It’s early days at the moment. It appears both we and Australia are simply asking for more information at this point, probably along the lines of what help is actually required and under what circumstances. Those circumstances are important because I would imagine New Zealand would not want to agree to help if there were a hot war underway — meaning shots being fired. I’d expect we would only be willing to help if there were an active and sustained ceasefire in place.
That said, I think that in the end we will still say yes because we’ve already indicated this is what we plan to do. We’ve already signed a joint statement with countries including the UK, France, Germany and Japan, saying we are ready to provide appropriate help to reopen the strait.
Now, I don’t think this is going to be popular when the time comes. I don’t think it will be popular in this country. There are now multiple polls and surveys showing consistently that Kiwis want nothing to do with a war started by the US. However, I think we can — and should — separate the war from the oil. Helping in the war is one thing but helping to reopen and keep the strait open is also helping ourselves because we need that oil to flow. We need diesel to keep food on our supermarket shelves.
Of course, we do have another option: we could simply leave it to other countries to do the hard work for us. But that would be a bad call because if there’s one thing we know about Donald Trump, it’s that he is transactional — and if we don’t help, he will remember.
So I would say that now the request has come in, it’s only a matter of time. And if the strait stays closed, I’d almost guarantee New Zealand will be heading there.
Heather du Plessis-Allan is a journalist and commentator who hosts Newstalk ZB's Drive show.
20 comments:
Our reluctance to assist is purely the fault of the lies we are continually and consistently told by our media- this is not the war you think it is.
For genuine coverage of what is happening in Iran a source worth your time is victor davis Hanson
Nz should have been alongside our American brothers from the very start- imagine the trade kudos we’d have by now too - not to mention the ally when china shows up wanting our country
Of course we shouldn't go. Trump is the devil and must be resisted no matter the cost. The fact that we would be giving Iran control of the world, a control they have shown they are happy to use against the West, is a small price to pay. Far better to tell our grandkids that we stuck it to Trump as they go to pray five times a day than the alternative.
A “war started by the US”? Or, a war started by Hamas.
"A “war started by the US”? Or, a war started by Hamas."
No, it was a war started by the US, quite obviously. Or more accurately, it was a war started by Israel instrumentalising the US.
It seems to me that Israel is always the common denominator in almost all Middle Eastern strife, whether directly or via its US proxy.
Not only have the Judeo-Americans botched their latest war of aggression aimed at regime change, they've actually strengthened the Iranian position – the Iranians were controlling the Strait of Hormuz before the they were attacked while they are now.
The best way to solve the Hormuz crisis is for the Judeo-Americans to leave with their tails between their legs. But that won't happen, so we all have to pay the price of their arrogance.
It's pretty obvious the Government should have no part in any US led initiative to open up Hormuz, if only because Trump is hopelessly unpredictable and therefore has no credibility to act as a leader in ANY context. We have already aligned ourselves with Europe on this issue. We are also firm supporters of the United Nations stance on the war, and by extension, the blockade, which is that it's illegal. So here's the best-case scenario. The US follows through on Trump's assertion that the US doesn't need the Straits anyway and so has nothing to lose by unilaterally lifting the blockade. If Iran then persists in its threats to shipping, Europe brings pressure to bear, with NZ support, to reinstate the international right of free passage by reimposing sanctions. All the time NZ continues to diversify its sources of refined petroleum product, fertilizer, helium, and all the other essential commodities that hitherto flowed through Hormuz. Luxon is making good progress on that score with his intiatives in Singapore and Australia. The world is already adapting to the new trade reality lead by Canada who, by the way have already commenced supplying crude oil to Korean refineries to replace the missing middle easten product. And isn't that where our refined product originates?
@boethius - Israel is rightfully defending themselves against the aggressor and attacker- which was hamas - Israel didn’t start the war.
The funders of Hamas are Iran.
The funders of Iran are China.
Not even other Arab and Muslim nations want anything to do with Hamas or Iran- uae, Saudi, Oman, all are on the side of the USA and Israel.
Hezbollah - funded by Iran- and again the attackers of Israel.
Israel’s crime today - existing.
Jews have been subjected to threats of annhilation since time began - this is the first time they’ve fought back by attacking the true source - and you condemn them for it.
Good on USA for standing with Israel.
Oman and Saudi Arabia do not recognise the state of Israel. To say that they are "on the side of Israel" is arrant nonsense.
What the author of this comment is overlooking is the Sunni/Shia divide in Islam. Saudi Arabia is the global centre of Sunni Islam and Iran is that of Shia Islam. Like the Catholic/Protestant Punch and Judy show in Europe after the Reformation, the Sunnis and Shiites have been at one another's throats ever since a major schism.
Oman is largely Ibadi Muslim, a sect that belongs to neither Sunni nor Shia, with most of the rest being Sunni. The UAE is almost entirely Sunni.
The Jews didn't do too badly in the genocide game during the Bronze and early Iron Ages themselves e.g. the Amelikites and Midianites were pretty well annihilated and they tried hard to do the same to the Canaanites (all with the blessing of their tribal god, of course). People have long memories in the Middle East.......
Anonymous at 12:05pm
Because I don't know you, I have to assume that your view (which you'd have to have been born yesterday to affirm, or at least disregard the last 100 years of history in the region) is based on ignorance rather than dishonesty.
If we're talking about sources of funding being the driving forces behind the conflict, then we should never forget that the US taxpayer has pumped upwards of $300 billion USD into Israel since 1946.
If the US cut its funding to Israel, we'd see an end to the ME conflict in about 5 minutes.
https://www.cfr.org/articles/us-aid-israel-four-charts
This lady is wrong. New Zealand is for New Zealand. We’re not simping for other peoples wars. USA invaded Iran and all we got is dead schoolchildren and soldiers and high petrol prices.
Maybe we go if they release the Epstein files.
While I have total sympathy for the Jewish cause, the current hostilities are simply a continuation of the agression fostered by Muhammed, and the behaviour of his Islamic companions and Caliphs of the 7th, 8th and 9th centuries CE. That behaviour is locked in place today and no-one doubts it's an existential threat to Western values. But most of the West has moved on from the dark-ages and countering the Islamic threat has become rather more nuanced than the Trumpian threat to destroy the Iranian civilisation. It doesn't help that he's targeted the wrong civilisation since Muhammed hails from Medina in today's Saudi Arabia which is no-where near Persia. Islamic expansionism needs to be checked, but Trump et al are the worst possible candidates for leadership of that effort if only because they exhibit precisely the same mindless barbarism and blinkered dogmatism as the most comitted jihadist. And isn't exactly what we consider uncivilised on the Islamic side?
Exactly how will the US get the Hormuz straits re-opened? Military force is Trump's obvious solution, which will cost many lives (as well as being mighty expensive - those Patriot missiles cost $3.6 million each). Why should NZ get dragged into that?
One warship per million unredacted Epstein files. Let’s go.
This appears to be part of president Trump strategy on the Iran war: involve others so you have somebody between you and the ventilator when the proverbial hits.
@jones boy @ boethius- at what point do the children stop paying for the sins of the parents/ grandparents?
We seem to be all for ending treaty crap…but can’t let the Israelis just be?
They are a so reign nation invaded and civilians slaughtered by soldiers from another country who took delight in murdering babies - in microwaves no less.
If someone turned up in nz and did that would it be ok for us to go and fight back?
On top of that - the USA is the only reason nz and Australia have been living in a sustained prolonged peacetime.the current leader is the first one to ask that we stand with them against the evil Shia islamists )who slaughtered 40,000 of their own citizen just three weeks before the first bomb was dropped).
Instead of taking the Helen Clark route of condemning Israel and the USA we should be thanking them and asking what we can do to help.
The children are not responsible for the sins of parents or grandparents….any more than your kids will take on your debts when you die. At some point the world needs to stop tolerating the intolerant and work together
I thought biblical accounts were all myth .The Amalekites were described biblically as the first nation to attack the Israelites after the Exodus, notoriously targeting the vulnerable women , children and elderly . They became archetypal enemies of Israel , allying with other nations to raid ,plunder and impoverish the Israelites during the era of the judges.They were relentlessly cruel to Israelites . The Midianites had a different tactic alluring Israelite men into sexual immorality and worship of Baal. But the exodus and other OT accounts are all made up according to modern secular academia .So what are we talking about here ? Real history or myth?
The chant of "From the ocean to the sea Palestine will be free 'means annihilation of Israel .
Myths are embellishments of events passed down by word of mouth from generation to generation. The story about the walls of Jericho is an excellent example. Jericho was very real, and a very prosperous place until it was hit by a seismic event or a siege that brought the walls down - archaeologists aren't sure. What they are sure about is that whatever brought those walls down was well before the time suggested by the subsequent Hebrew myth of Joshua and the trumpets.
Unlike the Amelikites, the Midianites have left plenty of physical evidence of their once sophisticated civilisation, but again they went into decline for various reasons that are not fully understood by period historians. And again the Hebrews wove some good yarns around this one-time rival tribe.
It was endless tribe versus tribe conflict in the Near and Middle East, each tribe with its own deity and each tribe coming up with its own embellished version of events (some would say little has changed!). Are we talking history or myth, asks Anon 845? Answer: both, firmly intertwined.
On the moral/ethical plane, the news is not good: mass murder, rape and enslavement were glorified. No doubt each tribe was guilty of these 'spoils of war' and their little tribal god gave its blessing to these activities. The little Hebrew tribal god was no exception. Isn't it weird how gods are reflections of the people who worship them? Now I wonder why that is......
Many theologians argue that the understanding of God's character evolves throughout the OT , moving from a, at times localized warrior deity, toward a more universal compassionate entity throughout the OT into a just God , culminating in the New Testament.
The Midianites lived in what is now Saudi Arabia which fits the biblical account of an exodus from Egypt and a return to Israel from where they had originated.
The story of Jericho illustrates how archaeology
usually declares biblical stories are myths until new evidence is excavated. Gradually more and more accounts in scripture are being verified making the bible more historical than eg Greek myths.
Anon 1113, your first para fits in perfectly with the paradigm that "Man creates god(s) in his own image". As civilisations become more sophisticated (and humane), their god-image is modified in line with these developments. Thanks for that, I could hardly have put it better myself.
Your second para runs into a slight problem, which is that there is broad consensus that there never was an 'exodus'. This is a foundational narrative of a polyphyletic tribe. The exodus myth MAY have at its core a movement of a small number of slaves (probably Canaanites) out of Egypt but nothing like the scale invoked by the myth. The bit about "returning to Israel from where they had originated" is sheer bunkum dreamed up during the exile in Babylon when different aetiological traditions were woven together by the scribes who produced Genesis.
You seem to have missed my earlier point about myths usually being embellishments of actual events. In the case of Jericho, we have known since 1868 that it was a real place but that does not add any credence to the myth surrounding it.
You are right about biblical accounts being more accurate than Greek ones. Most Greek myths appear to stem from ancient ancestor worship, dead obvious in the case of e.g. Haphaestus, less so in others. The Jewish myths are mostly based on quasi-historical narratives that became distorted through oral transmission over many generations.
Ridiculous as it may seem to many a modern observer, these issues remain topical to this day in the Middle East. The ultraorthodox parties in the Knesset lay claim to a vast area of the region based on these and other myths. The Qu'ran recognises the initial claim of the Jews to Palestine but claims that their common god then revoked its promise to them and ceded it to the Muslims. It is disconcerting to me as a rational man that mass murder continues to be carried out because of Bronze and Iron Age myths and deities.
Choice of Democracy or Sharia Law.
And just what "assistance" would NZ be able to contribute to the situation in the Hormuz straight?
A recent Naval peace time "contribution" ended in a fiasco and there is yet no guarantee of any fixes.
As much as we like to believe in the myth we "punch above our weight" on the world stage.
It would probably be better if our defense forces first address their endemic inadequacies and failures before wandering off on the high seas to create another embarrassing debacle.
At least we now have an ex-sailor as minister rather than a social media commentator and advocate for toilet drills.
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.