KEY POINTS:
National has put aside decades of debate and pledged a bipartisan approach to foreign affairs and defence issues, leaving little outward difference between it and Labour on the world stage.
The announcement yesterday of National's intentions in the areas of foreign affairs, defence and trade quickly led one
political rival to claim imitation was the sincerest form of flattery, and National leader John Key admitted the only real difference with Labour now was in tone.
"What we're saying is that post-1987 and the breakdown of Anzus, New Zealand has charted largely an independent foreign policy - that's a position National will continue to adopt," Mr Key said.
"It's really been an acceptance that we are running clearly our own independent foreign policy and the days of strategic alliances in the form of Anzus are something of the past for New Zealand under a National government."
National revealed its plans in a 19-page discussion document, in which the party said it accepted New Zealand's nuclear-free legislation and felt both major political parties had moved their positions on foreign affairs, defence and trade over the past 30 years toward a "new centre".
There was now, National said, the basis for an enduring consensus in the area. National's approach has been well-signalled in recent months and was not a surprise.
Its move to endorse much of what Labour has done signals a major shift from the party's approach under former leader Don Brash.
Asked what a National government would do if a conflict arose in Iran, Mr Key refused to be drawn on whether he would wait for the UN to endorse an invasion before he would commit local troops.
"We would always look at those situations on a case-by-case basis in a professional manner," Mr Key said.
"Committing New Zealand troops overseas is something that is a very serious issue, it's not something we're going to do in a lighthanded manner."
National has conceded ground when it comes to the shape of the country's defence force, with the party's discussion paper stating that it considers "old debates" are now over.
The party is no longer talking about reinstating the air force's air combat wing, but is instead looking at how the defence force can have a wide-ranging ability to deploy land forces at short notice, as well as have patrol and surveillance resources.
Mr Key would not even commit to increasing defence spending, and opted to leave those decisions until a White Paper is drawn up after next year's election if National wins.
National also signalled a shift in New Zealand's $440 million annual overseas aid contribution, with more focus to be put on the Pacific region.
The aid move was part of a wider push by National for New Zealand to focus more on its own backyard - the Pacific and Asia.
National's foreign affairs spokesman Murray McCully said his party would reduce the number of countries New Zealand contributed aid to, with some current contributions to far flung countries not renewed.
National also said "chequebook diplomacy" in the Pacific had to be countered, in a clear reference to the money that has gone into tiny nations from China and Japan in recent years.
National was confident it could improve New Zealand's relationship with the United States, claiming some comments made by Helen Clark's Government at the last election campaign did not help the relationship.
Political opponents later questioned whether National could be trusted to stick to its new foreign policy approach.
"On foreign affairs and defence, National's claim to be pursuing a bipartisan policy is novel and utterly contradicts its position in recent years," Defence Minister Phil Goff said.
"A party which flip flops so easily can equally easily change its policies in the opposite direction."
Foreign Affairs Minister Winston Peters chose to highlight what was missing from National's policy document - a position on Iraq and exactly how it viewed the UN's role in New Zealand's foreign policy.
