Source: Radio New Zealand
A MarineTraffic map showing ship movements in the Strait of Hormuz . AFP / JONATHAN RAA
A law professor says if New Zealand was asked to support ensuring safe passage through the Strait of Hormuz, a combat deployment is unlikely.
But Professor Alexander Gillespie said a joint statement between 19 countries condemning Iranian attacks on commercial ships in the Gulf was “effectively just scoping”.
“Nothing’s been nailed down, and it would be premature to nail it down until you know what’s happening with the wider war.”
If a request was made to New Zealand, Gillespie told RNZ it could be helping with intelligence, or picking up patrolling obligations for others so they could deploy to the region.
Another option was actual deployment, which he thought was unlikely.
On Tuesday, the Foreign Minister said people should not be alarmed that “we’re going to be engaged in some military exercise” after the government signed the joint statement.
Labour had raised concerns about the “broad nature” of the statement, criticising the government for not detailing what that commitment might look like, with leader Chris Hipkins saying New Zealanders had a right to know.
But Winston Peters said there had been “scaremongering” from critics who said the government was “rushing to contribute military forces to this conflict”.
“What absolute crap, what absolute nonsense – New Zealand is not a party to this conflict, and we have absolutely no intention of joining it,” he said at Parliament on Tuesday.
Foreign Minister Winston Peters. RNZ / Mark Papalii
It also came as the head of NATO included New Zealand as one of 22 countries “coming together” to secure the Strait of Hormuz.
On Tuesday the government said it had not made any commitment towards military action in the Middle East, but Hipkins said he was very concerned about “what the government had signed us up to”.
He was referring to the joint statement the government signed with 19 other countries, including the United Kingdom and Germany, condemning Iranian attacks on commercial ships in the Gulf.
They called on Iran to immediately cease threats, laying mines, drone and missile attacks and other attempts to block commercial vessels from travelling through the Strait of Hormuz.
“Freedom of navigation is a fundamental principle of international law, including under the United Nations Convention on the Law of the Sea,” the statement read.
The statement also expressed its signatories would be ready “to contribute to appropriate efforts to ensure safe passage through the Strait”.
Prime Minister Christopher Luxon clarified any such future support would need to be considered by Cabinet.
Prime Minister Christopher Luxon. RNZ / Samuel Rillstone
Luxon also outlined nothing had changed in terms of the government position on the initial attacks that started the war, after being asked about condemning Iran’s strikes, while “acknowledging” the strikes by the United States.
“What we’re talking about now is a second order consequence, which is Iranians holding hostage a whole bunch of ships that should be freely traveling to bring fuel and fuel and critical supplies to places like New Zealand.”
Gillespie said it was a “notable inconsistency”.
He said New Zealand should treat “all violations of the UN Charter the same”.
“In as much as we condemn Russia for their illegal war against Ukraine, we should act consistently with the US and Israel.”
On the ‘right side’ – law professor
Gillespie said New Zealand was on the “right side” in supporting an international principle – the freedom of navigation – but “we have to be very cautious and have our eyes wide open as we walk forward”.
He said the statement had the backing of the UN Security Council with regards to the protection of international waterways in freedom of navigation.
He said New Zealand was in good company with the other signatories, and pointed out it was not an initiative from the United States, Israel or Iran.
The protection of international waterways was a longstanding principle, “No country can effectively strangle international commerce by trying to control a waterway,” he said.
Professor Alexander Gillespie. Alexander Gillespie
“You just can’t do that.”
In terms of the wording “appropriate efforts” in the statement, Gillespie said that could be anything, “it could be civilian, but it’s likely to be military”.
In regards to what New Zealand could offer if support was requested he pointed to the operations in the Red Sea, where the contribution had been “modest”.
The personnel had helped with intelligence, and part of the operations of a much larger system, he said.
A second option was offering “our military to relieve other militaries to be deployed to the region”.
“So we might pick up the patrolling requirements and select some American vessels in a safe area to allow the American vessels to then be deployed to the strait.”
The third option was deploying the Air Force or Navy to the war zone, which he thought was “very unlikely”.
“We’re more likely to be doing the other two, if asked.”
Ultimately he said New Zealand needed to be “very careful what we commit ourselves to, because you can start off in these exercises with a fairly good objective, but then you can find yourself in a very sticky situation that can take years to unravel”.
‘New Zealanders have a right to know’ – Hipkins
On Tuesday, Hipkins said the government had “basically” signed the country up to say “we’re ready and willing to participate in securing the strait”.
“I don’t think we should be making a broad commitment like that at this point. Any support that New Zealand provides should be after a United Nations mandate, and at this point that doesn’t exist,” Hipkins said.
“The government has signed us up to an open ended commitment to re-open the strait, without detailing what that commitment might look like.
“New Zealanders have a right to know what the government is signing us up to.”
Labour leader Chris Hipkins. RNZ / Mark Papalii
Since the statement was released, speaking to Fox News, NATO Secretary-General Mark Rutte said countries including Japan, Korea, Australia, New Zealand, UAE, Bahrain and the NATO alliance were working to “implement [US President Donald Trump’s] vision of making sure that the Strait of Hormuz is free, is opening up as soon as that is possible”.
Asked for clarification about this comment, Peters said Rutte did not speak for New Zealand and he had probably been misinformed.
“We haven’t been asked, and should we be asked – we would consider it. That’s all I’ve said,” Peters emphasised.
On the joint statement, he said it was “specifically narrow”.
In Parliament during an urgent debate on the conflict in the Middle East, Peters said the government was committed to working with partners to try and address one of the consequences of this conflict, that was higher fuel prices for New Zealanders.
“But that is not the same as saying we are definitely going to contribute.
“If we receive a request, or if an international coalition was established in the future to safeguard commercial shipping, any possible contribution would be a matter for – guess who – the Cabinet first of all, to determine based on careful consideration of New Zealand’s interests.”
Currently, the government would not comment on what potential resources would be considered or committed if New Zealand was requested to help, due to it being a hypothetical issue.
Sign up for Ngā Pitopito Kōrero, a daily newsletter curated by our editors and delivered straight to your inbox every weekday.
– Published by EveningReport.nz and AsiaPacificReport.nz, see: MIL OSI in partnership with Radio New Zealand
