Only age and hemispheres separate the identical twins of Social Democracy

 Slight of build and with their perma-grins they even look alike. The two clever sticks share similar backgrounds, give a zig-zag or two.

Both are outsiders who put themselves on the inside – and both entered party politics at the same age

Mr Macron is from a wealthy professional family and he went into the Socialist Party.

Mr Key is from a working background and he went into the conservative National Party.

Both made their name and fortunes in big name investment banking, Mr Macron with Rothschild. Mr Key with Merrill Lynch.

Both displaced in their upward trajectory seemingly permanent institutional figures.

Mr Macron has swept away France’s underpinning centrist conservative party, and its leader Francois Fillon.

Both seem from a very early to have seen their destiny in politics. Both in their different ways are dedicated family men.

Both established strong institutional careers in finance prior to public life and thus boast that they are not professional politicians

A notable difference here being that Mr Macron did not have to wait for acceptance by an established party, and simply unwrapped his own, En Marche.

Mr Macron entered party politics in the same year that Mr Key handed in his prime minister’s warrant and quit party politics

Both Mr Key and Mr Macron are anything but dreamers. Their ascent is a product of their ability in the sphere of risk assessment: constantly calculating and weighing up the probabilities in the options before them.

Both understood the value in Napoleon’s dictum to the effect that those of high ambition and ability ascending the ranks do well to conceal their field marshal’s baton.

Mr Macron pulled out his baton a year ago when he suddenly resigned as President Hollande’s economics minister and went out on his own with his own party France En Marche which is best translated as France on the Move.

His calculation was that all the existing parties had lost their appeal and he has just been proved right as the Republicans were swept aside and the ruling Socialist Party hardly figured at all.

France’s left of the left, gauche de la gauche, was similarly swept from France’s variegated political board.

Mr Macron’s calculation can now be viewed for what it is. He has cleared away the clutter of parties from the landscape and has left the electorate with two clear options in the form of the National Front or his own En Marche.

En Marche is essentially a Gallic version of Tony Blair or John Key’ middle way, with its accompanying flexible and inclusive policies.

Like his Oceania avatar John Key, Mr Macron keeps his options open, preferring to give the impression that he will deal with the problems as they are encountered instead of sweeping them away with a ruthless doctrinal broom.

In Mr Macron’s inclusiveness will be his biggest operational problem. In sticking to the EU he must also adhere to the Euro currency.

This collective single currency contains 19 different public debts, 19 interest rates, 19 tax rates. All free to speculate in.

The shackling effect of this uniform currency is often considered to be the chain that binds and which explains why the Eurozone is taking so long to recover from the United States-induced bank bust.

Mr Macron might now be putting a probe into Mr Key’s stewardship of his economy which recovered so quickly from the same event that it seems a miracle that the nation did not succumb to a collective bends.

Mr Key personifies an entire anthology of French proverbs to the effect that the cleverest thing a clever person can do is to conceal how clever they in fact are.

He has simply quoted the Economist’s “rock star” economy value judgement on the success of his government.

Mr Macron meanwhile being from a Mediterranean nation does not have this need for public modesty and can let his light shine forth.

|  From the This email address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it. ||  Friday 27 April 2017   |||

New Zealand is funding a five-year $5.4 million project to help Vietnam reduce dam-related flooding on the Ca River.

New Zealand is funding a five-year project to reduce dam-related flooding in Vietnam.

The two countries have launched a $5.4 million initiative focusing on the 1000km Ca River.

The aim is to halve the death toll from flooding on the river and reduce associated economic losses by 30 per cent by 2021.

Foreign Minister Murray McCully says New Zealand will be sharing its expertise in water engineering and natural hazard management.

Issues include effective assessment of dams most in need of repair, coordination between dam owners and communities, and upgrading the training for future water managers.

Vietnam has more than 7000 dams and over the past 10 years there have been 43 unplanned water releases or dam failures.

|  A Beehive release  ||  April 26, 2017   |||

Immigration Minister Michael Woodhouse is taking steps to improve Immigration New Zealand’s decision making authority for cases involving residence class visa holders convicted of a criminal offence.

“Currently, Immigration NZ has the ability to make decisions on behalf of the Minister on deportation cases for some residence class visa holders convicted of a criminal offence,” Mr Woodhouse says.

“I have made my expectations very clear when it comes to deportation decisions involving offending of this nature and those expectations are not being met. So I am temporarily suspending Immigration NZ’s decision making authority until I have confidence that the decisions being made are consistent with my expectations.

“This course of action follows today’s New Zealand Herald article regarding an individual whose liability for deportation was suspended, despite the severity of the offending.

“It’s important we take the time to review the decision making process to ensure the right decisions are being made.

“I expect to be able to return the decision making authority to Immigration NZ within a fortnight, provided I can be assured the decision making process aligns with my expectations.”

|  A beehive release  ||  April 24, 2017   |||

As its future hangs in the balance a veteran EU trouble shooter weighs up the Union, past and present. Five questions now for Michael Lake.........

 This email address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it.Few officials have been involved in the EU at such a high level for so long and in so many sensitive postings as New Zealand-born Michael Lake, former EU ambassador to Turkey and to Hungary. Along the way he served also in New York, Brussels, and Tokyo. He was witness to the EU and participant in its operations from the outset of Britain’s membership when he was literally drafted in to assist the UK blend itself into European institutions.

Looking back between the 1975 referendum, the one which saw the UK joining the EU, and now Brexit, what went right? What went wrong?

What went right? Where do I start? Seventy years of peace, democracy and  stability in western Europe  after France and Germany had been at war with each other three times during the previous 70 years, usually dragging others into their fighting, notably Britain twice. Also the achievement of common policies which run more or less successfully today on international trade and remember that the EU is the world’s biggest trading bloc by far. It has acted in agriculture (sometimes too protectionist), and over the years in several other areas where it is more effective to act together than alone such as in climate change and the environment generally, energy policy, consumer rights, social policy especially in workers’ rights, and  in the 35 chapters  of the body of EU law.

There is the single market of 500 million consumers, which Mrs Theresa May seems to want Britain to leave. There is expansion of the EU to 28 members (soon to be 27) by including those countries recently released from 40-50 years of Soviet rule. Then there is the EU’s status as a community of law.

What went wrong?  Time and forgetfulness, and younger generations decade by decade who have taken it for granted and are unaware of its benefits.  Too much regulation, certainly. Although what happened was that the EU regulations replaced national regulations in order to make a level playing field for trade.  So the aggregate of regulations in this area has not changed much. A newish one is that such regulations forbid state aid for industries.   State aid is a subsidy and thus unfair. It’s like doping. It is allowed in special circumstances such as in restructuring major basic industries like steel and coal which are now almost irrelevant anyway, but which require concomitant efficiencies, such as down-sizing and major investment.

Generally speaking, the EU has always had trouble communicating with the public, largely because it can be highly technical and very diverse, and because national media tend to concentrate on national stories, thus undermining the more general overview of Europe working on a daily basis. Britain is particularly bad at this and over 40 years the coverage has been on a win/lose basis. In fact Britain has won most of its disputes by far, whether they actually got to the European Court of Justice or not.

The European Parliament which has a far closer hands-on role in governance on EU matters than ordinary British MPs have on British affairs is nevertheless remote from ordinary people partly because constituencies are too big and the media coverage has always been scant. But the European Parliament has the power of co-decision on most things with the Council of (national) Ministers.  It can vote against and thus wreck a Brexit deal with the UK.

You became the European Union’s ambassador to Turkey and as such point man for a policy to integrate Turkey into the EU. In the light of developments over the past year, how do you view this policy now?

I was EU ambassador in Turkey and then, as you know, in Hungary. Here I was locally in charge of monitoring Hungary’s “accession” or membership process covering the 35 chapters I referred to in your previous question.

I was also closely involved earlier with Turkey joining the EU customs union, the only country to be in the customs union without full membership. This had a huge effect in Turkey such as when. the first department stores opened, and the expansion of trade offered consumers better quality at more competitive prices. Turkey relies on the EU market for more than 50% of its exports.  Turkey no longer qualifies for membership and would be blocked because of its moving away from the pillars of democracy such as   freedom of expression, a free media, and an independent judiciary.

It still does meet the requirement for pluralistic elections.   Erdogan is now in charge of a bitterly divided country which is not what he intended. He expected to win by 60 per cent. Turkey’s candidacy for membership has not yet been revoked.  But if Erdogan goes ahead and reintroduces the death penalty it would be revoked by the EU.   This would be highly unpopular amid large swathes of the Turkish population who are pro-EU and highly sophisticated.

The recent referendum was so close as to create a new situation - Erdogan not only lost in his home city, Istanbul, but in his own constituency, Fatih, which is very conservative and rife with burkhas.  Watch this space...Meanwhile it’s a tragedy, but in spite of Erdogan’s dictatorial rule the country remains a very important member of Nato and largely western values on the edge of a region in turmoil.   There is no appetite to cut Turkey off.

Many believe that the United States was behind the expansion of the EU. To what extent was/is this true?The United States has always, and now, even under a revised Trump II, been strongly in favour of the EU for the democratic and economic values it represents. The EU and the US are each other’s biggest trading partner.  I have never heard of the US specifically interfering in EU policies except once which happened to be in my own case. This was when the US ambassador in Turkey came to me and said that the White House wanted to know how they could help get the fractious European Parliament to endorse Turkey’s membership of the customs union?

I told him how this could in fact be done.  He followed my advice. Tony Blair and ( Spain’s premier) Felipe Gonzales  personally gave instructions to their delegations which comprised the biggest political group in the European Parliament and the deed was done.

There was, however, a case where the US may have taken a discreet lead and must indeed have agreed.  At the G-7 summit in Paris in 1988, which I attended along with the seven other G7 summits in which I participated, the EU for the first time ever was given a role in eastern Europe and thus the Soviet bloc which hitherto had been the sole policy preserve of Nato

As Poland and Hungary, and indeed even East Germany, were showing signs of relaxing under the Soviet governance of Gorbachev there was a role for the EU in economic and social development (including more openness) of the bloc.  The US strongly supported the enlargement of the EU from 15 to 27 in 2005 for strategic reasons.  We have to remember too that the US has many, many citizens whose families hail from central and eastern Europe.

How do you gauge the success or otherwise of the Euro currency?The adoption of the Euro has been a boon to ease transactions without exchange rate costs across most of Europe. Anyone travelling on the Continent or involved in cross-border trading, whether in goods or finance, realises this immediately.  But the system lacks a unifying authority, such as a Federal Reserve Bank, able to take decisions and able to issue eurobonds. The issue of a federal Europe is still controversial, but there is still widespread reluctance to go further towards further union that the EU has done with the Treaty of Lisbon. So when the banking crisis hit  the world in 2008  the euro system was unable to cope properly because it was still subject to a national decisions. The European Central Bank has coped by effectively printing money but this is ultimately not sustainable.  This instability in the euro zone remains. And it has exacerbated a prosperity gap between the richer northern Europe and the poorer southern, Mediterranean countries

If you were asked for advice on the EU by anyone in the New Zealand diplomatic-trade sphere, what counsel would you proffer?Quite simply I would say this. Take any opportunity at all seriously and go for it. The EU should be seen as the land of opportunity from a national point of view and on an individual level, a career-enhancing prospect.

|  From the MSCNewsWire reporters' desk  ||  Tuesday 25 April 2017   |||

Prime Minister Bill English today announced the appointment of Gerry Brownlee as Minister of Foreign Affairs, Nathan Guy as Minister of Civil Defence, Nikki Kaye as Minister of Education and Mark Mitchell as Minister of Defence.

The changes follow the resignations from Cabinet of Hekia Parata and Murray McCully.

In other changes Simon Bridges has been appointed Leader of the House and Nicky Wagner has been made Minister supporting Greater Christchurch Regeneration.

Mr Mitchell has been promoted to Cabinet.

Tim Macindoe, a former chairman of the justice and electoral select committee and National’s senior whip since the 2014 election, and Scott Simpson, the chairman of the local government and environment select committee have been appointed ministers outside cabinet.

“This is a Government that is focused on the future. Our careful stewardship of the Government’s books over the past eight years has given us a rare opportunity to make a difference to people’s lives and we are going to take it.

“These changes illustrate the depth of talent within National’s parliamentary ranks,” Mr English says.

“As education minister, Ms Parata has changed the conversation in our schools and driven sharp rises in achievement for all our students, particularly Māori and Pasifika.

“As foreign affairs minister, Mr McCully has improved existing relationships and developed new ones, all the while running a truly independent foreign policy for New Zealand.

“Neither will be easily replaced but in Nikki Kaye and Gerry Brownlee we have two very well qualified successors.

“The same holds true for the Ministers who are picking up the roles relinquished by Mr Brownlee to take up the demanding foreign affairs position.

Mr English said he particularly wanted to pay tribute to Mr Brownlee for his untiring efforts to put Christchurch back on its feet after the 2011 earthquakes.

“Having worked alongside him as associate minister for several years his successor, Ms Wagner, is ideally placed to replace him.”

The Prime Minister also announced some changes to the housing portfolios.

Social Housing Minister Amy Adams will remain responsible for Housing New Zealand and all aspects of the Government’s supply of social and emergency housing. She will also take responsibility for the Crown land programme and have a closer involvement in the Government’s overall house building programme.

Building and Construction Minister Nick Smith will continue to oversee the various aspects of building regulation, including planning, minimum codes and building sector productivity issues.

The new ministers will be sworn in next Tuesday and the new Cabinet will hold its first meeting on May 8.

|  A beehive release  ||  April 24, 2017   |||

Economic Development Minister Simon Bridges will travel to the United Arab Emirates (UAE) tomorrow for meetings with Ministerial counterparts in Dubai.

“New Zealand’s relationship with the UAE continues to go from strength to strength. This visit will be an opportunity to progress discussions across a range of areas, including economic opportunities and collaboration in areas such as renewable energy and the New Zealand-Gulf Cooperation Council Free Trade Agreement,” Mr Bridges says.

The UAE is now New Zealand’s largest export market in the Middle East, and our 12th largest trading partner.

Alongside meetings with counterparts, the Minister will also meet with Dubai-based New Zealand manufacturing firms and Kiwi business representatives as well as the CEO of Emirates Airlines, His Highness Sheikh Ahmed Bin Saeed Al Maktoum.

“The UAE is often seen as the gateway to the wider Middle East and North Africa region and a number of New Zealand firms have a presence in market. It is also an increasingly important hub for tourists travelling to New Zealand. The five daily Emirates Airlines flights alone are estimated to be worth $700 million to the New Zealand economy,” Mr Bridges says.

“Like New Zealand, the UAE is investing significantly in innovation and given the complementarity of our respective markets, this presents real potential for greater cooperation. I look forward to discussing this opportunity on my visit.”

The Minister will also attend a Dawn Service to commemorate Anzac Day before returning to New Zealand.

|  A Beehive release  ||  April 21, 2017   |||

Foreign Minister Murray McCully welcomes the Angolan Minister of External Relations Georges Rebelo Pinto Chikoti, who he will meet in Wellington today.

“This visit presents an opportunity to deepen this relationship, including through discussing ways to increase trade flows. Angola had one of the fastest-growing economies of the past decade, and appointed its first ever Ambassador to New Zealand, resident in Singapore, last year,” Mr McCully says.

“New Zealand and Angola served together as non-permanent members of the UN Security Council from 2015–2016. Angola is a leader in the Southern African region, and it provides an important voice on African peace and security issues. Our mutual Security Council terms also provided an opportunity for increased engagement between our two countries.”

While in New Zealand, Minister Chikoti has also met with the Minister of Trade and the Minister for Primary Industries, and will discuss business opportunities with the fisheries sector.

|  A Beehive release  ||  April 05, 2017   |||

An agreement to boost New Zealand-China trade was today signed by Customs Minister Nicky Wagner and China’s Ambassador, His Excellency Mr Wang Lutong.

The Mutual Recognition Arrangement (MRA) ensures border agencies in New Zealand and China recognise one another’s trusted exporter programmes.

“New Zealand and China Customs enjoy a strong working relationship. This arrangement will further strengthen ties by helping streamline the movement of goods,” Ms Wagner says.

“Companies signed up to New Zealand Customs’ Secure Export Scheme will automatically benefit from faster cargo clearance, reduced document checks and less examination.”

The MRA will come into effect on 1 July 2017. More details on the implementation and benefits will be provided to New Zealand exporters and Chinese importers in the coming months.

China and New Zealand Customs also recently launched a Joint Electronic Verification System, which automatically sends New Zealand’s Certificate of Origin data to China for greater assurance over the authenticity of goods.

|  A Beehive release  |  March 27, 2017   |||

New Zealand and China will begin talks on an upgrade of the Free Trade Agreement between the two countries on April 25, Prime Minister Bill English announced today.

The announcement followed official talks between the Prime Minister and Chinese Premier Li Keqiang in Wellington today.

“The FTA with China has been an enormous success,” Mr English says.

“Since coming into force in 2008 two-way trade between our two countries has tripled to $23 billion, creating jobs and opportunities for people in both countries. An upgrade will ensure this momentum continues and ensure that the FTA remains a modern agreement that tackles barriers our exporters face. It will assist progress towards our target of $30 billion two-way trade by 2020.

“The agreement to commence of negotiations also confirms the commitment of both countries to open trade and economic growth,” Mr English says.

“Trade openness and strong ties in the region are critical to New Zealand’s economic growth, prosperity, and job creation.”

Mr English says today’s meeting with Premier Li provided an opportunity to reflect on the successes achieved since New Zealand established diplomatic relations with China 45 years ago, and to set the agenda for the future.

“Premier Li and I also reiterated the value we see in people-to-people links between our two countries, including the nearly 35,000 Chinese students studying in New Zealand, and the 400,000 Chinese who visit annually.

“Both countries also confirmed their commitment to open trade, sustainable development, and stability in the Asia-Pacific region.

In addition to agreeing a date for talks to begin on a FTA upgrade, the two leaders also announced a number of other initiatives, including:

• Access to China for chilled meat from 10 New Zealand meat processors, initially on a six-month trial with a view to later expanding trade.
• A climate change action plan, to enable closer cooperation as both countries transition to lower carbon economies.
• Mutual recognition of trusted exporters, which will facilitate faster border clearance times for the recognised New Zealand exporters who already account for nearly half of New Zealand’s $9.4 billion of goods exports to China
• An increase in the number of direct flights possible between China and New Zealand, from 49 to 59 under the Air Services Agreement.
• Frameworks to explore new economic opportunities, including on China’s Belt and Road Initiative, aimed at closer cooperation on regional infrastructure projects, and e-commerce, a growing platform that allows New Zealand companies to sell directly to Chinese consumers
• Enhanced cooperation in a number of areas including agriculture, sustainable fisheries, in the South Pacific, environmental issues, education and training, international development, health research, and intellectual property.
• Agreement to strengthen cooperation on judicial and law enforcement issues, to jointly fight corruption and transnational crime.

This is the Premier’s first visit to New Zealand as Premier, but he previously visited as Vice Premier in 2009.

“It was a pleasure to host Premier Li in New Zealand once again, together with his wife Madame Cheng Hong.

“I look forward to hosting them both at a China-New Zealand Gala in Auckland tomorrow.”

Related DocumentsList of Initiatives announced between China and New Zealand (pdf 213.9 KB)

|  A Beehive releas  |  march 27, 2017   |||

Five questions for ex United Nations Security Council President Terence O’Brien.

Few practitioners from any nation have enjoyed quite such an extended career at the heart of the global firmament as British-born diplomat Terence O’Brien (above). He was president of the Security Council of United Nations during the Balkans conflict. He was one of the principal access negotiators on behalf of New Zealand when Britain originally entered the European Common Market. He has occupied posts in London, Brussels, Bangkok and Geneva. He was the founding director of the Institute of Strategic Studies.

You have been an outspoken opponent of mixing trade with foreign affairs?

This is not strictly accurate. I take issue rather with the jargon that “all New Zealand foreign policy is trade” which is a holdover from earlier times and reflected today in a sense promoted by some New Zealand leaders, that NZ’s success and place in the world is to be judged primarily by the number of Free Trade Agreements that it is able to secure.

NZ’s modern experience especially in respect to emergent Asia proves emphatically that successful trade arrangements depend firstly and vitally upon sound political and diplomatic relationships (China is a prime but by no means solitary example). NZ’s accomplishments in Asia and indeed elsewhere rely in other words, upon earned trust with other governments. Fostering that trust is a political/diplomatic responsibility.

Predictable trade relationships require a great deal more than nimble private sector commercial skills- although those are indispensable of course to overall success and the New Zealand private sector plus NZ primary producer groups have been notably effective in this regard.

To what extent do you view the recent NZ sponsorship of the UN Israel censure as a development of this blend?

There may have been in the minds of some on the NZ side, the thought that sponsorship might earn credits in some Gulf States where NZ seeks to formalise free trade arrangements; but around the UNSC table there is genuine concern about the danger for the future of ‘two state solution’ to the Israel/Palestine conflict ,that has been the long established diplomatic basis for eventual peace. The present Israeli government appears openly to resile from this formula as it continues resolutely to expand Jewish settlements on the West Bank, a practice deplored by the UN Security Council. From the moment it gained a place on the 2015-16 UNSC NZ committed itself to contributing to the search for progress on this key issue. Co-sponsorship of the eventual UNSC resolution which calls as well for Palestinians to desist from provocation and terrorism, was the logical consequence.

Looking back on your days as a dairy sector negotiator during Britain’s entry into the Common Market, how do you view Brexit now in terms of NZ diplomacy and trade?

From the perspective of a small, distant but companionable partner of Europe, Brexit appears to be a mistake. It comes too at a time when conservative populism is on the rise within Europe with the emergence of right wing nationalist political groups in several countries. Twentieth century experiences of European mistakes and miscalculations and their devastating global consequences, not once but twice, are not to be overlooked.

British entry into Europe was a taxing experience for NZ. The deals struck for safeguarding NZ trade interests represented a stay of execution rather than reprieve for this country . Within relatively short periods of negotiated transition the New Zealand farm economy was obliged to diversify production and markets. That process drove foreign policy extending NZ political and diplomatic interests to a wide range of new partners (in the Middle East, Communist Europe, Latin America and, most notably Asia) . It consolidated NZ as a genuine world trader with global interests. Global interests are inextricably bound up with global responsibilities even for small countries, and require contributions to global wellbeing and stability.

The process deepened NZ support for international rules based behaviour particularly in trade but also in directly related areas such as peace and security, freedom for transport and navigation, responsible behaviour in global environmental and resource protection and so forth. Because of the very nature of its own being the European Union (EU) has been a notable champion of an international rules based system. But the fact of BREXIT places a question mark over how influential a collective European voice will now be in the future. At a time when American commitment to global rules is questionable under a new inexperienced President Trump, the need for sustained collective European support for the system has never been greater. The foreseeable future suggests that New Zealand will crucially need the courage of its convictions.

How do you feel about the Helen Clark bid to be the UN Secretary General especially in regard to her role as an officer of the UN at the time?

The selection process for a new UN Secretary General in 2016 sought to break new ground - which is always difficult in the UN. Formal candidatures backed by governments and involving public job interviews were decreed for the first time in 70 years. Hitherto candidatures had been exclusively personal affairs and selection decided behind tightly held UN Security Council doors where the votes of the five permanent Council members (US, UK, France, Russia and China) were decisive. This time a new approach was defined in the interests of greater transparency and democracy in the selection process. It is stretching things somewhat to suggest those goals were achieved.

There was a general sentiment beforehand that the new appointee should be from Eastern Europe (which has never supplied a UN Secretary General ) and also be female (which would be a first). In the event neither aspiration prevailed and the choice, of a Portuguese male, was once again taken behind closed doors at the UNSC.

Helen Clark was a creditable candidate and the NZ government campaigned for her, but her success depended first and foremost upon her own efforts. She came as a candidate from within the ranks of the UN itself, but this is not without precedent (Kofi Annan one the most effective SGs, was a UN Secretariat employee). As head of the UN’s largest aid institution she was well known across a very wide number of UN member countries ( especially developing countries).The reasons for her lack of success will probably never be known in full. Her relatively poor showing in the straw polling of UN member countries before the final appointment, was an undeniable disappointment. The most that can be said is that she was a serious contender; and NZ can take some consolation from that.

What are your views on Russia and NZ’s participation in the US-EU trade embargo?

With Russia and NATO we are reaping what was sown. At the end of the Cold War there was an opportunity for the Americans and Europeans to consolidate a cooperative inclusive (of Russia) security system for a post CW Europe. The Soviet led Warsaw Pact subsided into oblivion which is what military alliances historically do when conflicts end, and/or the reason for their existence disappears. NATO in direct contrast did not. It was enlarged with new members, new bases installed and its boundaries extended into Russia’s borderlands - which for the US anyway potentially included Ukraine. But who was the adversary? An enfeebled Russia could do nothing but (as George Kennan amongst others warned) one could not rule out economic recovery by Russia and new leadership that objected to NATO expansion (which included into the affairs of the Middle East) and would push back. Enter Mr Putin, and so it has come to pass. His preemptive seizure of Crimea (where the Russian fleet has had a base for two centuries or so) is contrary to the international rule of law - but hardly surprising in the wake of western foolhardiness.

NZ should sustain a suitably detached policy position over present NATO-Russia. We do not have a dog in the fight. Russia does not threaten the US although Putin clearly intends that Russia be assertive and taken seriously internationally. Russian interference in the US electoral process may or may not have occurred. If it is proven Russians would presumably point to equivalent American policies in the name of “spreading democracy” in Russia ,its satellites, and including Ukraine. They are, on both sides, ‘pots calling kettles black’

|  From the MSCNewsWire reporters' desk  |  Monay 27 March 2017   |||