Speaking in the immediate aftermath of the strikes at a scheduled press conference on Friday, Luxon characterised the strikes by Israel as ‘potentially catastrophic for the Middle East’, observing ‘the last thing this region needs is more instability’.
Adding to Luxon’s woes, oil prices initially surged by some 10 per cent after the Israeli strikes on Friday, signalling upcoming pain at the petrol pump for New Zealand consumers. Luxon has built his first-term government on easing cost-of-living pressures, but further escalation in the Middle East could scupper any success.
China was one of only three states to vote against an International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA) board of governors resolution passed on Thursday that deemed Iran to be in breach of its nuclear non-proliferation obligations. The vote effectively served as the pretext for Israeli strikes on Iran in the early hours of Friday morning.
Beijing and Tehran are not formal military allies, but the two countries signed a 25-year cooperation pact in March 2021 that concentrates mainly on trade and investment. Still, China has undertaken annual naval drills with Iran and Russia each year since 2019 near the strategically significant Gulf of Oman. The most recent edition, ‘Security Belt-2025’, took place in March.
The current geopolitical situation will invariably be canvassed when Luxon makes his long-awaited inaugural trip to China next week, during which the New Zealand PM will meet with both President Xi Jinping and Premier Li Qiang.
China is New Zealand’s biggest trading partner, and Luxon was keen to accentuate the business focus in a press release announcing the visit to Shanghai and Beijing.
The heavy trade emphasis is of course understandable and important in its own right: the $NZ38 billion two-way trading relationship with China is essential to New Zealand’s economic prosperity. And strong Chinese demand is currently helping to boost prices for New Zealand’s agricultural exports, such as dairy and red meat.
The visit is necessary and overdue.
But Luxon’s desire to centre the trip on trade also reflects Wellington’s current eagerness to distance itself from Beijing in most other areas.
Remarkably, the PM’s landmark trip to China had to share a press release with news that Luxon will also attend the annual North Atlantic Treaty Organization (NATO) summit later this month. Luxon will fly directly from China to Europe for the summit in The Hague, bridged only by a quick stop in Brussels.
It will be the fourth year in a row that a New Zealand Prime Minister has attended the NATO gathering, despite the South Pacific being half a world away from the North Atlantic. New Zealand is being invited to The Hague along with South Korea, Japan and Australia, which NATO collectively calls the ‘Indo-Pacific Four’.
The participation of the ‘IP4’ is very much aimed at China – but there is also an Iran dimension.
Mark Rutte, the NATO Secretary General, this week said China was ‘modernising and expanding its military at breakneck speed’. But he also added that ‘Russia has teamed up with China, North Korea and Iran’ and warned of a ‘really awful foursome of North Korea, China, Iran and Russia’.
Like Iran, New Zealand has a comprehensive strategic partnership with China. The New Zealand-China pact was signed in 2014 under Prime Minister John Key, who also represented Luxon’s centre-right National Party.
Wellington would now probably prefer to forget parts of the 2014 agreement with Beijing, such as a commitment to ‘develop and implement a long-term engagement plan for defence engagement’.
The US warship USS Blue Ridge recently visited Wellington, a highly-symbolic development in the context of the New Zealand-US relationship that hit the rocks over US ship visits in the 1980s. Meanwhile, a much-anticipated Defence Capability Plan released in April emphasised military ties with Australia, New Zealand’s only formal ally. To cap off the US-friendly agenda, Judtih Collins, the defence minister, recently travelled to Manila to sign a Status of Visiting Forces Agreement with the Philippines.
Still, everything is in flux.
There are signs that New Zealand is taking a harder line on Israel, a stance that could also impact on Wellington’s hopes to forge closer ties with Washington.
Winston Peters, the foreign minister, followed up Luxon’s remarks with a social media post that encouraged the resumption of talks between the United States and Iran and said ‘it is critical that all actors prioritise de-escalation’. Peters added that officials had conveyed New Zealand’s concerns to the Israeli and Iranian ambassadors in Wellington.
The foreign minister’s statement was carefully calibrated to avoid taking sides, referring to the Israeli strikes as an ‘escalation in tensions between Israel and Iran’.
In this respect, Peters was very much in step with early responses from his counterparts in Australia and the United Kingdom. In Australia, Penny Wong said ‘Australia is alarmed by the escalation’ and called on both sides to ‘prioritise dialogue and diplomacy’. Meanwhile, a statement from British foreign secretary David Lammy noted ‘further escalation is a serious threat to peace & stability in the region and in no one’s interest’ and called on ‘all parties to show restraint’.
Still, the early and relatively strong statements by both Luxon and Peters differed from their response to the first round of direct confrontation between Israel and Iran in April 2024. This began with an Israeli strike on Iran’s embassy in Damascus, but Peters did not criticise the bombing – which represented a significant violation of diplomatic norms – until pressed in a radio interview two weeks later.
However, after Iran sent a barrage of drones and ballistic missiles towards Israel in retaliation, Luxon and Peters quickly issued a joint statement to condemn ‘Iran’s shocking and illegal strikes against Israel’.
The slant was somewhat curious, given the pair’s inclination to speak out strongly on Gaza. Luxon issued joint statements with his counterparts from Australia and Canada calling for a ceasefire in December 2023 and February 2024, while Peters described the situation in Gaza as an ‘utter catastrophe’ in a speech to the United Nations in April 2024.
New Zealand went one step further this week, when it joined Australia, Canada, the UK and Norway in placing travel bans on Israeli finance minister Bezalel Smotrich and National Security Minister Itamar Ben-Gvir.
US Secretary of State Marco Rubio directly mentioned New Zealand is his condemnation of the move on a post on X, adding ‘we remind our partners not to forget who the real enemy is’.
And a spokesperson for Winston Peters also indicated that New Zealand officials would attend a UN conference in New York next week, to be co-hosted by France and Saudi Arabia, that will focus on a two-state solution for Palestinians.
The decision came despite the United States issuing a diplomatic cable ‘urging governments not to participate in the conference’ and warning of consequences for states that subsequently take ‘anti-Israel actions’.
If New Zealand is becoming more outspoken on the Middle East, it may reflect a level of frustration with the United States, for all the talk of closer ties.
After the US had spent more than two years encouraging New Zealand to consider involvement in an expanded AUKUS pact that is squarely aimed at China, the Donald Trump administration this week suddenly announced it would review the plan’s original submarine building programme.
The news left New Zealand unsure of where it stands, with Luxon commenting: ‘It’s been left very open-ended. We’re exploring Pillar Two – it’s been to be honest quite slow going’.
It is hard to see much progress on the second phase of AUKUS, which is supposedly focused on advanced technologies, until and unless the original ‘Pillar I’ is sorted out.
Christopher Luxon will have much to think about on his 12-hour flight to China.
Israel’s strikes on Iran complicate an already complex geopolitical picture.
The fog of war is here.
Geoffrey Miller is the Democracy Project’s international analyst and writes on current New Zealand foreign policy and related geopolitical issues. He has lived in Germany and the Middle East and is a learner of Arabic and Russian. This article was first published HERE
China was one of only three states to vote against an International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA) board of governors resolution passed on Thursday that deemed Iran to be in breach of its nuclear non-proliferation obligations. The vote effectively served as the pretext for Israeli strikes on Iran in the early hours of Friday morning.
Beijing and Tehran are not formal military allies, but the two countries signed a 25-year cooperation pact in March 2021 that concentrates mainly on trade and investment. Still, China has undertaken annual naval drills with Iran and Russia each year since 2019 near the strategically significant Gulf of Oman. The most recent edition, ‘Security Belt-2025’, took place in March.
The current geopolitical situation will invariably be canvassed when Luxon makes his long-awaited inaugural trip to China next week, during which the New Zealand PM will meet with both President Xi Jinping and Premier Li Qiang.
China is New Zealand’s biggest trading partner, and Luxon was keen to accentuate the business focus in a press release announcing the visit to Shanghai and Beijing.
The heavy trade emphasis is of course understandable and important in its own right: the $NZ38 billion two-way trading relationship with China is essential to New Zealand’s economic prosperity. And strong Chinese demand is currently helping to boost prices for New Zealand’s agricultural exports, such as dairy and red meat.
The visit is necessary and overdue.
But Luxon’s desire to centre the trip on trade also reflects Wellington’s current eagerness to distance itself from Beijing in most other areas.
Remarkably, the PM’s landmark trip to China had to share a press release with news that Luxon will also attend the annual North Atlantic Treaty Organization (NATO) summit later this month. Luxon will fly directly from China to Europe for the summit in The Hague, bridged only by a quick stop in Brussels.
It will be the fourth year in a row that a New Zealand Prime Minister has attended the NATO gathering, despite the South Pacific being half a world away from the North Atlantic. New Zealand is being invited to The Hague along with South Korea, Japan and Australia, which NATO collectively calls the ‘Indo-Pacific Four’.
The participation of the ‘IP4’ is very much aimed at China – but there is also an Iran dimension.
Mark Rutte, the NATO Secretary General, this week said China was ‘modernising and expanding its military at breakneck speed’. But he also added that ‘Russia has teamed up with China, North Korea and Iran’ and warned of a ‘really awful foursome of North Korea, China, Iran and Russia’.
Like Iran, New Zealand has a comprehensive strategic partnership with China. The New Zealand-China pact was signed in 2014 under Prime Minister John Key, who also represented Luxon’s centre-right National Party.
Wellington would now probably prefer to forget parts of the 2014 agreement with Beijing, such as a commitment to ‘develop and implement a long-term engagement plan for defence engagement’.
The US warship USS Blue Ridge recently visited Wellington, a highly-symbolic development in the context of the New Zealand-US relationship that hit the rocks over US ship visits in the 1980s. Meanwhile, a much-anticipated Defence Capability Plan released in April emphasised military ties with Australia, New Zealand’s only formal ally. To cap off the US-friendly agenda, Judtih Collins, the defence minister, recently travelled to Manila to sign a Status of Visiting Forces Agreement with the Philippines.
Still, everything is in flux.
There are signs that New Zealand is taking a harder line on Israel, a stance that could also impact on Wellington’s hopes to forge closer ties with Washington.
Winston Peters, the foreign minister, followed up Luxon’s remarks with a social media post that encouraged the resumption of talks between the United States and Iran and said ‘it is critical that all actors prioritise de-escalation’. Peters added that officials had conveyed New Zealand’s concerns to the Israeli and Iranian ambassadors in Wellington.
The foreign minister’s statement was carefully calibrated to avoid taking sides, referring to the Israeli strikes as an ‘escalation in tensions between Israel and Iran’.
In this respect, Peters was very much in step with early responses from his counterparts in Australia and the United Kingdom. In Australia, Penny Wong said ‘Australia is alarmed by the escalation’ and called on both sides to ‘prioritise dialogue and diplomacy’. Meanwhile, a statement from British foreign secretary David Lammy noted ‘further escalation is a serious threat to peace & stability in the region and in no one’s interest’ and called on ‘all parties to show restraint’.
Still, the early and relatively strong statements by both Luxon and Peters differed from their response to the first round of direct confrontation between Israel and Iran in April 2024. This began with an Israeli strike on Iran’s embassy in Damascus, but Peters did not criticise the bombing – which represented a significant violation of diplomatic norms – until pressed in a radio interview two weeks later.
However, after Iran sent a barrage of drones and ballistic missiles towards Israel in retaliation, Luxon and Peters quickly issued a joint statement to condemn ‘Iran’s shocking and illegal strikes against Israel’.
The slant was somewhat curious, given the pair’s inclination to speak out strongly on Gaza. Luxon issued joint statements with his counterparts from Australia and Canada calling for a ceasefire in December 2023 and February 2024, while Peters described the situation in Gaza as an ‘utter catastrophe’ in a speech to the United Nations in April 2024.
New Zealand went one step further this week, when it joined Australia, Canada, the UK and Norway in placing travel bans on Israeli finance minister Bezalel Smotrich and National Security Minister Itamar Ben-Gvir.
US Secretary of State Marco Rubio directly mentioned New Zealand is his condemnation of the move on a post on X, adding ‘we remind our partners not to forget who the real enemy is’.
And a spokesperson for Winston Peters also indicated that New Zealand officials would attend a UN conference in New York next week, to be co-hosted by France and Saudi Arabia, that will focus on a two-state solution for Palestinians.
The decision came despite the United States issuing a diplomatic cable ‘urging governments not to participate in the conference’ and warning of consequences for states that subsequently take ‘anti-Israel actions’.
If New Zealand is becoming more outspoken on the Middle East, it may reflect a level of frustration with the United States, for all the talk of closer ties.
After the US had spent more than two years encouraging New Zealand to consider involvement in an expanded AUKUS pact that is squarely aimed at China, the Donald Trump administration this week suddenly announced it would review the plan’s original submarine building programme.
The news left New Zealand unsure of where it stands, with Luxon commenting: ‘It’s been left very open-ended. We’re exploring Pillar Two – it’s been to be honest quite slow going’.
It is hard to see much progress on the second phase of AUKUS, which is supposedly focused on advanced technologies, until and unless the original ‘Pillar I’ is sorted out.
Christopher Luxon will have much to think about on his 12-hour flight to China.
Israel’s strikes on Iran complicate an already complex geopolitical picture.
The fog of war is here.
Geoffrey Miller is the Democracy Project’s international analyst and writes on current New Zealand foreign policy and related geopolitical issues. He has lived in Germany and the Middle East and is a learner of Arabic and Russian. This article was first published HERE
4 comments:
"...an International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA) board of governors resolution passed on Thursday that deemed Iran to be in breach of its nuclear non-proliferation obligations."
It's important to note that Israel doesn't have the same obligations as Iran because, unlike Iran, Israel has never bothered to sign up to any nuclear non-proliferation agreements, even though Israel has a substantial nuclear arsenal, and Iran does not.
Then again, Israel always holds itself to its own unique and self-intetested standards not applicable to anyone else, which is a good criterion for calling Israel a rogue state.
Israel is the one democracy in the ME. It is surrounded by countries that would like to wipe it off the map. It would only use or threaten to use nuclear weapons if its very existence was under threat. If Iran obtains a nuclear bomb it will likely use it against Israel and possibly other countries.
Chuck
You're just repeating Zionist talking points. Even if it were true that Israel was a genuine democracy (rather than an ethnostate where Jews have greater rights than non-Jews), so what?
First, I'm not sure how a nation's (purported) political system gives it license to do whatever it likes to those with different systems. Can a "democracy" have its way with a non-democracy, just because? Wouldn't such capricious violent behavior undermine the "democracy's" claims about itself?
Second, Israel, not its neighbours, would love to see surrounding nations wiped off the map, an activity which it has been deeply involved in with regards to Iraq, Lybia, Syria for example, which have, one way or another, ceased to exist as functional societies.
Third, Iran having nukes would allow Iran to avoid the same fate as Israel's targets previously noted above. There is no evidence, other than Israel's self-interested claims, that Iran has any intention of attacking any other nation.
Do you believe that Israel has a right to exist?
Post a Comment