New Zealand’s foreign policy could change – but we won’t know for weeks

New Zealand has now entered an unknown number of weeks of political limbo following a general election on Saturday, which left neither bloc able to declare victory. Now, we wait until 27 November, the deadline for tallying the 400,000 special votes, and then perhaps another week while recounts happen.

Then the coalition negotiations can really begin.

As it stands, the National-led centre-right bloc, supported by Winston Peters’ populist New Zealand First and the libertarian ACT, just have enough to govern. But they could easily lose a seat or two as special votes, which tend to favour the left, come in.

The Labour Party, supported by the Greens and Te Pāti Māori, would need the support of newcomer Opportunity, a centrist party that’s strong on climate and shares much in common with Australia’s Teals. Their road to majority is convoluted but not impossible.

The outcome could considerably change the tone, if not the overall trajectory, of New Zealand’s foreign policy. The outcome could significantly change the tone, if not the overall trajectory, of New Zealand’s foreign policy. While the country will still continue to rely on China economically and count on the US-led security infrastructure in the Pacific, the way Wellington communicates with and about these two giants could take on a markedly different tone.

But while New Zealand counts votes, the world keeps carrying on. The COP31 meeting , with Australia as chief negotiator, opens in Türkiye today, and the APEC leaders’ meeting will take place in Shenzhen, China, next week.

New Zealand is sending its climate change minister and a Labour Party MP to COP. But no decision has been made on whether Prime Minister Christopher Luxon, Trade Minister Todd McClay or Foreign Minister Winston Peters will travel to the APEC meeting in a caretaker capacity, their offices said.

There is precedent: Outgoing Labour trade minister Damien O’Connor represented New Zealand at the APEC meeting in San Francisco in 2023, which took place a month after the election. At the time, O’Connor said there weren’t too many areas of difference between the two political blocs at home on trade issues.

With APEC and COP31, however, there are plenty of differences.

Luxon’s government has taken a decidedly friendly approach towards the US, reorienting New Zealand’s foreign policy back towards traditional security partners like the US and Australia, New Zealand’s only treaty ally.

That has been evidenced by the silence on the attacks against Iran, even as they contravene the rules-based order the government continues to espouse.

The National-led government also declined to recognise Palestine as a state, and has abstained from votes on reappointing the UN human rights chief – with the US, Israel, Russia, and North Korea – and on a global pandemic preparedness measure at the United Nations.

In almost all cases, it was Peters who made the “captain’s call” on these votes, with Luxon leaving foreign policy almost entirely to the octogenarian foreign minister.

Labour has, meanwhile, signalled it will take a sharply different approach if it leads the next government, promising a return to “moral clarity” and values-based policy. A Labour-led government would recognise Palestine as a state and would join South Africa’s case against Israel at the International Court of Justice, foreign affairs spokesperson Vanushi Walters said last week. It would also “consistently” criticise actions by big powers – including China and the United States – to uphold New Zealand’s interests and values.

The APEC summit is expected to provide the venue for US President Donald Trump and China’s leader Xi Jinping to meet for the third time this year and probably also a trilateral meeting including Russia’s Vladimir Putin.

That would dominate the headlines at APEC, but the meeting matters for New Zealand for other reasons: all of its top five trading partners will be represented – China, Australia, the US, Japan and South Korea – and the forum will review the Aotearoa Plan of Action, on implementing ambitions to create an “open, dynamic, resilient and peaceful Asia-Pacific community” by 2040.

This is exactly the kind of discussion New Zealand should want to lead at a time of rapidly shifting global alliances. New Zealand might not be a middle power in Canadian Prime Minister Mark Carney’s framing of the world, but it can be an influential middle power at APEC.

The National-led coalition has rowed back many of the environmental laws that have helped New Zealand perpetuate a clean, green image. It has reversed the ban on drilling for oil and gas and enacted changes to make sure some of New Zealand's biggest polluters can never be sued for climate damage. New Zealand First has promised to pull the country out of the Paris Agreement.

Labour, together with the Greens, had promised to push ahead with policies to address climate change, including reinstating the ban on oil and gas drilling, reform the Emissions Trading Scheme and align it with New Zealand’s Paris Agreement targets.

So it could be very awkward when New Zealand’s ministers and representatives show up at these meetings being held during this limbo period. On climate change the two blocs are polar opposite, so New Zealand will be able to sit and watch. But at APEC and other similar trade-related forums, it’ll be in the room but not really at the table. This should concern New Zealanders, because as Carney memorably said: “If you’re not at the table, you’re on the menu.” And who knows what the world will look like when APEC rolls around next year?

VIEW ORIGINAL ARTICLE HERE

Photo: Electoral Commission
Creative Commons licence terms: Attribution-NoDerivs 3.0 Unported (CCBY-ND 3.0)