OJBs Web Site: Blog Page

Note: You are currently viewing my old web site. There is a new version with most of this content at OJB.NZ.
The new site is being updated, uses modern techniques, has higher quality media, and has a mobile-friendly version.
This old site will stay on-line for a while, but maybe not indefinitely. Please update your bookmarks. Thanks.

Add a Comment (Go Up to OJB's Blog Page)

Go to War?

Entry 1063, on 2009-07-29 at 21:36:31 (Rating 3, Politics)

Should New Zealand get more involved in the war in Afghanistan? The US has recently made a few "subtle hints" that it would like to see more involvement although it would be mainly symbolic since New Zealand's small armed forces are unlikely to make any real difference. But the symbolism is important, of course, because the US needs international support to make its activities in Afghanistan more acceptable. Of course Iraq is another matter. I don't think they will ever gain widespread acceptance for that!

The hints I mentioned above included the comment that if New Zealand ever expected help from the US military in the event of any future problems its only fair that New Zealand should help the US in this time of need. Fair enough too, although its hard to imagine a situation where New Zealand would need any military help - not because we can look after ourselves (we can't) but because no one is likely to want to start a war against us, first because we are so isolated, and second because New Zealand is fairly well respected and liked internationally.

No matter what we think of some sections of the US population and some of its less likable leaders it is still our ally and I think we should contribute to its military efforts if they have some justification, such as Afghanistan, but I think we should be careful what role we have in those efforts. Peace keeping, reconstruction, engineering and training is one thing but being on the front line calling in US air strikes which kill hundreds of innocent civilians is not something I think we should be involved with.

So I think we should say to the US that we will contribute to its efforts in Afghanistan but on our terms: that is in positive roles rather than traditional combat (which might not be very effective anyway as well as causing many casualties on both sides and often increasing resentment against the US and its allies).

If we can stick to a role which both sides respect then we will have fulfilled our obligations and also done the right thing. How often is that a consideration in modern diplomacy? Practically never I would say!

Comment 3 (2306) by SBFL on 2009-07-30 at 09:41:33: (view earlier comments)

Indeed. But it seems that political posturing has overtaken their inner views for the Labour party. This is a serious (internatrional) issue that should bypass local partisan BS. I may be wrong but I don't recall serious National party opposition to Helen's initial overtures to Bush. That mainly came from the Alliance. Where did they end up?

Comment 4 (2307) by OJB on 2009-07-30 at 09:46:33:

Well Its still not clear from that blog entry exactly what they object to. As I said, if NZ was going to fulfill a more positive role I suspect there would be broad support but if there was a suspicion it would be for front-line duties (I believe the PM has ruled this out though, right?) then there would quite rightly be objections.

Comment 5 (2309) by SBFL on 2009-07-30 at 09:58:24:

"Well Its still not clear from that blog entry exactly what they object to." - as I said, classic political posturing from the Labour Party. They will sell their own mother as long as it scores points against a ruling National-led government. Sad. There are bigger issues to consider I would have thought, but Trevor Mallard seems to think otherwise.

Comment 6 (2313) by OJB on 2009-07-30 at 14:56:26:

I don't think we can be too critical until we know exactly what Mallard's position is on this. You can hardly start raving about political posturing just because a blog entry is a bit vague!

Comment 7 (2314) by SBFL on 2009-08-01 at 03:12:40:

In case you hadn't noticed, that was Mallard's post. And in his last line he is unambiguous "Nothing I’ve seen to date convinces me that we should send the SAS back.".

So he is happy to send them when Labour are in govt, but not National. He says there is no exit plan (what was it before Trevor? How has it changed).

So presumably, he was happy with Bush's exit strategy, but not Obama's.

Like I said, silly political posturing from Labour.

You can leave comments about this entry using this form.

To add a comment: enter a name and email (both optional), type the number shown above, enter a comment, then click Add.
Note that you can leave the name blank if you want to remain anonymous.
Enter your email address to receive notifications of replies and updates to this entry.
The comment should appear immediately because the authorisation system is currently inactive.