Well, which is it? Would New Zealand support a United States intervention in Iraq, as the Prime Minister said in Washington? Or would we take our lead from the United Nations Security Council, as the Foreign Minister said in New York? The issue is probably academic, President Obama is not about to intervene, according to John Key after their meeting at the weekend. "I think the media are a long way ahead of him in terms of whether there would be any kind of air strike or drone strike," he told Herald political editor Audrey Young. "Their preferred option is to get a more inclusive government in Iraq and for the Iraqi people to sort it out."
Nor is the UN Security Council likely to authorise any sort of armed intervention against the Sunni extremists threatening Shia rule in Baghdad. Foreign Affairs Minister Murray McCully's deference to the UN was not exactly an expression of confidence. The Security Council should be given time to show leadership over the Iraq crisis, he said, adding, "Sadly, we saw it fail in its duty to the international community in relation to the issue of chemical weapons in Syria. We have seen it fail on too many occasions." But with New Zealand bidding for a seat on the council next year, this country could not be a party to action that would bypass it.
If the US did take such action, New Zealand's response would probably be to say nothing against it. This Government may not be anxious to support drone strikes or other forms of tactical support, but it would be unlikely to oppose them. The Prime Minister's meetings in Washington with the President, Secretary of State John Kerry and Defence Secretary Chuck Hagel, not to mention the secret visit he appears to have made to the National Security Agency, all signify a return to a normal relationship. We may no longer have an active alliance but New Zealand is a natural partner in intelligence sharing and diplomatic efforts.