“Oh, I mean… we obviously understand… we’re not saying that… what we’re saying is… we… we… we understand this… I don’t know how to be any clearer, guys…”
You know what’s going wrong here, eh? The Prime Minister doesn’t want to say what he actually thinks. He doesn’t want to take a position on the air strikes on Iran.
If he says he supports the strikes, he risks copping it from what may be a majority - but almost certainly is a very vocal minority - of New Zealanders who don’t like anything the US does militarily.
If he says he opposes the strikes, then he risks creating an international headline like 'New Zealand criticises US air strikes' and getting this country offside with the most volatile US president in modern history - and whatever comes with that.
So either way, he’s in a tough position.
A generous interpretation is that he’s trying to protect New Zealand from Trump. A less generous interpretation is that he’s trying to protect himself from unhappy voters.
The problem is that, as always, Chris Luxon trying to avoid taking a position ends the way it always does: he looks clumsy and uncertain. He makes mistakes - like saying he supports anything the US may do to prevent nuclear weapons, including carpet bombing - which he’s now had to walk back today.
And Luxon’s been here before, hasn’t he? Remember the three-minute interview with Mike Hosking where he wouldn’t take a position on whether he would have sacked Andrew Bayly?
I’d say that in trying to avoid choosing between supporting or not supporting the air strikes, he created a third position altogether - making himself look foolish.
And for a leader in an election year, that is the worst choice possible.
It is better - even if the position is unpopular - to pick one, than to look like he does today.
Heather du Plessis-Allan is a journalist and commentator who hosts Newstalk ZB's Drive show. This article was sourced from Newstalk ZB.
13 comments:
A familiar position - unless a clear pro-Maori issue where support is unequivocal.
I have read Luxon support base amongst women is lower than you would expect.
But think about it....
Women do not like indecisive (seen as weak )men. It makes us feel unsafe, it leaves us with no confidence
I dont want a weak man as a boss, no respect
I dont want a weak man as a husband
I dont like a weak man as a husband to a friend
I dont want weak men in my life if at all possible, not colleagues, not anyone i need to interact with.
Women avoid weak men, Luxon is a problem
Luxon is weak and indecisive that is his biggest problem
According to my Time magazine article on Iran:
Prominent Iranians who think the present regime is not fit for purpose. Azar Nafisi, Rabin Jahanbegloo, Azadeh Moaveni, Arash Azizi, and Shahrnush Parsipur.
Most say it is an ideology that has failed. So, it appears it is well worth having a committed goal of aiming for something better.
As Vaclav Havel said "Hope is definitely not the conviction that something will turn out well but the certainty that something makes sense, regardless of how it turns out".
The above lines tell you where Luxon is failing, he won't take a stand on anything unless he believes the outcome is certain, which of course it can't be.
Brave people in history all had to take a stand at some point.
Iran through proxies attacked Israel on October 7th 2023 and that started this war. Iran killed an estimated 50,000 of its own young citizens last month. I don't have a shadow of a doubt that the US is doing the right thing. It surprises me that Chris Luxon is so lost on this.
It is important New Zealanders compare the statement of Deputy PM David Seymour with PM Luxon utterances in regard to the US statement of war against Iran .
Our 2026 election is approaching fast and the Deputy PM Seymour is a leader of substance for NZ whose time has come.
Possibly for the same reason he is so ambivalent about the maori takeover. He is probably scared of both maori and Islamic extremist nutters.
This non-issue is an hilarious media beat up. Who cares what his position is? What difference does it make either way? Another cringe case of NZ pretending that what NZ thinks is remotely significant.
Well said Anon @ 7.02. You make an important point.
Anon @9.12 --it is an issue because his political opponents are attacking him on it in election year. It is also important because he continues to show weakness in making an stand on anything --that is not leadership.
No matter what position he takes he will upset some but most will agree or accept his his right to take a position.
The so called rules based order has been replaced by the rule that there are now no rules. As to the matter of Luxon. I wrote somewhere else on a comment that Luxon is scared of politics, doesn’t understand politics and would far rather not be in politics. Does the rest of the world care what New Zealand’s view is, on anything? NZ can nit-pick in its own backyard as much as it likes. It makes no difference.
My point is to anyone bleating about illegalities. Stop and ask whether it was/is legal for Hezbollah from Lebanon to fire rockets, for years, into Israel? Or Gaza to have fired rockets in the same way over the years. What is legal and what isn’t? It has been written up for God knows how long that Iran is the supplier of armaments to Hamas and Hezbollah. Consider the concept of a Just War. This “War” had its beginnings back in 1979 at the time of Iran’s Islamic revolution. Memo: not started by Israel. And take on board the fact War is a messy business. I doubt Luxon would understand a word of that.
Could it be because on international matters Luxon’ opinion is not his own but a NZ position? And at present NZ is split into people who believe that Trump is always right, those that believe that he is always wrong and those that try to make sense of the fluid and shifty objectives of the American administration?
Luxon is best not to comment on the matter. His person views aren’t government policy and he’s too inexperienced in foreign policy to be able to come out with a nuanced position. The left are all about international causes but care nothing about what happens locally.
He doesn’t want to be on the losing side?
This war is going to be a disaster, especially to trading nation like ours
How keen are we to get on the no shipping list?
The world is now rid of one less murderous tyrant.
To hell with the fringe mob, the Marxists, the apologists for extremism and haters of western culture.
Some might argue - if you choose to side with a devil there's a very special place reserved in hell.
Post a Comment
Thank you for joining the discussion. Breaking Views welcomes respectful contributions that enrich the debate. Please ensure your comments are not defamatory, derogatory or disruptive. We appreciate your cooperation.