Big Ideas for a Small Nation?

New Zealand may be widely thought of as a small country, writes Opposition spokesperson, Defence and Veterans Chris Penk MP, but our maritime domain requires us to think bigger, and interoperability with allies is key.

Chris Penk MP is the Opposition Spokesperson for Defence and Veterans, and the Member for Kaipara ki Mahurangi. Prior to entering Parliament, he served in the Royal New Zealand Navy and subsequently the Royal Australian Navy.

What should our military be doing long-term? And why? How should we be thinking about resourcing the NZDF to ensure we can achieve our national aims?

Considering questions like these is one of the most important tasks of an Opposition spokesperson for Defence. In answering them, strategic thinking above the usual political realm is required.

As a general rule, politicians tend to focus on relatively small, separate and short term issues (ideally explained in a single soundbite) with good retail political value (ideally resulting in voter support).

The “big picture” requirements of New Zealand’s defence simply must be an exception to this rule. In other words, anyone interested in the long term future of this country must turn their mind to these questions. I’ve been doing that as best I can, even in the hurly burly of day-to-day political life.

My first observation would be that we’ve traditionally thought about our place in the world along the lines that we are a small country in the South Pacific, relatively isolated and insulated from the gravity of world events.

Isolation and insulation is not the reality we face in 2021, however. We live in an increasingly connected world and, by way of obvious example, we have been forced to react to a certain pandemic and related public health pressures of a transnational and international nature in the past 12 months.

This is a reasonably obvious point, though. The more interesting aspect of the typical Kiwi self-reflection is surely that we invariably consider ourselves a ‘small’ nation.

Simply stated, we must update our thinking to reflect geographic reality. We need to dismiss the myth that New Zealand and its strategic needs are small. I say this because it makes no sense whatsoever to discuss our borders and other sovereign markers without considering the realms of maritime and air space.

When we view New Zealand this way, the area in question is multiplied many times over. Based on data supplied by the Ministry for the Environment, the whole of our territory is roughly 21 times greater than our land mass.

To put that in context, if we include our Exclusive Economic Zone (EEZ) and continental shelf when we discuss what’s at stake for New Zealand, we are a larger nation than India (also taking into account those factors for that nation).

Obviously the size of our respective populations is another question altogether, but a relevant one nonetheless.

That leads me to my second observation, which is that the way we organise our Defence Force – including its size – needs to be relative to what requires defending.

If that may seem a rather obvious point to make, it is worth considering that discussions of levels of funding for the NZDF – especially when we compare ourselves to other nations’ defence forces – are almost invariably expressed in terms of dollars spent per capita.

Given our small population size relative to our territory, this presents a mismatch with alarming implications. So, what does our Defence Force need in order to guarantee the safety of resources within our oceans, protect

our sovereign interests and maintain regional order in the Pacific?

Roughly speaking, there are two options.

The first is that we expend a large fortune creating a defensive capability equal to the task. Given that schools and hospitals also rely on public funding – and that the need for that infrastructure and investment is much more readily obvious to the average Kiwi (voter) – this is an unattractive option to any politician.

The second option is to ensure that our defence needs are able to be met in concert with our allies. The word ‘allies’ is one I choose deliberately, in preference to ‘friends’. The latter is practically meaningless in this context.

At the political and diplomatic level, relationships with other states must be managed carefully in the light of this. However, it’s not my place (in other words, it’s above my paygrade!) to provide a firm view on where our geopolitical interests currently lie, in that sense.

As far as the military is concerned, meanwhile, our imperative must be to ensure that we enjoy a high degree of interoperability with allies and prospective allies.

That being so, my final observation is that all aspects of NZDF’s mandate need to be realised in this way. Our personnel must be recruited and trained in such a way that they will be able to fight alongside our allies. Our platforms and assets must be acquired and upgraded in ways that make sense in combination with those of our allies. Our peacetime operations, including exercises, must be undertaken when, where and how our allies need them to be undertaken such that they gain comfort and understanding about our capabilities.

The policies of government and opposition parties alike must be viewed through this lens. I invite readers of Line of Defence Magazine to challenge any politician who fails in their solemn duty to consider the strategic needs of the NZDF in favour of considerations that may be more urgent but are ultimately much less important.

Chris Penk MP is the Opposition Spokesperson for Defence and Veterans, and the Member for Kaipara ki Mahurangi. Prior to entering Parliament, he served in the Royal New Zealand Navy and subsequently the Royal Australian Navy.