Source: Radio New Zealand
New year, fresh start, as the saying goes.
Your chance to shut (or slam) the door on 2025 and fling open a new one to a bright and shiny 12 months ahead.
If only it was that easy, right? It’s hard to bundle up the pain of a difficult year, take it to the tip and push it into the void.
Karen Nimmo.
Supplied
Source: Radio New Zealand
123rf
The past year was a tough grind for many households and businesses but forecasters say there is economic improvement on the horizon.
Kelly Eckhold, chief economist at Westpac, said he was expecting the economy to be much stronger in 2026, with growth in GDP of about 3 percent over the year compared to a flat 2025.
“That’s supported by lower interest rates in the coming year. Whereas in 2025 we saw relatively strong performance by the primary sector and tourism to some extent but not so much the services sector and the bits of the economy that really drive the major urban areas, we think we probably have much more balanced growth in 2026.”
Households might not see much wage growth initially, he said, because that was one of the last things to move, but inflation should be weaker. “The cost of living crisis should ease off a bit.”
Gareth Kiernan, chief forecaster at Infometrics, agreed things should improve.
“It can’t be worse, right? You’ve had good export prices, you’ve got interest rates which are headed lower than we had been thinking… there’s a bit of caution coming on some of those exports… but I think between the effects of the strong prices over the last 18 months and the low interest rates and the government doing more in the infrastructure space – if not anywhere else, you put all those together and there are enough signs that growth should be better.”
He said the international environment would be something to keep an eye on. “Trump and the tariffs had derailed things somewhat through the early part of this year and that sort of has hung over the economy for the rest of 2025. But who really knows in that space, I guess.”
He said there were some small signs that the labour market was already improving and that should continue to build. “There does seem to be a bit more of an air of optimism and maybe a bit more genuine growth starting to come through as opposed to the high business confidence we had a year ago which didn’t really translate into anything much this year.”
Economists from BMI, a Fitch Solutions company, said they expected 2 percent growth in 2026.
“The Reserve Bank of New Zealand’s rate cuts will continue to ease monetary policy conditions – even if most of the easing cycle is likely behind us – supporting household spending and business investment. We anticipate a 25 basis points cut to 2 percent by the end of 2026. Government infrastructure projects – including Auckland’s City Rail Link, major highway upgrades such as the Waikato Expressway, and water resilience programmes – will add momentum. Externally, strong demand for dairy and meat, alongside a tourism rebound, should underpin growth.
“However, downside risks persist. An escalation in global trade tensions or new tariffs could weaken export performance, while a slower-than-expected recovery in Mainland China – New Zealand’s largest trading partner – would dampen agricultural demand.
“Domestically, persistent labor shortages and wage pressures could restrain productivity, and delays to infrastructure projects would reduce fiscal support. Additionally, if inflation proves sticky, the Reserve Bank may pause or reverse rate cuts, curbing the anticipated lift to consumption and investment.”
Simplicity chief economist Shamubeel Eaqub said he was much more optimistic about 2026. “Mainly because we’re starting to see a bottom in a lot of things a the moment. Some of the distress is fading.”
But he said the recovery would not be felt evenly.
“I think there has been a real expansion of poverty in New Zealand, there’s a chunk of New Zealanders that are continuing to do it really tough.
“They’re stuck in that position where they work in industries that are not going to recover strongly. They work in industries that have relative low-wage, they work and live in places where the cost of living has gone up a lot with rents… so these things are not going to turn around quickly.
“A rising economy Is not enough to lift them up.. But for the median and for the people in the top end I think things will look a lot better.”
Sources of growth will change, he said, as some of the momentum shifted out of the primary sector.
“But by the second half of the year, all the weight of the rate cuts, the cumulative benefits of all the rate cuts would have come through. And we should start to see banks lending again because, you know, they’re fair weather friends.
“And then once they start lending money, that’s when you really juice up the cycle because it’s really about investments.
“When people start to make investments and businesses make investments, that’s really when the economy recovers. Also, I’m getting more optimistic on the government’s capex plans.
“For the last couple of years, they’ve been reducing spending, reducing spending, reducing spending. That’s really the only place austerity has worked so far in not investing in infrastructure. But if you look at all the announcements that have taken place in the second half of this year, it’s all about central government and local government doing more next year. And so all the pipeline stuff, it looks like we are going to see quite a lot of activity starting in the beginning of next year. So with the government coming back and hopefully the private sector coming back through the middle of next year, you’ve kind of got more of a platform for growth.”
[ https://rnz.us6.list-manage.com/subscribe?u=211a938dcf3e634ba2427dde9&id=b4c9a30ed6 Sign up for Money with Susan Edmunds], a weekly newsletter covering all the things that affect how we make, spend and invest money
– Published by EveningReport.nz and AsiaPacificReport.nz, see: MIL OSI in partnership with Radio New Zealand
Kidnap, murder, torture, brutality, subversion, treachery, and barbarism, writes Adrian Blackburn reflecting on US President Donald Trump’s New Year present to the world.
COMMENTARY: By Adrian Blackburn
Blatantly, boastfully, bullyingly, shamelessly, Trump overnight threw open to the world’s eyes the cruel reality of US foreign policy. He has brought out from the shadows the ugly reality of what for generations previous administrations have found politic to keep covert.
That foreign policy has been shown most especially arrogant in regard to its neighbours anywhere in the Americas.
It has been based on a lie, a lie to its own people first but no less potently to the nations, including New Zealand, which have subscribed to that fiction of a United States democracy representing all the best human qualities.
The nicely gift-wrapped package includes belief in equality, fairness, justice, the sanctity of human life, acceptance of difference, mutual respect, kindness and love: The American way, the ultimate Christian morality in practice.
Trump has done all of us who have bought that lie a favour. What he is saying out loud with the attack on Venezuela and the kidnapping of President Nicolas Maduro is the age-old message of a rogue state — might is right, all power comes from the barrel of a gun, bow down to us.
Any self-reflection by Trump, unlikely, would reveal to him the deeper historical truth that empires which once seemed invulnerable resort to such desperate measures as his Venezuelan adventure in an attempt to deny, to delay, to divert from the fact they are in their death throes. Decline and fall.
It will get worse for the United States, as a state. The lie will become increasingly acknowledged internationally as trust is shown to be a one-way street. The allied fiction of US Treasury bills as a long-term safe repository for the world’s savings may be undermined even faster.
Run on the US bank
Trust gone, it’s the work of moments for an international run on the bank of the US to begin. Even if its already hard-working monetary printing presses go into overtime, an economy and society propped up on trillions upon trillions of dollars of debt can quickly become bankrupt
Immediately, though, what can the international community do in protest? I believe there’s a special obligation on the “Western” nations to assuage a little of their guilt as willing US accomplices over many years, accomplices ready to abandon true independence and a fair bit of morality to self-interest, cowardice.
Just a gesture in protest, but a powerful one, would be to immediately and in unison demand the temporary closure of US embassies and the withdrawal of their staff as persona non grata.
Unrealistic? Of course. Real-politik will rule, OK!
Turning blind eyes to Venezuela
But we should all beware of turning blind eyes to Venezuela. Who next, after Maduro, incurs the Don’s displeasure? If Zelensky stubbornly won’t surrender to Don and Vlad’s territorial demands, will he be safe on his next State visit to the US from arbitrary arrest and incarceration as an alleged war criminal?
Does our own Christopher Luxon need to brush up his flattery skills even further? Losing every hole of a golf match with Trump would help.
Trump, though, has already lost, whether in his hyperbolically hypocritical state he knows it or not. But he has done the world a useful service in revealing how an empire on the way out is likely to act.
Big oil will be triumphal about a grab for Venezuela’s oil riches in the hypocritical guise of protecting the US from illicit drug imports.
Chinese President Xi Jinping, meanwhile, is quietly gloating.
Adrian Blackburn is lifelong journalist and writer. Staff writer on many publications, including The NZ Herald, Sydney Morning Herald, BBC World Service, Beaverbrook Newspapers, NZ Listener and NZ Woman’s Weekly. Author of The Shoestring Pirates (Hodder and Stoughton, 1974) a history of pirate Radio Hauraki, and Gift: A Troubling Message from the Afterlife (2024). This commentary was originally a Facebook posting under the title “Trump grabs Venezuela by the pussy” and is republished here with permission.
Article by AsiaPacificReport.nz
Source: Radio New Zealand
Connor Purvis. Supplied / NZ Police
Police have launched a major search for a missing tramper near Lake Ōhau.
Connor Purvis, 20, set off to climb Mt Huxley on or around 30 December, descending through the Huxley River South Branch.
But he has not returned from his tramp, which police say is sparking concern.
Police Search and Rescue teams, Land Search and Rescue teams, and a Department of Conservation alpine rescue team are all trying to find him.
Connor Purvis. Supplied / NZ Police
Otago Coastal Search and Rescue Coordinator Sergeant Matt Sheat said helicopters were also scouring the area.
They have been looking through huts and camp sites but have found no sign of Purvis.
“We ask anyone who has climbed Mt Huxley or has been tramping or hunting in the Huxley River South Branch between 28 December and 2 January to make contact with Police if they haven’t already,” said Sheat.
“We also want to hear from anyone who may have seen or spoken to Connor in the South Temple, Ahuriri or Huxley valleys in that same timeframe.
“It’s a large-scale search over a large area, and the smallest piece of information could make all the difference.”
– Published by EveningReport.nz and AsiaPacificReport.nz, see: MIL OSI in partnership with Radio New Zealand
Source: Radio New Zealand
Luxury, indulgence, immediately satisfying every need and want – these are all must-haves when it comes to a holiday. Or so you might think.
However, in an era of self-improvement surrounded by a world of excess, deprivation might be what you need. It can seem somewhat ironic – paying money to have or do less, but taking out noise, food, or comfort might leave room for something better (that’s the idea anyway).
While science can’t vouch for all the claimed benefits, there is some evidence that a moment of discomfort can result in, well, results, whether that be more confidence, detoxification or meaningful relaxation.
Āio Wīra Retreat Centre in Auckland.
supplied
Source: Radio New Zealand
File photo. RNZ / Simon Rogers
Three rescue helicopters have rushed to a four-vehicle crash that has closed State Highway 8 near Tekapo.
Three people have serious injuries.
Police say the crash happened about 7pm, between Tekapo Powerhouse Road and Braemar Road.
Another person has moderate injuries.
The road is expected to be closed for some time.
Police are urging drivers to delay travel between Tekapo and Twizel, or face delays.
– Published by EveningReport.nz and AsiaPacificReport.nz, see: MIL OSI in partnership with Radio New Zealand
Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By Juan Zahir Naranjo Cáceres, PhD Candidate, Political Science, International Relations and Constitutional Law, University of the Sunshine Coast
In the early hours of Saturday morning, US special forces captured Venezuelan President Nicolás Maduro from his home in Caracas and flew him out of the country. US President Donald Trump announced that Maduro and his wife, Cilia Flores, would face federal narco-terrorism charges in New York.
For anyone familiar with the history of US interventions in Latin America and the Caribbean, the basic pattern is grimly familiar: a small state in Washington’s “backyard”, a leader deemed unacceptable, military force applied with overwhelming effect, and a government removed overnight.
Yet what makes Venezuela’s case different – and profoundly alarming – is the brazen nature of the months-long US military operations against the country based on shifting and shaky justifications, with little evidence.
This moment is also significant, with many scholars already warning that international law is in deep crisis.
Venezuela is not the first country in the region to see its leader overthrown or seized with direct US involvement or acquiescence.
In 1953, the British government suspended the constitution of its colony British Guiana (now Guyana) and removed the democratically elected government of Cheddi Jagan after just 133 days. The British believed Jagan’s social and economic reforms would threaten its business interests.
A decade later, the CIA conducted a sustained covert operation to destabilise Jagan’s later administration, culminating in rigged 1964 elections that ensured his rival, Forbes Burnham, would win.
In 1965, US President Lyndon Johnson sent more than 22,000 US troops to the Dominican Republic to prevent the return of former President Juan Bosch, overthrown in a 1963 coup, and another communist regime forming in the region.
Following the violent overthrow and execution of Prime Minister Maurice Bishop of Grenada in 1983, President Ronald Reagan ordered an invasion. His administration justified the action by citing the need to protect US medical students and prevent the island from becoming a “Soviet-Cuban colony”.
In December 1989, President George H.W. Bush launched a full-scale invasion of Panama involving about 24,000 US troops to remove General Manuel Noriega, who had been indicted on drug-trafficking charges (like Maduro). He was subsequently flown to the United States, tried and imprisoned.
And in 2004, Haitian President Jean-Bertrand Aristide was removed from power and flown to Africa in what he described as a US-orchestrated coup and “kidnapping”. In 2022, French and Haitian officials told The New York Times that France and the US had collaborated to remove him.
In all of these cases, Washington asserted control over what it has long considered its sphere of influence, intervening when governments threatened its interests through ideology, alliances or defiance.
But Venezuela in 2026 is not Grenada in 1983 or Panama in 1989. It is a much larger country with some 30 million people and significant armed forces, which has spent years preparing for a possible US invasion. More importantly, the operation unfolded in an entirely different global context.
During the Cold War, US interventions were often condemned but rarely threatened the legitimacy of the international order itself.
Today, by contrast, the Maduro operation has been met with swift and sharp condemnation from across the political spectrum.
Colombian President Gustavo Petro called the strikes an “assault on the sovereignty” of Latin America, while Brazilian President Luiz Inácio Lula da Silva said the attack “crossed an unacceptable line” and set an “extremely dangerous precedent”. Mexican President Claudia Sheinbaum said the strikes were in “clear violation” of the UN Charter.
Even traditional US allies expressed discomfort. France’s foreign minister said the operation contravened the “principle of non-use of force that underpins international law” and that lasting political solutions cannot be “imposed by the outside”.
And a statement from UN Secretary-General Antonio Guterres said he was “deeply alarmed” about the “dangerous precedent” the United States was setting and the rules of international law not being respected.
The UN Charter prohibits the use of force against the territorial integrity or political independence of any state under Article 2(4).
For years, scholars have warned that repeated violations of the UN Charter by the United States were steadily eroding the basic rules governing the use of force.
Venezuela may represent the moment that erosion becomes collapse. When a permanent Security Council member not only bombs another state but abducts its head of state, the precedent is indeed profound.
The immediate consequences for Latin America are already being felt. Colombia has moved troops to its border with Venezuela, while neighbouring Guyana has activated its own security plans.
It’s unclear at this point if further US military operations are planned. Trump has said the US will “run” Venezuela until a “safe transition” is complete, but analysts question whether Washington has the appetite for such an open-ended commitment. Venezuela’s defence minister has also pledged to continue to fight against what he called “criminal aggression”.
The operation has also deepened divisions that already existed in Latin America over Venezuela. After Maduro’s 2024 election, the results were immediately contested: Maduro’s government claimed victory, while the opposition said it won based on voting tallies it published online.
Regional governments split over which narrative to accept, with some recognising Maduro’s government and others backing the opposition. These fault lines have made a coordinated regional response to the Trump administration’s actions impossible.
The broader risk is that Venezuela becomes a precedent not only for great powers, but for regional actors. If Washington can seize a head of state without legal sanction, what stops others from doing the same?
Maduro’s removal may or may not bring the political change Trump desires. But the manner of his removal – brazen, unilateral, defended in the language of US exceptionalism – has already done serious damage to the fragile architecture of international law.
If sovereignty can be set aside when inconvenient, heads of state can be abducted without UN approval, and the most powerful decide which governments may exist, then we have returned to a world governed by force – not the law. And in that world, no state can consider itself truly secure.
Juan Zahir Naranjo Cáceres does not work for, consult, own shares in or receive funding from any company or organisation that would benefit from this article, and has disclosed no relevant affiliations beyond their academic appointment.
– ref. The US has invaded countries and deposed leaders before. Its military action against Venezuela feels different – https://theconversation.com/the-us-has-invaded-countries-and-deposed-leaders-before-its-military-action-against-venezuela-feels-different-272682
Source: Radio New Zealand
A Māori and a migrant explore the heart, history and future of Māori wardens – Aotearoa‘s hi viz kaitiaki of aroha, manaaki, and mana motuhake.
Find out how one becomes a Māori warden, what they do and what the future holds for the uniquely Kiwi institution.
– Published by EveningReport.nz and AsiaPacificReport.nz, see: MIL OSI in partnership with Radio New Zealand
Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By Juan Zahir Naranjo Cáceres, PhD Candidate, Political Science, International Relations and Constitutional Law, University of the Sunshine Coast
In the early hours of Saturday morning, US special forces captured Venezuelan President Nicolás Maduro from his home in Caracas and flew him out of the country. US President Donald Trump announced that Maduro and his wife, Cilia Flores, would face federal narco-terrorism charges in New York.
For anyone familiar with the history of US interventions in Latin America and the Caribbean, the basic pattern is grimly familiar: a small state in Washington’s “backyard”, a leader deemed unacceptable, military force applied with overwhelming effect, and a government removed overnight.
Yet what makes Venezuela’s case different – and profoundly alarming – is the brazen nature of the months-long US military operations against the country based on shifting and shaky justifications, with little evidence.
This moment is also significant, with many scholars already warning that international law is in deep crisis.
Venezuela is not the first country in the region to see its leader overthrown or seized with direct US involvement or acquiescence.
In 1953, the British government suspended the constitution of its colony British Guiana (now Guyana) and removed the democratically elected government of Cheddi Jagan after just 133 days. The British believed Jagan’s social and economic reforms would threaten its business interests.
A decade later, the CIA conducted a sustained covert operation to destabilise Jagan’s later administration, culminating in rigged 1964 elections that ensured his rival, Forbes Burnham, would win.
In 1965, US President Lyndon Johnson sent more than 22,000 US troops to the Dominican Republic to prevent the return of former President Juan Bosch, overthrown in a 1963 coup, and another communist regime forming in the region.
Following the violent overthrow and execution of Prime Minister Maurice Bishop of Grenada in 1983, President Ronald Reagan ordered an invasion. His administration justified the action by citing the need to protect US medical students and prevent the island from becoming a “Soviet-Cuban colony”.
In December 1989, President George H.W. Bush launched a full-scale invasion of Panama involving about 24,000 US troops to remove General Manuel Noriega, who had been indicted on drug-trafficking charges (like Maduro). He was subsequently flown to the United States, tried and imprisoned.
And in 2004, Haitian President Jean-Bertrand Aristide was removed from power and flown to Africa in what he described as a US-orchestrated coup and “kidnapping”. In 2022, French and Haitian officials told The New York Times that France and the US had collaborated to remove him.
In all of these cases, Washington asserted control over what it has long considered its sphere of influence, intervening when governments threatened its interests through ideology, alliances or defiance.
But Venezuela in 2026 is not Grenada in 1983 or Panama in 1989. It is a much larger country with some 30 million people and significant armed forces, which has spent years preparing for a possible US invasion. More importantly, the operation unfolded in an entirely different global context.
During the Cold War, US interventions were often condemned but rarely threatened the legitimacy of the international order itself.
Today, by contrast, the Maduro operation has been met with swift and sharp condemnation from across the political spectrum.
Colombian President Gustavo Petro called the strikes an “assault on the sovereignty” of Latin America, while Brazilian President Luiz Inácio Lula da Silva said the attack “crossed an unacceptable line” and set an “extremely dangerous precedent”. Mexican President Claudia Sheinbaum said the strikes were in “clear violation” of the UN Charter.
Even traditional US allies expressed discomfort. France’s foreign minister said the operation contravened the “principle of non-use of force that underpins international law” and that lasting political solutions cannot be “imposed by the outside”.
And a statement from UN Secretary-General Antonio Guterres said he was “deeply alarmed” about the “dangerous precedent” the United States was setting and the rules of international law not being respected.
The UN Charter prohibits the use of force against the territorial integrity or political independence of any state under Article 2(4).
For years, scholars have warned that repeated violations of the UN Charter by the United States were steadily eroding the basic rules governing the use of force.
Venezuela may represent the moment that erosion becomes collapse. When a permanent Security Council member not only bombs another state but abducts its head of state, the precedent is indeed profound.
The immediate consequences for Latin America are already being felt. Colombia has moved troops to its border with Venezuela, while neighbouring Guyana has activated its own security plans.
It’s unclear at this point if further US military operations are planned. Trump has said the US will “run” Venezuela until a “safe transition” is complete, but analysts question whether Washington has the appetite for such an open-ended commitment. Venezuela’s defence minister has also pledged to continue to fight against what he called “criminal aggression”.
The operation has also deepened divisions that already existed in Latin America over Venezuela. After Maduro’s 2024 election, the results were immediately contested: Maduro’s government claimed victory, while the opposition said it won based on voting tallies it published online.
Regional governments split over which narrative to accept, with some recognising Maduro’s government and others backing the opposition. These fault lines have made a coordinated regional response to the Trump administration’s actions impossible.
The broader risk is that Venezuela becomes a precedent not only for great powers, but for regional actors. If Washington can seize a head of state without legal sanction, what stops others from doing the same?
Maduro’s removal may or may not bring the political change Trump desires. But the manner of his removal – brazen, unilateral, defended in the language of US exceptionalism – has already done serious damage to the fragile architecture of international law.
If sovereignty can be set aside when inconvenient, heads of state can be abducted without UN approval, and the most powerful decide which governments may exist, then we have returned to a world governed by force – not the law. And in that world, no state can consider itself truly secure.
Juan Zahir Naranjo Cáceres does not work for, consult, own shares in or receive funding from any company or organisation that would benefit from this article, and has disclosed no relevant affiliations beyond their academic appointment.
– ref. The US has invaded countries and deposed leaders before. This time feels different – https://theconversation.com/the-us-has-invaded-countries-and-deposed-leaders-before-this-time-feels-different-272682
Source: Radio New Zealand
Finley Melville Ives in action at the FIS World Cup halfpipe event in Calgary, 4 January, 2026. FIS Park and Pipe
Wānaka teenager Finley Melville Ives’ impressive form has continued in the latest FIS World Cup event with a second in the halfpipe in Calgary.
The 19-year-old reigning world champion won the China leg last month, and has followed up with runner-up in Calgary after being outpointed by American Nick Goepper.
His consistency is a good sign with the Milano Cortina Winter Olympics in northern Olympics just over a month away.
Conditions were testing in Calgary with temperatures of about -10deg Celsius affecting speed in the pipe, while flat light reduced visibility.
But that didn’t deter Melville Ives from successfully performing a trick for the first time in competition, nailing a switch left double corked 1440 safety grab on the second hit of his second finals run.
“The conditions were pretty tricky today, but managed to put my run down and land a trick I’d never done before in competition, so I am pretty hyped to tick that one off,” Melville Ives said.
New Zealand free skier Finley Melville Ives, left, on the podium after finishing second to American Nick Goepper, centre, and Birk Irving, who was third in the FIS World Cup halfpipe event in Calgary, 4 January, 2026. Snow Sport NZ
After topping qualification from his heat, he took the early lead with his first run, but Goepper took the lead on the second run.
Melville Ives struck back with his trick switch 1440, but a couple of bobbles on two of his runs saw him fall short of Goepper, whose American team-mate Birk Irving finishing third.
“I’m so stoked, I can’t believe it. It’s been an incredible start to the World Cup season,” Melville Ives said.
“To be up there on the podium with Nick, I am so grateful.”
Fellow Wānaka athlete Ben Harrington had his best result of the season, finishing eighth.
The halfpipe tour heads to Aspen for next weekend, with New Zealand’s slopestyle athletes returning to competition.
It wasn’t such a good day for Queenstown alpine skier Alice Robinson, who crashed out of a second successive World Cup event, failing to finish the first run in the giant slalom in Slovenia.
The two dips have dropped Robinson to third in the overall World Cup standings, behind American Mikaela Shriffin and Switzerland’s Camille Rast, who won a World Cup giant slalom for the first time in Slovenia.
Robinson had led the standings after winning two giant slaloms in November and December, followed by the first Super G win by a New Zealander in St Moritz.
– Published by EveningReport.nz and AsiaPacificReport.nz, see: MIL OSI in partnership with Radio New Zealand
Source: Radio New Zealand
A person flutters a national flag in Caracas on January 3, 2026, after US forces captured Venezuelan leader Nicolas Maduro. AFP / FEDERICO PARRA
A Venezuelan woman living in New Zealand says her family and friends in Venezuela are happy – but anxious – about the move by the United States to capture the Venezuelan leader Nicolas Maduro.
Ari Ruiz and her sister Katherine Halkett have both lived in New Zealand for more than 10 years.
Ruiz said she rang her parents in Venezuela this morning to tell them the news, and her mother broke into happy tears.
Ruiz said her parents hoped this will be the first step towards change for the country.
“There has also been a lot of uncertainty about what comes next,” said Katherine Halkett.
“I think that is where a lot of the anxiety comes from, but the mood in Venezuela, of most Venezuelans, is of happiness and hope. The attacks started at about 8 o’clock (pm) New Zealand time, and we haven’t stopped watching the news since and it very scary.”
Halkett said their parents are in Barquisimeto – about five hours drive from Caracas where the attacks were – and knew nothing of the attacks until their phone call.
Other friends and family members who live in Caracas had a very different experience.
“None of them were in any danger at any point, but there were loud noises, windows shaken by the explosion, and smoke. Very scary of course.”
MARTIN BERNETTI/AFP
Halkett said America’s reasons for the attack may be complicated, but she said people who say it was all about oil did not understand the situation in Venezuela.
“To all the people in New Zealand, from the comfort of their couches with all their human rights, I tell them that we in Venezuela have not had access to the petroleum money from the Venezuelan government for many years.
“They have given away our petrol to Iran, to Cuba, to Russia, to China. So for them now to be worried about our petrol when we haven’t had our petrol for many years.
“That’s why Venezuelans are not really worried about that.”
Halkett said people in New Zealand were worried about what will happen with the petrol, but not the torture, state violence and political detainees.
Halkett said about 90 percent of the population lived in poverty, with about half the population in extreme poverty.
“My mum’s pension is $US4 a month, and box of 20 eggs is $US10, so people are dying,” said Ruiz. “People don’t have access to food.”
Ruiz said their family and friends say the streets have been very quiet, and it felt as if everyone was waiting to see what will happen next.
– Published by EveningReport.nz and AsiaPacificReport.nz, see: MIL OSI in partnership with Radio New Zealand
Source: Radio New Zealand
General practices remain open and are providing services, and people have been assured they can continue to seek care as normal. File photo. Photo /123RF
Manage My Health has identified general practices whose patients have had their private health information breached in a cybersecurity hack – but it is not yet clear when all those patients will be told.
More than 120,000 patient files on the privately-operated portal were compromised in the ransom-ware attack, which was reported to the authorities in the early hours of New Year’s Eve.
Health NZ national director of planning, funding and outcomes Jason Power said the company has advised that individual patients will be notified.
“We expect MMH to share the timeframe for notifications by Tuesday.”
Meanwhile, Health NZ was working with primary care providers through General Practice New Zealand (GPNZ) to clarify the potential impact on patients and general practices.
It had also established an incident management team and was co-ordinating with other government agencies, including the National Cyber Security Centre and the Police Cyber Crime Unit.
“Unfortunately, malicious cyber activity is a constant threat, and New Zealand is not exempt from this.
“We expect MMH, and all other providers of health information systems, to meet the highest standards around system security, with patient safety and privacy a top priority,” Power said.
“We are working with MMH to ensure clear communication to patients and general practices impacted by this breach. We expect assurance that appropriate protections are in place to avoid any repeat and that learning from this incident will be rapidly shared across the health system.”
There had been no impact on Health NZ systems nor any other patient portals, Power said.
The agency was “supporting” MMH in legal action it was taking to protect the information taken in the breach.
GPNZ chair Bryan Betty said Primary Health Organisations would continue to work with their general practices in the coming days.
“They will be assuring that queries and concerns are able to be addressed and will work alongside MMH and Health NZ to engage and support any patients whose information has been compromised.”
General practices remained open and providing services, and people could continue to seek care as normal.
MMH said it would provide regular updates on its website and directly through its patient app and would be establishing an 0800 number for concerned and impacted people.
– Published by EveningReport.nz and AsiaPacificReport.nz, see: MIL OSI in partnership with Radio New Zealand
Source: Radio New Zealand
Hanmer Springs Thermal Pools and Spa is a water park two hours north of Christchurch. There is archaeological evidence that Māori travellers used the area to rest and warm up on their journeys long before Pākehā arrived in New Zealand.
The first dressing shed was built 150 years ago. It has since transformed into a water park with 22 outdoor pools of various temperatures and four waterslides, including the 13.5 metres-high Conical Thrill.
During summer, daily patrons swell to 4000 from a winter low of 300 people. The complex has 20 lifeguards on duty while it is open in the busy season. Lifeguard manager Chantelle Hutton has some interesting techniques to make sure they are paying attention.
Lifeguard manager Chantelle Hutton at Hanmer Springs Thermal Pools and Spa.
supplied
Source: Radio New Zealand
Changes are coming to the rules that prevent gay men from giving blood. AFP
The blood service is on track to start accepting donations from men who have sex with men by the middle of 2026.
It has been almost two years since NZ Blood first committed to change its rules, and almost a year since [https://www.rnz.co.nz/news/national/540366/rules-preventing-blood-donations-from-men-who-have-sex-with-men-to-change
Medsafe gave it the green light].
The new policy would have each donor assessed on an individual basis, rather than the current blanket ban on men who had sex with another man during the previous three months.
It was a change that required significant time and effort to formalise, NZ Blood spokesperson Dr Gavin Cho explained.
“We’ve undergone a series of steps, and this is evidence-based, so we started off with joining the SPOT (Sex and Prevention of Transmission) study where there was a survey of gay, bisexual and other men who have sex with men on how they viewed blood donation,” he said.
“We found that there was a clear desire for NZ Blood to tailor our assessments rather than having a blanket MSM (men who have sex with men) rule.”
The blood service then looked at its counterparts in other countries such as the UK and Canada which had made similar changes.
“A number of them have already implemented individualised donor assessment so we are fortunate to be able to learn from their experiences,” Cho said.
“Some of these blood services [internationally] have published their results after implementation and they’ve shown there is no increase in risk [of HIV] so we’ve felt confident about this in terms of safety.”
After a thorough risk assessment, NZ Blood started to consult with pharmaceutical partner CSL Behring, which converts donated plasma into products that can be used.
“They’ve told us that we need to do certain things including introduce a new test, and this involves new equipment, training staff and a whole lot of other things,” Cho continued.
“So there’s been quite a lot involved in making the decision to do this, but we’ve made that decision and we’re committed to seeing it through.”
The Burnett Foundation, formerly the AIDS Foundation, had long been campaigning for such a change.
The foundation’s research and policy officer Pete Hanl said he “can’t wait,” but “safety is always first”.
“I think we’re moving in the right direction, and it’s important that things are getting done in the right way,” he said.
“New Zealanders need to have full trust that the blood donation process is safe.”
Hanl noted that in the SPOTS study, only 13 percent of gay or bisexual men surveyed fit the existing criteria of not having had sex in the prior three months.
“Why should people who live in a monogamous relationship not be able to donate blood?”
“Just like anybody else, MSM try to be altruistic and do something good for the community.”
Cho said gay and bisexual men eager to donate blood would have to wait just a little bit longer.
“We don’t have a definite date at the moment, we’re confident it will probably be in 2026 and our hope is to be able to announce a date early in the year,” he said.
“We’re aiming for the first half of the year, but there’s no firm commitment at the moment because there are still a few things we need to have in place.”
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
Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By Sarah Heathcote, Honorary Associate Professor in International Law, Australian National University
United States President Donald Trump has said the US will “run” Venezuela until a new government is installed, following the US military intervention in the country’s capital, Caracas.
American forces have seized Venezuela’s president, Nicolás Maduro, and his wife, and brought the pair to the US to face what Trump has described as a “narco-terrorism” trial.
This follows months of build-up of US military forces in the region.
The Russian Foreign Ministry has said the US attacks are:
an act of armed aggression against Venezuela. This is deeply concerning and condemnable. The pretexts used to justify such actions are unfounded.
So, what does international law say?
Article 2(4) of the United Nations Charter says:
All members shall refrain in their international relations from the threat or use of force against the territorial integrity or political independence of any state, or in any other manner inconsistent with the purposes of the United Nations.
Russia’s framing of the US’ Venezuela intervention as a condemnable “act of armed agression” is at least an affirmation of its own belief in the existence of international law.
Similarly, Russia appeals to international law when it claims, spuriously, that its own actions in Ukraine are justified under exceptions to the prohibition on armed aggression – or that they are mere “operations” within its own territory, and so for different legal reasons, lawful under international law.
Commentators have been quick to describe the US strikes in Venezuela as a breach of article 2(4) of the UN charter.
The US’ actions are only lawful if supported by a resolution from the UN Security Council; if the US was acting in self-defence; or – and this is often overlooked – if there was consent by the lawful government of Venezuela to the intervention.
There was no UN Security Council authorisation for the US to intervene in Venezuela, nor has the US been the victim of an ongoing or imminent act of aggression by Venezuela.
A claim of consent by the lawful Venezuelan government might have more ostensible credit because evidence suggests the 2024 presidential election was stolen from Maduro’s opponent, Edmundo González.
However, because the identity of the lawful government is contested (some countries have recognised Maduro’s win in the 2024 election) and the opposition controls no Venezuelan territory, the US can only intervene on the legal ground of consent with a Security Council resolution.
So, if you define the US’ actions in Venezuela as an act of “force” within the meaning of article 2(4) UN Charter, then yes, the US has engaged in a prohibited act, since none of the justifications apply.
For its part, the Trump administration appears to be arguing the strikes on Venezuela were not a “use of force” in the first place, but rather a law enforcement operation.
In a press conference following the strikes, US Secretary of State Marco Rubio described the Venezuelan president as “a fugitive of American justice”. (Given the US Congress was not notified before the Venezuela strikes, this framing comes across as an attempt to obfuscate the need for Congressional authority to use force under US domestic law).
What, then, if the intervention was not a “use of force” as defined by the UN charter, but merely a law enforcement operation?
In making this assessment, one has to take into account the operation’s scale, target, location and the broader context.
Media reports have described 15,000 US troops amassing in the region by December, and the recent deployment of a US aircraft carrier near Venezuela.
Read more:
Tracking the US build-up in the Caribbean
The intervention in Venezuela came from the highest US authority (the president), targeted Venezuela’s acting head of state, and was executed against a background of unfriendly relations between the two states.
In this context, it is hard to see how this can be anything other than a “use of force” within the meaning of article 2(4) of the UN Charter.
It does not, in my view, constitute a law enforcement operation.
Few will mourn the removal of Maduro, widely considered an autocrat. Democracy might even be restored to Venezuela.
Nonetheless, the US intervention in Venezuela was as brazen and unlawful as its military strike on Iran in June last year. As such, it challenges international law.
But international law is not “dead” just because the most powerful no longer respect it.
Breaches of the law are normal in any legal system. Indeed, they are expected or there would not be a need for the rule.
International law is created by all states, not just the powerful few. This makes international community reactions to breaches particularly important.
So, to preserve the rules-based international order, all states need to call out breaches of the law when they occur, including in the current instance.
Sarah Heathcote does not work for, consult, own shares in or receive funding from any company or organisation that would benefit from this article, and has disclosed no relevant affiliations beyond their academic appointment.
– ref. Were the US actions in Venezuela legal under international law? An expert explains – https://theconversation.com/were-the-us-actions-in-venezuela-legal-under-international-law-an-expert-explains-272684
Source: Radio New Zealand
Debris blocks lanes on Southern Motorway in Auckland. Supplied / NZTA Waka Kotahi
A truck carrying a small house has ploughed into an overbridge on an Auckland motorway, piling debris onto the road.
Police were called to the crash between the Papakura on-ramp and Manurewa and Takanini off-ramp just before 3.30pm.
Nobody was hurt.
Two lanes were initially shut down while debris was cleared on lanes heading north.
One of them has since re-opened, leaving one closed.
The Transport Agency says traffic in the area is very heavy, and drivers should allow extra time.
– Published by EveningReport.nz and AsiaPacificReport.nz, see: MIL OSI in partnership with Radio New Zealand
Source: Radio New Zealand
Former Dunedin mayor Jules Radich. RNZ / REECE BAKER
Former Dunedin Mayor Jules Radich has died.
Radich was a councillor from 2019 to 2022, and was mayor from 2022 to 2025.
He was reelected as a councillor in 2025.
Dunedin Mayor Sophie Barker said she ws shocked and saddened by his sudden passing.
She said his dedication and love for Dunedin was immense and he always had the city’s best interests at heart.
The council said that as Councillor Radich was a sitting councillor, a by-election will now be triggered.
Mayor Barker said their deepest love and sympathies were with Radich’s family and friends, and the city’s flags will fly at half mast.
– Published by EveningReport.nz and AsiaPacificReport.nz, see: MIL OSI in partnership with Radio New Zealand
ER Report: Here is a summary of significant articles published on EveningReport.nz on January 4, 2026.
Trump’s new world order is taking shape in Venezuela. Five keys to understanding the US military attacks
Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By Juan Luis Manfredi, Prince of Asturias Distinguished Professor @Georgetown, Universidad de Castilla-La Mancha On the back of every dollar bill, the phrase Novus Ordo Seclorum (“New order of the ages”) hints at the principle guiding the US’ new security strategy. The attack on Venezuela and the capture
A predawn op in Latin America? The US has been here before, but the seizure of Venezuela’s Maduro is still unprecedented
Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By Alan McPherson, Professor of History, Temple University A motorcycle rides past graffiti depicting Venezuelan President Nicolas Maduro in Caracas on Jan. 3, 2026. Juan Barreto/AFP via Getty Images In the dead of night during the holidays, the United States launched an operation inside a Latin American country,
I wrote a book on the politics of war powers, and Trump’s attack on Venezuela reflects Congress surrendering its decision-making powers
Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By Sarah Burns, Associate Professor of Political Science, Rochester Institute of Technology Explosions were seen across Caracas after the U.S. launched large-scale attacks on Venezuela and captured its leader and his wife. AFP via Getty Images Americans woke up on Jan. 3, 2025, to blaring headlines: “US CAPTURES
US snatches Maduro in raid on Caracas: what we know so far
Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By Andrew Gawthorpe, Lecturer in History and International Studies, Leiden University Venezuela’s president, Nicolás Maduro, has been apprehended and flown to the US where the US attorney-general has announced he will face charges of drug trafficking and narco-terrorism. The US military’s operation to snatch Maduro was carried out
Source: Radio New Zealand
Taylors Mistake. Unsplash / Anja Polic
A person has been airlifted to hospital after falling off a cliff at Te Onepoto / Taylors Mistake, near Christchurch.
Police said the person appeared to have significant injuries.
They believed a boat was used to get the person to lifeguards, to then meet the rescue helicopter on land.
St John crews were notified just after midday and responded with the rescue chopper.
Neither Police nor St John could say what condition the person was in.
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
Source: Radio New Zealand
Otago University international relations Professor Robert Patman. Provided
New Zealand experts in international relations and law have criticised the attack on Venezuela by the United States, saying the move is also a direct challenge to New Zealand.
International relations Professor Robert Patman of the University of Otago described the US’ military actions against Venezuela as an audacious move.
“It’s a direct challenge for countries like New Zealand, which support the view that international relations should be based on rules, procedures and laws,” he told RNZ’s Worldwatch.
On Saturday, the US attacked the Venezuelan capital Caracas and captured the South American nation’s president and his wife, citing alleged drug offences.
The fire at Fuerte Tiuna, Venezuela’s largest military complex, after a series of explosions in Caracas on 3 January, 2026. LUIS JAIMES
Patman said while many would be pleased to see Nicolas Maduro gone, that did not mean they would be happy the US “[violated] Venezuela’s sovereignty”.
He believed New Zealand’s response to the US action in Venezuela should be firm and robust, and that the US had shown little regard for New Zealand’s interests by imposing tariffs.
“When in fact, the United States faces virtually little or no tariffs on their own products coming to this country.”
He also highlighted that New Zealand did not speak out in defence of Canada or Denmark when the Trump administration made “territorial threats” against them.
“I think it’s time that we made our voice clear. Foreign policy in this country has been traditionally bipartisan. We have stood up for the rule of law internationally.”
Foreign Minister Winston Peters earlier on Sunday said New Zealand was “concerned”, calling on “all parties to act in accordance with international law”. Prime Minister Christopher Luxon’s office declined to add more to Peters’ statement when asked by RNZ.
Patman said it was important that while New Zealand might not support the Maduro government, it should be up to the people of Venezuela to decide what happens in their political leadership.
University of Waikato international law Professor Al Gillespie also urged for Venezuelan people to have the opportunity of choosing their country’s next leader.
He said the “worst-case scenario” now was that the US attempted to run the country.
Professor Alexander Gillespie of the University of Waikato. Alexander Gillespie
Trump has claimed the US would “run” Venezuala in the meantime.
“I think an ideal situation, if you were seriously concerned about the corrupt practices of that regime, is that you would call for an election.”
He said Venezuela should be handed over to an independent body such as the Organisation of American States or the United Nations.
“You’d let the regional or international community govern an election process so the Venezuelan people can speak to their own interests.”
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
Source: Radio New Zealand
Police want to hear from anyone who was at the campsite and saw the fight. NZ Police / Supplied
Police are seeking witnesses to an assault at a campsite in Central Otago.
The fight happened at the Champagne Gully camping area near Cromwell about 10pm on Friday.
A 33-year-old man has been charged with assaulting three people, and is due to appear in the Dunedin District Court on Monday.
Police want to hear from anyone who was at the campsite and saw the fight, or who has information or footage.
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
Source: Radio New Zealand
TV adventurer Bear Grylls has built a global reputation through his often unconventional and sometimes extreme survival feats to stay hydrated.
He has squeezed moisture from elephant dung, sipped the contents of camel intestines, downed yak eyeball juice and, perhaps most famously, drank his own urine.
If you’ve seen Grylls gulp down a mouthful of his own urine on camera, you might conclude it’s a legitimate survival hack. After all, Grylls used to be in the SAS.
This video is hosted on Youtube.
– Published by EveningReport.nz and AsiaPacificReport.nz, see: MIL OSI in partnership with Radio New Zealand
Source: Radio New Zealand
This combination of pictures created on August 08, 2025 shows Venezuela’s President Nicolas Maduro (L) in Caracas on January 10, 2025, and US President Donald Trump (R) in Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania on July 15, 2025. Powerful explosions, resembling aircraft flyovers, were heard blasting in Caracas on January 3, 2026 at around 2:00 am (0600 GMT), an AFP journalist reported. The sounds of explosions come as US President Donald Trump, who has deployed a large navy armada in the Caribbean with a stated mission of combatting drug trafficking, raised the possibility of ground strikes against Venezuela. JUAN BARRETO / AFP
RNZ presents a special edition of Worldwatch, airing after the midday news from about 12.10pm – listen live in the player above.
On Saturday, the US attacked the Venezuelan capital Caracas and captured President Nicolás Maduro and his wife, citing alleged drug offences.
US President Donald Trump said in the meantime, the US would “run” the South American nation, which has some of the world’s largest oil reserves.
The New Zealand government has expressed concern, calling on all parties to respect and follow international law, while the United Nations has called an emergency meeting for Monday.
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
Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By Juan Luis Manfredi, Prince of Asturias Distinguished Professor @Georgetown, Universidad de Castilla-La Mancha
On the back of every dollar bill, the phrase Novus Ordo Seclorum (“New order of the ages”) hints at the principle guiding the US’ new security strategy.
The attack on Venezuela and the capture of President Nicolás Maduro herald the decoupling of Trump’s United States from the rules-based international order, and the end of liberal order as a whole. A new international order is now emerging, based on the use of force, revisionism and security on the American continent.
Here are five keys to understanding the outcomes of the military intervention, and the new order it ushers in.
The attack cements the new doctrine of an imperious president, one who executes orders without waiting for congressional approval, legal validation or media opinion.
With checks and balances weakened, the second Trump administration is free to present the new order as a question of urgent security: with the US at war against drug trafficking (or migration) and threatened by “new powers” (a euphemism for China), it has no need to respect proper procedures or timelines.
Trump identifies himself with historic, founding American presidents like Washington, Lincoln and Roosevelt. All three were charismatic leaders, and with the 250th anniversary of the US republic approaching such comparisons feed into Trump’s authoritarian rhetoric.
Erosion of the US political and legal system is undeniable. The president has approved an extensive package of regulations that promote emergency powers, a permanent state of crisis, and suppression of political opposition and the judicial system. The attack on Venezuela is yet another milestone in the reconfiguration of the presidency’s relations to the legislative and judicial branches of power, in line with the Hamiltonian tradition of a strong and unifying executive branch.
Leer más:
Trump sees himself as more like a king than president. Here’s why
On the international stage, the attack on Venezuela advances a diplomatic agenda that is rooted in the defence of national interests. The concept of “America for the Americans” has made a strong comeback: Panama, Mexico and Canada have all been made to bow to Trump’s will, while the administration continues to push for control of Greenland.
In Latin America, Brazil and Colombia’s left-wing governments lead regional opposition to the US, while Chile’s newly elected José Antonio Kast and Argentina’s Javier Milei are Trump’s ideological allies. The continent as a whole is witnessing a broad shift towards nationalist, right-wing parties that oppose migration.
If Venezuela’s post-Maduro transition aligns with these values, any hope for national unity and a peaceful transition to full democracy will disappear.
Leer más:
American dominance is not dead, but it is changing — and not for the better
Once again, it’s all about oil, but for different reasons than in Iraq. In a world where globalisation has shifted to geoeconomics, the United States wants to project its power in international energy markets and regulation. Venezuela’s infrastructure, ports and minerals are key to making this happen.
The US therefore doesn’t just want Venezuelan oil to supply its domestic market – it also wants to impose international prices and dominate supply. Its new vision aims to align energy sovereignty and technological development with trade and security.
Pax Silica – the international US-led alliance signed at the end of 2025 to secure supply chains for critical technologies such as semiconductors and AI – ushers in an era of transactional diplomacy: computer chips in exchange for minerals. For the “new” Venezuela, its oil reserves will allow it to participate in this new power dynamic.
Leer más:
Why is Trump so obsessed with Venezuela? His new security strategy provides some clues
The American view of territory fuels a revisionist foreign policy based on sovereignty – similar to those of China, Israel, or Russia – which is rooted in the concept of “nomos”, as defined by mid-20th century German philosopher Carl Schmitt. This is a worldview where the division of nations into “friend or foe” prevails over a liberal worldview governed by cooperation, international law, democracy and the free market.
Under this logic, spheres of influence emerge, resources are distributed, and power blocs are balanced, as the above examples demonstrate: without opposition, China would dominate Southeast Asia, Russia would scale back its war in exchange for 20% of Ukraine and control over its material resources and energy, and Israel would redraw the map of the Middle East and strike trade agreements with neighbouring countries.
Ideals like democracy, the rule of law and free trade are fading fast, and without effective capacity, things don’t end well for the European Union. As we have seen with Gaza, the EU often has strong ideological disagreement with other major powers but doesn’t command enough respect to do anything. The US’ military intervention revives Hobbesian political realism, where freedom is ceded to an absolute sovereign in exchange for peace and security.
In Trump’s new order, it is presidential authority – not truth, laws or democratic values – that has the final say.
2026 is an election year in the US, with 39 gubernatorial elections and a raft of state and local elections to be contested between March and November.
Through its actions in Venezuela, the Trump administration is effectively debating its model for succession. One faction, led by JD Vance, wants to avoid problems abroad and to renew the industrial economic model. The other, led by Secretary of State Marco Rubio, is committed to rebuilding the international order with a strong and dominant US. The outcome of the Venezuelan operation may tip the balance, and could determine Trump’s successor in the 2028 presidential elections.
The attack on Venezuela is not just an intervention in the region: it also reflects the changing times in which we live. While international Trumpism was previously confined to disjointed slogans, it has now taken its first step into military strategy. Gone are the days of soft power, transatlantic relations and peace in Ibero-America. A new order is being born.
Juan Luis Manfredi no recibe salario, ni ejerce labores de consultoría, ni posee acciones, ni recibe financiación de ninguna compañía u organización que pueda obtener beneficio de este artículo, y ha declarado carecer de vínculos relevantes más allá del cargo académico citado.
– ref. Trump’s new world order is taking shape in Venezuela. Five keys to understanding the US military attacks – https://theconversation.com/trumps-new-world-order-is-taking-shape-in-venezuela-five-keys-to-understanding-the-us-military-attacks-272673
Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By Alan McPherson, Professor of History, Temple University
In the dead of night during the holidays, the United States launched an operation inside a Latin American country, intent on seizing its leader on the pretext that he is wanted in U.S. courts on drug charges.
The date was Dec. 20, 1989, the country was Panama, and the wanted man was General Manuel Noriega.
Many people in the Americas waking up on Jan. 3, 2026, may have been feeling a sense of déjà vu.
Images of dark U.S. helicopters flying over a Latin American capital seemed, until recently, like a bygone relic of American imperialism – incongruous since the end of the Cold War.
But the seizure of Venezuelan President Nicolás Maduro, along with his wife, Cilia Flores, recalls an earlier era of U.S. foreign policy.
U.S. President Donald Trump announced that, in an overnight operation, U.S. troops captured and spirited the couple out of Caracas, the Venezuelan capital. It followed what Trump described as an “extraordinary military operation” involving air, land and sea forces.
Maduro and his wife were flown to New York to face drug charges. While Maduro was indicted in 2020 on charges that he led a narco-terrorism operation, his wife was only added in a fresh indictment that also included four other named Venezuelans.
Secretary of State Marco Rubio said he “anticipates no further action” in Venezuela; Trump later said the he wasn’t afraid of American “boots on the ground.”
Whatever happens, as an expert on U.S.-Latin American relations, I see the U.S. operation in Venezuela as a clear break from the recent past. The seizure of a foreign leader – albeit one who clung to power through dubious electoral means – amounts to a form of ad hoc imperialism, a blatant sign of the Trump administration’s aggressive but unfocused might-makes-right approach to Latin America.
It eschews the diplomatic approach that has been the hallmark of inter-American relations for decades, really since the fall of the Soviet Union in the early 1990s took away the ideological grab over potential spheres of influence in the region.
Instead, it reverts to an earlier period when gunboats — yesteryear’s choppers — sought to achieve U.S. political aims in a neighboring region that American officials treated as the “American lake” – as one World War II Navy officer referred to the Caribbean.
The renaming of the Gulf of Mexico as the “Gulf of America” – one of the earliest acts of the second Trump administration – fits this new policy pivot.
But in key ways, there is no precedent to the Trump administration’s operation to remove Maduro.
Never before has the U.S. military directly intervened in South America to effect regime change. All of Washington’s previous direct actions were in smaller, closer countries in Central America or the Caribbean.
The U.S. intervened often in Mexico but never decapitated its leadership directly or took over the entire country. In South America, interventions tended to be indirect: Lyndon Johnson had a backup plan in case the 1964 coup in Brazil did not succeed (it did); Richard Nixon undermined the socialist government in Chile from 1970 on but did not orchestrate the coup against President Salvador Allende in 1973.
And while Secretary of State Henry Kissinger – the architect of U.S. foreign policy under Nixon and his successor, Gerald Ford – and others encouraged repression against leftists throughout the 1970s, they held back from taking a direct part in it.
U.S. officials long viewed South American countries as too far away, too big and too independent to call for direct intervention.
Apparently, Trump’s officials paid that historical demarcation little heed.
What is to happen to Venezuela after Maduro? Taking him into U.S. custody lays bare that the primary goal of a monthslong campaign of American military attacking alleged drug ships and oil tankers was always likely regime change, rather than making any real dent in the amount of illegal drugs reaching U.S. shores. As it is, next to no fentanyl leaves Venezuela, and most Venezuelan cocaine heads to Europe, anyway.
What will preoccupy many regional governments in Latin America, and policy experts in Washington, is whether the White House has considered the consequences to this latest escalation.
Trump no doubt wants to avoid another Iraq War disaster, and as such he will want to limit any ongoing U.S. military and law enforcement presence. But typically, a U.S. force changing a Latin American regime has had to stay on the ground to install a friendly leader and maybe oversee a stable transition or elections.
Simply plucking Maduro out of Caracas does not do that. The Venezuela constitution says that his vice president is to take over. And Vice President Delcy Rodriguez, who is demanding proof of life of her president, is no anti-Maduro figure.
Regime change would require installing those who legitimately won the 2024 election, and they are assuredly who Rubio wants installed next in Miraflores Palace.
With Trump weighing the demands of two groups – anti-leftist hawks in Washington and an anti-interventionist base of MAGA supporters – a power struggle in Washington could emerge. It will be decided by men who may have overlapping but different reasons for action in Venezuela: Rubio, who wants to burnish his image as an anti-communist bringer of democracy abroad; Trump, a transactional leader who seemingly has eyes on Venezuela’s oil; and Secretary of Defense Pete Hegseth, who has shown a desire to flex America’s military muscle.
What exactly is the hierarchy of these goals? We might soon find out. But either way, a Rubicon has been crossed by the Trump administration. Decades of U.S. policy toward neighbors in the south have been ripped up.
The capture of Maduro could displace millions more Venezuelans and destabilize neighboring countries – certainly it will affect their relationship with Washington. And while the operation to remove Maduro was clearly thought out with military precision, the concern is that less attention has been paid to an equally important aspect: what happens next.
“We’re going to run the country” until a “safe, proper and judicious transition” occurs, the Trump promised. But that is easier said than done.
Alan McPherson does not work for, consult, own shares in or receive funding from any company or organization that would benefit from this article, and has disclosed no relevant affiliations beyond their academic appointment.
– ref. A predawn op in Latin America? The US has been here before, but the seizure of Venezuela’s Maduro is still unprecedented – https://theconversation.com/a-predawn-op-in-latin-america-the-us-has-been-here-before-but-the-seizure-of-venezuelas-maduro-is-still-unprecedented-272664
Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By Sarah Burns, Associate Professor of Political Science, Rochester Institute of Technology
AFP via Getty Images
Americans woke up on Jan. 3, 2025, to blaring headlines: “US CAPTURES MADURO, TRUMP SAYS,” declared The New York Times, using all capital letters. The U.S. had mounted an overnight military raid in Venezuela that immediately raised questions of procedure and legality. Prime among them was what role Congress had – or should have had – in the operation.
Politics editor Naomi Schalit interviewed political scientist Sarah Burns, author of the book “The Politics of War Powers” and an expert at Rochester Institute of Technology on the historical struggle between Congress and U.S. presidents over who has the power to authorize military action.
Is this a war?
I wouldn’t call it a war. This is regime change, and whether or not it has a positive impact on the United States, whether or not it has a positive impact on Venezuela, I think the likelihood is very low for both of those things being true.
How does Congress see its role in terms of military action initiated by the United States?
Congress has been, in my view, incredibly supine. But that’s not just my word. Having said that, it is true that Congress – in the House, predominantly – tried to pass a war powers act recently, saying that President Donald Trump was not allowed to do any action against Venezuela, and that failed on very close votes.
So you see some effort on the part of Congress to assert itself in the realm of war. But it failed predominantly on party lines, with Democrats saying we really don’t want to go into Venezuela. We really don’t want to have this action. Republicans predominantly were supporting the president and whatever it happens to be that he would like to do. Moderate Republicans and Republicans who are in less safe districts were and are more likely to at least stand up a little bit to the president, but there’s a very small number of them.
So there may be an institutional role for Congress, a constitutional role, a role that has been confirmed by legal opinion, but politics takes over in Congress when it comes to asserting its power in this realm?
That’s a perfect way of putting it. They have a legal, constitutional, one might even say moral, responsibility to assert themselves as a branch, right? This is from Federalist 51 where James Madison says “Ambition must be made to counteract ambition.” So it should be that as a branch, they assert themselves against the president and say, “We have a role here.”
In the 1940s, presidential scholar Edward Corwin said that in the realm of foreign policy, it is an invitation for Congress and the president to struggle. So it should be that Congress and the president are struggling against each other to assert, “I’m in charge.” “No, I’m in charge.” “No, I’m in charge,” in an effort to create a balance between the two branches and between the two things that each of the branches does well. What you want from Congress is slow deliberation and a variety of opinions. What you want from the president is energy and dispatch.
So certainly, if we have an attack like 9/11, you would want the president to be able to act quickly. And you know, conversely, in situations like the questions around what the U.S. is doing in Venezuela, you want slow deliberation because there is no emergency that requires energy and dispatch and speed. So the president shouldn’t be entirely in the driver’s seat here, and Congress should very much be trying very hard to restrain him.
What power does Congress have to restrain him?
They have to pass legislation. They aren’t particularly well suited right now to passing legislation, so effectively there is not a very clear way for them to restrain the president.
One of the things that members of Congress have attempted to do several times, with very little positive impact, is go to the courts and say, “Can you restrain the president?” And political scientist Jasmine Farrier has written that the courts have regularly said to members of Congress: “You have the power to stop the president, and you are ineffective at that. And so if you want to stop the president, you shouldn’t turn to us. You should work together to create legislation that would restrain the president.”
What would such legislation do? Cut off money for troops? Is it finger-wagging, or is it something really concrete?
There are a few different tiers. Joint resolutions are finger-wagging. They just say, “Bad, Mr. President, don’t do that.” But they have no effect in law.
The War Powers Resolution, first passed in 1973, is a legitimate way of trying to restrain the president. Congress intended to say to presidents, “You cannot start a war and continue a war without our authorization.” But what they said instead was “You could have a small war or a short war – of 60 to 90 days – without our authorization, and then you have to tell us about it.” That just sort of said to presidents the opposite of what they intended. So President Barack Obama took advantage of that with the military engagement in Libya, as well as Trump in his first administration.
This is not a partisan issue. It’s not Republican presidents who do it. It’s not Democratic presidents who do it. It’s every president since the War Powers Resolution was passed, and the only time that Congress has drawn down troops or drawn down money was the Vietnam War.
Other than that disastrous war, we have not seen Congress willing to put themselves on the politically negative side, which is taking money away from the troops. Because if you take away money right now, they’re going to be harmed.
What is the War Powers Resolution?
The War Powers Resolution from 1973, also known as the War Powers Act, was Congress – during the Vietnam War – saying definitively to President Richard Nixon, “You have overstepped your bounds.” They had explicitly said in law, you cannot go into Cambodia. And Nixon went into Cambodia.
So that was their way of trying to reassert themselves very aggressively; as I mentioned before, it didn’t work effectively. It worked insofar as presidents don’t unilaterally start wars that are large scale, the way that World War II was large scale. But they do have these smaller actions at varying levels.
Then we get to 9/11 and we see the 2001 authorization for the use of military force, and the 2002 authorization for the use of military force. The 2001 law authorized going after anyone in al-Qaida and associated with 9/11. The 2002 authorization was directly related to Iraq, saying “There is a problem with Iraq, we have to do something.” Both of them were extremely vague and broad, and that’s why we’ve seen four presidents, including Trump, using the 2001 and 2002 authorizations to carry out all sorts of operations that had very little to do with Saddam Hussein or al-Qaida.
In 2021, senators Mike Lee, Bernie Sanders and Chris Murphy collectively got together and tried to create a national security document that would restrain presidential unilateralism. It was a good effort on the part of members of Congress from a variety of different ideological views to attempt to restrain the president. It did not even sort-of pass – it barely got out on the floor.
Since that time, we haven’t seen a lot of efforts from members of Congress. They haven’t really reasserted themselves since the war in Korea, which began in 1950. It’s very clear that ambition is no longer checking ambition the way that it was meant to by the founders.
When you woke up this morning and saw the news, what was your first thought?
Here we go again. This is not a Republican or a Democratic issue. Lots of presidents have made this error, which is that they think if you do this smaller-scale action, you are going to get a positive result for the nation, for the region, for international stability. And very rarely is that the case.
Sarah Burns does not work for, consult, own shares in or receive funding from any company or organization that would benefit from this article, and has disclosed no relevant affiliations beyond their academic appointment.
– ref. I wrote a book on the politics of war powers, and Trump’s attack on Venezuela reflects Congress surrendering its decision-making powers – https://theconversation.com/i-wrote-a-book-on-the-politics-of-war-powers-and-trumps-attack-on-venezuela-reflects-congress-surrendering-its-decision-making-powers-272668
Source: Radio New Zealand
A serious crash has closed State Highway 3/Ōhaupō Road where it intersects with Ryburn Road. Pretoria Gordon / RNZ
Emergency services have responded to the scene of a serious crash that has closed State Highway 3/Ōhaupō Road where it intersects with Ryburn Road in Waikato.
Police said a two-vehicle crash was reported about 9.15am on Sunday.
“Initial indications are that two people have serious injuries.”
Diversions are in place and delays are expected as emergency services work at the scene.
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
Source: Radio New Zealand
Winston Peters. RNZ / Samuel Rillstone
Foreign Minister Winston Peters has made the government’s first statement following the US military action against Venezuela, saying New Zealand is “concerned”.
On Saturday, the US attacked the Venezuelan capital Caracas and captured the South American nation’s president and his wife, citing alleged drug offences.
US President Donald Trump said in the meantime, the US would “run” the country, which has some of the world’s largest oil reserves.
“New Zealand is concerned by and actively monitoring developments in Venezuela and expects all parties to act in accordance with international law,” Peters said in a post on X (formerly Twitter), using the official Minister of Foreign Affairs account.
New Zealand is concerned by and actively monitoring developments in Venezuela and expects all parties to act in accordance with international law. New Zealand stands with the Venezuelan people in their pursuit of a fair, democratic and prosperous future.
We continue to advise…
— Winston Peters (@NewZealandMFA) January 3, 2026
“New Zealand stands with the Venezuelan people in their pursuit of a fair, democratic and prosperous future.
“We continue to advise that New Zealanders do not travel to Venezuela. New Zealanders requiring urgent consular assistance can contact the 24/7consular emergency line on +64 99 20 20 20.”
The military action comes after months of accusations from the Trump administration that Venezuela has been shipping narcotics into the US, but Trump has made no secret of his desire to access Venezuela’s natural reserves.
“We’re going to have our very large United States oil companies, the biggest anywhere in the world, go in, spend billions of dollars, fix the badly broken infrastructure,” he said. “We’ll be selling large amounts of oil.”
The United Nations is set to have an emergency meeting on Monday to discuss the action, which has recieved both praise and condemnation from world leaders.
International law expert Professor Alexander Gillespie of the University of Waikato said while it was “very good that Peters has called upon all countries to ‘act in accordance with international law’”, he was curious to know whether Peters believed the US action was lawful or not, or if Venezuelan leader Nicolas Maduro had diplomatic immunity.
In theory, Gillespie said it appeared the US military action was unlawful.
Professor Alexander Gillespie of the University of Waikato. Alexander Gillespie
“You can only attack another country in times of self-defence and that situation must be urgent, proportionate in action, and no alternative to the use of force,” he told RNZ via email.
“Trump is not wrong to be concerned about the problem of illegal drugs and transnational criminal/terrorist groups, but the pretext of illegal drugs in this area is fanciful; where the ‘war on drugs’ has turned into something completely different. To say it is self-defence stretches the doctrine way beyond what it has previously been understood as.”
But it was unlikely Trump would face any legal retaliation, as the US has a veto on the UN Security Council and would “just laugh” at the prospect of being taken to the International Court of Justice.
Gillespie said there was a risk the US arrest of another country’s president would give others such as Russia, China and Iran “a green light to intervene in countries they disapprove of unilaterally – without going through the UN”.
“It will be a small step for countries like China to take Taiwan on this precedent; or Russia to push even harder into Ukraine.”
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
Source: Radio New Zealand
Pia Vlok of the Phoenix in action against Brisbane Roar. photosport
Brooke Nunn scored late in second half stoppage time to secure the Phoenix a 2-2 draw with Brisbane Roar and stretch their unbeaten run.
Coming off massive wins over Sydney FC (7-0) and Western Sydney (3-0), sharing the spoils in Brisbane was a small let-down but coach Bev Priestman said she walked away satisfied.
“If you’d asked me at the beginning of the game I’d say no, but you ask me at the end and yes, I’m very happy to take the point,” Priestman said.
“Overall whenever you take points on the road you have to be happy.
“The first half we weren’t at our best. They changed shape and we took some adjusting to that. But in the second half we did a much better job of preventing any shots.
“What I’m most proud of is that the team never gave up and they went to the very end. Sometimes some of the best teams cannot be at their best and still take points out of a game, especially on the road.
“And to get back-to-back points on the road and three games undefeated, we have to also be proud of that.”
Sabitra “Samba” Bhandari. photosport
Manaia Elliott had opened the scoring for the visitors in the 15th minute with a speculative effort from distance, wide on the left, but the Roar equalised almost instantly and took the lead shortly after the half hour mark.
It looked like Wellington’s pursuit of an equaliser would be in vain until the eighth minute of time added on, when Nunn delivered a cross from the right flank which beat Lincoln at her near post and nestled in the back of the net.
Wellington drop one place to six ahead of a home match against Melbourne City on Saturday.
The Phoenix could be without Sabitra “Samba” Bhandari, who limped off with a knee injury late in the second half.
“We’re not sure yet. I think she’ll definitely need to get a scan on her knee,” Priestman said.
“It could be nothing but it also could be something and it’s something we need to look into.”
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
Source: Radio New Zealand
It’s hardly a revelation that we’re living in an era of distraction and smartphone addiction. Our phones interrupt us, hijack our attention, and tempt us into scrolling. Even when we aren’t interacting with them, their mere presence makes it difficult to concentrate.
To address this, app developers have responded with a vast ocean of productivity and focus apps, each promising to tame the chaos with timers, app blocking, habit reminders, and rewards designed to help you stay focused and be productive.
To understand whether these apps are worth our while, we first need to consider why staying focused is so difficult in the first place.
A range of productivity apps now promise to tame the chaos with timers, app blocking, habit reminders, and rewards.
Honey B Games / ENFP Dev Master
Source: Radio New Zealand
Rāhui from the Glinks Gully entrance to Mahuta Gap Police
Two people drowned at Ripirō Beach, between Mahuta Gap and Glinks Gully, on Saturday.
Police were called about 6.50pm to reports two men could be seen struggling in the water.
Police and other emergency services responded immediately, and the men were pulled from the water unresponsive.
Surf Life Saving New Zealand (SLSNZ) confirmed surf lifeguards responded to an incident at Glinks Gully.
Police had informed SLSNZ of two people caught in a rip, 300m north of the access way at Glinks Gully, approximately 17km south of the Baylys Beach patrolled area.
The first surf lifeguards to arrive at the scene launched an inflatable rescue boat and located both people, who were in the water and unresponsive.
They returned them to the beach to commence CPR, however resuscitation attempts were unsuccessful.
The deaths have been referred to the coroner and local iwi have placed a rāhui on the area, until 7pm Monday 5 January.
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
Source: Radio New Zealand
Neighbourly is back online after it was shut down on New Year’s Day when its operators became aware of a data breach. Screenshot
Names, email addresses and GPS locations – as well as posts and private messages – of users of the Stuff-owned community website Neighbourly have been put up for sale on the dark web.
Neighbourly is back online after being shut down on New Year’s Day when its operators became aware of a data breach.
A website monitoring the dark web says a massive database of information belonging to Neighbourly was put up for sale over Christmas.
Daily Dark Web said a user claiming to possess more than 213 million lines of data from the site offered the information for sale on a cybercrime marketplace.
Neighbourly has told its members it will look to seek a court injunction against the use of any of the material, but said it was satisfied the breach was quickly contained.
The breach came the same week as details of up to 126,000 ManageMyHealth users were accessed without authorisation.
– Published by EveningReport.nz and AsiaPacificReport.nz, see: MIL OSI in partnership with Radio New Zealand
Source: Radio New Zealand
Julia Sudnitskaya / 123RF
State Highway 35 at Tolaga Bay has reopened to one lane and is expected to be fully reopened by mid-morning.
Flooding on Saturday closed a stretch of SH35 overnight between Wharf Road, just south of Tolaga Bay, and Okitu.
Dozens were evacuated and spent the night at Tolaga Bay Area School’s gymnasium, many of whom have now been able to return.
A majority of the evacuees were tent campers from Tolaga Bay Top 10 Camp, who moved early Saturday night.
Despite the road reopening, NZ Transport Agency / Waka Kotahi urged caution for travellers. It asked anyone in the area to be alert to possible flooding, slips and debris in other parts of the region.
Crews were also monitoring a build up of woody debris around Gladstone Road bridge on SH35 in Gisborne.
Ūawa deputy civil defence officer Nori Parata told RNZ the rain had been torrential.
“We had to open up the base because there are a number of travellers that had got caught with the road closure, and also didn’t have appropriate vehicles for that kind of situation.
“But equally we also had the holiday camp [at Tolaga Bay] needed to evacuate people that were camping in tents down there. So I think we’ve got about 80 people in our gym between the travellers and the campers.”
Parata said there were plenty of mattresses in the school gym for evacuees and anyone else caught out by the flooding, and the Civil Defence base was well-equipped with kai and other supplies.
“We’re set up to cater in these emergencies. This is not our first rodeo.”
Parata said the Tolaga Bay Holiday Park had just reopened this season after recovering from Cyclone Gabrielle three years ago.
Shanan Gray from Tolaga Bay Civil Defence hoped the worst was over on Sunday. He told RNZ it had been pelting down overnight, but had since eased.
“The wind is quite heavy at the moment, so hopefully it is pushing the rain out to sea,” he said.
MetService meterologist Braydon White said rain of more than 50mm/h had fallen in Tolaga Bay since 8pm on Saturday.
While the orange-level heavy rain warning had expired at 8am, White said there had been some reasonably large accumulations of rainfall on Sunday morning too, especially on the East Cape.
Ūawa Civil Defence has warned on Facebook that the wharf bridge was “underwater and dangerous”.
“Do not go near it or try to cross. Please stay home, stay off the roads, and keep yourself safe.”
Meanwhile, Tai Rāwhiti Civil Defence is monitoring the situation in the city of Gisborne. Group controller Ben Green told RNZ there was a lot of surface flooding across the region, but the Waimatā River and the Tarahiru River had remained steady overnight.
It was feared residents would have to be evacuated after the Waimatā River measured at 7m and the Tarahiru River at 4.26m at 11pm.
Green said access to Tolaga Bay had also been restored, after a slip had closed the gorge on Saturday night.
Tai Rāwhiti Civil Defence would be looking into the impact of the flooding on Sunday.
In a video message, Green said the focus was on the Taruheru River, which flowed through Gisborne City.
“What we’re asking people to do is adopt a ‘be prepared’ and cautious approach to really monitoring the river.
“If you haven’t already done so, check in with your neighbours. Make sure that they’re aware of what the current situation is. In the worst case if you do feel unsafe then, certainly, proactively evacuate if you are uncomfortable with that situation.”
Green said Fire and Emergency had been keeping people informed on Fergusson Drive and other low-lying streets.
He said people could sign up for text alerts through the Gisborne District Council website.
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
Source: Radio New Zealand
Ifeanyi Eze celebrates after scoring for the Wellington Phoenix against the Brisbane Roar. photosport
Wellington Phoenix overcame a wretched run of form and an early red card to upset the Brisbane Roar 3-0 on the road in a major A-League upset.
In a result described by coach Giancarlo Italiano as his best win as a head coach, the Phoenix scored twice in the second half despite being without the services of winger Carlo Armiento, who was shown a straight red in the 38th minute.
The result came five days after their 5-1 loss to Melbourne Victory, which left the club languishing in 10th place ahead of a clash with the third-placed Roar.
Italiano was thrilled with their response, which included keeping a first clean sheet of the season.
“That’s probably the best victory I’ve ever had as a coach. We’ve had it very hard,” Italiano said, close to tears at one point in the press conference.
“I’m just immensely proud for the group. We suffered today. We spoke about it yesterday and it was like a self-fulfilling prophecy. We talked about in order for teams to be successful they need to learn to suffer, to grind, to be committed, to have courage and to be brave. They demonstrated everything today.
“It was almost like the football gods wanted Carlo to get sent off for us to go through this lesson. We needed this. It wasn’t so much the result, it was the performance.
“The boys showed a lot of character tonight. I couldn’t have asked for anything more.”
Ifeanyi Eze scored Wellington’s first goal in the sixth minute, but their chances of victory nosedived when Armiento was shown red for an illegal tackle which sparked an all-in melee.
Wellington Phoenix and Brisbane Roar players involved in a melee. photosport
However, the visitors responded with resolute defence and speed on the counter after the break, scoring through
Kazuki Nagasawa and substitute Paulo Retre.
Italiano reserved praise for teenage goalkeeper Eamonn McCarron, who made a number of fine saves in just his second start.
“Eamonn is like an experienced goalkeeper caught in a young guy’s body,” Italiano said.
“He’s fearless and what I really liked about him today was the reaction from conceding five goals against Victory. It didn’t faze him.
“In the air he was fantastic and the last ditch, brave saves were amazing. He started as the number three at the beginning of the season and now he’s playing like a mature number one.”
Ninth-placed Wellington host sixth-placed Adelaide United on Sunday.
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
Source: Radio New Zealand
Rāhui from the Glinks Gully entrance to Mahuta Gap Police
Two people have died following a water related incident on Ripirō Beach between Mahuta Gap and Glinks Gully on Saturday.
Police were called about 6.50pm on Saturday with a report that two men could be seen struggling in the water.
Police and other emergency services responded immediately, and the men were pulled from the water unresponsive.
Police said first responders provided first aid but sadly both men died at the scene.
“Our thoughts are with their family and friends during this difficult time.”
The deaths have been referred to the Coroner.
Local iwi have placed a rāhui on the area, until 7pm Monday 5 January.
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
Source: Radio New Zealand
Julia Sudnitskaya / 123RF
Tolaga Bay Civil Defence is cooking breakfast for the evacuees who have spent the night at the Area School’s gymnasium.
State Highway 35 is still closed on Sunday, after heavy flooding in the Tai Rāwhiti region overnight.
The 30 remaining evacuees at Tolaga Bay Area School are a mix of travellers who were caught out when the road closed, and campers evacuated from the Tolaga Bay Holiday Park.
Ūawa deputy civil defence officer Nori Parata told RNZ the rain had been torrential.
“We had to open up the base because there are a number of travellers that had got caught with the road closure, and also didn’t have appropriate vehicles for that kind of situation.
“But equally we also had the holiday camp [at Tolaga Bay] needed to evacuate people that were camping in tents down there.
“So I think we’ve got about 80 people in our gym between the travellers and the campers.”
Parata said there were plenty of mattresses in the school gym for evacuees and anyone caught out by the flooding, and the civil defence base was well-equipped with kai and other supplies.
“We’re set up to cater in these emergencies. This is not our first rodeo.”
Parata said the Tolaga Bay Holiday Park had just reopened this season after recovering from Cyclone Gabrielle three years ago.
Shanan Gray from Tolaga Bay Civil Defence hoped the worst was over on Sunday.
He told RNZ that it had been pelting down overnight, but had since eased.
“The wind is quite heavy at the moment, so hopefully it is pushing the rain out to sea,” he said.
MetService meterologist Braydon White said rain of more than 50 millimetres an hour had fallen in Tolaga Bay since 8pm on Saturday.
While the orange-level heavy rain warning had expired at 8am, White said there had been some reasonably large accumulations of rainfall on Sunday morning too, especially on the East Cape.
Ūawa Civil Defence has warned on Facebook that the wharf bridge was “underwater and dangerous”.
“Do not go near it or try to cross. Please stay home, stay off the roads, and keep yourself safe.”
Meanwhile, Tai Rāwhiti Civil Defence is monitoring the situation in the city of Gisborne.
In a video message, the Tai Rāwhiti emergency management controller Ben Green said the focus was on the Taruheru River, which flowed through Gisborne City.
It was at 4.26m at 11pm, and the level of concern that posed a risk to low-lying properties was 4.5m, so it would be under monitoring overnight.
“What we’re asking people to do is adopt a ‘be prepared’ and cautious approach to really monitoring the river.
“If you haven’t already done so, check in with your neighbours. Make sure that they’re aware of what the current situation is. In the worst case if you do feel unsafe then, certainly, proactively evacuate if you are uncomfortable with that situation.”
Green said Fire and Emergency had been keeping people informed on Fergusson Drive and other low-lying streets.
He said people could sign up for text alerts through the Gisborne District Council website.
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
Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By Andrew Gawthorpe, Lecturer in History and International Studies, Leiden University
Venezuela’s president, Nicolás Maduro, has been apprehended and flown to the US where the US attorney-general has announced he will face charges of drug trafficking and narco-terrorism. The US military’s operation to snatch Maduro was carried out in the early hours of January 3 and follows months of steadily mounting pressure on the Venezuelan government.
Now it appears that the US operation to remove a leader it has designated as a “narco-terrorist” has come to fruition. But whether the capture and removal of Maduro will lead to regime change in the oil-rich Latin American country remains unclear at present.
The US campaign against Venezuela is the product of two distinct policy impulses within the Trump administration. The first is the long held desire of many Republican hawks, including the US secretary of state, Marco Rubio, to force regime change in Caracas. They detest Venezuela’s socialist government and see overturning it as an opportunity to appeal to conservative Hispanic voters in the US.
Read more:
How Venezuela has been preparing for a US invasion for more than two decades
The second impulse is more complex. Trump campaigned for election in 2024 on the idea that his administration would not become involved in foreign conflicts. But his administration claims that Venezuela’s government and military are involved in drug trafficking, which in Washington’s thinking makes them terrorist organisations that are harming the American people. As head of the country’s government, Maduro, according to the Trump administration’s logic is responsible for that.
During Trump’s first administration, his Department of Justice indicted Maduro on charges of “narco-terrorism”. Now Bondi says there might be a new indictment which also covers Maduro’s wife, who was taken into detention with him. The fact that US law enforcement was involved in their capture reinforces the idea that they will now face those charges in a New York court, despite an early claim by opposition sources in Venezuela that Maduro’s departure may have been negotiated with the US government.
The big question is what comes next in Venezuela, and whether either the Republican hawks or the “America first” crowd will get the outcome that they want: ongoing US military presence to “finish the job” or simply a show of US strength to punish its adversary which doesn’t involve a lengthy American involvement.
The US has discovered time and again in recent decades that it is extremely difficult to dictate the political futures of foreign countries with military force. The White House might want to see the emergence of a non-socialist government in Caracas, as well as one which cracks down on the drug trade. But simply removing Maduro and dropping some bombs is unlikely to achieve that goal after nearly three decades of bulding up the regime under Maduro and his predecessor Hugo Chavez.
The Trump administration could have learned this lesson from Libya, whose dictatorial government the US and its allies overthrew in 2011. The country collapsed into chaos soon after, inflicting widespread suffering on its own citizens and creating problems for its neighbours.
In the case of Venezuela, it is unlikely that American military’s strikes alone will be enough to fatally undermine its government. Maduro may be gone, but the vast majority of the country’s governmental and military apparatus remains intact. Power will likely pass to a new figure in the regime.
The White House may dream that popular protests will break out against the government following Maduro’s ousting. But history shows that people usually react to being bombed by a foreign power by rallying around the flag, not turning against their leaders.
Nor would Venezuela’s descent into chaos be likely to help the Trump administration achieve its goals. Conflict in Venezuela could generate new refugee flows which would eventually reach America’s southern border. The collapse of central government authority would be likely to create a more conducive environment for drug trafficking. Widespread internal violence and human rights violations could hardly be portrayed as a victory to the crucial conservative Hispanic voting bloc.
If the Trump administration dreams of establishing a stable, pro-American government in Caracas, it is going to have to do more than just arrest Maduro. Bringing about durable regime change typically involves occupying a country with ground troops and engaging in “nation building”. The US tried this with decidedly mixed results in Iraq and Afghanistan.
Trump has pledged to avoid such entanglements and Rubio has said that, for now at least, the US has no plans for further military action against Venezuela. Trump has a penchant for flashy, quick wins, particularly in foreign policy. He may hope to tout Maduro’s capture as a victory and move on to other matters.
In almost no recent US military intervention did the American government set out to engage in nation-building right from the beginning. The perceived need to shepherd a new government into existence has typically only come to be felt when the limits of what can be accomplished by military force alone become apparent.
The war in Afghanistan, for instance, started as a war of revenge for the terrorist attacks on the US on September 11 2001 before transforming into a 20-year nation-building commitment. In Iraq, the Bush administration thought that it could depose Saddam Hussein and leave within a few months. The US ended up staying for nearly a decade.
It’s hard to imagine Trump walking down the same path, if only because he has always portrayed nation-building as a waste of American lives and treasure. But that still leaves him with no plausible way to achieve the divergent political outcomes he, his supporters and America’s foreign policy establishment want with the tools that he has at his disposal.
Meanwhile the US president will face pressure from a range of constituencies from Republican hawks to conservative Hispanic voters to force wholesale regime change in Venezuela. How Trump responds to that pressure will determine the future course of US policy towards the country.
Andrew Gawthorpe is affiliated with the Foreign Policy Centre in London.
– ref. US snatches Maduro in raid on Caracas: what we know so far – https://theconversation.com/us-snatches-maduro-in-raid-on-caracas-what-we-know-so-far-272660
Source: Radio New Zealand
Julia Sudnitskaya / 123RF
Eighty evacuees are spending the night at Tolaga Bay Area School, which has been opened as a Civil Defence base because of heavy flooding in Tai Rāwhiti.
Surface flooding, slips and downed trees have led to the closure of State Highway 35 between Wainui Beach and Tolaga Bay.
Ūawa deputy Civil Defence officer Nori Parata told RNZ the rain had been pretty torrential.
“We had to open up the base because there are a number of travellers that had got caught with the road closure, and also didn’t have appropriate vehicles for that kind of situation.
“But equally we also had the holiday camp [at Tolaga Bay] needed to evacuate people that were camping in tents down there.
“So I think we’ve got about 80 people in our gym between the travellers and the campers.”
Parata said there were plenty of mattresses in the school gym for evacuees and anyone caught out by the flooding, and the Civil Defence base was well-equipped with kai and other supplies.
“We’re set up to cater in these emergencies. This is not our first rodeo.”
Parata said the Tolaga Bay Holiday Park had just reopened this season after recovering from Cyclone Gabrielle three years ago.
On social media, Civil Defence said the wharf bridge was “underwater and dangerous”.
“Do not go near it or try to cross. Please stay home, stay off the roads, and keep yourself safe.”
MetService lifted the thunderstorm warning for the Gisborne and Hawke’s Bay areas just before 9.30pm.
“Severe thunderstorms have eased, however a few thunderstorms are still expected this evening bringing localised heavy rain.”
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
Source: Radio New Zealand
Delays are to be expected as emergency services work at the scene. NZ Police / Supplied
Motorists travelling between Northland and Auckland faced long delays on Saturday afternoon after a crash closed the main highway.
The two-vehicle crash was reported around 12.45pm on Saturday.
Several people were injured, after a ute and truck collided on State Highway 1 at Brynderwyn, between Whangārei and Wellsford.
Two helicopters and two ambulances helped to take the four injured to hospital, where two are in a critical condition.
SH1 was closed between SH12 and Waipu Gorge Rd, but has since been reopened.
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
Source: Radio New Zealand
Motorists in Gisborne are advised to avoid non-essential travel. mrtwister/123RF
Police are urging motorists in the Gisborne area to avoid non-essential travel due to heavy rain and surface flooding in the region.
A severe thunderstorm warning is in place from Tolaga Bay to Gisborne and up to 170mm of rain is expected about the wider Gisborne region – ahead of 10am Sunday morning.
A police spokesperson said several roads had been closed and there are multiple reports of surface flooding.
Police are asking drivers who must travel to use extreme care – drive to the conditions – and respect road closures.
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
