Charles Swindells: Status quo no option for friends to progress

Charles Swindells

Opinion

It is easy to overlook the fact that New Zealand and the United States are related in many, many respects. In a way we are like family. We share common elements of history and culture.

We are both young countries with a stoic and worthy commitment to democratic principles and the rights of man. Both countries continue to share the liberal values of freedom and peace, justice and human rights. We have a common goal of a world that is stable, peaceful, prosperous and democratic.

Over my four years here I have also come to see that in some ways we are very different. It's not just the noticeable things - geography, accents, or the way New Zealanders insist - wrongly, I believe - that Vegemite on toast makes a tasty breakfast.

The way we look at the world today and our roles within that world can be very different. How each country looks at our dispute of 20 years ago - what caused it, what the remaining implications are - can be very different. I think if we are honest with ourselves we would admit that those differences remain. Let's face it, family differences are the hardest to face up to.

So the question is: what are these differences? Are they inevitable because of different ways of viewing the world, or are they a product of a single split in policy that happened 20 years ago? Can we bring ourselves closer, or will we continue to drift ever further apart?

I confess that I do not have the answers. But I do have a suggestion - we need to talk about it.

Successive governments in both countries have been unwilling or unable to deal comprehensively with the strains that have accumulated in the bilateral relationship since the mid-eighties. Let me be clear.

I don't think that departures in global interests or differences in political, economic and defence policies will ever force the US-New Zealand relationship to an end. Neither does my Government. The United States not only expects differences, we respect differences.

Such is the nature of democracy and our respect for national sovereignty. I strongly suspect that New Zealanders feel the same way.

But a key pillar of a mature and trusting relationship is honest and open dialogue. The past 20 years have witnessed, unfortunately, a somewhat stifled dialogue. We keep disagreeing about the past. But the world moves on and we need to move with it.

A lack of dialogue, in any relationship, creates mistrust. That kind of mistrust continues to affect a range of aspects of the bilateral relationship and not just military co-operation.

Values and interests change with the times. However, principles of trust and respect should not change. Ever. If they do then we risk losing for good the bond that both countries have worked so hard to forge.

Past grievances should not deter full and frank discussion between friends about areas of mutual interest, of which there are many, and areas of disagreement, of which some still exist. The foundation stone of any friendship is surely the willingness to move beyond past grievances and to see things as they are now, without echoes of past difficulties impeding progress.

Some favour the status quo, and that's their choice. But in my view, there's really no such thing. It's like treading water in a strong current - if you don't take decisive action you may unintentionally end up in a place not to your liking. Relationships are slowly but surely swept away when they are backward looking and starved of trust, open dialogue and mutual respect. Relationships are dynamic. If they are not changing to meet new challenges they lose relevance.

The United States does not want this to happen to our bilateral relationship.

It needn't happen if both countries open the door to comprehensive dialogue about the issues that have adversely affected the relationship over the last 20 years. We cannot do this by working around the edges.

I don't think I'm alone in wanting this comprehensive discussion. From my conversations, it appears clear to me that many New Zealanders: 1. Believe that our bilateral relationship is important to both countries; 2. Are frustrated that successive governments, in both countries, have let the relationship drift to a point where it does not fulfil its potential; and 3. Realise that until there is a frank and open discussion on the issues that divide us, we will continue to drift. Nothing will change and the potential will remain unrealised.

When the United States talks about what the relationship could be if we go forward, we do not seek to turn back time. We fully realise that the New Zealand foreign policy approach of today is different from what it was in Anzus days. So is our own. More to the point, the world has changed. We need to talk - fully and openly - about what kind of bilateral relationship makes sense today. That, after all, is what friends do. Even if the discussion does not resolve the differences that we have, it would surely go a long way to help re-establish the trust that eroded 20 years ago.

Although much can be learned from history, the present day can also provide valuable lessons. Forty years ago, the United States and communist Vietnam were mired in a bloody and violent war that divided the two countries and claimed the lives of many thousands on both sides. Yet as a result of comprehensive dialogue, the two countries now co-operate on a wide variety of issues including security, economic and cultural initiatives.

The scale of the divergence between New Zealand and the United States obviously never reached anything near the level of our conflict with Vietnam.

However, the improved relations between the United States and Vietnam remind us to see things as they are today, and not as they once were. It shows what's possible when two countries work together to address the most difficult of issues and stop working around the edges. New Zealand and the United States are two countries most dear to my heart. I care deeply about the bond between the two. I will continue to care deeply long after I depart my post.

I believe that the relationship is good - but it could be so much better.