Prime Minister Christopher Luxon says New Zealand’s stance on the United States and Israeli bombing of Iran mirrors that of Australia.

Australian Prime Minister Anthony Albanese said the government supported the United States acting to stop Iran acquiring nuclear weapons.

A statement by Luxon and Foreign Minister Winston Peters yesterday “acknowledges” the strikes.

Asked on RNZ’s Morning Report whether New Zealand supported the attacks, Luxon repeatedly refused to say the word, but said it condemned the Iranian regime as evil and as having claimed countless lives.

“We think Iran has been repressing its own people. We think it’s been arming proxies and terrorist organisations. We think it has been developing its ballistic and nuclear programmes and years of diplomacy hasn’t actually paid any fruits,” he said.

“We understand fully why the Americans and Israelis have undertaken the independent action that they have taken to make sure Iran can’t threaten people.”

Pressed on whether the strikes were legally right, Luxon said it would be up to the US and Israel to explain the legal basis for their attacks.

NZ should back international rules
Former Prime Minister Helen Cark has called the government’s stance a “disgrace” and says New Zealand should support a rules-based international order.

Luxon said what was disgraceful was the repressive Iranian regime which had killed thousands of its own people who had taken to the streets calling for freedoms.

“Iran has been a destabilising force. It has supported armed proxies throughout the region. It has seen tens of thousands of people murdered by own government, who were asking for freedom and rights.”

Australia and Canada have openly supported the strikes on Iran.

In a statement on Sunday, Luxon and Foreign Affairs Minister and Winston Peters said New Zealand had consistently condemned Iran’s nuclear programme and its “destabilising activities” in the region and “acknowledged” the strikes.

“Iran has, for decades, defied the will and expectations of the international community. The legitimacy of a government rests on the support of its people. The Iranian regime has long since lost that support,” they said.

“In this context, we acknowledge that the actions taken overnight by the US and Israel were designed to prevent Iran from continuing to threaten international peace and security.”

Luxon and Peters condemned in the “strongest terms Iran’s indiscriminate retaliatory attacks” on neighbouring states.

The statement also said “we call for a resumption of negotiations and adherence to international law.”

Call out illegal strike
Clark told Morning Report said the statement was a disgrace.

“What was wrong with it was it didn’t call out the illegal strike against Iran in the middle of diplomatic negotiations “which were going quite well and further talks were scheduled,” she said.

“The whole point of international law is to put rules around when force is legitimate.”

“A strike is justified if there is an imminent threat of attack, which clearly there was not.”

She said the initial strikes by the US and Israel violated international law.

“The New Zealand government seems only interested in the Iranian retaliation and not looking at the reason for the retaliation, which was the attack by the United States and Israel,” she said.

“I think it’s consistent with a steady drift in New Zealand foreign policy to realign strongly with the United States, which at this particular time seems even more questionable as a strategy.”

“We’re not putting a stake in the ground in defence of the international rule of law.”

This article is republished under a community partnership agreement with RNZ.

Article by AsiaPacificReport.nz

New Zealand should be robust in its response to the “unacceptable” situation in Gaza but it must also back its allies against threats by the US President, says an international relations academic.

Otago University professor of international relations Robert Patman said the rest of the world also “should stop tip-toeing” around President Donald Trump and must stand up to any threats he makes against allies, no matter how outlandish they seem.

Trump doubled down on his proposal for a US takeover of Gaza on Friday, after the idea was rejected by Palestinians and leaders around the world.

Foreign Minister Winston Peters told RNZ that New Zealand would not comment on the plan until it was clear exactly what was meant, but said New Zealand continued to support a two-state solution for Israel and Palestine.

Dr Patman said the president’s plan was “truly shocking and absolutely appalling” in light of the devastation in Gaza in the last 15 months.

It was not only “tone deaf” but also dangerous, he added, with the proposal amounting to “the most powerful country in the world — the US — dismantling an international rules=based system that [it] has done so much to establish”.

“This was an extraordinary proposal which I think is reckless and dangerous because it certainly doesn’t help the immediate situation. It probably plays into the hands of extremists in the region.

“There is a view at the moment that we must all tiptoe round Mr Trump in order not to upset him, while he’s completely free to make outrageous suggestions which endanger people’s lives.”

Winston Peters’ careful position on a potential US takeover of Gaza was “a fair response . . . but the Luxon-led government must be clear the current situation is unacceptable” and oppose protectionism, he said.

“[The government ] wants a solution in the Middle East which recognises both the Israeli desire for security but also recognises the political right to self determination of the Palestinian people — in other words the right to have a state of their own.”

New Zealand should also speak out against Trump’s threats to annex Canada, “our very close ally”, he said.

He was “not suggesting New Zealand be provocative but it must be robust”, Dr Patman said.

Greens also respond to Trump actions
The Green Party said President Trump had been explicit in his intention to take over Gaza, and New Zealand needed to make its position crystal clear too.

Greens co-leader Chlöe Swarbrick said the Prime Minister needed to stand up and condemn the plan as “reprehensible”.

“President Trump’s comments have been pretty clear to anybody who is able to read or to listen to them, about his intention to forcibly displace, or to see displaced, about 1.8 million Gazans from their own land, who have already been made refugees in their own land.”

France, Spain, Ireland, Brazil and other countries had been “unequivocal” in their condemnation of Trump’s plan, and NZ’s Foreign Affairs Minister should be too, she added.

“New Zealanders value justice and they value peace, and they want to see our leadership represent that, on the international stage. So [these were] really disappointing and unfortunately unclear comments from our Deputy Prime Minister.”

Yesterday Foreign Minister Winston Peters told RNZ that New Zealand still supported a two-state solution, but said he would not comment on Trump’s Gaza plan until officials could grasp exactly what this meant.

Trump sanctions International Criminal Court
Meanwhile, an international law expert says New Zealand’s cautious position following Trump’s sanctions on International Criminal Court (ICC) staff is the right response — for now.

Dozens of countries have expressed “unwavering support” for the ICC in a joint statement, after the US President imposed sanctions on its staff.

The 125-member ICC is a permanent court that can prosecute individuals for war crimes, crimes against humanity, genocide and the crime of aggression against the territory of member states or by their nationals.

The United States, China, Russia and Israel are not members.

Trump has accused the court of improperly targeting the US and its ally, Israel.

Neither New Zealand nor Australia had joined the statement, but in a statement to RNZ the Ministry of Foreign Affairs said it had always supported the ICC’s role in upholding international law and a rules-based system.

University of Victoria law professor Alberto Costi said currently New Zealand is at little risk of sanctions and there’s no need for a stronger approach.

“At this stage there is no reason to be stronger. New Zealand is perceived as a state that believes in a rules-based order and is supportive of the work of the ICC.

“So there’s not much need to go further but it’s a space to watch in the future, should these sanctions become a reality.

“But as far as New Zealand is concerned, at the moment there is no need to antagonise anyone at this stage.”

This article is republished under a community partnership agreement with RNZ.

Article by AsiaPacificReport.nz

COMMENTARY: By John Minto

In 2003, the International Court of Justice ruled that Israel’s “apartheid wall” being built through Palestinian territory was a violation of international law and should be dismantled. Israel ignored the ruling and more than 20 years later the wall remains a potent symbol of Israeli policies of segregation based on ethnicity.

Last December, Israel was taken to the court again, this time by South Africa which argued Israel was committing genocide against the Palestinian people in Gaza with genocidal talk from Israeli leaders and indiscriminate killing of civilians — more than 27,000 killed so far including more than 12,000 Palestinian children.

The charge of genocide against Israel will take years to be heard and decided upon but in the meantime South Africa argued for the court to issue interim orders to require Israel to end its military operation and allow desperately needed humanitarian assistance to flow freely into Gaza.

Last month, the ICJ gave an interim ruling and although it did not demand an immediate ceasefire, it agreed with South Africa’s case that there was evidence to suggest Israel had breached the Genocide Convention and requiring Israel to report back to the court within a month on the steps it was taking to protect Palestinian lives and their very existence in Gaza.

Israel is now on probation. What happens in the coming weeks will determine whether Israel ends its killing spree in Gaza or shows the ICJ its middle finger as it did in 2003.

Commentary on the ICJ decision indicates the huge moral weight the decision carries for Israel and its small coterie of supporters, including New Zealand, which has been complicit through its silence, to end the war on Gaza.

The only way Israel will follow the ICJ ruling is if it comes under enough pressure from countries such as New Zealand.

Strong demand or look away?
Western countries have previously called on other countries to abide by ICJ rulings — such as the ruling which said Russia must end its war in Ukraine. Will we make the same strong demand of Israel or will we look the other way?

So far New Zealand has been equivocal, Foreign Minister Winston Peters making a few obligatory tweets but nothing more. The contrast with how we dealt with Russia compared with Israel could not be clearer.

The Foreign Minister’s stance seems more aimed to avoid difficult conversations with US representatives at diplomatic cocktail parties than pressure to end the killing of Palestinian children.

With Israel’s history of ignoring international law, New Zealand must speak out in a principled, assertive way. The alternative is to be silent and for this country to suffer derision for such cowardly, obsequious behaviour.

Already New Zealand is swimming against the tide of world opinion. We have refused to criticise the killing of Palestinian civilians by Israel despite loudly condemning the killing of Israeli civilians in the October 7 attack.

We have also refused to condemn other war crimes such as the “collective punishment” of Palestinians through the withholding of food, water and other necessities of life. We haven’t even made an unequivocal call for an immediate, permanent ceasefire or called for an International Criminal Court investigation into war crimes on and after October 7.

We did this for Russia’s invasion of Ukraine, so why the reticence over the Middle East?

NZ’s selective morality
Our embarrassing history is one of selective morality. In 2014 when Israel launched a war on Gaza with similar mass killing of Palestinians, the John Key government called in the Israeli ambassador and made clear New Zealand’s expectations. The Christopher Luxon-led government has failed to take even this most rudimentary measure.

The time for doing that is well past. We must indicate to Israel that its behaviour is morally and ethically reprehensible.

The government should immediately close the Israeli embassy until Israel is in full compliance with the ICJ decision as well as the broader provisions of international law such as allowing Palestinian refugees the right to return to their land and homes in Palestine, ending the military occupation and ending Israel’s apartheid policies against Palestinians.

Wringing our hands is not an option. It might be acceptable for the comfort of the Minister of Foreign Affairs but for Palestinians it means ongoing death and destruction.

John Minto is the national chairman of Palestine Solidarity Network Aotearoa (PSNA) and contributes to Asia Pacific Report. This article was first published by the Otago Daily Times and is republished wit the author’s permission.

Article by AsiaPacificReport.nz