Opportunity for NZ to rethink global role
The new government has yet to make a global impact. has some suggestions.
New Zealand’s new government has been oddly silent on foreign policy priorities. Prime Minister Jacinda Ardern has outlined an ambitious 100-day plan to address child poverty, homelessness and water quality, but there is little indication of whether it will translate its domestic agenda on the world stage.
We don’t know whether the government will rethink New Zealand’s development policy (which changed dramatically under National), whether it will push for gender equality, and what international partners it will look to work with. Tackling these questions seems even more pertinent, since Ardern has announced her pregnancy and Deputy Prime Minister Winston Peters will take over (briefly) as prime minister in June.
There are obvious reasons why we’ve not heard much on foreign policy yet. Most Kiwis care more about domestic issues – and this is understandable as there are lots of serious issues to figure out on our shores.
In addition, the government does not have anyone with clear foreign policy expertise and commitment to forging a new progressive, independent foreign policy. The Labour Party no longer has David Shearer or Phil Goff; and the Greens have lost Kennedy Graham.
In Peters we have a competent foreign minister who is likely to build strong relationships with our key partners in the Pacific. If his last term as foreign minister is an indicator he will be also be a strong supporter of the Ministry of Foreign Affairs and Trade, but not outline bold new priorities.
Meanwhile, David Parker, as Minister of Trade and Export Growth, is rethinking New Zealand’s trade agenda. He wants New Zealand to sign free trade agreements that facilitate international trade and protect the nation’s economy, environment, labour and Ma¯ ori. Hence Ardern’s renegotiation of the TPP agreement to ensure foreign nonresidents could not buy homes in New Zealand late last year.
Parker is already urging the Ministry of Foreign Affairs and Trade to prioritise new ‘‘gold standard’’ trade agreements that include clauses to curb the negative effects of globalisation on New Zealand.
He will be strongly supported by James Shaw, as Minister of Climate Change, who has an ambitious domestic agenda to establish an independent Climate Commissioner, and to pass legislation, and implement the necessary policy, to make New Zealand carbon neutral by 2030.
Shaw will also look to translate his commitment to address climate change on the international stage.
But what else could the new government do on the international stage? Here I suggest three areas where New Zealand could think innovatively.
1) Gender equality
Ardern and Minister of Women’s Affairs Julie Anne Genter are strong advocates of gender equality and women’s rights. They have pledged to address the pay gap in the public sector.
They could also advocate for more women to be selected as ambassadors and in other senior roles in the MFAT. New Zealand could look to Justin Trudeau, who is increasing the number of women ambassadors in the Canadian foreign service, and actively encouraging other foreign services to do the same.
This country could also ensure our development and foreign policy supports women’s rights to an even greater extent than currently (e.g. through funding initiatives that combat domestic violence; ensuring women have access to family planning; and get a seat at the table in peacenegotiations). New Zealand ministers could also talk with Sweden, which has outlined a ‘‘feminist foreign policy’’.
2) Ma¯ ori and foreign policy
New Zealand could lead the world in engaging indigenous peoples in foreign-policy making. This government will need to tackle more directly how the Crown engages Ma¯ ori in foreign policy. Under the last National government the Waitangi Tribunal ruled that MFAT had not sufficiently consulted Ma¯ ori as partners (as opposed to stakeholders) in the Trans-Pacific Partnership negotiations.
If the government takes this ruling to heart, it could look for innovative ways to engage Ma¯ ori in discussions over our positions on international negotiations.
This would require MFAT to scale up its ability to listen to the diverse range of Ma¯ ori priorities across New Zealand. This would not be easy, nor a typical role for a foreign service as most are geared up to listen to what’s happening internationally, not domestically. Other countries would be interested in such innovation – Canada is already thinking about how it engages First Nations in the reopened negotiations over the North Atlantic Free Trade Agreement.
3) Development and aid
This government will need to consider how and for what purpose it delivers development assistance.
Former foreign minister Murray McCully closed down New Zealand’s independent aid agency, NZAID, and argued that NZAID’s focus on alleviating poverty was ‘‘too nebulous’’ and our aid should instead focus on ‘‘sustainable economic growth as the means by which we seek to improve the lives of our poorest neighbours’’.
The new government may – or may not – want to recreate an independent aid agency, but it should, at a bare minimum, reconsider the objectives that drive our aid allocation. This government may want to focus on addressing global poverty and inequality, and ensuring our aid generates broader social and environment benefits to all.
New Zealand may want to invest more in multilateral institutions, at a time when United Nations’ funding is under threat from the Trump Administration (which has cut funding to the UN Educational, Scientific and Cultural Organisation and its Relief and Works Agency). New Zealand should advocate for core funding to international organisations, as they are not only starved of funds, but increasingly rely on earmarked funding.
There are many other areas where New Zealand could rethink its role in the world: conflict resolution and peacekeeping; humanitarian and refugees; and human rights.
We are already making important contributions to international co-operation on whaling, disarmament and, if Peters has his way, possibly on North Korea. Now is the time for a broad public debate about where and how New Zealand can contribute on the international stage.
❚ Nina Hall is Assistant Professor of International Relations, Johns Hopkins School of Advanced International Studies.