NZ, Aust still have much in common

Despite recent hiccups in the trans-Tasman relationship, Australia remains committed to its relationship with New Zealand, according to a foreign policy statement released in Canberra. But there are now significant differences in the way we and our Australian mates see the world.

It is interesting to compare the newly released Australian Foreign Policy Statement with the New Zealand equivalent, the Ministry of Foreign Affairs and Trade’s Strategic Intentions 2017-2021. Two points of divergence concern the United States and United Nations.

The United Nations has been an essential pivot point of New Zealand’s international relations, especially since we fell out with our Anzus defence pact partners, Australia and the US, over nuclear warship visits in the 1980s. Active participation in the UN has enabled tiny New Zealand to punch well above its weight in recent decades.

This strategy is wholeheartedly endorsed in the New Zealand MFAT document, where it is described as giving New Zealand the opportunity to ‘‘engage and influence at the highest level to advance our strategic and relationship objectives’’.

The quibble we might have with the UN is that it doesn’t always reflect the interests of New Zealand and other small states. The Kiwi strategy is to work with it to improve this.

The Australians, however, have expressed forthright dissatisfaction with the UN in their policy document.

‘‘The United Nations system is frequently cumbersome and sometimes responds too slowly to urgent challenges,’’ according to the Australians – remember this is a document supposedly written in diplomatic language. They want more accountability, a reform of the UN’s governance, and more focus on conflict prevention, ‘‘rather than waiting for crises to develop’’.

Some Australian commentators have noted the lack of attention the UN gets – just five paragraphs of direct commentary in a 136-page document. The UN seems to have been sidelined in the Australians’ thinking.

Instead, and despite US President Donald Trump’s isolationist tendencies, the Australians still pin their future security on being a good friend to the US. ‘‘Our alliance with the United States is central to Australia’s approach to the Indo-Pacific,’’ the strategy states. ‘‘Without strong US political, economic and security engagement, power is likely to shift more quickly in the region and it will be more difficult for Australia to achieve the levels of security and stability we seek.’’

The words about shifting power can be taken as a reference to China, whose growing influence is acknowledged in both countries’ strategies, but more wholeheartedly embraced by New Zealand, which sees in its 1.4 billion population and the 640m people of South East Asia ‘‘a significant opportunity’’ for trade.

Meanwhile, New Zealand’s document shows that we now expect little from the American side of the Pacific. The words ‘‘United States’’ appear in the New Zealand statement only four times, and in three cases they are paired with the words ‘‘and China’’, acknowledging the developing jostle for power.

The remaining New Zealand reference to the US is a forlorn expression of hope for a trade deal – a vanishing prospect since Trump pulled out of the Trans-Pacific Partnership arrangements.

So is there any ground where Australian and New Zealand interests still align? Absolutely – especially in the bilateral relationship and our joint desire to further the development of the Pacific.