LIBERTARIANZ DEFENCE SPOKESMAN

POLICY RELEASE

FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE

Defence Policy, Main Points:

1) Renegotiate all existing defence treaties.

2) Negotiate complete withdrawal from any current UN Peace Keeping Missions. Introduce legislation preventing NZ Defence Forces from serving in future UN Peace Keeping Missions.

3) Enter into mutual defence treaties only with Free Societies.

Such defence treaties will only permit the committing of military forces if the rightful territories of ourselves or our treaty partners come under unprovoked attack or verified threat of imminent military action by a third nation. Said treaties will specifically include the right to use pre-emptive force should a third party be shown to be preparing to attack.

4) Realign defence spending.

We recognise four key areas in the Defence Forces: the Intelligence Services, the Air Force, the Navy and the Army. Because the threat to New Zealand is low at present, a largely part-time military built around a small cadre of professionals is all that is required. In fact, there is little wrong with the current size of New Zealand's military forces - they just need to be properly equipped.

5) Restructure Intelligence Services

We believe that to be forewarned is to be forearmed. This means having a credible intelligence service with the specific role of monitoring foreign military activities. Libertarianz would review the Military Intelligence arm of the NZ Defence Forces (NZDF) with a view to improving the capability to monitor the movements and strength of likely foreign aggressors in our region. Such funding would include the Listening Stations currently based in our country and re-establishing links with previous allies. Individuals worried about government eavesdropping on internal communications should note that Libertarianz would not prevent private ownership of the latest and best encryption technology as the United States and other countries do.

We will not set up our intelligence forces like the secret private armies depicted in cinematic portrayals of the CIA, MI-5, et al. The simple objective is to reduce the likelihood of a surprise attack, similar in effect to Pearl Harbour.

6) Remove all legal obstacles which would otherwise impede individual citizens from fighting as mercenaries in foreign territories in support of foreign causes.

Robert Winefield

LIBERTARIANZ DEFENCE SPOKESMAN

POLICY RELEASE

FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE

Does New Zealand Need a Defence Force?

"Libertarianz holds that the provision of a defence organisation to protect against the use of military force against New Zealand is part of the proper function of government," says their Defence Spokesman Robert Winefield today. "That is, that the government exists to prevent the use of force against individuals within that nation, and the protection against foreign invasion is one important aspect of that." Note that the proposed Libertarianz constitution, available on our web site, bans the use of conscription and stops the military from operating against NZ citizens.

Does New Zealand Need a Defence Force?

History has shown that the most militarily aggressive nations are those with totalitarian or authoritarian governments. Examining an Atlas, we find that New Zealand is an island nation with its Southern, Northern, and Eastern flanks protected by Antarctica and the vast South Pacific Ocean. In these directions there are no such nations, and our Western flank is protected by a benevolent Australia. It is because of this that many New Zealanders believe that we do not need a defence force at all. After all, any invading army must come by sea and it must be big enough to occupy a territory almost as large as the British Isles. The only overtly militaristic nations with amphibious forces large enough for the task are Indonesia, China, Russia and possibly India. All of which would have to come through or round Australia first to threaten us directly.

Unfortunately, this is a view almost Napoleonic in its outlook. Two lessons from history serve to demonstrate this point:

On the 8th of December, 1941, New Zealand felt safe from harm. On that day in Singapore and across the International Dateline at Pearl Harbour, Japanese pre-emptive military strikes began a campaign which brought Australia within a hair's breadth of becoming a battleground. Had that happened, New Zealand, too, would have been directly attacked, as Darwin was. It took six months, more or less, for a modern military force to advance across a hemisphere of the globe. Since then, innovations in military technology have continued apace until in 1991, the fourth largest army in the world was vaporised before a prime time TV audience in about 100 hours.

Military campaigns have been increasing exponentially in ferocity and velocity throughout the 20th Century and show every indication of continuing to do so in the 21st. But military forces which took part in The Gulf War of1991 took much longer to train; this is why we need a standing defence force: It takes longer to train a competent defence force than it does for a (previously "impossible") crisis to arise.

Robert Winefield

LIBERTARIANZ DEFENCE SPOKESMAN

© Scoop Media

Gordon Campbell: On the Sony cyber attack

Given the layers of meta-irony involved, the saga of the Sony cyber attack seemed at the outset more like a snarky European art film than a popcorn entry at the multiplex.

Yet now with (a) President Barack Obama weighing in on the side of artistic freedom and calling for the US to make a ‘proportionate response’quickly followed by (b) North Korea’s entire Internet service going down, and with both these events being followed by (c) Sony deciding to backtrack and release The Interview film that had made it a target for the dastardly North Koreans in the first place, then ay caramba…the whole world will now be watching how this affair pans out. More>>