....For the airforce an off the shelf solution for the medium range MPA was signed off earlier this year.....
I'm curious as to what you're referring to here, the EMAC project? Are you saying cabinet signed off the 'ok' to proceed with the project?
 

Lucasnz

Super Moderator
Staff member
Verified Defense Pro
I'm curious as to what you're referring to here, the EMAC project? Are you saying cabinet signed off the 'ok' to proceed with the project?
Sorry for the delay in replying. I have been trying to find the link that referenced the comment, as I read it passing (without success). I recall reading it and thinking surplus ATR-600 (as it was during COVID). It was pretty brief article and did not mention a aircraft type. I'll keep looking, but maybe I'm losing the plot (finally).
 

ngatimozart

Super Moderator
Staff member
Verified Defense Pro
Sorry for the delay in replying. I have been trying to find the link that referenced the comment, as I read it passing (without success). I recall reading it and thinking surplus ATR-600 (as it was during COVID). It was pretty brief article and did not mention a aircraft type. I'll keep looking, but maybe I'm losing the plot (finally).
I think I saw something similar too and it was just something in passing. So I don't have a clue where I saw it. Agree about the ATR-600 and have posted on them in the RNZAF thread.
 

Nighthawk.NZ

Active Member
The only article I can find that comes close But don't see where that it was signed off, just suggesting it as an option???
Page 6-7

Page 16
 

Gibbo

Active Member
The only article I can find that comes close But don't see where that it was signed off, just suggesting it as an option???
Page 6-7

Page 16
Hmm, Line of Defence carries a lot of 'advertorial' based discussion and I'm always cautious when reading it. Those articles are a thinly veiled sales pitch for the ATR72-MPA, which I'd love to see flying the kiwi roundel, but there is nothing of substance in relation to the EMAC project referred to in them. I wonder if we now need to wait for the new Govt to from and minsters review their portfolios before we see or hear anymore about EMAC... ie: Q2 2021+
 

Nighthawk.NZ

Active Member
but there is nothing of substance in relation to the EMAC project referred to in them.
I know... that's what I said... I can't see or find anything that suggests that it was signed... and that is basically the only article I could find to even suggest it could be an option for the RNZAF for the EMAC project.

I am well aware that this was most likely a paid advert article... ;-)

So I am not sure what Lucas read, saw or misinterpreted...
 

ngatimozart

Super Moderator
Staff member
Verified Defense Pro
Hmm, Line of Defence carries a lot of 'advertorial' based discussion and I'm always cautious when reading it. Those articles are a thinly veiled sales pitch for the ATR72-MPA, which I'd love to see flying the kiwi roundel, but there is nothing of substance in relation to the EMAC project referred to in them. I wonder if we now need to wait for the new Govt to from and minsters review their portfolios before we see or hear anymore about EMAC... ie: Q2 2021+
Talking about portfolios, about six weeks ago David Farrar, a blogger, wrote a an article behind his Patreon pay wall in which he a suggested a Cabinet list if Labour won a clear margin. He had Andrew Little as Minister for Workplace Relations, Treaty Negotiations, Defence, Veterans. It's only his own opinion, but there are very few in the Labour caucus who have the capability of being good Cabinet Ministers. So we'll see.
 
Top