New Zealand’s national security is at greater risk now than it was at the most volatile period of the threat posed by Islamic State, with the loss of personnel in our defence force among the factors having an effect.
That’s the view of the NZ Defence Force which is keeping secret information about the NZ Special Air Service that was previously made public.
It’s a position endorsed by Minister of Defence Andrew Little who says the security risk to New Zealand has shifted from one in which the greatest threat came from within through radicalised would-be terrorists to threats caused by the geopolitical flexing of global players.
The Herald had sought through the Official Information Act details of those who had put themselves forward for the gruelling NZSAS selection process and those who had passed to become members of the elite unit.
It was an exercise the Herald undertook in 2016 when it received a detailed accounting of the 243 people who went through the selection process over four years of which only 27 made it through.
This time, though, NZDF only provided the numbers of the 312 people who went through selection over a five-year period - and no information about how many of those made it through.
Not only was the withholding of information a switch on its previous position, it also came after an extraordinary level of security-cleared disclosure about the NZSAS capabilities and systems through the Operation Burnham inquiry into its actions in Afghanistan.
When challenged over withholding the NZSAS selection numbers, NZDF’s Chief of Staff Air Commodore Andy Woods said: “The NZDF considers New Zealand’s current security environment to have changed since 2016 and that current security concerns outweigh a desire to be progressively more transparent.”
Woods said the information that was withheld could be put together with the 2016 data and “permit an estimation of our Special Operations Forces’ capabilities”.
“This risk to the NZDF is increased when the information is viewed alongside publicly available information regarding retention and attrition issues in the NZDF.”
In 2016, Islamic State was losing territory after rapid expansion across the Middle East and was seeking to extend its influence into the West through a series of terror attacks. It created a volatile and uncertain security situation with the Herald aware of concerns among security forces of potential terrorists carrying out attacks inside the country.
Ultimately, fears of those radicalised by ISIL were realised with the New Lynn knife attack carried out by Ahamed Aathill Mohamed Samsudeen. Security services had been criticised for focusing too intently on the Islamic community after the Christchurch massacre by a white supremacist.
Little - who is also Minister for the NZSIS and GCSB intelligence agencies - told the Herald that NZDF’s reference to a worsening security situation was a reflection of geopolitical conditions, particularly around the Pacific and Indo-Pacific regions.
The Defence White Paper published in 2016 described the global threat environment as one where “conflicts within states now occur more frequently than those between states”.
In contrast, the 2021 Defence strategic assessment - He Moana Pukepuke E Ekengia E Te Waka/A Rough Sea Can Still Be Navigated - described how growing strategic competition across the world “will increase the potential for confrontation and conflict”.
The assessment highlighted China’s rise as a “major driver for this competition” while saying all states were playing a role.
It also said greater extreme weather patterns brought about by climate change would have direct human security impacts across the world and “exacerbate national security challenges”. In the Pacific, those challenges were “existential”. The assessment was produced before Russia invaded Ukraine last year.
Little said there was a growing body of evidence around the security alliances and collaboration in our wider geographical space such as Japan, South Korea and the Philippines which had just agreed to an increase in United States military bases.
He said it was a reflection of the fresh US interest in the wider Pacific region.
“All the publicly-visible indicators are telling us there is more going on, greater competition and national security pressure.”
Little said “accelerated attrition” had been a feature of recent years with pay scales part of the picture along with opportunities missed during Covid-19 and defence personnel used to manage MIQ facilities.
The government has recently targeted pay boosts initially at specific trades and then across the entire NZDF.
He said the biggest loss among the 900 personnel shortfall was among those with 6-12 years’ experience who were well-trained, skilled and “able to be deployed quickly”.
Those who had been recruited in their place were able to be deployed but less experience and training meant there were “some limitations” on how they could be used.
Little said he was keen to see a greater level of openness but the shift in the security situation made it difficult.
“There is a need to afford (the NZSAS) a considerable degree of protection. What we don’t want to do is give away information that might lead others who would do us harm to know the size and composition of the forces we have.”
Massey University’s Dr Rhys Ball - who has studied the history of the NZSAS - said the regiment’s history was one which had seen fluctuations in manpower as it “grappled with competing demands or limited opportunities”.
Increased departures were often driven by those “keen to practice those skills that they have worked so very hard to acquire”. He said the Anzus crisis in the 1980s and war in Iraq after 2003 were examples of periods during which New Zealand’s combatant role was limited and there had been an increase in departures.
Ball said the security environment had changed but “not necessarily got worse”. He said “great power rivalry” was now dominating international relations, shifting it away from threats posed by non-state actors.
He said it was important to understand that potential or real adversaries would study the capabilities of the internationally highly-regarded NZSAS “and how we reduce the information that might be useful to them is an important consideration as we try to balance openness and transparency in a democratic society”.
OPINION: A Parliamentary committee might look at whether MPs need greater punishments.