VZCZCXRO3816
RR RUEHAP RUEHDT RUEHNZ RUEHPB
DE RUEHWL #0259 2290251
ZNR UUUUU ZZH
R 170251Z AUG 09
FM AMEMBASSY WELLINGTON
TO RUEHC/SECSTATE WASHDC
INFO ASEAN REGIONAL FORUM COLLECTIVE
RHEHAAA/NATIONAL SECURITY COUNCIL WASHINGTON DC
RHMCSUU/CDR USPACOM HONOLULU HI
RUEHAP/AMEMBASSY APIA
RUEHBN/AMCONSUL MELBOURNE
RUEHBUL/AMEMBASSY KABUL
RUEHBY/AMEMBASSY CANBERRA
RUEHDN/AMCONSUL SYDNEY
RUEHIL/AMEMBASSY ISLAMABAD
RUEHNE/AMEMBASSY NEW DELHI
RUEHNO/USMISSION USNATO
RUEHNZ/AMCONSUL AUCKLAND
RUEHWL/AMEMBASSY WELLINGTON
RUEKJCS/SECDEF WASHINGTON DC

UNCLAS WELLINGTON 000259 
 
SENSITIVE 
SIPDIS 
 
E.O. 12958: N/A 
TAGS: PREL MOPS MARR NZ AF
SUBJECT: MIXED REACTION TO NZ SAS DEPLOYMENT 
 
REF: A. 09 WELLINGTON 260; B. 09 WELLINGTON 223 
 
¶1. (SBU) Summary.  Political criticism of the GNZ's August 10 
announcement to re-deploy the SAS to Afghanistan has been largely 
limited to the opposition Labour Party's criticism of the decision. 
This discord broke a long-held political convention in NZ of 
bipartisan support for foreign policy, especially overseas military 
deployments.  Media reaction in the wake of the decision has 
generally been supportive of further contributions to Afghanistan, 
including sending back the SAS.  More political reaction is 
expected when Parliament resumes on August 18.  End Summary. 
 
Labour Party Opposes SAS Deployment 
----------------------------------- 
 
¶2. (U)  The leader of the opposition Labour Party, Phil Goff, has 
pointedly disagreed with GNZ's August 10 decision to send SAS 
troops back to Afghanistan (Reftel A. Wellington 260).  Goff has 
argued that SAS will not be as useful in Afghanistan as it was when 
the previous Labour Government first decided to deploy it in 2005. 
[Note.  Goff was the Defence Minister in the previous 
administration when it sent the SAS into Afghanistan three times 
and, on every occasion, with the support of the then opposition 
National party.  End Note]. 
 
¶3. (U)  Goff stated that New Zealand's past contributions have been 
more on the military rather than the development side for good 
reason: to rid Afghanistan of Al Qaeda strongholds.  Now that this 
imperative has been largely met, Goff believes that the focus in 
Afghanistan should be on advancing development and good governance. 
He would, therefore, like to see a "better balance" in New 
Zealand's contribution.  Goff asserts that New Zealand's efforts in 
Afghanistan will be more effective if the GNZ focus on its 
Provincial Reconstruction Team (PRT) in Bamyan Province and 
training Afghan police and army.  Goff believes that the NZ PRT has 
proven effective in winning essential local support and promoting 
development and stability. 
 
Goff's Support Victim of Left Wing Pressures 
-------------------------------------------- 
 
¶4. (SBU)  Labour's decision to support the continuation of the PRT, 
but oppose the re-deployment of the SAS, breaks New Zealand's 
long-standing political convention of bipartisan support for 
matters of foreign affairs, particularly overseas military 
deployments.  Goff has condemned Prime Minister John Key for not 
providing to opposition parties, and indeed the country, any new 
information that justifies the decision to send the SAS back to 
Afghanistan. 
 
¶5. (SBU)  Comment:  The political imperatives behind Goff's posture 
are transparent to most Kiwis.  He stands at the right end of the 
political spectrum of the left/center Labour Party.  To maintain 
his tenuous grip on party leadership, Goff needs to convince the 
left wing of the Labour base that he represents their concerns.  By 
opposing the SAS deployment and supporting the PRT transition with 
an emphasis on redevelopment and reduced military staffing, Goff 
hopes to ensure that he is still the Labour standard bearer at the 
next election, scheduled for 2011.  End Comment. 
 
Newspaper Editorials Support Return of SAS 
------------------------------------------ 
 
¶6. (U)  Despite some negative op-ed commentary in the days leading 
up to August 10, editorial reaction after the announcement has been 
generally supportive of the GNZ's decision to re-deploy the SAS. 
The country's largest circulation daily, Auckland's New Zealand 
Herald, carried an August 12 editorial which began "John Key has 
acted correctly in sending Special Air Services troops back to 
Afghanistan so New Zealand can play its part in tackling the 
breeding ground of international terrorism."  "However," the 
editorial continued, "to place operational or geographical 
restrictions on its role would be a mistake.  Having been 
committed, it should be used where it can be most effective. If 
not, this country will be making a half-hearted contribution." 
 
 
¶7. (U)  Another prominent newspaper, Wellington's Dominion-Post, 
ran an editorial that supported re-deploying the SAS to "advance 
the cause of global security."  However, the newspaper stated that 
"the extent and nature of any role played by New Zealand troops 
should be determined by this country in accordance with its 
interests.  The SAS should not be deployed to curry favor with the 
US, no matter the blandishments or the increasingly unsubtle hints 
of US officials." 
 
Comment:  Political Debate likely to Grow 
----------------------------------------- 
 
¶8. (SBU)  Post expects political debate over GNZ's decision to 
continue, and broaden, when Parliament returns on August 18.  Green 
Party MP Dr. Kennedy Graham has requested from post copies of the 
publicly available 2008 State Department Country Terrorism Report. 
Graham has already publicly questioned the legal justification for 
foreign combat forces in Afghanistan (Ref. B. Wellington 223). 
Post therefore believes that the Greens are preparing to challenge 
the Government when Parliament reconvenes next week.  It is less 
clear how strongly Labour will align itself with the Greens or 
revert to a more centrist emphasis on national unity in support of 
overseas deployments. We will continue to report as the debate 
evolves.  End Comment. 
KEEGAN