With America in global retreat, the world has lost its policeman. America’s long-standing security commitments can no longer be relied on – not under Trump and not for a long time after him, not in Europe and not in the Pacific.
It took little time for the consequences of this geopolitical earthquake to materialise in our region.
In late February, three Chinese warships conducted live-fire exercises in the Tasman Sea, approximately 700 kilometres off Sydney’s coast, causing commercial aircraft from Australia and New Zealand to divert their flight paths.
Following these exercises, the vessels proceeded to circumnavigate Australia, passing near major cities such as Perth and Adelaide in a display of naval capability.
Additionally, Kiribati has initiated discussions with China regarding a deep-sea mining partnership, potentially granting Beijing access to vast mineral-rich areas of the Pacific. This followed the signing of a comprehensive Chinese partnership with the Cook Islands, which also included port infrastructure development.
The symbolism could not have been clearer. By choosing to showcase its military and economic strength in our region, Beijing underlined its new assertiveness in the South Pacific.
These moves have alarmed Wellington and Canberra. But it is only in combination with Trump’s foreign policy changes that we can understand what all this means for us: Australia and New Zealand can no longer rely on external security guarantees. Effectively, we are now on our own.
Older citizens of both countries might experience a sense of déjà vu. We have been abandoned before, both economically and militarily.
In 1973, Britain’s entry into the European Economic Community sent shockwaves through both nations. Our main trading partner suddenly disappeared behind Europe’s tariff walls. The effects were devastating. Agricultural exports to Britain plummeted.
The psychological impact cut even deeper. Australians and New Zealanders spoke of “abandonment” and “betrayal”. They felt “edged firmly from the imperial nest”, as historians James Curran and Stuart Ward once put it. After all, many Aussies and Kiwis at the time still regarded themselves as (at least somewhat) British.
Yet what seemed catastrophic in 1973 ultimately strengthened both nations. The severing of British economic ties forced Australia and New Zealand to find new markets. They had to develop trading relationships in Asia. Though painful initially, this reorientation benefited both economies. It undoubtedly created a new sense of identity. It also drove the creation of trans-Tasman economic integration through the Closer Economic Relations agreement.
A few surviving and much older Australians and New Zealanders may also be reminded of another experience of abandonment. When Japanese naval bombers sunk the Royal Navy battleships Prince of Wales and Repulse in 1941, Australia and New Zealand realised that Britain could no longer guarantee their security against Japanese expansion. So they both turned to the US, forging an alliance that would shape regional security for the next eight decades – until two weeks ago.
Now, thanks to Trump, the American security guarantee is in doubt. But unlike 1941, there is no alternative superpower protector waiting in the wings. For the first time since European settlement, Australia and New Zealand face hostile military activities in our region without the backing of a global naval power.
Under the British Empire, the Royal Navy’s dominance safeguarded our waters. After World War II, US Navy power guaranteed freedom of navigation in the Pacific. Beyond that, there was an explicit (Australia - ANZUS) or at least an implicit (New Zealand) guarantee that America would protect both countries’ security.
Whether any such guarantee still formally exists does not matter. What matters is that Trump’s actions have fatally damaged their credibility. That makes them worthless.
Australia is New Zealand’s only formal military ally. But Australia cannot rely on America anymore. This means that Australia and New Zealand are now on their own with whatever military capacity they have.
Australia at least has modern fighter jets, submarines and some armoured vehicles. Still, it is a small force dependent on US backing in any major conflict. Without that support, Australia’s defence setup is incomplete and insufficient.
New Zealand’s situation is even more precarious. Its defence forces have atrophied over decades of strategic complacency and neglect. With no combat aircraft and only two ageing frigates, New Zealand’s military is under-equipped, under-funded and unprepared for any serious threats.
The situation is too serious for blame games. It does not matter how naïve past New Zealand governments were about their country’s security. It does not matter what choices Australia could have made years ago.
What matters now is that both countries must now build robust military capabilities – and quickly. It is pointless to cry over spilt milk or engage in recriminations. There is simply no time for that. The Chinese navy’s provocative exercises made that abundantly clear.
Australia and New Zealand face the same threat. Over the weekend, both Qantas and Air New Zealand jets had to change course to dodge the Chinese live-fire drills.
Rather than bickering , Australia and New Zealand would do better to cooperate now. They will either secure their neighbourhood together or watch it unravel separately.
For air defence, Australia’s three F-35 squadrons provide a foundation. New Zealand must either rebuild an air combat capability or invest in advanced air defence systems. These decisions must be coordinated between the two countries.
Maritime security demands particular attention. Australia’s future nuclear submarines will be potent but they are many years away. New Zealand’s two frigates need replacement soon. Again, a coordinated strategy could see both navies operating compatible vessels, sharing maintenance facilities and conducting integrated operations.
Both countries also need enhanced missile and drone capabilities. The Chinese Navy’s Tasman Sea exercises exposed the inability of either nation to credibly deter such operations. Modern air defence systems and anti-ship capabilities are essential. Once more, joint procurement would reduce costs and ensure interoperability.
Because both countries will need each other much more than in the past, they should deepen their military integration. This would build on their long tradition of combined operations – from the original ANZAC forces in World War I through to modern peacekeeping missions.
Australia and New Zealand could follow European examples like Germany’s maintenance of joint brigades with the Netherlands and France, creating permanent combined units for the changed strategic environment. It would be a new ANZAC for 2025.
New alliances must also be formed with other like-minded countries. Japan, South Korea and India present natural partners, all concerned about Chinese expansion and experienced in maintaining strategic autonomy from superpowers. Their naval and technological capabilities could help fill gaps that Australia and New Zealand cannot address alone.
The Quad framework (the security dialogue between Australia, India, Japan and the US), even without reliable US leadership, provides a foundation for deeper security cooperation.
Relations with America under Trump and beyond require careful calibration. While US reliability has collapsed in the short term, long-term institutional relationships – especially in intelligence sharing – should be preserved if at all possible. The Five Eyes framework remains valuable even if its leading member is stepping back from its broader security commitments.
When future historians analyse the collapse of Pax Americana, they will mark Trump’s February 2025 pivot to Putin as the decisive moment. The old certainties are gone, in both Europe and the South Pacific.
But Australia and New Zealand have overcome abandonment before. Just as they mastered the difficult economic transition after 1973, they must now manage an even more challenging strategic transition.
And just like then, a jointly experienced shock should drive our countries closer together, militarily, economically and politically.
There is only one difference: This time, the stakes are not just prosperity but our survival as liberal democracies.
Dr Oliver Hartwich is the Executive Director of The New Zealand Initiative think tank. This article was first published HERE
In late February, three Chinese warships conducted live-fire exercises in the Tasman Sea, approximately 700 kilometres off Sydney’s coast, causing commercial aircraft from Australia and New Zealand to divert their flight paths.
Following these exercises, the vessels proceeded to circumnavigate Australia, passing near major cities such as Perth and Adelaide in a display of naval capability.
Additionally, Kiribati has initiated discussions with China regarding a deep-sea mining partnership, potentially granting Beijing access to vast mineral-rich areas of the Pacific. This followed the signing of a comprehensive Chinese partnership with the Cook Islands, which also included port infrastructure development.
The symbolism could not have been clearer. By choosing to showcase its military and economic strength in our region, Beijing underlined its new assertiveness in the South Pacific.
These moves have alarmed Wellington and Canberra. But it is only in combination with Trump’s foreign policy changes that we can understand what all this means for us: Australia and New Zealand can no longer rely on external security guarantees. Effectively, we are now on our own.
Older citizens of both countries might experience a sense of déjà vu. We have been abandoned before, both economically and militarily.
In 1973, Britain’s entry into the European Economic Community sent shockwaves through both nations. Our main trading partner suddenly disappeared behind Europe’s tariff walls. The effects were devastating. Agricultural exports to Britain plummeted.
The psychological impact cut even deeper. Australians and New Zealanders spoke of “abandonment” and “betrayal”. They felt “edged firmly from the imperial nest”, as historians James Curran and Stuart Ward once put it. After all, many Aussies and Kiwis at the time still regarded themselves as (at least somewhat) British.
Yet what seemed catastrophic in 1973 ultimately strengthened both nations. The severing of British economic ties forced Australia and New Zealand to find new markets. They had to develop trading relationships in Asia. Though painful initially, this reorientation benefited both economies. It undoubtedly created a new sense of identity. It also drove the creation of trans-Tasman economic integration through the Closer Economic Relations agreement.
A few surviving and much older Australians and New Zealanders may also be reminded of another experience of abandonment. When Japanese naval bombers sunk the Royal Navy battleships Prince of Wales and Repulse in 1941, Australia and New Zealand realised that Britain could no longer guarantee their security against Japanese expansion. So they both turned to the US, forging an alliance that would shape regional security for the next eight decades – until two weeks ago.
Now, thanks to Trump, the American security guarantee is in doubt. But unlike 1941, there is no alternative superpower protector waiting in the wings. For the first time since European settlement, Australia and New Zealand face hostile military activities in our region without the backing of a global naval power.
Under the British Empire, the Royal Navy’s dominance safeguarded our waters. After World War II, US Navy power guaranteed freedom of navigation in the Pacific. Beyond that, there was an explicit (Australia - ANZUS) or at least an implicit (New Zealand) guarantee that America would protect both countries’ security.
Whether any such guarantee still formally exists does not matter. What matters is that Trump’s actions have fatally damaged their credibility. That makes them worthless.
Australia is New Zealand’s only formal military ally. But Australia cannot rely on America anymore. This means that Australia and New Zealand are now on their own with whatever military capacity they have.
Australia at least has modern fighter jets, submarines and some armoured vehicles. Still, it is a small force dependent on US backing in any major conflict. Without that support, Australia’s defence setup is incomplete and insufficient.
New Zealand’s situation is even more precarious. Its defence forces have atrophied over decades of strategic complacency and neglect. With no combat aircraft and only two ageing frigates, New Zealand’s military is under-equipped, under-funded and unprepared for any serious threats.
The situation is too serious for blame games. It does not matter how naïve past New Zealand governments were about their country’s security. It does not matter what choices Australia could have made years ago.
What matters now is that both countries must now build robust military capabilities – and quickly. It is pointless to cry over spilt milk or engage in recriminations. There is simply no time for that. The Chinese navy’s provocative exercises made that abundantly clear.
Australia and New Zealand face the same threat. Over the weekend, both Qantas and Air New Zealand jets had to change course to dodge the Chinese live-fire drills.
Rather than bickering , Australia and New Zealand would do better to cooperate now. They will either secure their neighbourhood together or watch it unravel separately.
For air defence, Australia’s three F-35 squadrons provide a foundation. New Zealand must either rebuild an air combat capability or invest in advanced air defence systems. These decisions must be coordinated between the two countries.
Maritime security demands particular attention. Australia’s future nuclear submarines will be potent but they are many years away. New Zealand’s two frigates need replacement soon. Again, a coordinated strategy could see both navies operating compatible vessels, sharing maintenance facilities and conducting integrated operations.
Both countries also need enhanced missile and drone capabilities. The Chinese Navy’s Tasman Sea exercises exposed the inability of either nation to credibly deter such operations. Modern air defence systems and anti-ship capabilities are essential. Once more, joint procurement would reduce costs and ensure interoperability.
Because both countries will need each other much more than in the past, they should deepen their military integration. This would build on their long tradition of combined operations – from the original ANZAC forces in World War I through to modern peacekeeping missions.
Australia and New Zealand could follow European examples like Germany’s maintenance of joint brigades with the Netherlands and France, creating permanent combined units for the changed strategic environment. It would be a new ANZAC for 2025.
New alliances must also be formed with other like-minded countries. Japan, South Korea and India present natural partners, all concerned about Chinese expansion and experienced in maintaining strategic autonomy from superpowers. Their naval and technological capabilities could help fill gaps that Australia and New Zealand cannot address alone.
The Quad framework (the security dialogue between Australia, India, Japan and the US), even without reliable US leadership, provides a foundation for deeper security cooperation.
Relations with America under Trump and beyond require careful calibration. While US reliability has collapsed in the short term, long-term institutional relationships – especially in intelligence sharing – should be preserved if at all possible. The Five Eyes framework remains valuable even if its leading member is stepping back from its broader security commitments.
When future historians analyse the collapse of Pax Americana, they will mark Trump’s February 2025 pivot to Putin as the decisive moment. The old certainties are gone, in both Europe and the South Pacific.
But Australia and New Zealand have overcome abandonment before. Just as they mastered the difficult economic transition after 1973, they must now manage an even more challenging strategic transition.
And just like then, a jointly experienced shock should drive our countries closer together, militarily, economically and politically.
There is only one difference: This time, the stakes are not just prosperity but our survival as liberal democracies.
Dr Oliver Hartwich is the Executive Director of The New Zealand Initiative think tank. This article was first published HERE
6 comments:
The United States roll as the world’s policeman has created a mentality amongst its allies of many beneficiaries- they have been incentivised to be lazy and fail to take responsibility for themselves. Trumps comments to NATO early in his first term proved well founded. The status quo is not sustainable given The US government’s quarter century of budget deficits, and Trump knows this. The Historian Niall Fergusson notes the decline of an empire/nation occurs when a nation’s interest bill is greater than its military spend. It is likely that Trump is well aware of China’s ascendency in the Pacific and therefore wants to pivot out of Europe to focus on China.
The self indulgent West with its ascendant culture featuring the likes of pregnant men and female rapists etc probably deserves what is coming to it. The reason being we have allowed people to dominate our countries who are really barking mad.
Surely this is fear mongering? "Australia and New Zealand can't rely on the US anymore". Is this because the US hasn't managed to solve the Ukraine war within the writers timeframe? There is constant negotiation taking place regarding a peace deal. Well, it's not reported by our MSM, but it is happening. There will need to be concessions made.
Does the writer want WW3? It does not seem feasible to take an aggressive stance and attack Russia.
The best tack New Zealand can do is align ourselves as closely as possible with the US. That might mean having a greater naval presence here.
Meanwhile Germany is in big trouble.
Australia will never see the nuclear submarines. It is a fantasy.
The NZI reports are opinions only , however they are displayed as if they are of significant importance. Nowhere in the biased essay was the ridiculous anti nuclear stance that NZ government took and still hasn't repudiated. NZers travel globally and everywhere there is nuclear power and not a travel document gives the alert that NZers should stay clear of XYX because they have nuclear power .
I trust the NZI fund their own anti US hubris because taxpayers shouldnt give a dime to NZI.
Post a Comment