VZCZCXYZ0008
OO RUEHWEB

DE RUEHWL #0209 1900629
ZNY CCCCC ZZH
O R 090631Z JUL 09
FM AMEMBASSY WELLINGTON
TO RUEHC/SECSTATE WASHDC IMMEDIATE 0062
INFO RHHMUNA/USPACOM HONOLULU HI
RUEHBN/AMCONSUL MELBOURNE 0004
RUEHBUL/AMEMBASSY KABUL 0008
RUEHBY/AMEMBASSY CANBERRA 0012
RUEHDN/AMCONSUL SYDNEY 0014
RUEHSV/AMEMBASSY SUVA 0003
RUEHWL/AMEMBASSY WELLINGTON
RUEKJCS/SECDEF WASHINGTON DC

C O N F I D E N T I A L WELLINGTON 000209 
 
SIPDIS 
 
E.O. 12958: DECL: 2019/07/09 
TAGS: PREL PGOV MARR OPRC NZ US
SUBJECT: New Zealand Releases Documents on US Afghan Troop Request 
 
REF: WELLINGTON 179 
 
CLASSIFIED BY: DJKeegan, CDA, DOS, Embassy Wellington; REASON: 
1.4(B), (D) 
 
¶1. (SBU) Radio New Zealand (RNZ) reported July 8 that it had 
obtained New Zealand Government documents that showed that the U.S. 
Government had put "constant pressure" on the GNZ to increase its 
military commitment to Afghanistan. Embassy contacted NZ Ministry 
of Foreign Affairs and Trade (MFAT) who confirmed that it had 
provided documents to RNZ in response to an "Official Information 
Act (OIA) request" and provided the documents to the Embassy 
(emailed to EAP/ANP). The documents show no evidence of pressure, 
but concerns about New Zealand's possible additional military 
commitment to Afghanistan will likely cause increasing media 
scrutiny. 
 
 
 
¶2. (SBU) MFAT Americas Division Director David Taylor told the 
Embassy that MFAT had received the RNZ request three months ago and 
had just released the material in response. He noted that MFAT had 
exceeded the statutory 21 day limit for responding to OIA requests. 
The heavily redacted documents released include a series of 
fourteen diplomatic cables, most between MFAT and the NZ Embassy in 
Washington, dated from 11 February to 9 April as well as three MFAT 
press releases and the transcript of a media interview. The cables 
report that the US side on several occasions expressed appreciation 
for NZ military capabilities, including particularly the NZ PRT and 
the SAS. The cables also report that the U.S. Embassy in Wellington 
conveyed a USG request for comment on a series of topics as the 
U.S. prepared to review its own policy in Afghanistan and that MFAT 
responded with comments. In the cables and in the media pieces, the 
GNZ, Foreign Minister Murray McCully, and Defence Minister Wayne 
Mapp state that they are looking at what they might be able to do 
to help in Afghanistan, while noting that the New Zealand Defence 
Force (NZDF) is stretched thin by current commitments. They note 
that the GNZ is undertaking a review of its own posture in 
Afghanistan and any decision on military commitments will be made 
after the conclusion of that review. 
 
 
 
¶3. (U) Radio New Zealand's report based on the OIA documents was a 
very brief factual report on its main morning news program, Morning 
Report, saying that they had asked for and received the papers 
which showed, they said, that the U.S. had constantly pressured GNZ 
for an increased commitment to Afghanistan.  The story and papers 
have not yet received extensive coverage elsewhere. 
 
 
 
¶4. (C) ChargC) noted to Taylor that the Embassy and the USG should 
have been informed before any documents were shared regarding 
meetings with USG officials. Taylor said that MFAT had made a 
mistake in not consulting with the U.S. side, apologized, and 
promised to convey ChargC)'s objections. He assured me that he would 
do everything possible to ensure that this does not occur again. He 
confirmed that the documents provided to RNZ would also be provided 
to any news organization which requested them. The Embassy DAO has 
contacted NZ Ministry of Defence which reports that they have not 
received any OIA requests along these lines. If they did they would 
respond by providing the same documents already released by MFAT. 
 
 
 
¶5. (C) Comment. Having reviewed the documents released, we find 
nothing to support an allegation of U.S. pressure on New Zealand. 
Instead, the dominant themes are U.S. respect and appreciation for 
NZ military capabilities and contributions.  Even though there is 
no smoking gun, we anticipate that the NZ media will continue to 
question whether the GNZ is justified in considering possible 
additional military deployments to Afghanistan. As Green Party 
Member of Parliament Kennedy Graham demonstrated in his questions 
to the Foreign Minister in Parliament (reftel), there is a 
continuing undercurrent of suspicion toward the U.S. and doubt 
about whether U.S. and NATO actions in Afghanistan are in keeping 
with New Zealand's tradition of strong adherence to the letter of 
UN limitations on the use of force. In addition, there are NZ 
reporters and columnists who are looking for a way to show that 
either the Key Government is not fully in control of its agenda or 
too willing to listen to requests from the USG. I would anticipate 
that one or more of them will obtain these documents and try to 
tease out of this thin gruel something more intriguing than RNZ has 
yet produced. 
KEEGAN