Discussion:
Five Eyes
Add Reply
James Christophers
2021-04-24 05:52:44 UTC
Reply
Permalink
https://www.theguardian.com/world/2021/apr/23/new-zealands-stance-on-china-has-deep-implications-for-the-five-eyes-alliance

Plenty of political, economic and security implications for any genuine debater to get his teeth into.

At first sight it looks to me like realpolitik in play, with an eye on the mid-term future of the global economy very much at the heart of it.
Rich80105
2021-04-24 09:44:07 UTC
Reply
Permalink
On Fri, 23 Apr 2021 22:52:44 -0700 (PDT), James Christophers
Post by James Christophers
https://www.theguardian.com/world/2021/apr/23/new-zealands-stance-on-china-has-deep-implications-for-the-five-eyes-alliance
Plenty of political, economic and security implications for any genuine debater to get his teeth into.
At first sight it looks to me like realpolitik in play, with an eye on the mid-term future of the global economy very much at the heart of it.
From near the end of the article:
"Ciaran Martin, the former chief executive of the National
Cybersecurity Centre, part of GCHQ, has said that the idea that New
Zealand had endangered the foundations of the network was to
misunderstand its specific security role. He wrote on Twitter: “Five
Eyes governments could choose to expand the alliance for example
coordinate foreign policy on China. But they have not, yet, and it
would be a huge change in how the Five Eyes works. For now, New
Zealand is not opposing anything anyone has actually (publicly)
proposed”."

The fuss seems to be a bit of a beat up - perhaps designed to attack
Jacinda Ardern who has embarrassed some other leaders by being a
conspiuously better leader in terms of Covid-19. Certainly New Zealand
has for quite a few years now taken a relatively independent foreign
policy - and to imply that participating in joint intelligence
gathering means that participation covers foreign policy is farcical -
especially given the lack of any cohesion on foreign policy within the
five eyes alliance under Trump . . .
James Christophers
2021-04-24 23:47:23 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Post by Rich80105
On Fri, 23 Apr 2021 22:52:44 -0700 (PDT), James Christophers
Post by James Christophers
https://www.theguardian.com/world/2021/apr/23/new-zealands-stance-on-china-has-deep-implications-for-the-five-eyes-alliance
Plenty of political, economic and security implications for any genuine debater to get his teeth into.
At first sight it looks to me like realpolitik in play, with an eye on the mid-term future of the global economy very much at the heart of it.
"Ciaran Martin, the former chief executive of the National
Cybersecurity Centre, part of GCHQ, has said that the idea that New
Zealand had endangered the foundations of the network was to
misunderstand its specific security role. He wrote on Twitter: “Five
Eyes governments could choose to expand the alliance for example
coordinate foreign policy on China. But they have not, yet, and it
would be a huge change in how the Five Eyes works. For now, New
Zealand is not opposing anything anyone has actually (publicly)
proposed”."
The fuss seems to be a bit of a beat up - perhaps designed to attack
Jacinda Ardern who has embarrassed some other leaders by being a
conspiuously better leader in terms of Covid-19. Certainly New Zealand
has for quite a few years now taken a relatively independent foreign
policy - and to imply that participating in joint intelligence
gathering means that participation covers foreign policy is farcical -
especially given the lack of any cohesion on foreign policy within the
five eyes alliance under Trump . . .
From the Five Eyes' angle, it's about China which has shown that, if there is any kind of a global war to be won, then it shall be through economic intelligence, not military conflict. There is also the growing - I would say inevitable - political ambivalence of those countries China has made hostage to its economic policies - e.g. South Korea, New Zealand - this inescapably set against Beijing's repressive domestic policies that most of the rest of the civilised world rightly finds abhorrent.

When you're out to conquer the world, ruthless, unheeding pragmatism beats all. Look only to Britannia and her Empire upon which the sun never set, and to hell with human rights; all of which, as History repeats itself, puts today's rise of China and its ruling technocrats in the shade.
Rich80105
2021-04-25 01:05:35 UTC
Reply
Permalink
On Sat, 24 Apr 2021 16:47:23 -0700 (PDT), James Christophers
Post by James Christophers
Post by Rich80105
On Fri, 23 Apr 2021 22:52:44 -0700 (PDT), James Christophers
Post by James Christophers
https://www.theguardian.com/world/2021/apr/23/new-zealands-stance-on-china-has-deep-implications-for-the-five-eyes-alliance
Plenty of political, economic and security implications for any genuine debater to get his teeth into.
At first sight it looks to me like realpolitik in play, with an eye on the mid-term future of the global economy very much at the heart of it.
"Ciaran Martin, the former chief executive of the National
Cybersecurity Centre, part of GCHQ, has said that the idea that New
Zealand had endangered the foundations of the network was to
misunderstand its specific security role. He wrote on Twitter: “Five
Eyes governments could choose to expand the alliance for example
coordinate foreign policy on China. But they have not, yet, and it
would be a huge change in how the Five Eyes works. For now, New
Zealand is not opposing anything anyone has actually (publicly)
proposed”."
The fuss seems to be a bit of a beat up - perhaps designed to attack
Jacinda Ardern who has embarrassed some other leaders by being a
conspiuously better leader in terms of Covid-19. Certainly New Zealand
has for quite a few years now taken a relatively independent foreign
policy - and to imply that participating in joint intelligence
gathering means that participation covers foreign policy is farcical -
especially given the lack of any cohesion on foreign policy within the
five eyes alliance under Trump . . .
From the Five Eyes' angle, it's about China which has shown that, if there is any kind of a global war to be won, then it shall be through economic intelligence, not military conflict. There is also the growing - I would say inevitable - political ambivalence of those countries China has made hostage to its economic policies - e.g. South Korea, New Zealand - this inescapably set against Beijing's repressive domestic policies that most of the rest of the civilised world rightly finds abhorrent.
As I am sure does New Zealand. Our independent foreign policy does not
mean we necesarily disagree with the concerns of the UK and USA and
others, but sometimes it is more productive to have different
approaches on issues of concern from the international community. I
have no doubt that our government has fairly represented the views of
New Zealanders to those best in a position to influence actions by
China; they will in any event be in no doubt about New Zealand's
concerns and those of other countries from their monitoring of our
media. Getting results does not always require public posturing; sadly
that is often seen as all the blustering from the Right is intended to
achieve - a public image for a domestic audience.
Post by James Christophers
When you're out to conquer the world, ruthless, unheeding pragmatism beats all. Look only to Britannia and her Empire upon which the sun never set, and to hell with human rights; all of which, as History repeats itself, puts today's rise of China and its ruling technocrats in the shade.
James Christophers
2021-04-26 00:10:11 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Post by Rich80105
On Sat, 24 Apr 2021 16:47:23 -0700 (PDT), James Christophers
Post by James Christophers
Post by Rich80105
On Fri, 23 Apr 2021 22:52:44 -0700 (PDT), James Christophers
Post by James Christophers
https://www.theguardian.com/world/2021/apr/23/new-zealands-stance-on-china-has-deep-implications-for-the-five-eyes-alliance
Plenty of political, economic and security implications for any genuine debater to get his teeth into.
At first sight it looks to me like realpolitik in play, with an eye on the mid-term future of the global economy very much at the heart of it.
"Ciaran Martin, the former chief executive of the National
Cybersecurity Centre, part of GCHQ, has said that the idea that New
Zealand had endangered the foundations of the network was to
misunderstand its specific security role. He wrote on Twitter: “Five
Eyes governments could choose to expand the alliance for example
coordinate foreign policy on China. But they have not, yet, and it
would be a huge change in how the Five Eyes works. For now, New
Zealand is not opposing anything anyone has actually (publicly)
proposed”."
The fuss seems to be a bit of a beat up - perhaps designed to attack
Jacinda Ardern who has embarrassed some other leaders by being a
conspiuously better leader in terms of Covid-19. Certainly New Zealand
has for quite a few years now taken a relatively independent foreign
policy - and to imply that participating in joint intelligence
gathering means that participation covers foreign policy is farcical -
especially given the lack of any cohesion on foreign policy within the
five eyes alliance under Trump . . .
From the Five Eyes' angle, it's about China which has shown that, if there is any kind of a global war to be won, then it shall be through economic intelligence, not military conflict. There is also the growing - I would say inevitable - political ambivalence of those countries China has made hostage to its economic policies - e.g. South Korea, New Zealand - this inescapably set against Beijing's repressive domestic policies that most of the rest of the civilised world rightly finds abhorrent.
As I am sure does New Zealand. Our independent foreign policy does not
mean we necesarily disagree with the concerns of the UK and USA and
others, but sometimes it is more productive to have different
approaches on issues of concern from the international community. I
have no doubt that our government has fairly represented the views of
New Zealanders to those best in a position to influence actions by
China; they will in any event be in no doubt about New Zealand's
concerns and those of other countries from their monitoring of our
media. Getting results does not always require public posturing; sadly
that is often seen as all the blustering from the Right is intended to
achieve - a public image for a domestic audience.
Better to view it from a national rather than a party political perspective, this, I think, being the way Washington and Beijing view us, each presumably with its own "plans for New Zealand".

Unwise, therefore, for this country to let itself be inveigled into becoming a cat's paw to satisfy the self-seeking expediencies and machinations of others which have their own significant axes to grind.

Grounded yet nuanced seems about right to me.

Loading...