NZDF General discussion thread

Gooey

Well-Known Member
I don't know much about the quality and bias of the Sydney Morning Herald but the contrast between this piece on the visit by Finish PM Marin's for talks in Australia and the recent focus by NZ journalists (sorry, young social-warrior hacks) is amusing from a certain point of view and alarming from a National Security one:


“It’s a beautiful idea, the world without conflicts and wars, and that’s what we want and that is what I want, but we cannot be naive because not everybody wants that. There are countries that are questioning the rules-based order, that are questioning our democratic values, and we have to make sure that we show our strengths.

“We cannot afford to be naive. It is to do with our critical dependencies: we have to learn from the COVID-19 crisis, we have to learn from the war, we have to learn from the energy crisis that we are now in.”

How can it be that NZ media did not pick up these talking points from PM Marin when she essentially said the same thing in Wellington?

As a nation, based on our past performance since leaving ANZUS, we really do have the collective mind set of ignorance and stupidity. Most sadly, we do not appear to be learning anything about our current critical dependancies and 'how to show our strengths'; let alone realise that we might need to be able to deter a fight with our military capabilities.

Our media is essential for living in a modern world, responsibly. This visit from PM Marin, to me, just shows how far we have fallen.
 

Rob c

The Bunker Group
Verified Defense Pro
I don't know much about the quality and bias of the Sydney Morning Herald but the contrast between this piece on the visit by Finish PM Marin's for talks in Australia and the recent focus by NZ journalists (sorry, young social-warrior hacks) is amusing from a certain point of view and alarming from a National Security one:


“It’s a beautiful idea, the world without conflicts and wars, and that’s what we want and that is what I want, but we cannot be naive because not everybody wants that. There are countries that are questioning the rules-based order, that are questioning our democratic values, and we have to make sure that we show our strengths.

“We cannot afford to be naive. It is to do with our critical dependencies: we have to learn from the COVID-19 crisis, we have to learn from the war, we have to learn from the energy crisis that we are now in.”

How can it be that NZ media did not pick up these talking points from PM Marin when she essentially said the same thing in Wellington?

As a nation, based on our past performance since leaving ANZUS, we really do have the collective mind set of ignorance and stupidity. Most sadly, we do not appear to be learning anything about our current critical dependancies and 'how to show our strengths'; let alone realise that we might need to be able to deter a fight with our military capabilities.

Our media is essential for living in a modern world, responsibly. This visit from PM Marin, to me, just shows how far we have fallen.
I cannot remember were I saw it, but some months ago I read that a survey of journalist had found that a significant majority of NZ journalist were either left leaning or strongly left leaning. From memory the proportion was around 75%, this explains a lot of what you are saying.
I happen to think that you may find a similar problem in the political cartoonists as neither group appears particularly even handed or neutral in this neck of the woods.
 

John Fedup

The Bunker Group
I cannot remember were I saw it, but some months ago I read that a survey of journalist had found that a significant majority of NZ journalist were either left leaning or strongly left leaning. From memory the proportion was around 75%, this explains a lot of what you are saying.
I happen to think that you may find a similar problem in the political cartoonists as neither group appears particularly even handed or neutral in this neck of the woods.
Probably true for Canadian journalists as well. However pollies here, unlike NZ, don’t bend the knee quite as much to defence avoidance due to our neighbour to the south.
 

Gracie1234

Active Member
One thing we can learn from Finland is how a small country can still have a viable defence capability and not just excuses and spin. It is good to see that even Finland can see the similarity between Finland-Russia and Australia/NZ-China from a risk perspective.

The previous points are good. NZ public discussion is very naive. This is very similar to our relationship with India. Opinion: New Zealand’s relationship with India is in trouble

Throughout this entire article talking about our relationship with India and why Australia is in a better position, there is never a single mention of defence and how Australia's increased market access is linked to their defence relationship, this is also true for the USA-Australia relationship and why they have a FTA and we do not.

The problem is our officials believe their own spin. I remember one of our party leaders stating that we would be more inclined to support the USA position if we had a FTA but the reality is you have to earn the FTA not the other way around.
 
Last edited:

John Fedup

The Bunker Group
One thing we can learn from Finland is how a small country can still have a viable defence capability and not just excuses and spin. It is good to see that even Finland can see the similarity between Finland-Russia and Australia/NZ-China from a risk perspective.

The previous points are good. NZ public discussion is very naive. This is very similar to our relationship with India. Opinion: New Zealand’s relationship with India is in trouble

Throughout this entire article talking about our relationship with India and why Australia is in a better position, there is never a single mention of defence and how Australia's increased market access is linked to their defence relationship, this is also true for the USA-Australia relationship and why they have a FTA and we do not.

The problem is our officials believe their own spin. I remember one of our party leaders stating that we would be more inclined to support the USA position if we had a FTA but the reality is you have to earn the FTA not the other way around.
Finland learnt the hard way about how important self sufficient defence is. Kind of pathetic how neighbours ignored Finland’s situation when A-hole Stalin invaded…except for one neighbour led by another A-hole.
 

CJR

Member
I don't know much about the quality and bias of the Sydney Morning Herald but the contrast between this piece on the visit by Finish PM Marin's for talks in Australia and the recent focus by NZ journalists (sorry, young social-warrior hacks) is amusing from a certain point of view and alarming from a National Security one...
SMH? Formally part of the Fairfax media group, traditionally socially progressive but centrist on economics drifting a bit left or right depending on the vagaries of the year. In the last few years Fairfax was bought out by Channel Nine, which is headed by the former Treasurer from the Howard government, Peter Costello. Since then the SMH and it's Melbourne sister, The Age, have both taken a stronger right wing lean (e.g. The SMH's handling of reporting on the corruption scandal that brought down NSW Premier Gladys Berejiklian, or the Age's handling of the recent Victorian election). Yet to go full crazy like most of the Murdoch empire though...

And don't be too impressed by the Australia media either... The ABC did an interview with the Finnish PM as part of the 7:30 Report and it got bogged down in just as pointless inanity as the questions at the NZ press conference.
 
Last edited:

ASSAIL

The Bunker Group
Verified Defense Pro
SMH? Formally part of the Fairfax media group, traditionally socially progressive but centrist on economics drifting a bit left or right depending on the vagaries of the year. In the last few years Fairfax was bought out by Channel Nine, which is headed by the former Treasurer from the Howard government, Peter Costello. Since then the SMH and it's Melbourne sister, The Age, have both taken a stronger right wing lean (e.g. The SMH's handling of reporting on the corruption scandal that brought down NSW Premier Gladys Berejiklian, or the Age's handling of the recent Victorian election). Yet to go full crazy like most of the Murdoch empire though...

And don't be too impressed by the Australia media either... The ABC did an interview with the Finnish PM as part of the 7:30 Report and it got bogged down in just as pointless inanity as the questions at the NZ press conference.
I don’t agree with you.
Fairfax used to be a centre right organisation but since being bought by the channel 9 group it has trended centre left with a number of of progressive journos. It is however not nearly as progressive as the ABC which hasn’t got one conservative editor, presenter or producer on its books, this from a public owned media organisation which by statute is required to present a balanced view.
I have no problem with the 9 organisation, Ch 10 and 7 being left leaning or Murdoch being right leaning that’s their privilege by being privately owned however the news and current affairs sections of the ABC piss me off, some of their other programmes are wonderful.
 

kiwi in exile

Active Member
It is however not nearly as progressive as the ABC which hasn’t got one conservative editor, presenter or producer on its books, this from a public owned media organisation which by statute is required to present a balanced view.
tom switzer hosts between the lines on abc rn. Between The Lines with Tom Switzer - ABC Radio National
Great interviews with conservative guests, foreign afairs, China etc


lets get off percieved Aust media bias and back to nz defence.
 

Gooey

Well-Known Member
Yes, double thumbs up for Tom Switzer. ABC 'B/w the Line' is absolutely quality.

Back to NZDF & any comparison with Finland:

... they obviously have some sort of national conscription based on the number of reserves within the FiAF. Being as we have an aging population (therefore, attracting full time service is becoming more difficult) like most FVEY countries and that the strategic environment has changed somewhat, perhaps a return to a similar system should be considered for NZ?

I know, it'll go down like cold vomit in some/most quarters. It'd certainly get the discussion going though!

From my limited understanding of what happended in NZ in the 50/60's, national conscription is a strain on the professional full timers; the truth is though, if something kinetic starts it will not be over by Christmas. Like Ukraine. So resources, like trained reserves, will be critical in such an eventuality.
 

Xthenaki

Active Member
I support what you are saying fully. Participated in CMT at school in late 50*s early 60*s. It was a culture and part of your education giving you a start to a real life. One of my sons was a part time terratorial and the skills he honed there set him up in the leadership role he now works in. Looking After and trusting your fellow man is sadly two qualities to name that seem to have gone out the back door with the younger generation>
 

ngatimozart

Super Moderator
Staff member
Verified Defense Pro
Yes, double thumbs up for Tom Switzer. ABC 'B/w the Line' is absolutely quality.

Back to NZDF & any comparison with Finland:

... they obviously have some sort of national conscription based on the number of reserves within the FiAF. Being as we have an aging population (therefore, attracting full time service is becoming more difficult) like most FVEY countries and that the strategic environment has changed somewhat, perhaps a return to a similar system should be considered for NZ?

I know, it'll go down like cold vomit in some/most quarters. It'd certainly get the discussion going though!

From my limited understanding of what happended in NZ in the 50/60's, national conscription is a strain on the professional full timers; the truth is though, if something kinetic starts it will not be over by Christmas. Like Ukraine. So resources, like trained reserves, will be critical in such an eventuality.
I'm not in favour of conscription ATM. It would take to much of the inadequate resources of NZDF and even when I was in they wouldn't been happy about it coming back. Beefing up the Reserves across the three services would be a far better option at the moment. I missed out on the CMT raffle by a couple of years.

The big difference between us and the Finns is that we don't have a potential invader on our doorstep, especially one who's made a bit of a habit of it, unless Tasmania gets all bolshie. So they have plenty of good reasons to have conscription. If I was going to compare us to a Scandinavian country, I would probably say Denmark because I think that we are similar sized and have similar problems. They are just far smarter than we are at addressing some of them.

I am going to wait to see what this new defence review, which is supposed to be due out next year just before the election, will have to say. I will be interested in how they frame the international geostrategic position and what the differences, if any, are from their 2018 document. That will tell us how serious the current govt are taking the situation. The real trouble will be the incoming govt after next year's election, its make up and policies. The real problem is that there won't be a DCP until after the election leaving it to the new govt to undertake, unless of course they raise and issue one at the same time. Whilst unheard of in recent times, there is no reason I can think of, to believe that it couldn't be done. I could be wrong in this respect though.
 

Rob c

The Bunker Group
Verified Defense Pro
'm not in favour of conscription ATM. It would take to much of the inadequate resources of NZDF and even when I was in they wouldn't been happy about it coming back. Beefing up the Reserves across the three services would be a far better option at the moment. I missed out on the CMT raffle by a couple of years.
I agree with you on this and when I was in there was no liking for it even though it was still in force when I joined. I was balloted for it and as I had been in the air force for almost 2 years at that stage I had great pleasure in sending them a some what rude reply.:rolleyes:
 

ngatimozart

Super Moderator
Staff member
Verified Defense Pro
I agree with you on this and when I was in there was no liking for it even though it was still in force when I joined. I was balloted for it and as I had been in the air force for almost 2 years at that stage I had great pleasure in sending them a some what rude reply.:rolleyes:
I can guess that you being a baggie at the time it would of comprised of probably two words :D
 

STURM

Well-Known Member
Finland learnt the hard way about how important self sufficient defence is. Kind of pathetic how neighbours ignored Finland’s situation when A-hole Stalin invaded…except for one neighbour led by another A-hole.
Neither Britain or France was ready for a war with the Soviet Union; nor did it serve their immediate interests. To me what's hypocritical is that war was declared on Germany because it had invaded Poland but Britain and France did absolutely nothing when the Soviets invaded eastern Poland.

As part of the security guarantees given to Poland was a clause which stipulated that assistance would only be provided in the event of German aggression. The Poles were actually confident of beating back an invasion and there was even talk of advancing to Berlin.
 

Gooey

Well-Known Member
Hi Nga

As an isolated Western Liberal Democracy in the Pacific I disagree and do see ourselves as being surrounded by potential invaders who are on our doorstep, from the oceans; well one really. The CCP. I do like the term Sea Blindness to attempt to understand this miss-understanding of our vulnerability: here's one explanation, be it not the most focused for NZ;


"Arguably it simply means that the public, and by extension Governments of nations do not understand the maritime domain, and do not understand the case for the maritime domain – not just from a military, but also from a wider sector perspective."

If anything the COVID crisis should have underlined our dependency. But it sadly appears that politicians, our strategic masters, don't want to honor this threat.

As for the new defence review next year, I find your faith in the ability of our inbreed national security system to function coherently, somewhat amusing. IMHO, there is absolutely 100% no (NIL) possibility that this review will change anything. We, NZ as a nation, are beyond tinkering with this problem, which is all that the review will deliver. I'll bet my first born and the farm on that.

The real problem is not the potential change of government next year making this review pointless; it is the complete hollowing of the mana and ability of our professional Service Chiefs, MoD, and FM to provide a coherent national security picture to NZ Gov and to argue for a balanced war fighting capability.

If only I was King for a day, things would be different!
 

John Fedup

The Bunker Group
Neither Britain or France was ready for a war with the Soviet Union; nor did it serve their immediate interests. To me what's hypocritical is that war was declared on Germany because it had invaded Poland but Britain and France did absolutely nothing when the Soviets invaded eastern Poland.

As part of the security guarantees given to Poland was a clause which stipulated that assistance would only be provided in the event of German aggression. The Poles were actually confident of beating back an invasion and there was even talk of advancing to Berlin.
Western appeasement of the Soviet Union was also evident when there was no protest about a big chunk of Finland seized by them as a condition for a pease treaty after WW2.
 

Rob c

The Bunker Group
Verified Defense Pro
The real problem is not the potential change of government next year making this review pointless; it is the complete hollowing of the mana and ability of our professional Service Chiefs, MoD, and FM to provide a coherent national security picture to NZ Gov and to argue for a balanced war fighting capability.
I know from my time in Def HQ that at that time the Chiefs of Staff did advise the Government confidentially in a more forceful way on military matters. This was never allowed to become public, as to embarrass the the Government meant there would not be a job available when that officer was retired, usually in those days around the age of 55. This had been brought home by the treatment of AV Morrison when he retired after going public. The only job he could get was as a building manager (glorified caretaker) in Wellington. Pollies can be very nasty to people that embarrass them.
the other big problem in NZ is the lack of public engagement by the pollies in respect of the what is really needed to defend NZ as they simply don't want to know themselves. It is noticeable that whenever anything about defence is mentioned publicly that the word SOVEREIGNTY is never mentioned and when new equipment is purchased, the talk will be about SAR or peace keeping, nothing will be mentioned about maintaining our freedom. Our pollies do not and will not talk about defending NZ, this is a taboo subject, which means that the pollies make sure that the general population are kept in a mushroom state. KEPT in the DARK and FEED ON SH_T. Over the years our pollies have worked very hard at maintaining the status quo on this and due to this a significant number of opportunities have gone begging.
 

Gooey

Well-Known Member
Rob C
Yep, what you said!
I was struct by exactly this, during the recent Finland PM visit. Just compare and contrast between Oz & NZ reporting and interactions with Governments.
I've been away a lot: what did AV Morrison do?
I've wondered if the public humiliation treatment by PM Lange of the 'geriatric generals' and if the culling of a generation of top ranks by PM Clark, also left its mark on the whipped dog that is the NZ Services?
 

Rob c

The Bunker Group
Verified Defense Pro
I can guess that you being a baggie at the time it would of comprised of probably two words :D
A little more than 2 words, I made an enquiry as to why no one had figured out that they had it wrong when they sent it in an envelope addressed to me C/- 75 SQD RNZAF Station Ohakea. Bases were called stations in those days.:rolleyes:
They never did answer that question, wonder why?
 

ngatimozart

Super Moderator
Staff member
Verified Defense Pro
Hi Nga

As an isolated Western Liberal Democracy in the Pacific I disagree and do see ourselves as being surrounded by potential invaders who are on our doorstep, from the oceans; well one really. The CCP. I do like the term Sea Blindness to attempt to understand this miss-understanding of our vulnerability: here's one explanation, be it not the most focused for NZ;


"Arguably it simply means that the public, and by extension Governments of nations do not understand the maritime domain, and do not understand the case for the maritime domain – not just from a military, but also from a wider sector perspective."
Ah "seablindness"; a favourite term of mine that I have been using for years about NZ. I found it reading Geoffrey Till's Sea Power years ago and he used NZ as an example of it.
If anything the COVID crisis should have underlined our dependency. But it sadly appears that politicians, our strategic masters, don't want to honor this threat.

As for the new defence review next year, I find your faith in the ability of our inbreed national security system to function coherently, somewhat amusing. IMHO, there is absolutely 100% no (NIL) possibility that this review will change anything. We, NZ as a nation, are beyond tinkering with this problem, which is all that the review will deliver. I'll bet my first born and the farm on that.
There was a young ram and old ram sauntering past a paddock full of ewes when the young ram noticed that the gate was ajar. He said to the old ram "Lets rush in and shag a couple each". The old ram replied "Settle down boy, let's walk in and shag the lot". Moral of story don't rush into things and obtain small gains, when with patience you can obtain greater gains. In this case I am waiting to see what they come up with before I burst into print about it. It's called keeping your powder dry.
The real problem is not the potential change of government next year making this review pointless; it is the complete hollowing of the mana and ability of our professional Service Chiefs, MoD, and FM to provide a coherent national security picture to NZ Gov and to argue for a balanced war fighting capability.

If only I was King for a day, things would be different!
NZDF is far to top heavy. It has far to many officers of flag rank so our senior sirs aren't hollowed out, far from it. Where we are hollowed out is at our mid level officer and SNCO levels.
 
Top