A letter submitted to the Christchurch Press, by Kim Bryant. The only point I am slightly doubtful on is “armed neutrality”. I still woner if a a return to ANZUS might serve us better. Any opinions?
“History is famous for its repetition. The myopia that allowed Hitler to arm Germany to the teeth in the 1930’s, has been resurrected by Helen Clark’s peacenik cadre. Their left-wing roots make it impossible for them to acknowledge that China, an unrepentant communist dictatorship, is arming itself at an alarming rate, way beyond the requirements of home defence, or even the re-taking of Taiwan.
To these wishfull thinkers any aggressive ambitions by the world’s most populous nation are too horrendous to contemplate. They continue to base their defense strategy, more on John and Yoko’s “Give Peace a Chance” than on a concise analysis of “The Rise of Hitler’s Germany” Why else would the emphasis be on international peacekeeping (Helen’s UN Secretary General aspirations aside.)
It’s not necessary for NZ to formally devote itself to US foreign policy, like Australia, but rather to follow the Swiss WW2 model of armed neutrality. Hitler’s generals advised that taking Switzerland was not worth the cost. Our emphasis should be on High Tech air and sea defense. The exact reverse of current priorities. Whilst good relations with the US are essential, they are sadly not the defenders of world freedom Bush and Rumsfeld would have us believe.
In depth analysis of both China’s strategic intentions and her massive military buildup is glaringly absent. The current “Emperor’s” new clothes are plainly military fatigues not the benign business suits of Hu Jin Tao. I am sure he has studied Sun Tzu’s “The Art of War”, in which the central dictum is deception, “…when weak feign strength, and when strong feign weakness…”