Heather du Plessis-Allan: Where's the real criticism of NZ and Five Eyes coming from?

COMMENT

Australia's Foreign Minister Marise Payne seems to have settled it. The warnings that New Zealand could be thrown out of the Five Eyes alliance over Foreign Minister Nanaia Mahuta's speech appear overblown.

Of course Payne was always going to be diplomatic. Foreign ministers mostly speak in vague, coded language few of us understand. But they show displeasure when they need to, and there was none over our position on Five Eyes.

On the contrary, she seemed completely comfortable with New Zealand resisting the expansion of the spy network's remit, saying "my view is that countries will choose to address issues of concerns in whichever forum they themselves determine appropriate".

Frankly, some of the hysteria coming from Australian and UK commentators is ridiculous.
According to The Times and The Telegraph, we've cut Five Eyes down to four and "Jacinda Ardern is now the West's woke weak link".

According to Nigel Farage and another conservative MP, we've formed an alliance with China.

And Sky News Australia host Andrew Bolt is accusing New Zealand of "'selling out Australia and the West to keep sweet with the genocidal Chinese dictatorship".

There's a theme here. All the criticism is coming from right-leaning commentators and none from the governments themselves. In fact, both UK and Australian government sources are quoted as saying our membership is not at risk.

Frankly, Mahuta's speech to the New Zealand-China council this week was on point. Apart from the clumsy taniwha allegory, it was almost pitch perfect. It warned China we reserve the right to criticise, it warned our exporters to diversify just in case China punishes us with tariffs and it told the Five Eyes alliance to stop pressuring us to fall into line.

The speech clearly articulated our independent foreign policy, without picking sides, and without making the mistake of pretending everything is rosy out there.

Of course, the frustration expressed by foreign commentators isn't coming from nowhere entirely. While the speech itself might not have upset foreign capitals, we have clearly resisted the previous Trump Administration's anti-China pressure and it's widely known Canberra is a bit tetchy with us for not pulling our weight in the region.

Canberra is doing the heavy lifting and taking the body blows from the Chinese. The Australians called for a WHO investigation into the origins of Covid-19 and have signed the Five Eyes communiques criticising China's human rights record. For that they have copped tariffs on a long list of their exports, from barley to wine.

New Zealand, by contrast, pulls its punches, earns a sweet FTA upgrade and then has the temerity to tell Australia they can be a friend with benefits too if they just show some 'respect' to China.

Canberra has a right to be annoyed at us. Their perspective that we're putting trade first is bang on the money. And why wouldn't we? Of the Five Eyes nations, we are said to be the most exposed to China economically. It is said that if China chose to, it could cut us off and then replace our main exports by going to other nations. Australia doesn't face quite that risk because China can't yet replace their minerals easily.

But just as Canberra has a right to be annoyed at us, we have a right to do what we want with our foreign policy. Our position on the Uighur human rights abuse is no secret. Nor is our position on the Hong Kong crackdown. We've made both public.

At some stage in the future, we may have to pick sides. Given the concern over China's flexing in the South China Sea and predictions it could invade Taiwan in the next six years, we may not always have the luxury of courting both sides.

But for as long as we do have that luxury, we should use it, and not be forced to choose.