Written By:
notices and features - Date published:
6:00 am, January 7th, 2026 - 25 comments
Categories: open mike -
Tags:
Open mike is your post.
For announcements, general discussion, whatever you choose.
The usual rules of good behaviour apply (see the Policy).
Step up to the mike …
From. The Intercept.
What is worse, is that it legitimises Russia, Israel, and soon maybe China, following suit. When the powerful ignore the rule of law, mayhem follows.
Link.
“We Are Going to Run the Country”: Trump Boasts of Regime Change in Venezuela
Patman makes that point too: https://newsroom.co.nz/2026/01/07/nz-faces-a-foreign-policy-reckoning/
Yet Trump can play the cowboy as long as there's no sheriff to stop him. UN impotence was institutionalised by design. Great powers agreed to that during WWII. Every good law should have a loop-hole through which vested interests can escape. The way of the world has not changed since then, so Trump proceeds on that basis.
Patman reckons credibility is at issue. Yet conformity seems to prevail in geopolitics – those who can, do, and everyone else nods along with that (except for those who feel compelled to issue ritualised bleats about it).
Lux will wriggle around like a worm on a hook. "I'm a hero, so I can do both!" Credibility will always be defeated by necessity, often in a fraction of a second.
Having stolen my thunder and saved me my own post, Robert Patman's synopsis is a must read so will add another link :
NZ faces a foreign policy reckoning – Newsroom
I fear our current CoC will stand with the Trump administration because they are too weak and lily livered to stand up to them.
A change of government later this year has now become an absolute necessity if we wish to remain a sovereign state and be able to make our own choices in an inclusive and rules-based international arena.
We absolutely can, and should, do both.
Yes, our long-term survival as a small state relies on international law, multilateralism, and respect for sovereignty. We benefit disproportionately from a rules-based order, and we should continue to defend it wherever we can.
But if the structures that underpin that order are visibly fraying, the worst possible outcome for a small state is to find itself without any major allies at all. Principles don’t deter missiles, and credibility alone doesn’t secure trade routes, intelligence sharing, or security guarantees.
Small-state foreign policy has never been about moral purity; it’s about managing tension. We push for rules and norms precisely because we lack raw power. While simultaneously maintaining relationships with the powers that still shape the system as it actually exists. That isn’t hypocrisy, it’s survival.
The choice that the article you've quoted poses: alignment or rules; is analytically neat but strategically naïve. New Zealand has always operated in the space between necessity and principle. Abandoning either side of that equation would make us less credible, not more.
Credibility that ignores power is posturing. Necessity without norms is submission. Foreign policy is the uncomfortable work of managing both at once.
Excellent reframing of Patman's view
and I agree that both/and logic applies.
Folks often neglect the role of the middleman, both in originating foreign trade in prehistory and deal-making today. Eisenhower's view that it was better to have Patton in the tent pissing out than outside pissing in also pertains. It implies that alignment can be conditional upon circumstance. The role of mediator is useful too.
Seems like the small thinking which has blighted NZ foreign policy since Lange and Clark. NZ still benefits from the courage of those people. This government and those who pimp them erode that work.
Appeasement is central to your thesis. Sucking up to strength dilutes overall rules, and you're happy to go there.
Every time you pardon a strong man you embolden them and they will take the next step.
I think you may have misread my intent here. My argument isn’t that we should appease or absolve Trump. Or any strongman.
It’s that our capacity to confront great powers is constrained by our lack of hard power. For a small state like New Zealand, foreign policy necessarily involves two parallel imperatives:
a) defending a multilateral, rules-based international order, and
b) maintaining a sufficiently close relationship with at least one major power capable of providing a credible security guarantee should that order fracture.
That isn’t appeasement; it’s risk management under conditions of asymmetrical power.
Publicly grandstanding against a superpower doesn’t strengthen international law if it leaves you isolated and exposed. Nor does it magically deter further violations. It would be a very different prospect if, for example, we could co-sponsor a UN resolution condemning the intervention as part of a broader coalition.
The uncomfortable truth is that small states don’t get to choose between principle and survival. We have to hold both at once.
We can’t afford to rock the boat for the sake of it. But when there’s an opportunity to add our weight: collectively, and in defence of basic norms; we should absolutely take it.
There'e not a lot of reporting from within the country.
Democracy Now has some, and it's somewhat different from what we're seeing on BBC and the likes
Something I've not seen on our televisions
Venezuelans in huge numbers demanding the return of their President
https://www.facebook.com/AlAraby.en/posts/massive-protests-have-flooded-streets-across-venezuela-as-locals-demand-the-retu/1192202266336249/
I presume the effect of Maduro supporters flooding the streets like that will be to scare Trump into changing his mind and re-installing Maduro as president. But wait, could it possibly be that such partisan politics doesn't actually work?
Somehow the honchos must get her to swing a deal for a cut of Trump's take from getting the petrodollars flowing again. An old movie line comes to mind, in response to a beautiful woman's indignant response to being propositioned: "I'm not that kind of woman!" "We already know what you are, my dear, it's just a matter of negotiating your price."
Reply to KJT above.
Just in case any further evidence was needed that governments don't serve the citizenry but rather companies and corporations look no further. Aided and abetted by said businesses with their crafted media narrative.
It isn't just an American thing either. 'Mom and Pop' landlords have their rentier behaviour rewarded here. Alcohol industry had its way with the last mob.
https://www.rnz.co.nz/news/national/486382/prime-minister-s-chief-of-staff-andrew-kirton-led-lobbying-firm-that-fought-against-reforms-now-binned-by-chris-hipkins
Isn't Kirton married to Labour List MP Camilla Belich?
Kirton worked for a lobbying firm. Their clients included Asahi and Lion.
Manage My Health have been working tirelessly to manage the fallout from their penny pinching approach to securing patient's data.
In his 'apology', which lacks insight as to the profound impact on patients, the Chief Excuse Offerer tries to paint Manage My Health as a victim along with himself and some of his friends and family. Protecting private providers access to the public trough would appear to be the motivation here
The dropping the ball narrative is woefully inaccurate. To further mangle a metaphor, they didn't stay fit, practice let alone get on the team bus.
We must resist a Digital I.D. whenever that terrible notion raises it's head again.
https://www.rnz.co.nz/news/national/583319/manage-my-health-ceo-trust-us-even-though-we-have-dropped-the-ball
To expand on his painting himself as a victim (from the same link). I would interpret this as if people he didn't know- and himself- weren't affected, then he wouldn't be so distressed. I'd love to know how many Ministers of the Crown are caught up in this.
"…how many Ministers of the Crown are caught up in this."
That was one of my first thoughts. Would
Pee Wee HermanMinister Brown have a higher profile and be saying and doing a lot more if we were at risk of seeing, say, Judith Collins's medical history?As someone else here has highlighted, for someone that reckons our Christmas/NY break is too long, Luxon is damn quiet on events.
Luxon is damn quiet on events.
Is he even in the country, or sunning it in Hawai'i?
Hawaii would be one way for a certain sorted someone to manage their health.
Worst PM in my lifetime, for the speed-wrecking orchestrated on his ‘watch’ 🙁
https://nickrockel.substack.com/p/missing-luxon
Who's the "duty minister" this year? Has anything been heard from them?
Google AI summary:
In January 2026, the New Zealand Government has not officially designated a single "summer duty minister" to cover the entire holiday period. Instead, several ministers have been active in their respective portfolios throughout the start of the year:
Typically, "duty ministers" are assigned to handle urgent matters while the rest of the Cabinet is on leave during the summer break. However, active press releases from early January 2026 indicate that multiple senior ministers are currently fulfilling duties in their specific areas.
"…their penny pinching approach…" Levy, under direction of Reti/Brown hasnt been pinching he's brutally slashed digital services etc to meet coalition budgets.
Budgets that don't give a F about the legacy systems, underinvestment and real world implications of a cyberspace full of bad actors waiting to take advantage of org's who fail to keep up with the tech.
MyHealth's a private provider isn't it so in taking taxpayers dosh IMO it has less excuses than Te Whatu Ora do post coalition hobbling of their digital capability.
Operation Absolute Resolve succeeeced. Not a sausage about Epstein.
/
Colombia president is on to it as well
News reports state that snow causes chaos for travellers in Europe, while there are heatwaves in Australia.
We're in for a wild ride.
Yup, ya gotta feel for the animals.
Herds with no trees and dogs out for walkies on those scorching hard surfaces whilst the owners go about being social was a hard watch today.