Was this a friendly hack?

The news was important but did the delivery seem just a bit too low-key? In the wake of the UK and the US announcing that Chinese spies had been caught in the act and there would be repercussions, New Zealand followed suit, but with a press release, not a major announcement. And with no repercussions. That is in keeping with the awkward co-dependence of our relationship with China. The metaphor of a tightrope walk is accurate, because the relationship requires contortions and nearimpossible balancing on the New Zealand side.

Intelligence Agencies Minister Judith Collins explained that while Chinese hacking of our government systems was “totally unacceptable”, New Zealand and China have been “very good friends for a very long time”.

The usual way of talking about China is to say that we need their trade, which tends to mute our criticism, as though commerce buys compliance. Yet that is simplistic, because the response to this week’s spying revelations is steelier than it has ever been.

Foreign Affairs Minister Winston Peters almost thundered when he said in a press release that “foreign interference of this nature is unacceptable, and we have urged China to refrain from such activity in future”.

That is because of the nature of the allegation. The Government Communications Security Bureau (GCSB) revealed that a Chinese state-sponsored agency known as APT40 hacked Parliament’s systems in 2021. The same group was previously named in connection to commercial hacks in New Zealand but as the GCSB explained, this is the first time “state-sponsored malicious cyber activity” has been attributed to the People’s Republic of China, over “intrusion into New Zealand government systems”.

It is believed that none of the data was sensitive or strategic. In response, the Chinese Embassy called the accusations “groundless and irresponsible”.

In the UK example, the details of 40 million people were taken from an Electoral Commission register, presumably for the purposes of spreading disinformation. British MPs who were members of the Inter-Parliamentary Alliance on China were also targeted.

In the US, seven Chinese nationals were charged over a long campaign targeting politicians, journalists and businesses.

Both the UK and the US are applying sanctions to China. But New Zealand lacks the legislation to do the same.

While that may make us look weak, the explicit naming of China as the sponsor of the New Zealand hack is a relatively bold step. Both the naming and the timing must be interpreted in light of the Government’s increasingly close defence relationship with the UK and US.

Prime Minister Christopher Luxon’s comment was that while New Zealand has a “longstanding, complex relationship” with China, we call out differences when we can. That is a less bland statement than it sounds. It underscores that we maintain a relationship that allows for disagreement.

A week before the spy revelations, after meeting with Chinese Foreign Minister Wang Yi, Peters shared a statement on his

X (Twitter) account. “We observed that, alongside areas of co-operation, it was important to acknowledge areas of difference such as human rights, including the situation in Xinjiang, Hong Kong and Tibet,” Peters wrote.

That brief statement points to what New Zealand Contemporary China Research Centre director Jason Young described this week as “the narrowing of the bilateral relationship”. The more that challenges or areas of difference pile up, the harder it is for new opportunities or areas of cooperation to develop between New Zealand and China.

While the Chinese Embassy said “we have never, nor will we in the future, interfere in the internal affairs of other countries, including New Zealand”, no-one else doubts the GCSB’s conclusion. Routine denials are just part of the dance of diplomacy.

There was other spying news. By pure coincidence, Security Intelligence Service (SIS) director-general Andrew Hampton told the Intelligence and Security Committee it had concerns about seven New Zealand military-trained pilots who had helped train Chinese army aviators. Hampton described the activity as posing a major national security risk.

Both the GCSB and SIS are also working on the much more quotidian task of “identifying savings options” within the new, austere public service environment. And they are not alone.

We also learned this week that the Ministry of Ethnic Communities is cutting its workforce by 14%. Ironically, the same ministry got $9 million over four years in the 2023 Budget to “assess the impact of foreign interference activities in New Zealand”.

Only time will tell if the public service cuts have a lasting effect on national security.

Luxon’s comment was that while New Zealand has a “longstanding, complex relationship” with China, we call out differences when we can.