Anzac ‘force multiplier’ talk risks NZ defence identity – expert

by Sam Sachdeva

New Zealand’s military risks losing crucial advantages if it becomes “a small Australia” as part of efforts to build a joint Anzac force, an academic has warned.

However, a senior defence official says the country is not blindly following its larger neighbour, and the risks of increasingly close association are outweighed by the benefits of mutual support in an increasingly dangerous world.

Since coming to power, the coalition Government has stressed the need to strengthen military relations with Australia, the country’s only formal ally – a point reiterated by Defence Minister Judith Collins at Victoria University of Wellington’s Centre for Strategic Studies conference on Tuesday.

Addressing the Wellington audience, Collins said New Zealand “has no stronger bond than that with our Australian neighbours. We may wage war on the sporting field … but in every other way that matters we are family.”

She and Australian defence minister Richard Marles had begun work on a more integrated Anzac force, as outlined in last year’s Defence Capability Plan, combining the country’s troops “in defence of our shared interests, common values and respective territories”.

Prime Minister Christopher Luxon has previously spoken of his desire for the NZ Defence Force to become a “force multiplier” for Australia, an approach which has attracted some criticism from the likes of former leader Helen Clark.

Speaking after Collins, NZ Chief of Army Major-General Rose King said the Defence Force had begun to pivot towards greater interoperability, acting as “a fast follower” to Australia’s defence capabilities.

“Australia being our ally, we are hand in glove with them. I’ve never seen our relationship as strong as it is now.

“For me, that is fundamental … being able to be open and honest with each other about where are our gaps, where are our strengths, how we can work collectively.”

However, Massey University international relations professor Dr Beth Greener later raised concerns about the possible effect of the Government’s plans on its ability to stand out from its international partners.

“We have a national identity which is really useful on the world stage, and we can use that. It means our comparative advantage is not being somebody else – it’s not being a small Australia.

“So when I see discussions about increased integration with Australia … fantastic. In terms of some of the technical and technological requirements, absolutely. ‘Force multiplier’ – it begins to make me shake.

“For our allies, our greatest contribution is the fact we are not them – particularly if we are looking for spaces to negotiate in a contested context, if we could be seen as a different kind of interlocutor at times in different spaces.”

Greener said diversity was important when it came to militaries to avoid shared vulnerabilities, while there was potential value in maintaining “certain niche spaces” when it came to defence technologies.

Katie Roche, the head of the Ministry of Defence’s international branch, said the New Zealand and Australian governments had asked their defence forces to work ever closer together, “building on our Anzac history forged in the battlefields of World War I”.

“From defence policy to capability acquisition to tactical decision making – and frankly, everything in between – if we can work with Australia and it’s in our interest to do so, we should.”

The countries were working on a common doctrine to ensure they had a shared approach to planning, training and conducting operations, while they had senior military leaders embedded in each others’ joint operational headquarters.

However, Roche said New Zealand was “not just blindly following Australia wherever they go”, with the maintenance of national sovereignty a critical part of the alliance.

“There are times where we will and we should go our own way, whether that be due to operational needs of our militaries, the politics of the day, or expectations from other partners in our lives.

“Our alliance relationship means we discuss these differences frankly and understand the reasons behind each other’s decisions.”

While there were risks associated with being seen as “two big entities” acting in unison in the Pacific, any drawbacks associated with operating as Australia’s ally were far outweighed by the benefits, she said.

* The author chaired a panel at the conference in a voluntary capacity

The article was first published on Newsroom.