A scaled-down Rim of the Pacific Exercise was held this month in Hawaii with a third of the expected countries due to Covid-19-related restrictions. Photo / AP
A scaled-down Rim of the Pacific Exercise was held this month in Hawaii with a third of the expected countries due to Covid-19-related restrictions. Photo / AP
Opinion
COMMENT
Given Rimpac (Rim of the Pacific Exercise) this week, there's an apparent need for discussion and clarity on who and what is defended by particular notions of security. This greatly influences the strategies employed to achieve it.
Many people believe that traditional military approaches to national security are intheir best interests. But citizen-centred security focuses on protecting people from a variety of life-threatening risks. These continue to evolve in various forms including pandemics and resulting challenges to economies, racist and religious attacks, and environmental threats such as climate change which progressively undermine earth's ability to continue to support humanity and ecosystems.
Security now is increasingly threatened by human actions which ignore planetary boundaries (eg, as outlined by English economist Kate Raworth). Interactions between humanity and environmental and ecological networks are crucial to security.
National security in the 20th century was seen as war readiness. New Zealand willingly supported the "Mother" country's interests in WWI and WWII, and succumbed to US pressure to back its war in Indochina.
But many New Zealanders opposed hegemonic proxy wars and feared nuclear war making the planet uninhabitable. NGO conferences discussed leaving Anzus to become a non-aligned nation supporting international peace initiatives.
The peace movement generated political commitment to make New Zealand a nuclear-free zone, distancing NZ from the US for years.
But New Zealand's military collaboration and investment to support US dominance have grown in recent decades. Government is spending billions to make our military interoperational with US forces and participate in confrontational exercises such as Rimpac.
Five Eyes involvement may compromise our independence and economic interests. Rocket Lab is now part US-owned with US military contracts in the space field.
Transparency is needed between alliance partners and Government and citizens. The public's voice on "defence" has quietened, while sentimentality over past war sacrifices appears to be intensifying.
Regression to outdated paradigms is unfortunate as NZ would now have the greatest international impact by joining non-aligned nations promoting an inclusive internationalist stance in the interests of humanity everywhere, rather than supporting aggressive military power.
Supporting a human needs based approach is more in our economic and security interests, and those of the entire world, than military and spy posturing with any military power.
Climate change is now recognised, including by NZ's Defence Force, as generating security risks. This doesn't make the military "green" as some might suggest. That would entail radical mitigation to cut emissions urgently, not just adaptation responses such as rescues after worsening cyclones, and evacuating atolls as sea levels rise after irreversible climate change.
Traditional notions of military security are obsolete and dangerous, partly because of direct lethal threats and acts, and also the international divisiveness they engender with lost opportunity costs of misdirected colossal military funds, scientific expertise, R&D and operations which could instead generate constructive action to address growing security threats in sectors such as health and the environment.
Climate change may become irreversible and unmanageable, even by adaptation, if feedback loops are not reversed by concerted global action such as emissions reduction this decade.
Concepts of security - grounded in the protection of people in safe, liveable, sustainable environments - do not line up well with strategies designed to defend nation state entities structured to enhance powerful vested interests such as the military industrial complex.
It is now clearer than ever that human security depends not on sophisticated weapons to threaten those designated as "outsiders", but on strong systems of environmental and climate protection and sturdy civil defence and public health systems to protect citizens, their resilience maximised by adequate income and housing; appropriate training and employment; and education relevant to current needs in a 21st century democracy amidst constant challenge and change nationally and internationally.
Although relatively remote location-wise, New Zealand is impacted by what happens worldwide, as coronavirus has shown. The health of the world, is eventually, our health; and global security, our security.
Frances Palmer. Photo / Supplied
We must realise that we are no longer just citizens of one country, but also citizens of one world.
Continued collaboration with alliances refining weapons of human incineration for "national security" (creating only insecurity) threatens us just as much as the "enemies" created by such strategies.
It simultaneously thwarts attempts to deal with global security threats which know no borders, by undermining trust and cooperation and shrinking civilian welfare and research budgets.
Coronavirus crises have shown vividly that leadership required to guarantee human security requires an approach demonstrated best by female leaders such as Jacinda Ardern. A leadership style characterised by both cognitive and emotional intelligence, gleans science findings and best practice strategies, alongside the capacity to unite citizens in difficult circumstances, not against perceived "enemies", but in collaboration with others, striving to achieve global strategies to reduce risks and enhance the life chances of all.
• Frances Palmer served as a civilian nurse in the Vietnam War and after MA, worked as an activist, educator and civil servant on nuclear arms and disarmament issues.
